how does this sound to you? does this solve the convervative vs. liberal debate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Disgusted American
  • Start date Start date
D

Disgusted American

Guest
have the federal government powerless except when it comes to defense and interstate commerce (the states provide money for both,and leave it up to the states how they want to be.
if you live in a state and the people vote and say they want a socialist state (social welfare, social healtcare, etc etc) then the state can be set up that way, but the citizens need to understand that they will be taxed mercilessly and trade will be heavily regulated by the state (the STATE government, not the federal) and education may be great, but you'll pay through the nose for it with very high taxes.

on the other hand, if the people vote and they want the state to be conservative, the taxes will be lower and business will thrive, but the people need to understand there will be NO welfare and if you fall on hard times, you will be run over by the wheels of commerce, with NO parachute to lessen your fall. and education will suffer.
free movement between states ensures freedom of the people.
small, almost powerless central federal government (except in times of REAL war, and it has to be voted on by the STATES) and states dictate what their face will be (socialist, capitalist) based on their people VOTING. do away with the president, and congress, since the matters the federal government will deal with comes from decisions made by the STATES, i havent figured out how to have the states make decisions, but the idea of a congress has proven to be a detriment to the people.
businesses will be forced to sell only american made goods to americans, but will be free to export whatever they want. the states bargain with each other to get what they need.
the states pay taxes, not the people.
i know its how the constitution spells it out. its funny that we adhere to anything in it given the structure of the government itself is unconstitutional.
 
You are describing a confederacy of independant states. Sounds like a great idea to me.

I mean, how much do people in New York City REALLY have in common with people from Nebraska? Why then should all of these people be forced into political union with one another? Mutual defense is fine. Regulation of commerce is fine. However, most people in Nebraska don't want legal abortion. Most people in New New York City do.

Unfortunately, big business functions better in an environment of standardization...this is why Lincoln fought to preserve the Union: to safeguard big business; not to free slaves.
 
Sounds like a good idia, but after all the libs states fail, all the libs will migrate to the conservative states and try to takeover and piggy back hard working conservatives.
 
I love your ideas, even though some of them are not fully developed. I know where you're going. It won't work, though, because you didn't factor in how all the greedy, power-hungry people are going to get away with legally exploiting from and robbing those they deem to be lower than themselves. Human nature won't change, and I think people forget that human nature is our biggest problem. Change that, and you change everything. But if you ever create your own state, let me know. I'm willing to help.
 
I also suppose that if the states revert to 19th century slavery or 20th century segregation and racism, nobody will be able to stop them. No thanks.
 
All that does is replace a bloated federal government with a bunch of rogue bloated state governments. All the conservatives would move to red states, all the moderates and liberals to blue, and the country would be on the verge of schism. A house divided against itself cannot stand.
 
What you describe has already been decided. And you don't have to be happy with the resolution, but it's the way things work. If you truly don't like it, then petition Congress to change it - that's how you enact change in this country.

The federal government doesn't have as much power as you think it does.

Personally, I don't understand where the government - on ANY level - has the authority to expect me to fund the military. The Constitution specifically states that the government will provide a defense. The government isn't doing that - WE are. And we have no say in how the military is used.

EDIT: The states pay taxes, not the people? Where does the tax money come from? A state is a mass of land. Masses of land don't have bank accounts. PEOPLE make money, dirt doesn't.
 
Back
Top