How much power should government have?

[American]

"To me... it appears that there have been differences of opinion and party differences, from the first establishment of government to the present day, and on the same question which now divides our own country; that these will continue through all future time; that every one takes his side in favor of the many, or of the few, according to his constitution, and the circumstances in which he is placed... that as we judge between the Claudii and the Gracchi, the Wentworths and the Hampdens of past ages, so of those among us whose names may happen to be remembered for awhile, the next generations will judge favorably or unfavorably according to the complexion of individual minds and the side they shall themselves have taken; that nothing new can be added to what has been said by others and will be said in every age in support of the conflicting opinions on government; and that wisdom and duty dictate an humble resignation to the verdict of our future peers." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1813. ME 13:283

"Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depositary of the public interests. In every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. Call them, therefore, Liberals and Serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, Whigs and Tories, Republicans and Federalists, Aristocrats and Democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still and pursue the same object. The last one of Aristocrats and Democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all." --Thomas Jefferson to Henry Lee, 1824. ME 16:73

This has been the question throughout the ages, and will remain the question forever. The Founders knew the ageless character of man, and how men think and behave in society. The question of how much power to five the government is fought on this board daily.

 

[joG]

This has been the question throughout the ages, and will remain the question forever. The Founders knew the ageless character of man, and how men think and behave in society. The question of how much power to five the government is fought on this board daily.

The tighter and more robust the control over the persons holding power is, the more power can be granted them.

 

[CMPancake]

I think the only responsibility of the Government should be to protect and serve it's citizens. The things we the people need from the Government is security, and the protection from monopolies. Without a strong government the country is weak but without people who can act against the government makes the country weaker.

 

[DaveFagan]

This has been the question throughout the ages, and will remain the question forever. The Founders knew the ageless character of man, and how men think and behave in society. The question of how much power to five the government is fought on this board daily.

The quotes define the present day 99% vs. 1%, although it is 1/10th of 1%. In this
day it is CORPORATE vs. LABOR, and CORPORATE has won. We are at their mercy,
and they have none. They have the power at all levels of gov't.

 

[WCH]

The quotes define the present day 99% vs. 1%, although it is 1/10th of 1%. In this
day it is CORPORATE vs. LABOR, and CORPORATE has won. We are at their mercy,
and they have none. They have the power at all levels of gov't.

Collectively we could ruin most corporations fairly easily...breaking their hold. The individuals who own those corps are another story. They can operate from a different angle.

 

[smb]

I remember reading somewhere (I don't know where off the top of my head) that American's by nature of culture and education generally over-simplify the complicated and over-complicate the simple. I think this thread is classic example of this. It would be nice to fit everyone into two boxes - those that think government should be more powerful and those that think government should be less powerful. That is an oversimplification. I believe both simultaneously. I believe the government should have more power to reign in profiteering, more power to socialize health care and health care delivery while at the same time I believe government should have less power to regulate behavior especially if they do not infringe upon other people. The government should have more power to regulate carbon emissions but less power to seize property. What the OP lacks is the understanding that each individual issue can have its own stance on government power and not necessarily be hypocritical.

 

[Thoreau72]

The quotes define the present day 99% vs. 1%, although it is 1/10th of 1%. In this
day it is CORPORATE vs. LABOR, and CORPORATE has won. We are at their mercy,
and they have none. They have the power at all levels of gov't.

To me, it's a coin toss as to which has more control over the federal government--Wall Street and corporations, or the Israeli government.

 

[Master PO]

the founders logic was this.......people were to be governed by states government, not the federal government.

the principle of the constitution was that if the federal government could not make laws in the life's liberty and property of the people, when it was impossible for the federal government to violate the rights of people

this was the argument madison and hamilton made to the anti federalist.

federalist 45- The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

 

[jet57]

This has been the question throughout the ages, and will remain the question forever. The Founders knew the ageless character of man, and how men think and behave in society. The question of how much power to five the government is fought on this board daily.

One of the best ways to reduce "government power" is to stop asking for government money.

If you don't borrow from the mob, they have no hold on you.

 

[Goshin]

Just barely enough...



... to secure the nation against invasion, to secure the rights of the people against oppression, and to keep such order as is necessary to maintain a functional society.



... would be my personal ideal.

 

[Master PO]

Just barely enough...



... to secure the nation against invasion, to secure the rights of the people against oppression, and to keep such order as is necessary to maintain a functional society.



... would be my personal ideal.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined....The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

 

[haymarket]

the founders logic was this.......people were to be governed by states government, not the federal government.

the principle of the constitution was that if the federal government could not make laws in the life's liberty and property of the people, when it was impossible for the federal government to violate the rights of people

this was the argument madison and hamilton made to the anti federalist.

federalist 45- The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

Sadly for that argument - the Constitution does otherwise and extends to the national government powers that permit them to pass laws in areas that you object to.

