Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) The Planet Money Presidential Platform (Read 4522 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #120 - Feb 14th, 2017 at 8:09am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 6:03pm:
..To establish Post Offices and Roads"
[/i]
When this was written, there was no such thing as a "Highway" So any road that is used by the US Postal Service could be considered compliant with this clause.

Its shaky, for sure, but it will hold up to scrutiny in a Court of Law.

OK, Congress can authorize construction of a road to anywhere that can't currently be reached by USPS employees...

In fact, the need for the Post Office has passed, as has the need to construct roads for Postal access.

The construction of "federal" highways such as the interstate system never passed the Constitutional smell test as "postal roads" to begin with. That's why they were sold as a 'national defense' project.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #121 - Feb 14th, 2017 at 8:14am
Print Post  
merkelstan wrote on Feb 14th, 2017 at 2:13am:
Canals, not highways were the first major transportation projects in the US. Early 'infrastructure' development began shortly after signing the constitution - but guess what? It wasn't the job of the Federal Govt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_turnpikes_and_canals_in_the_United_Stat...
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/detoc/transport/canal.html

There followed a period when there was a rash of crony-corporatist canal-building by state legislatures that generated so much corruption that almost all of them ended-up forbidding it in their constitution. I don't have a reference to that handy unfortunately. But I recall Thomas DiLorenzo talking about it in a couple of Mises.org lectures. 

Jeff has already explained why the 'general welfare' clause wasn't designed to allow for *any* Federal Govt. activity, but to further qualify and restrict the activities pursued under the enumerated powers of the constitution to only things that would benefit the whole nation (as opposed to specific groups)..
Thank you.
Construction of our railroad system involved a lot of corruption and scandalous behavior by the national and state governments too, resulting in the creation of crony capitalist railroad Barons.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4474
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #122 - Feb 14th, 2017 at 9:02pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Feb 14th, 2017 at 8:09am:
OK, Congress can authorize construction of a road to anywhere that can't currently be reached by USPS employees...

In fact, the need for the Post Office has passed, as has the need to construct roads for Postal access.

The construction of "federal" highways such as the interstate system never passed the Constitutional smell test as "postal roads" to begin with. That's why they were sold as a 'national defense' project.

Woah woah woah now.  USPS utilizes all public roadways to deliver the mail. And I see USPS big rigs on the Interstate highways.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the roads built for Postal use can be used the Postal Service exclusively.

When USPS uses a specific roadway in their business of delivering mail, said roadway can be considered a "Postal" road, and its constuction can be authorized by Congress.

I know you said the interstate highway network was sold as a means of transporting military personnel and weaponry - and that may very well be true - but that is not the "legal" purpose of the highway network.

The Constitution made no provisions for Congress to build Military Roads.  It DID make provisions for roadways to be built for the use of the Postal Service.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #123 - Feb 15th, 2017 at 6:45am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 14th, 2017 at 9:02pm:
Woah woah woah now.  USPS utilizes all public roadways to deliver the mail. And I see USPS big rigs on the Interstate highways.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the roads built for Postal use can be used the Postal Service exclusively.

When USPS uses a specific roadway in their business of delivering mail, said roadway can be considered a "Postal" road, and its constuction can be authorized by Congress.

I know you said the interstate highway network was sold as a means of transporting military personnel and weaponry - and that may very well be true - but that is not the "legal" purpose of the highway network.

The Constitution made no provisions for Congress to build Military Roads.  It DID make provisions for roadways to be built for the use of the Postal Service.

If roads are available for the delivery of junk mail and packages, the national government doesn't need to do anything. There isn't any Constitutional authorization to nationalize roads whenever a mail carrier drives on them.
The authority is to provide roads for mail delivery where none exist.

The Constitution doesn't authorize building advanced fighter jets either, it just happens to fall under the broad umbrella of national defense. Did we really need (and do we still need) an interstate highway system for national defense? Probably not, but times have changed, so it's now permissible to claim that the interstate highway system is for the general Welfare.

Which is still a result of an incorrect reading of the Constitution.

"In order to provide for the general Welfare and preserve the Blessings of Liberty, the government shall have the power to provide for the general Welfare" is bad form and structure., as well as being one of those grants of general power people were assured repeatedly did not exist in the Constitution.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
AlayneLeung
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 356
Joined: Mar 20th, 2015
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #124 - Feb 26th, 2017 at 4:21pm
Print Post  
Let's also remember that the United Nations wants to very soon impose a global treaty progressive income tax on rich United States citizens and also on rich United States corporations and also onto rich citizens & rich corporations of other places of earth, so if you don't want to pay that tax, then you'll probably want that $1M idea of mine to become law, and Lou Dobbs of CNN had said some years ago that the United Nations wants to impose that global tax treaty on the rich of earth.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #125 - Feb 26th, 2017 at 5:06pm
Print Post  
AlayneLeung wrote on Feb 26th, 2017 at 4:21pm:
Let's also remember that the United Nations...

