Alright Constitutional Scholars...

[rebeccajo 14]

Gary -

I'm really not trying to be mean here, but I just want you to think about something.

You bought your house with a VA loan (if my memory serves me correctly). That gives you 100% financing and some other perks.

That's a program borne out of the Veterans Administration.

I guess some of us could say that's an entitlement. I mean - we should be taking care of those who serve our country, but going so far as to lend them money to buy a home?

You see what I am saying?

Edited May 23, 2009 by rebeccajo

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary -

I'm really not trying to be mean here, but I just want you to think about something.

You bought your house with a VA loan (if my memory serves me correctly). That gives you 100% financing and some other perks.

That's a program borne out of the Veterans Administration.

I guess some of us could say that's an entitlement. I mean - we should be taking care of those who serve our country, but going so far as to lend them money to buy a home?

You see what I am saying?

I'm wondering if his parents are collecting Social Security and are on Medicare?

[GaryC 7]

Gary -

I'm really not trying to be mean here, but I just want you to think about something.

You bought your house with a VA loan (if my memory serves me correctly). That gives you 100% financing and some other perks.

That's a program borne out of the Veterans Administration.

I guess some of us could say that's an entitlement. I mean - we should be taking care of those who serve our country, but going so far as to lend them money to buy a home?

You see what I am saying?

The VA falls under the federal government because it is part of the military. I think you all have me wrong. I don't have a problem with entitilments, I just feel that it is a job for each state and not the federal government. You can laugh at me all you want but I firmly believe that the federal government has overstepped its constitutional authority by implementing them. I would rather see the states doing it.

[scandal 951]

Gary -

I'm really not trying to be mean here, but I just want you to think about something.

You bought your house with a VA loan (if my memory serves me correctly). That gives you 100% financing and some other perks.

That's a program borne out of the Veterans Administration.

I guess some of us could say that's an entitlement. I mean - we should be taking care of those who serve our country, but going so far as to lend them money to buy a home?

You see what I am saying?

The VA falls under the federal government because it is part of the military. I think you all have me wrong. I don't have a problem with entitilments, I just feel that it is a job for each state and not the federal government. You can laugh at me all you want but I firmly believe that the federal government has overstepped its constitutional authority by implementing them. I would rather see the states doing it.

The VA is not part of Department of Defense and never has been.

The VA is its own Cabinet level department, and has been since the Reagan Administration. Prior to that it had been part of the Interior Department.

The VA was also never envisioned by the Founders as a federal government function. It is not mentioned in the Constitution and you will find no reference to it there. The concept of the government having some responsibility for veterans care arose during the Civil War, and the VA itself as an organized department began in the 1930s.

You are latching onto the term "entitlements" as though it has some deep legal significance. It does not.

The phrase "entitlement program" simply means a government program established to hand out funds or other benefits to recipients. That includes Social Security and Medicare. It also includes SCHIP and Medicaid. And RJ is right, it also includes VA. The VHA, the Veteransl Health Administration which is a division of the VA, operates hospitals and provides health care and disability care to veterans across the country with an operating budget of over $40 billion. That most certainly is a federal entitlement program, by anyone's measure.

[GaryC 7]

Gary -

I'm really not trying to be mean here, but I just want you to think about something.

You bought your house with a VA loan (if my memory serves me correctly). That gives you 100% financing and some other perks.

That's a program borne out of the Veterans Administration.

I guess some of us could say that's an entitlement. I mean - we should be taking care of those who serve our country, but going so far as to lend them money to buy a home?

You see what I am saying?

The VA falls under the federal government because it is part of the military. I think you all have me wrong. I don't have a problem with entitilments, I just feel that it is a job for each state and not the federal government. You can laugh at me all you want but I firmly believe that the federal government has overstepped its constitutional authority by implementing them. I would rather see the states doing it.

The VA is not part of Department of Defense and never has been.

The VA is its own Cabinet level department, and has been since the Reagan Administration. Prior to that it had been part of the Interior Department.

The VA was also never envisioned by the Founders as a federal government function. It is not mentioned in the Constitution and you will find no reference to it there. The concept of the government having some responsibility for veterans care arose during the Civil War, and the VA itself as an organized department began in the 1930s.

You are latching onto the term "entitlements" as though it has some deep legal significance. It does not.

The phrase "entitlement program" simply means a government program established to hand out funds or other benefits to recipients. That includes Social Security and Medicare. It also includes SCHIP and Medicaid. And RJ is right, it also includes VA. The VHA, the Veteransl Health Administration which is a division of the VA, operates hospitals and provides health care and disability care to veterans across the country with an operating budget of over $40 billion. That most certainly is a federal entitlement program, by anyone's measure.

Ok, It is a benefit derived from military service. Since the military is part of the constitution then any derivitives from that should be part of the federal government. Happy now? As for the rest, entitilment programs such as SS, medicare and health have no business being a part of the federal government. Those should belong to the states to run. You still cannot show me where it is allowed no matter how much you dance. It is only allowed because 9 guys in robes decided to get creative with the constitution. To hell with the federal government.

[Heracles 417]

Are you guys seriously going to sit here and debate whether something is or is not mandated by the constitution.

What about analyzing and studying what works and what does not? Once again, the constitution was written in the 1700's. Using it to determine whether something should be federalized or not is ridiculous by any stretch.

Sound research and debate is what should be used to determine what is the best approach to run something. Not a document written in a totally different era. Never in my life have I ever heard people discuss whether something should be public or private, relying solely on the basis of the country's founding fathers.

I guess Rob and Mel's view about people turning on autopilot once the constitution is mentioned turns out to be true. Some people need to read up on the concept of ratification and change.

I also recommend a book called "Who moved my cheese".

Edited May 23, 2009 by Constellation

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Are you guys seriously going to sit here and debate whether something is or is not mandated by the constitution.

What about analyzing and studying what works and what does not? Once again, the constitution was written in the 1700's. Using it to determine whether something should be federalized or not is ridiculous by any stretch.

Sound research and debate is what should be used to determine what is the best approach to run something. Not a document written in a totally different era. Never in my life have I ever heard people discuss whether something should be public or private, relying solely on the basis of the country's founding fathers.

I guess Rob and Mel's view about people turning on autopilot once the constitution is mentioned turns out to be true. Some people need to read up on the concept of ratification and change.

I also recommend a book called "Who moved my cheese".

A document??????? Yeah, just a piece of paper? My GOD!

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Gary -

I'm really not trying to be mean here, but I just want you to think about something.

You bought your house with a VA loan (if my memory serves me correctly). That gives you 100% financing and some other perks.

That's a program borne out of the Veterans Administration.

I guess some of us could say that's an entitlement. I mean - we should be taking care of those who serve our country, but going so far as to lend them money to buy a home?

You see what I am saying?

I'm wondering if his parents are collecting Social Security and are on Medicare?

You definately wont be under your king!

[Heracles 417]

Ok, It is a benefit derived from military service. Since the military is part of the constitution then any derivitives from that should be part of the federal government. Happy now? As for the rest, entitilment programs such as SS, medicare and health have no business being a part of the federal government. Those should belong to the states to run. You still cannot show me where it is allowed no matter how much you dance. It is only allowed because 9 guys in robes decided to get creative with the constitution. To hell with the federal government.

You're right. They should be on a state level. That is just common sense. Furthermore, SS should be privatized and expanded into a 401K style scheme.

Unemployment should be a federal benefit. As with the pension but then again the age pension is not offered in the US. Many would rather the elderly just roll in a ditch and die. So when money hungry corrupt bastards bankrupt a company, along with your retirement account, you should just roll into a ditch and die. Hence the need for federal protection too, as well as benefits.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Constellation

[Heracles 417]

A document??????? Yeah, just a piece of paper? My GOD!

It's not holy man. Come on. No one is saying to use it as toilet paper but you cannot sit here and take it word for word and say well 300 years ago they thought this so we should still do the same.

Otherwise this country is going to end up like Chrysler. People here are already dirt poor. Americans escaped the British only to be enslaved by the wealthy and powerful in their own country. Another example, the constitution protecting and promoting people pop over to have a child to gain citizenship. The current constitution has so many loopholes you could drive a train through it. It not only protects criminals but organized crime too. Just needs modernizing.

Australia had the same issue with baby popping immigrants. A simple ratification changed their constitution overnight.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Constellation

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Entitlements? Nobody is entitled to anything! cut your own road!

[Heracles 417]

Entitlements? Nobody is entitled to anything! cut your own road!

Rogue come on. How can you do that when the system is not equitable? I agree with you but the system has to be fair for this to occur. Like it is in Australia where everyone gets paid a fair wage. Therefore, it is up to each individual to make it happen. How is someone on minimum wage going to succeed? Not going to happen. Minimum wage is about $409 a week there. At least something to live on. You also have the benefit of not having to worry about health care.

It actually angers me to see so many good honest people working hard only to be exploited and paid peanuts. The rich don't need to earn $3 billion a year. they should earn $2 billion and pay their share back to the country. After all, it is not as if they are going to defend you in a time of war. They are going to pull a Cheney and buy their way out of going to war (eg Vietnam).

Edited May 23, 2009 by Constellation

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Entitlements? Nobody is entitled to anything! cut your own road!

Obama said we are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

[scandal 951]

Entitlements? Nobody is entitled to anything! cut your own road!

Obama said we are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Actually I thought he said we're entitled to one bourbon, one scotch, and one beer?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Entitlements? Nobody is entitled to anything! cut your own road!

Rogue come on. How can you do that when the system is not equitable? I agree with you but the system has to be fair for this to occur. Like it is in Australia where everyone gets paid a fair wage. Therefore, it is up to each individual to make it happen. How is someone on minimum wage going to succeed? Not going to happen. Minimum wage is about $409 a week there. At least something to live on. You also have the benefit of not having to worry about health care.

It actually angers me to see so many good honest people working hard only to be exploited and paid peanuts. The rich don't need to earn $3 billion a year. they should earn $2 billion and pay their share back to the country. After all, it is not as if they are going to defend you in a time of war. They are going to pull a Cheney and buy their way out of going to war (eg Vietnam).

I know what I'm worth! Of course if I'm startin out with a new employer I might take less, but minimum wage? Thats for teenagers.

Its all about the skills bud. Skills come with age!

Entitlements? Nobody is entitled to anything! cut your own road!

Obama said we are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Actually I thought he said we're entitled to one bourbon, one scotch, and one beer?

Get your shot glass out i need to piss!