 

[Master PO]

Sadly for that argument - the Constitution does otherwise and extends to the national government powers that permit them to pass laws in areas that you object to.

no it does not, and your refuseal or inablity to post where in the constutution proves you wrong.

 

[Paschendale]

to secure the rights of the people against oppression

That takes a lot more power than you seem to think.

 

[haymarket]

no it does not, and your refuseal or inablity to post where in the constutution proves you wrong.

It is right where it has been for over two centuries now. Article I Section 8.

Same thing I gave you time after time after time in post after post after post in thread after thread after thread when you brought up this nonsense many many many other times.

 

[Master PO]

it is right where it has been for over two centuries now. Article i section 8.

Same thing i gave you time after time after time in post after post after post in thread after thread after thread when you brought up this nonsense many many many other times.

no its noT right there..please post the clause you are talking about instead of being vague.

 

[haymarket]

no its noT right there..please post the clause you are talking about instead of being vague.

I have done it over and over - do your own research......just do your own work.

See EB - how do you like it when the shoe is on the other foot? :lamo:roll::2wave:

 

[Master PO]

I have done it over and over - do your own research......just do your own work.

See EB - how do you like it when the shoe is on the other foot? :lamo:roll::2wave:

sorry no.... you have not POSTED the clause......you posted article and section...now post the clause.

 

[Geoist]

While many leftists today seem to support centralization of power, I believe decentralization is the best way to push progressive issues. There is too much money in DC to get anything done that actually benefits the People. Historically, states have often led the way. In the past it was women's suffrage (started in Wyoming). Today its marijuana legalization (started in Colorado) and gay marriage (Massachusetts).

 

[Master PO]

While many leftists today seem to support centralization of power, I believe decentralization is the best way to push progressive issues. There is too much money in DC to get anything done that actually benefits the People. Historically, states have often led the way. In the past it was women's suffrage (started in Wyoming). Today its marijuana legalization (started in Colorado) and gay marriage (Massachusetts).

the only way that would happen, is to reduce the powers of the federal government, and return them to the states.......but that will not happen has long as the states have no voice in the federal government[senate].

the federal government has pushed outside of its delegated powers of the constitution, because a stated controlled senate is no longer there to CHECK the power of the federal government.

 

[Geoist]

the only way that would happen, is to reduce the powers of the federal government, and return them to the states.......but that will not happen has long as the states have no voice in the federal government[senate].

the federal government has pushed outside of its delegated powers of the constitution, because a stated controlled senate is no longer there to CHECK the power of the federal government.

All we need are states to ignore federal law and pass their own policies. We are seeing that with marijuana legalization. While DC may not like that, there is little they can actually do short of physical force.

 

[Master PO]

All we need are states to ignore federal law and pass their own policies. We are seeing that with marijuana legalization. While DC may not like that, there is little they can actually do short of physical force.

that is correct........if the states would thump there noses at Washington, and tell them no, there is very little the federal government could do, but it will not work with a single state.

 

[haymarket]

sorry no.... you have not POSTED the clause......you posted article and section...now post the clause.

All the damn clauses EB - all the damn clauses empower the Congress to have power.

THE CONGRESS SHALL HAVE THE POWER

Every clause after that in Article I Section 8 begins with that phrase and giving of power to the US Congress as the law making body of the national government. Even your demigod James Madison knew that as he had a hand in writing it.

That is what it says if you only READ with your own eyes and not your heart and your beliefs.

 

[Master PO]

All the damn clauses EB - all the damn clauses empower the Congress to have power.

THE CONGRESS SHALL HAVE THE POWER

Every clause after that in Article I Section 8 begins with that phrase and giving of power to the US Congress as the law making body of the national government. Even your demigod James Madison knew that as he had a hand in writing it.

That is what it says if you only READ with your own eyes and not your heart and your beliefs.

:lamo

this is funny.....

the powers of congress are national powers, they are not powers which concern themselves with lives liberty and property of the people...those are state powers

article 1 section 8 clause 18

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.


federalist 45:

federal power---The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.


state power- Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

 

[faithful_servant]

I remember reading somewhere (I don't know where off the top of my head) that American's by nature of culture and education generally over-simplify the complicated and over-complicate the simple. I think this thread is classic example of this. It would be nice to fit everyone into two boxes - those that think government should be more powerful and those that think government should be less powerful. That is an oversimplification. I believe both simultaneously. I believe the government should have more power to reign in profiteering, more power to socialize health care and health care delivery while at the same time I believe government should have less power to regulate behavior especially if they do not infringe upon other people. The government should have more power to regulate carbon emissions but less power to seize property. What the OP lacks is the understanding that each individual issue can have its own stance on government power and not necessarily be hypocritical.

While I disagree with the examples you gave, I do agree with your opening point. To simply state that the government should have more or less power is grossly over-simplifying the issue. Person liberty, security, economics, crime, int'l relations, etc. can be argued for or against more power.