The world looks very divided to me right now...

Is there a list of the nations that are united?

Do you know why they have united?

Should I guard my wallet and my asshole?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4474
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #126 - Feb 26th, 2017 at 8:56pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Feb 26th, 2017 at 5:06pm:
The world looks very divided to me right now...

Is there a list of the nations that are united?

Do you know why they have united?

Should I guard my wallet and my asshole?

There are many alliances forming up now.
Brazil, Russia, India, China, South America and Australia [BRICSA] have formed a trading alliance so they may use their own currencies instead of the US Dollar.  Which benefits these countries greatly because money is lost when conversion to different currencies is necessary.

And of course, there's another even larger trade alliance - the TPP which includes  Australia, Brunei, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam, Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Peru.

The US was to be included in the TPP, but Congress never oficially ratified it, so Trump withdrew the US from the alliance.  Good thing, too - it would have hurt the American workers by eliminating import tariffs from all the participating countries. TPP would have removed leverage from the US, putting us at a disadvantage.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #127 - Feb 27th, 2017 at 7:54am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 26th, 2017 at 8:56pm:
The US was to be included in the TPP, but Congress never oficially ratified it, so Trump withdrew the US from the alliance.  Good thing, too - it would have hurt the American workers by eliminating import tariffs from all the participating countries. TPP would have removed leverage from the US, putting us at a disadvantage.

I am puzzled that you can't see the real benefits of free trade and continue to cheer for centrally planned government managed trade.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
merkelstan
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 618
Joined: Jan 22nd, 2017
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #128 - Feb 27th, 2017 at 7:54am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 26th, 2017 at 8:56pm:
- it would have hurt the American workers by eliminating import tariffs from all the participating countries. TPP would have removed leverage from the US, putting us at a disadvantage.


I'm still struggling with the whole idea of 'protectionist' tariffs.

On the one hand you have the argument that a high wage country can't compete with low-wage countries, without putting stiff tariffs on the imports from the low wage countries. "Without the import tariff, the jobs go to the lower-wage countries."

On the other hand you have the Comparative Advantage argument, and the analogy of import tariffs being equivalent to self-imposed economic sanctions. (Why else do nations impose embargoes in order to punish other countries?)  In addition to this is the argument that real wages (income vs. cost of goods) only rise from increases in productivity caused by capital investment. In other words, the person operating the backhoe gets paid more than the guys doing the same jobs with shovels only because of the capital that flowed into building the backhoe and training him has increased his productivity many times over the shovel guys.

The situation is further complicated by the US issuing the world reserve currency, which as Schiff puts it, enables the US to export printed paper notes and receive real goods and services in return.

I'm sorry i can't be more useful in this question, but I thought I'd mention some of the arguments people have made..
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Reply #129 - Feb 27th, 2017 at 8:16am
Print Post  
merkelstan wrote on Feb 27th, 2017 at 7:54am:
I'm still struggling with the whole idea of 'protectionist' tariffs.

On the one hand you have the argument that a high wage country can't compete with low-wage countries, without putting stiff tariffs on the imports from the low wage countries. "Without the import tariff, the jobs go to the lower-wage countries."

On the other hand you have the Comparative Advantage argument, and the analogy of import tariffs being equivalent to self-imposed economic sanctions. (Why else do nations impose embargoes in order to punish other countries?)  In addition to this is the argument that real wages (income vs. cost of goods) only rise from increases in productivity caused by capital investment. In other words, the person operating the backhoe gets paid more than the guys doing the same jobs with shovels only because of the capital that flowed into building the backhoe and training him has increased his productivity many times over the shovel guys.

The situation is further complicated by the US issuing the world reserve currency, which as Schiff puts it, enables the US to export printed paper notes and receive real goods and services in return.

I'm sorry i can't be more useful in this question, but I thought I'd mention some of the arguments people have made..

That's useful.

Being mostly simple minded, I keep asking, how can the same people who have driven us into our current fiscal and monetary mess that promises our children and grandchildren a lifetime of high taxes to pay for it all possibly make good decisions about trade?

Many of these 'lawmakers' don't have the faintest idea how much food costs, but they are ever willing to screw around subsidizing and/or prohibiting the growing of all sorts of different foodstuffs...

Most of these 'lawmakers' don't have any idea of what it takes to get a business started (or maintain a business), but they are willing to listen to business lobbyists tell them how to manage trade... And they ask us to believe it's all for for our benefit, and things would have been even worse if they hadn't passed the laws the lobbyists wanted them to. Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › The Planet Money Presidential Platform
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy