Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Republicans block child nutrition bill

  1. #11
    Senior Member Scrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,401
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    01:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    AC, the constitution was written 230+ YEARS AGO!!! You might want to look at what kind of people wrote it too. A lot has changed since then, one of the things that have changed is science and knowledge. Not too long ago they discovered children that are adequately fed, clothed and housed do much better in school than those kids who are cold and hungry.

    You sound foolish.

    For christs sake, in Belarus they spare no expense for their children. There's not a school there that doesn't have a cafeteria a school nurse and heating. They produce some pretty smart kids.

    As for the repugnicans, they'd have us in caves if they could.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    529
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    04:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrat View Post
    Not too long ago they discovered children that are adequately fed, clothed and housed do much better in school than those kids who are cold and hungry.
    Which unfortunately means nothing to idealists who cannot alter rules even in such examples of programs designed to alleviate child poverty. The rules must be followed, even when they lead to bad results!

  3. #13
    Senior Member Accountable's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    24,996
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    03:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by recovering conservative View Post
    For libertarians unfortunately, the merits of preventing childhood malnutrition are not enough to maintain the program, because it's not in the Constitution.
    You really should educate yourself before commenting on things. You'll look less of an idiot. In the US, we have levels of government, of which the federal level is only one, the most general & remote, and the least able to handle problems such as this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrat View Post
    AC, the constitution was written 230+ YEARS AGO!!! You might want to look at what kind of people wrote it too. A lot has changed since then, one of the things that have changed is science and knowledge. Not too long ago they discovered children that are adequately fed, clothed and housed do much better in school than those kids who are cold and hungry.

    You sound foolish.

    For christs sake, in Belarus they spare no expense for their children. There's not a school there that doesn't have a cafeteria a school nurse and heating. They produce some pretty smart kids.
    You sound as ignorant as RC obviously is. You seem to think that if the federal government doesn't do it, then it doesn't get done. You're right about the Constitution being over 230 years old, but your implication that it's no longer valid it, to put it bluntly, stupid. If you want the federal government to take over child nutrition, work to install an amendment. The process is relatively straightforward.

    Quote Originally Posted by recovering conservative View Post
    Which unfortunately means nothing to idealists who cannot alter rules even in such examples of programs designed to alleviate child poverty. The rules must be followed, even when they lead to bad results!
    Are you implying that if the rules lead to bad results that they must be broken, rather than changed? That's dumb. Why not change undesirable rules to something you can follow?

  4. #14
    Senior Member yaaarrrgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,262
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    02:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Accountable View Post
    I scoured the US Constitution and I just couldn't find the "feed the school kids" clause. If the key word isn't food but school, education's been the responsibility of the States since we first had schools. In fact, we didn't even have a department of education until Jimmy Carter mistakenly thought he had been elected the governor of Usa (apparently pronounced Oosah) rather than President of the United States of America.
    It falls squarely under general welfare and common defense. That's right, WELFARE.

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
    And

    welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    529
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    04:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Accountable View Post
    You really should educate yourself before commenting on things. You'll look less of an idiot. In the US, we have levels of government, of which the federal level is only one, the most general & remote, and the least able to handle problems such as this.
    Oh really! You mean there's more than one level of government?

    You sound as ignorant as RC obviously is. You seem to think that if the federal government doesn't do it, then it doesn't get done.
    And it gets done 50 different ways, with 50 different levels of funding for the problem.....and most likely, the poorest states, which have the most children living in poverty will have the least amount of money to address the problem. So, why not have a uniform system for all American? Oh yeah, that constitution that won't allow you to start a federal program without the arduous task of ratifying an amendment to the constitution.

    You're right about the Constitution being over 230 years old, but your implication that it's no longer valid it, to put it bluntly, stupid. If you want the federal government to take over child nutrition, work to install an amendment. The process is relatively straightforward.
    And the children will be grandparents by the time that amendment is passed! Why not take a short cut and allow Supreme Court justices to determine if such a program is constitutional?

    Are you implying that if the rules lead to bad results that they must be broken, rather than changed? That's dumb. Why not change undesirable rules to something you can follow?
    Break em or change em -- the stupid thing is to disregard results so as to adhere to rules and methods.

  6. #16
    Senior Member Accountable's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    24,996
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    03:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by recovering conservative View Post
    And it gets done 50 different ways, with 50 different levels of funding for the problem.
    Yes, and that's the beauty of it. I know it pains you that things aren't wrapped up in a single, neat, one-size-fits-all package, but you can always immigrate, get your citizenship, and vote for a "better" way.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    529
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    04:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Accountable View Post
    Yes, and that's the beauty of it. I know it pains you that things aren't wrapped up in a single, neat, one-size-fits-all package, but you can always immigrate, get your citizenship, and vote for a "better" way.
    States rights has been used as an excuse to deny equal rights (Rand Paul is still telling us that Civil Rights Act rules applying to private business are unconstitutional), and what doesn't get enough attention, is that the disparity and inequality in your union allowed the first cracks to break in the middle class 40 years ago, when manufacturers set up non-union factories in the South, and closed operations in what came to be known as The Rust Belt. Wages and living standards for the average worker started being driven down even before the effects of outsourcing caused by globalization, began having an impact. It's as if the United States already had their own little third world nation down south that was driving down living standards!

  8. #18
    Senior Member Accountable's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    24,996
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    03:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by recovering conservative View Post
    States rights has been used as an excuse to deny equal rights (Rand Paul is still telling us that Civil Rights Act rules applying to private business are unconstitutional), and what doesn't get enough attention, is that the disparity and inequality in your union allowed the first cracks to break in the middle class 40 years ago, when manufacturers set up non-union factories in the South, and closed operations in what came to be known as The Rust Belt. Wages and living standards for the average worker started being driven down even before the effects of outsourcing caused by globalization, began having an impact. It's as if the United States already had their own little third world nation down south that was driving down living standards!
    You wanna tie that into the actual subject, or are you just spewing random hate again?

  9. #19
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    10,204
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    03:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Well, he is only a "recovering" (not yet fully recovered) conservative.
    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”
    Voltaire

    I have only one thing to do and that's
    Be the wave that I am and then
    Sink back into the ocean

    Fiona Apple

  10. #20
    Senior Member yaaarrrgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,262
    Local Date
    02-24-2020
    Local Time
    02:17 AM

    Re: Republicans block child nutrition bill

    Register to remove this ad.
    The whole point of the Constitution was to create the foundation of a better society, and escape English rule. To prevent the arbitrary taxation, and to give people representation. The notion that "the" founders wanted this or that is oversimplifying the history to align it to a modern political viewpoint. Some of the founders wanted a strong central government that emulated England, and others favored a decentralized approach. Some, like Jefferson, saw banks and corporations as top level threats, equal to standing armies. Many of them thought the people were too stupid to self rule, and others (like Jackson later) nurtured the more modern idea of U.S. democracy.

    It's become fairly trendy since Ron Paul to call any and every social policy "unconstitutional." Though by the same logic, I don't see "school lunches" listed as an exception when Congress is defining taxes to provide for the health and happiness of the U.S.. This line of attack is not very far off from birthers calling Obama's presidency unconstitutional. I mean if we are going this route, I can equally claim that libertarianism itself is unconstitutional. Anything that the majority of people vote for, that improves the standard of living for a majority of people, or provided long term cost savings for the whole nation, would fall under general welfare. It doesn't seem implausible that providing better nutrition and education would cut heath and social costs later on down the road. But even if it didn't, like it or not, even bread and circuses are consistent with the Constitution's open wording.

    Ironically though, Ron Paul libertarians might suffer from a case of "beware what you wish for" if they ever got exactly what they wanted. Living under arbitrary taxation of an empire across the ocean isn't a whole lot different than living under the rule of a multinational corporation that's monopolized a given market. They have no vested interest in local communities, and if you aren't a major shareholder, forget any representation. You can gripe about paying arbitrary taxes, only to turn around and pay the arbitrary prices set by a monopoly which -- after it becomes big enough -- also owns and operates the government in the market as well.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Australian Republicans - American Republicans
    By AussiePam in forum Australia
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-29-2010, 11:50 AM
  2. Republicans are trying to steal the election... again
    By Benjamin in forum Presidential Elections & Campaigns
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-25-2008, 11:45 AM
  3. Why Men Become Republicans
    By BTS in forum Political Humor & Satire
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-02-2005, 06:52 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts