Adan Stribble: Because then we would have a nation of annoying mindless hipsters.On second thought, maybe that wouldn't be so bad. Steve Jobs could convince the nation to do anything he wanted and we would have no more debates. Wait why does this sound familiar? Oh yeah, Hitler.
Eleni Mccier: because apple isn't funding 2 failed wars that the government has to pay for.
Irvin Guiles: Who needs the Government in health care?WAKE UP SHEEP PEOPLEHealth Insurance Company profits and the Democrats and Republicans that have received kickbacks for decades from them.Its the ONLY reason health care is so expensiveI negotiated my ACL repair with a surgeon instead of thru health insurance.I paid half the normal price and paid it off in 1 1/2 yearsOver 10 years later my knee is better than everONCE AGAIN GOVERNMENT GETS IN THE WAY FOR MOST OF YOUI have not needed a doctor visit in 3 yearsHe charged $52 dollars for a visitI go to a chiropractor 6 times a year at $40 a visit! I had a ring finger that I almost cut in half in 1997stitched up in emergency for $1200The ambulance dropped the cost of the trip from$900 to $450 is I could pay that amount immediatelyPaid those both off in 5 monthsI have saved about $50,000 in health insurance costs over the last 18 years by simply paying my own costs.Simple peopleGet government out of our lives and our health and we thriveThey get enough of our tax dollarsThey dont need our health insurance money in form of numerous "corporate kickbacks" - "Obamacare"...Show more
Catheryn Small: Apple more than likely get 36 billion dollars in tax breaks, besides, Obama probably has taken in more political money contribution from Apple already.
Rose Krouse: ...in General Welfare it mean for ALL AMERICANS...The Idiot in CHief and the Axis of Idiots Healthcare will only benefit 3% of Americans...Franklin said, "...the Constitution does not guarantee happiness, just the pursuit..." Or Madison, "...the question h! as been raised if a orphanage should burn down, should public ! monies be used to rebuild it. The answer is no..."
Autumn Vacio: Obama's skin color? Romney's money? Wow . . .how do you people get so smart and how in Gods name did you get to be the "major" parties. The candidates I have always supported may not be as popular with the MTV crowd or the Ken and Barbie news service but at least I get to use my brain when I vote.Oh ya the question . . .How many candidates (other than the two clowns we know about) are there and what are their names?...Show more
Toby Women: I'm a Republican so I'm better and smarter than a Democrat..... no wait a minute... I'm a Democrat so I'm better and smarter than a Republican. come on people, I don't care what you are, Republican or Democrat... vote for the best person.... and that may not be your party. So grow up and get over the fight.
Misty Vagle: Look up promote, provide, and enforce. You might find them to have different meanings.
Felipa Nosis: That is one of the most misund! erstood phrases in the Constitution. "To promote the general welfare" did not, and does not mean "Provide welfare". It means the government will promote an environment where people could prosper. People do not prosper when they live on handouts. The government promotes the general welfare by building highways, maintaining water courses and controlling airspace. Then there is law enforcement agencies and fire departments.People see the word "Welfare" in the constitution and the first thing they think is the government is there to give them a handout.And you should read the writings of the founding fathers. You would be surprised to learn what their intent was...and I bet it ain't what you assume it to have been....Show more
Lu Tiner: The founding fathers and the documents they wrote stipulate that rights are endowed by the creator, they are inalienable. If the government has to pass a law to provide you with something it is not a right. For instance, civil rights! /racial/sexual equality did not need legislation to grant rights that a! lready existed. The problem was existing law created inequality. The law was the problem, not the solution. The general welfare clause was provided to grant Congress sufficient authority to handle infrastructure. The previous American government, under the Articles of Confederation, had proven to be too weak. It could not collect taxes, raise the militia, or enforce trade law. The Federal Constitution was crafted to provide a rigid structure directing a stronger central government that would still yield to the nation-states and the people under it in all circumstances except those powers specifically laid out as being under its domain. Twisting the general welfare clause to take control of private interests is about as far from the intent as you can get....Show more
Coleman Petropoulos: Ask yourself: *IF* the proposed health-care program will be *so good*, why the president, his family and the Congress *will NOT* be on it...!!!!!!!!
Arnette Dominici: probably, B! ut I also think that KKK is a direct REPUBLICAN!
Melvin Nakama: I believe the Republicans are planning on going for the world record for most completely useless votes attempted for repealing legislation. earlier in the week, they voted to repeal healthcare for the 32 time.
Carmina Stickney: Apple doesnt have enough cash to pay for all the goverenment and its debts. Apple has about 80 billions dollars and the U.S. owes 14 Trillions dollars. It will take like 15 Apples to pay off the U.S. debt.
Olen Penhallurick: It does not need Apple. Any business owner could tell that Obama is spending recklessly, like each and every politician spends.
Boris Hadsall: Very good point. For the 1200 for-profit insurance companies in the U.S, to be so frightened of one little public plan component, I'm reminded of a pack of wild and rabid dobermans joining forces to defeat a Chihuahua puppy...lol. One questioner on Y!A used the analogy of the Post Office as a gov! ernment-run success story and then reminded people that UPS and Fed-Ex ! are for-profit competitors who seem to be doing just fine. There's a researcher website I found (Lee Fang July 31st 2009 @ 11:33 am) that gave details about who the lobbyists are behind the fake protests at Democrats' town halls and the backers of those lobbyists: Examples include right-wing Dick Armey (against reducing carbon emissions or reducing dependence on foreign oil) heads FreedomWorks (used to be Citizens for a Sound Economy/CSE)---a front company for DLA Piper (huge lobbying firm) who represents Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirate (UAE) and Ruler of Dubai (that's Dubai---the country that Bush wanted to hand over the security of our ports to); Another example: Right-wing lobbyists Tim Phillips, whose front company Americans for Prosperity is funded by Koch Family Foundations (oil industrialists with investments in for-profit insurance, pharmaceuticals, and other health-related entities). Phillips is former lobbyist ! partner with Republican extremist Ralph Reed, and he admitted on Rachel Maddow to busing Glenn Beck fans and Republican staffers into districts not their own to disrupt town hall meetings. Newt Gingrich's corporate-funded American Solutions for Winning the Futures (ASWF) provides tool kits of talking points (scripts) for the protestors and their goal is to scare voters, especially seniors, and to prevent civil discourse while the GOP right-wingers and their corporate sponsors flood the airwaves with attack ads. Don't let these greed-driven idiots fool you, people! Health Care Reform is, as the questioner says, "to promote (and also to protect) the general welfare" for all of us....Show more
Clemmie Burkleo: Because he doesn't wanna be embarrassed.. being the first president to have to ask assistance outside of the government.. he would be known as a hero for it, but he won't..
Carlee Tangaro: It looks like dumb Gov workers know NOTHING...for sure!
Delph! ine Cajka: Because Apple is sucks and charges it's customer way more th! an it should for any product except for the iPod
Toshiko Reimers: Oh oh, you quoted the Constitution and used the word "welfare"...here come the NEO-CONS to tell you that it didn't mean food stamps!!!! (Yes, neo-cons are THAT ignorant.)
Hope Lundmark: Not hardly. But nice try for a 5th grader.
Faustino Mellerson: Don't you want to sell your ethics cheaply to participate in political bigotry?Welcome aboard. The vast majority of us are ethical and don't hate half the country.You keep speaking up.Advice from an ethical JFK Democrat.
Robt Betker: No one is against health care reform. But, what's being proposed will only promote the general welfare of the govt. Go ahead, hit the ol thumbs down, but your question is meant to bait anyway. No way can you support what you just said.I think that giving everyone, and I mean everyone, a million $ would go a long way to promoting the general welfare. It's not a fiscally sound idea. Neither is the current he! alth care proposal....Show more
Granville Stray: Neither Obama or Romney own a party. in fact technically, neither is a candidate for 2012 election as the parties have not held nominating conventions yet. Obama is a shoo-in, but Romney will have to face Ron Paul in a contested convention, so it truly is not decided yet, wait for the fat lady to sing.the presidential election is an electoral election. each state decides who goes to the electoral college to make the presidential decision. because of that, you will see more parties with candidates in some states than others, and perhaps an independent or two. only the Republicans and Democrats will be in all 50 states. California always has a laundry list of presidential candidates on the ballot. if you like to waste a vote in order to have more choices, move to California....Show more
Ileen Oshell: General welfare just means 'making things as good as possible', and some believe the cons outweigh the pros when it c! omes to healtcare. The Constitution states that anything not listed in ! the Constitution speciffically as duties of th federal government is to be dealt with by the state governments, so healtcare is left up to the states.
Asley Quickle: I can't find it anywhere!
Star Gollnick: This is quite an unfair strawman argument. I doubt the "lady in PA." comment was against the health care reformation for the welfare of insurance companies. Like another answer suggested, hand outs do not always increase general welfare. Sometimes hand outs hinder the people. Idealistically, universal health care will benefit the people. Realistically, how obtainable would this be? Lets face it, the US government is hemorrhaging money. The revenue for 2010 is $2.3 trillion and the budget is $3.5 trillion. So how much will this plan add to the national budget? Many people say, "Increase the taxes." But keep in mind, taxing too much can hurt business or drive them to other countries - hindering the revenue. Overall, our $11 trillion dollar debt is a black clo! ud looming over our heads. With a global economy, this debt will hurt us and potentially the world. And if the US or US economy collapses, say good bye to "general welfare" as we know it. You can mock the people against this plan. But don't bring the Founding Fathers into this. I doubt they would support such reckless behavior....Show more
Alden Soldano: shh, they don't want to hear uncomfortable facts!
Autumn Vacio: The people who are saying it doesn't mean what it says remind me of the so called "Christians" who backed mr. Bush's Iraq War despite Jesus saying "Blessed Be The Peacemakers", holding that Jesus didn't mean what he said, either. They think of themselves as the only patriotic Americans but despise the Constitution its founded on. They are pathetic, really.
No comments:
Post a Comment