Quote:Well, first of all...  The Constitution puts the power in the hands of the people.  In theory, the republic creates a government that represents the will of the "majority".  Not the most wealthy, but the majority of citizens.  (that's the problem, of course)  One which Trump initially got the Republican riled up about.  

 

But if we are true Constitutionalists that find our values based on the Constitution of the United States, we all understand that the people (you know WE THE PEOPLE) already have the power and responsibility via our government.  

 

To say you don't trust our government means that you really don't want responsibility in the hands of the people.  You want the power in the hands of whatever constituency you've been duped by, unfotunately, you're duped by the Republicans which means you go against your best interests every time.  It's sad (in my opinion), but it's your choice.  In your case, especially since you've lived your entire life getting checks from the government either directly or indirectly, it's really sad to see how much you dislike a democratically representative government having the ability to make the decisions.  I mean, it's alot better than just having a few people tell you what to do without any input by you.  But I think that's a discussion for another day.

 

No, its the discussion for today.  Your narrative about the constitutional foundations of our democratic republic are incorrect.  A representative republic is based on the idea that the people should elect representatives that become more specialized and informed on the issues and thus can make day to day decisions about the inner working of the country more efficiently and more accurately than a random polling of the general citizenry.  This is designed to allow public input, but in the 6 years after a senator is elected, 2 years after a congressman is elected or within the 4 years of a presidential term there is not one word in the constitution that binds them to the will of the MAJORITY of citizens.  


 

One of the major draw backs of a representative republic is the fact that it essentially truncates the amount of people that you would have to bribe to influence the direction of the country away from the countries national interest. FL says that he doesn't trust the current ittiration of the federal government, its an acknowledgement that more often than not every two years a large portion of them make just enough campaign promises to affect a 95% retention rate and then as soon as they get back to the capital they discard those promises and govern according to the will of their donors. 


 

One of the things you hear me talk about when discussing private vs. public sector allocation of resources is REAL TIME ACCOUNTABILITY.  In the private sector if you screw up today you can be fired or sanctioned immediately (unless you belong to a teachers union.) In the political arena there is enough time for the national news cycle to regenerate before your next re-election.  


 

In terms of the employer mandate, I think you mentioned the history of it, which is accurate.  It was only because of WWII and the depleted labor force and strained federal government's inability to support the citizenship that was at home during the war that caused the employer benefit of healthcare to be enacted.  Which means, in a world without war, where the democratic republic is not overwhelmed by the military industrial complex, the cost of health care (along with other social programs) would be funded fully by the government.  Of course this means via taxes and nationalistic pride in helping your fellow US citizen.

 

it was more than that.  During WWII your hero enacted wage and price controls, WHICH NEVER WORK!  one way that employers went around the concept of wage controls was to offer other BENEFITS including health insurance. 


 

But we all know the failures of that.  The first being that republicans have been indoctrinated to not trust the government because of other coutnries failures.  It's such tripe.  But for whatever reason (dixie-crats, civil war, perhaps?) republicans have been brain washed to think that the government is out to get them and that they should hate it.  

 

Lol.  You talk about the constitution but you have no idea what it means and what it was written for.  Why did the founding fathers spend so much time restraining and limiting the power of the state that they were in the middle of creating?  because they understood that the nature of the state is to overgrow and consume resources at the expense of the citizens property and liberty.  


 

Moreover, the federal government has tried its hand at financial services in the past, social security medicare medicaid etc.  As a result, the private sector has demonstorably kicked its [BLEEP] in efficency, and rate of return and the country is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.  


 

Perhaps we should figure out a way to work within the government and do what's best for the majority, and not just worry about  businesses, especially since businesses have no loyalty to the USA.