Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Why do liberals think government should pay for....

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by PeoplesElbow View Post
    I never said anything about the federal government taking over farmland, this is where I think a lot of conservatives turn people off by going full pegged to one side. That said though, if most of the country was starving I don't think anyone would give a damn about states rights.

    It is hard to argue that any state, industry etc would be more able to respond to such a disaster. States already have disputes over water supplies etc.
    Ok, so what were you saying? You brought up farmland and dustbowl. Once the crops are ruined, they're ruined. What were you suggesting the federal government do about that?

    Anyone funded like the federal government (take whatever you want by fear of jail, print whatever more you feel like) could do what the federal does. That said, it's not even close to the concept of providing for the general welfare of the United States.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by PeoplesElbow View Post
    Beyond New Jersey providing a significant amount of tax revenue and economic cogs I am not sure.

    If NJ suffered enough damage to hamper its economy I am pretty sure it would have a ripple effect at least on the region.
    So, are you implying that the commerce clause provides the authority?

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by SamSpade View Post
    Well maybe this should put SOME things in perspective - at the time of the Constitution's founding, the framers had in mind a *massive* canal system all over the eastern United States.
    Since the federal government was low on funds a lot of the time, the first efforts were done with private funding but later with federal dollars. Similarly the railroads were done this way.
    (Actually an interesting point of history is just HOW MANY canal ideas were abandoned, but their markers still exist today as monuments as to where they wanted them to go).

    So - while I also am concerned about federal dollars being spent to create a project that is limited to a handful of people in just one state - say, a bullet train in California - the framers and early government foresaw a nationwide transportation network as vital to the nation.
    I can easily see how major highways between states and canals that connect states fall under the commerce clause.

    FEMA is charity, and the federal government has no business in the charity field.

  4. #44
    Registered User PeoplesElbow's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Smackdown hotel
    Posts
    5,055
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    Ok, so what were you saying? You brought up farmland and dustbowl. Once the crops are ruined, they're ruined. What were you suggesting the federal government do about that?

    Anyone funded like the federal government (take whatever you want by fear of jail, print whatever more you feel like) could do what the federal does. That said, it's not even close to the concept of providing for the general welfare of the United States.
    Well what I am saying is your thoughts are binary, there is nothing else except for the two choices.

    From the wikipedia entry on dust bowl

    The greatly expanded participation of government in land management and soil conservation was an important outcome from the disaster. Different groups took many different approaches to responding to the disaster. To identify areas that needed attention, groups such as the Soil Conservation Service generated detailed soil maps and took photos of the land from the sky. To create shelterbelts to reduce soil erosion, groups such as the United States Forestry Service’s Prairie States Forestry Project planted trees on private lands. Finally, groups like the Resettlement Administration, which later became the Farm Security Administration, encouraged small farm owners to resettle on other lands, if they lived in dryer parts of the Plains.[22]
    I doubt any other entity would have been able to help the planes recover so quickly.
    If what I say offends you then you really don't want to hear what I keep to myself.

  5. #45
    Registered User PeoplesElbow's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Smackdown hotel
    Posts
    5,055
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    So, are you implying that the commerce clause provides the authority?
    Maybe, it is very broad.
    If what I say offends you then you really don't want to hear what I keep to myself.

  6. #46
    I seem to remember that before Hurricane Katrina, FEMA was an agency that was supposed to "manage" the various federal, state, and local agencies (once the federal govt was called in) involved in recovery and relief. It was a result of the public outcry after Katrina that FEMA became an agency that not only managed but "provided stuff".
    "Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever." - Shane Falco

Members who have read this thread: 61

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search:     Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment |
| Forums | Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | Mortgage | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Survey | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |