All the rest is just socialist crap that's been tacked on, mostly by (and since) FDR.
Well, that makes your world-view abundantly clear...
I seriously doubt, however, that you'd last very long without the federal govt providing more than the local defence installation.
Why don't YOU pump your money into cancer research.
This survival-of-the-fittest mentality is why the US is doing (in real terms, not monetary or superpower-ish) so poorly. A lot of the rest of the world's governments are actually trying to improve the human condition; they've realized that that benefits everyone. The US was founded on DIY principles; that experiment is failing miserably, and the US is powerful enough that it's taking down others with it into the abyss.
You're just saying that you wish the country was founded more like, say, contemporary France or Sweden. But it wasn't.
If only...
The country was founded on the backs of slaves too; thankfully, that ended. Times change.
The govt's purpose is to protect citizens from foreign threats? So, you don't think govt should fund research into curing/preventing the major diseases such as cancer, AIDS, heart attacks? Govt's shouldn't set drinking water standards? Shouldn't make or enforce domestic laws banning, say, murder, theft, rape? FEMA shouldn't exist?
Govt's job is to provide services to its citizens. Some of that is defence from external threats. Defence against societal and environmental threats are also important. And, giving the govt's limited resources, all these need to be prioritized and funded according to their relative probabilities.
Nobody has made a rational argument that terrorist organizations could or would have the ability to detonate a nuke in any city. States such as Iran or Iraq maybe could do it. Their targets would probably be in Israel, however, not in US or UK. And they wouldn't have the ability to accurately hit a target from halfway around the globe anyway.
So, given that a nuclear threat is rationally placed at low probability, it makes far more sense for the govt to spend money on societal and environment threat defences.
Like shoring up levees in New Orleans. Like pumping money into cancer/heart disease/AIDS research. Like mandating and enforcing EPA standards. Like helping the poorest members of society.
These have all been historically underfunded in the US, to the benefit of the DoD to protect from vague, sometimes incorrect, and grossly overestimated external threats.
But at least temporarily secret court proceedings are better than no proceedings at all, or those which are farcical at best, and now (thankfully) ruled illegal.
America creates anti-Americanism by being so un-American.
Go back and read Darwin and modern evolutionary theories. Evolution doesn't demand that "unfit" organisms cease to exist. It talks about "on average" and "tendancies", not absolutes.
Besides, if the rest of the world also had lousy/non-existant sight and smell, there's no competitive disadvantage wrt sight and smell, so other factors would be at play. It's like saying that humans are bad at mind-reading, so we should have been wiped out by now...
Right.. because using the F word in a debate is oh so refined, and throwing people out of your "free" country because they don't agree with you is so progressive.
Take a look in the mirror. Maybe the French ( and the rest of the world for that matter ) see something you don't...
Slashdot Mirror
All the rest is just socialist crap that's been tacked on, mostly by (and since) FDR.
Well, that makes your world-view abundantly clear...
I seriously doubt, however, that you'd last very long without the federal govt providing more than the local defence installation.
Why don't YOU pump your money into cancer research.
This survival-of-the-fittest mentality is why the US is doing (in real terms, not monetary or superpower-ish) so poorly. A lot of the rest of the world's governments are actually trying to improve the human condition; they've realized that that benefits everyone. The US was founded on DIY principles; that experiment is failing miserably, and the US is powerful enough that it's taking down others with it into the abyss.
You're just saying that you wish the country was founded more like, say, contemporary France or Sweden. But it wasn't.
If only...
The country was founded on the backs of slaves too; thankfully, that ended. Times change.
The govt's purpose is to protect citizens from foreign threats? So, you don't think govt should fund research into curing/preventing the major diseases such as cancer, AIDS, heart attacks? Govt's shouldn't set drinking water standards? Shouldn't make or enforce domestic laws banning, say, murder, theft, rape? FEMA shouldn't exist?
Govt's job is to provide services to its citizens. Some of that is defence from external threats. Defence against societal and environmental threats are also important. And, giving the govt's limited resources, all these need to be prioritized and funded according to their relative probabilities.
Nobody has made a rational argument that terrorist organizations could or would have the ability to detonate a nuke in any city. States such as Iran or Iraq maybe could do it. Their targets would probably be in Israel, however, not in US or UK. And they wouldn't have the ability to accurately hit a target from halfway around the globe anyway.
So, given that a nuclear threat is rationally placed at low probability, it makes far more sense for the govt to spend money on societal and environment threat defences.
Like shoring up levees in New Orleans.
Like pumping money into cancer/heart disease/AIDS research.
Like mandating and enforcing EPA standards.
Like helping the poorest members of society.
These have all been historically underfunded in the US, to the benefit of the DoD to protect from vague, sometimes incorrect, and grossly overestimated external threats.
A similar resolution has been on the ballot for a few years for MSFT. Never gets anywhere.
Yes, secret trials make me very nervous...
But at least temporarily secret court proceedings are better than no proceedings at all, or
those which are farcical at best, and now (thankfully) ruled illegal.
America creates anti-Americanism by being so un-American.
Go back and read Darwin and modern evolutionary theories. Evolution doesn't demand that "unfit" organisms cease to exist. It talks about "on average" and "tendancies", not absolutes.
Besides, if the rest of the world also had lousy/non-existant sight and smell, there's no competitive disadvantage wrt sight and smell, so other factors would be at play. It's like saying that humans are bad at mind-reading, so we should have been wiped out by now...
Right.. because using the F word in a debate is oh so refined, and throwing people out of your "free" country because they don't agree with you is so progressive.
Take a look in the mirror. Maybe the French ( and the rest of the world for that matter ) see something you don't...