What do you think are the minimal entitlements Americans should receive?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
According to the constitution:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How one reads the phrase 'promote the general welfare' is a matter of interpretation not fact. Or even a matter of one's personal outlook and political beliefs. There are those who fell that an improvement in the live of the population helps the society and country. Providing basic coverage, the ability to eat and access to basic health care, for example, for all is one way to promote general welfare. The Govt can be in the business of providing retirement and health care benefits.

Few things say "I'm an idiot!" more clearly than citing to the Preamble of the Constitution as authority for a specific gov't power. Make that same argument in any federal court in the land, and the bench would laugh itself silly right before issuing a summary judgment against you.
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Uhh... so if you're a stay-at-home mom, is that considered "work"? I think it's harder work than most jobs I've ever had, but it's not technically "paid employment".

True, but stay at home moms contribute nothing to society as far as taxes/payments go. They are not earning money, not being taxed on income. Should they be entitled to benefits used by other's tax dollars if they contributed nothing? Simple enough solution: Spouses are entitled to contributions based on their spouse.

If someone is married, mom is stay home, father works for 20 years, mom is entitled to benefits earned by father, such as medical coverage, etc.

Another incentive of paying the marriage tax.

But I was just giving an example, there would have to be more than 30 seconds of thought into the idea. Which is all I've devoted to it. I think if someone puts some brain power into it and does some critical thinking, I believe a fair system could be fleshed out which can't really be abused in the manner it is today.


 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
According to the constitution:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How one reads the phrase 'promote the general welfare' is a matter of interpretation not fact. Or even a matter of one's personal outlook and political beliefs. There are those who fell that an improvement in the live of the population helps the society and country. Providing basic coverage, the ability to eat and access to basic health care, for example, for all is one way to promote general welfare. The Govt can be in the business of providing retirement and health care benefits.

Promote, not provide.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
You still whining that farm workers have AC when they come home?

Yes. Do you have a list of basics that you think Americans are entitled to or not? Don't forget to put A/C on there. ;)

 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Who decides? Time mostly, but also Demand, simple Logic, and Cost/Benefit comparisons. If something Proves to offer Society a great Benefit and that Benefit isn't being fully realized, then that thing may very well become Infrastructure. It will also be determined based on what Competitors are doing. If they make something Infrastructure and it gives them a Competitive Advantage, it is only a matter of time before Others also must follow that lead. That's the situation the US finds itself with right now regarding HealthCare. It simply can not continue to have an ever increasingly inefficient thing eating away at its' efficiency from the inside.

That sounds very messy. But please, are you willing to list what you CURRENTLY think is "infrastructure" (and what most people call entitlements)?
 

GroundedSailor

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2001
2,502
0
76
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
According to the constitution:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How one reads the phrase 'promote the general welfare' is a matter of interpretation not fact. Or even a matter of one's personal outlook and political beliefs. There are those who fell that an improvement in the live of the population helps the society and country. Providing basic coverage, the ability to eat and access to basic health care, for example, for all is one way to promote general welfare. The Govt can be in the business of providing retirement and health care benefits.

Few things say "I'm an idiot!" more clearly than citing to the Preamble of the Constitution as authority for a specific gov't power. Make that same argument in any federal court in the land, and the bench would laugh itself silly right before issuing a summary judgment against you.

Thanks for your polite comments.

The preamble is a statement of intent of the rest of the document and courts do refer to it to try and understand the intent of the founding fathers.

Everything is not always black & white.





 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Who would've guessed Infohawk is a welfare queen.

Infohawk really seems to have changed. I remember him/her being much more liberal, but it's still early, so most of my memories are fuzzy! ;)

A few years back most of P&N was focused on Iraq. I have been and still am completely against the neocon agenda. Also, Bush and the right were really focusing on social issues where I also am more on the side of liberals. That's why you remember me as liberal.

Now economic issues are taking center stage on P&N and I trend towards free markets (might have changed on this a bit over the years) which is why some partisans are resorting to name-calling. If there's one thing that hasn't changed on P&N, it's that personal attacks are okay. ;)
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Infohawk
(no chronic-illness medicine, no diabetes treatment)

So in your world how does one survive and function to treat their chronic illness?

Most people can afford to treat themselves. More would be able to rely on family to help them out. Some truly might not be able to help themselves. A lot of people could just do what our ancestors did: deal with it. (Think allergies.) If we had to give them handouts, I would prefer a separate program. But let's admit that a lot of diabetics have brought the condition on themselves.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
How about we lock you in a car on a hot day to see if your attitude changes? You sound like a boob who has never done without and does not know the hardship it entailes.

edit;"no diabetes treatment" you gonna let hemophiliacs bleed to death too?? Boob!

Another example example of how personal attacks are still welcome on P&N. Anyway, do you have a list of entitlements you think people should have beyond A/C? (And shame on you for not thinking of the environment. A/C leads to pollution.)
 

themusgrat

Golden Member
Nov 2, 2005
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

According to the constitution:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How one reads the phrase 'promote the general welfare' is a matter of interpretation not fact. Or even a matter of one's personal outlook and political beliefs. There are those who feel that an improvement in the lives of the population helps society and the country. Providing basic coverage, the ability to eat and access to basic health care, for example, for all is one way to promote general welfare. The Govt can be in the business of providing retirement and health care benefits.

You are right. It could be interpreted to mean any number of things, but somehow I doubt that our founding fathers intended for us to interpret it as grounds for government mandated/run health insurance and retirement money. Whether that's true or not (which it is), I will admit it's not grounds to dismiss those enterprises today. I guess at heart I'm a conservative in the truest sense. We need a small government that focuses on regulating these things rather than providing them. It's becoming more and more obvious as our deficit grows and grows, as our government finds more and more new things to spend money on that we don't have.

If the government could balance a budget, and could be trusted to truly keep our general welfare at the foremost of its mind, then I'm not sure that I'd have a problem with government handouts. But let's be honest, it cannot do either of those things, given our recent past.

And they're right, using the Preamble as a justification of almost anything doesn't hold up in court. I do agree however that it's not like we should discount it, but the word is "promote," not "provide" as previously noted. You could still interpret that many ways, but to interpret "promote" as providing retirement checks, that's a stretch.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
A/C leads to pollution.)
How does A/C lead to pollution?

It uses electricity. As far as I can tell we don't have any completely clean source of electricity yet.

In any case, this is a side-issue. What, if any, entitlements do you think AMericans should have a right to?
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
According to the constitution:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How one reads the phrase 'promote the general welfare' is a matter of interpretation not fact. Or even a matter of one's personal outlook and political beliefs. There are those who fell that an improvement in the live of the population helps the society and country. Providing basic coverage, the ability to eat and access to basic health care, for example, for all is one way to promote general welfare. The Govt can be in the business of providing retirement and health care benefits.

Few things say "I'm an idiot!" more clearly than citing to the Preamble of the Constitution as authority for a specific gov't power. Make that same argument in any federal court in the land, and the bench would laugh itself silly right before issuing a summary judgment against you.

Thanks for your polite comments.

You're right; the tone of my response was harsher than it needed to be. For that, I apologize. I am admittedly exasperated with the several times people have cited to the Preamble as some sort of justification for the specific exercise of gov't power, especially gov't-run healthcare. If anyone honestly thinks the Preamble is anything more than a vague and flowerly statement of intent, then you might as well ignore the rest of the document - practically any action can be justified as "promoting the general welfare" and such.

The preamble is a statement of intent of the rest of the document and courts do refer to it to try and understand the intent of the founding fathers.

See above. Find me one case of record from any federal court citing to the Preamble as the basis for a specific exercise of federal power.

Everything is not always black & white.

In this case, it is.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
A/C leads to pollution.)
How does A/C lead to pollution?
It uses electricity. As far as I can tell we don't have any completely clean source of electricity yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity

In any case, this is a side-issue. What, if any, entitlements do you think AMericans should have a right to?
Besides what's included in the Constitution:
- education (preschool - high school)
- order and tranquility as enforced by the local police department
- preventative health care
- proper waste/sewage disposal
- privacy in their personal lives
- ability to "marry" who they want

I'm sure more will come to mind later.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
81
I lived the first 16 years of my life w/o ac... how the hell is that even an option?
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Seriously, wtf? You earn what you get. Get the welfare state crap out of here.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
A/C leads to pollution.)
How does A/C lead to pollution?
It uses electricity. As far as I can tell we don't have any completely clean source of electricity yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity

Dams mess up local ecosystems and downriver ecosystems. Nuclear power drives up the temperature of the water source it uses for cooling, harming the ecosystems. I'm not saying we shouldn't use these sources of power or that people shouldn't be allowed to use A/C, but there is an evironmental cost to funding modern luxuries for everyone and their illegal mother.
 

TheSkinsFan

Golden Member
May 15, 2009
1,141
0
0
Hey kids, do you remember learning about the Era of Enlightenment in school? Welcome to the 21st century version... the Era of Entitlement.

:|
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
A/C leads to pollution.)
How does A/C lead to pollution?
It uses electricity. As far as I can tell we don't have any completely clean source of electricity yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity

Dams mess up local ecosystems and downriver ecosystems. Nuclear power drives up the temperature of the water source it uses for cooling, harming the ecosystems. I'm not saying we shouldn't use these sources of power or that people shouldn't be allowed to use A/C, but there is an evironmental cost to funding modern luxuries for everyone and their illegal mother.

So do floods.

I personally think anybody that is working fulltime at ANY job should be not only be able to afford air conditioning, carpet on the floor, and beef roast once a week, but have decent, affordable health care.

Anybody who disagrees with me is obviously nothing but an evil neocon. :p
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
A/C leads to pollution.)
How does A/C lead to pollution?
It uses electricity. As far as I can tell we don't have any completely clean source of electricity yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity
Dams mess up local ecosystems and downriver ecosystems. Nuclear power drives up the temperature of the water source it uses for cooling, harming the ecosystems. I'm not saying we shouldn't use these sources of power or that people shouldn't be allowed to use A/C, but there is an evironmental cost to funding modern luxuries for everyone and their illegal mother.
Every method of power generation is going to have a local environmental impact, but hydroelectricity doesn't generate pollution.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Who would've guessed Infohawk is a welfare queen.

Infohawk really seems to have changed. I remember him/her being much more liberal, but it's still early, so most of my memories are fuzzy! ;)

A few years back most of P&N was focused on Iraq. I have been and still am completely against the neocon agenda. Also, Bush and the right were really focusing on social issues where I also am more on the side of liberals. That's why you remember me as liberal.

Now economic issues are taking center stage on P&N and I trend towards free markets (might have changed on this a bit over the years) which is why some partisans are resorting to name-calling. If there's one thing that hasn't changed on P&N, it's that personal attacks are okay. ;)

sticks and stones will break your bones, but names will never hurt you!
 

tk149

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2002
7,253
1
0
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Infohawk
A/C leads to pollution.)
How does A/C lead to pollution?
It uses electricity. As far as I can tell we don't have any completely clean source of electricity yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity

You haven't factored in the materials and energy used to build and maintain hydroelectric plants and the transmission of power across miles and miles.

Nothing is free.