Again, total nonsense.
Advertisement
by Austreylia » Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:52 am
by Bear Stearns » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:29 am
by Neutraligon » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:46 am
Bear Stearns wrote:State governments in the US tend to be nepotistic and corrupt. The federal government is just downright evil. I'll take my chances with the state.
by Page » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:48 am
by Kilobugya » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:52 am
Page wrote:I think of it like there's a crazed murderer and a hungry grizzly bear: Ideally, they'll keep fighting and neither will ever win against the other and turn its knife or teeth on me, but sometimes depending on where you're standing, you want one of the two to be winning at the moment.
by Just-An-Illusion » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:53 am
by Bear Stearns » Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:04 am
Neutraligon wrote:Bear Stearns wrote:State governments in the US tend to be nepotistic and corrupt. The federal government is just downright evil. I'll take my chances with the state.
Considering some of the state reactions to covid as well as what they are doing to voting rights I would claim that certain state governments are evil.
by Neutraligon » Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:13 am
Bear Stearns wrote:Neutraligon wrote:Considering some of the state reactions to covid as well as what they are doing to voting rights I would claim that certain state governments are evil.
The federal reaction to covid was evil. But go ahead and simp for citibank and amazon.
also doesn't the federal government drone strike children?
by Punished UMN » Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:19 pm
Kilobugya wrote:Borderlands of Rojava wrote:So we should have someone who isn't from Washington telling Washington how they should solve their problems? My man, this is why the Soviet Union had alot of issues regarding starvation, because bureaucrats in Moscow were trying to run farming operations all the way across Russia without having the knowledge about how it was going in those far off places.
Actually the Soviet Union had less starvation issues than Tsarist Russia. But that aside, I'm not saying the federal government should micro-manage everything and tell to a farmer in the state of Washington exactly what crop he should plant in which land. But general rules that either create rights which should be universal or have global consequences, like minimal wage, or universal healthcare, or bans on dangerous pesticides, or mask mandates during a pandemic are much more efficiently decided globally yes.
Do you really oppose federal level $15 minimal wage or Medicare for All ? I though that's the kind of things you would support...
by Middle Barael » Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:24 pm
by Lady Victory » Thu Jun 10, 2021 3:22 pm
by Lady Victory » Thu Jun 10, 2021 3:25 pm
by Postauthoritarian America » Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:06 pm
by Union of All Socialist Peoples » Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:09 pm
by Ayytaly » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:29 pm
by Austreylia » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:30 am
by Kilobugya » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:44 am
Austreylia wrote:I just don't think a take as ridiculous as "the constitution is obsolete and should be rewritten" even deserves a response that is more than a couple of words in length.
by Engadine Mcdonalds 1997 » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:30 am
by Exxosia » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:31 am
by Ifreann » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:28 am
Austreylia wrote:Lady Victory wrote:
Did you come here to debate or just say "no u" because so far you've yet to actually argue anything.
I've posted an argument, if you look a few posts above.
I just don't think a take as ridiculous as "the constitution is obsolete and should be rewritten" even deserves a response that is more than a couple of words in length.
by Punished UMN » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:37 am
Ifreann wrote:Austreylia wrote:I've posted an argument, if you look a few posts above.
I just don't think a take as ridiculous as "the constitution is obsolete and should be rewritten" even deserves a response that is more than a couple of words in length.
Any progress on identifying where in the Constitution states are afforded rights?
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
by Ifreann » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:42 am
Punished UMN wrote:Ifreann wrote:Any progress on identifying where in the Constitution states are afforded rights?
I know you're not American, but come on, Iffy:The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Ifreann wrote:Austreylia wrote:Yeah, that's not correct at all.
In fact it is entirely correct. Let's skip the boring back and forth bit. You're going to say something to the effect of "Read the Tenth Amendment", because you've heard so-called states rights advocates talking about the Tenth Amendment. But I'm guessing that you haven't actually read the Tenth Amendment recently.The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
No reference to rights at all. But imagine arguing for states powers. "We want more government power!" wouldn't play well with Republican voters, not when you say it openly. So instead they argue for states rights, because that sounds good, that can be sold as a noble and brave endeavour. But it's a lie. It's a marketing ploy.
by Ethel mermania » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:44 am
Ifreann wrote:Austreylia wrote:I've posted an argument, if you look a few posts above.
I just don't think a take as ridiculous as "the constitution is obsolete and should be rewritten" even deserves a response that is more than a couple of words in length.
Any progress on identifying where in the Constitution states are afforded rights?
by Punished UMN » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:57 am
Ifreann wrote:
About that.Ifreann wrote:In fact it is entirely correct. Let's skip the boring back and forth bit. You're going to say something to the effect of "Read the Tenth Amendment", because you've heard so-called states rights advocates talking about the Tenth Amendment. But I'm guessing that you haven't actually read the Tenth Amendment recently.The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
No reference to rights at all. But imagine arguing for states powers. "We want more government power!" wouldn't play well with Republican voters, not when you say it openly. So instead they argue for states rights, because that sounds good, that can be sold as a noble and brave endeavour. But it's a lie. It's a marketing ploy.
James Madison wrote:I find, from looking into the amendments proposed by the State conventions, that several are particularly anxious that it should be declared in the Constitution, that the powers not therein delegated should be reserved to the several States. Perhaps words which may define this more precisely than the whole of the instrument now does, may be considered as superfluous. I admit they may be deemed unnecessary: but there can be no harm in making such a declaration, if gentlemen will allow that the fact is as stated. I am sure I understand it so, and do therefore propose it.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Barinive, Dazchan, Diarcesia, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Google [Bot], ImSaLiA, Ineva, Insaanistan, Keltionialang, Likhinia, Maximum Imperium Rex, Patolia, Soul Reapers, Washington Resistance Army
Advertisement