One Day in and Trump attacks the Planet

[Curious George]

The Articles of Confederation is still in effect as organic Law.

I don't think that link means what you think that link means.

 

[icehorse]

It wasn't meant to be a country. It was meant to be multiple sovereign countries (aka States) in a common federation

This is really interesting stuff - you ought to start a thread - seriously.

For the sake of discussion, let's say you're correct. Isn't the real pressing issue here the environment?

 

[buddhist]

Except it didn't work. So we changed it.

It's still in operation.

 

[Sha'irullah]

We have states rights. The principles of federalism are important. I don't think anyone disputes that. But certain aspects are far too important to remain in the exclusive domain of states rights. Especially when we are speaking of constitutionally protected rights. Or resources that are part of our country. Without a strong central government nothing prevents states from negatively impacting natural resources of other states. Nothing limits corporations from monopolizing industry and crushing the free market (or our version thereof).

Either for youth or magical thinking libertarians think everything will just work out. Bad news, it doesn't.

There is no version of the free market. Free market capitalism is free market capitalism. We have federal regulations to ensure corporate powers exists as persons and federal regulation to ensure methodical taxation on business. This is not free market capitalism it is crony capitalism at its core and a heavy mixture of welfare statism.

Free market = Laissez-faire

Nowhere do we have that. To even argue on anything else you said requires understanding of capitalism.

 

[Sha'irullah]

This is really interesting stuff - you ought to start a thread - seriously.

For the sake of discussion, let's say you're correct. Isn't the real pressing issue here the environment?

I would actually agree on this assertion, I would say the environment is a massive issue in why people in my political position remain so adamant on denouncing climate change.

 

[buddhist]

I don't think that link means what you think that link means.

I think you're the one that doesn't understand it. Check this out. The Articles is still Law and hasn't been repealed - it is foundational Law - along with the Declaration, Northwest Ordinance, and Constitution.

 

[Curious George]

There is no version of the free market. Free market capitalism is free market capitalism. We have federal regulations to ensure corporate powers exists as persons and federal regulation to ensure methodical taxation on business. This is not free market capitalism it is crony capitalism at its core and a heavy mixture of welfare statism.

Free market = Laissez-faire

Nowhere do we have that. To even argue on anything else you said requires understanding of capitalism.

A broken model that doesn't work. I understand we don't have a true free market, thank goodness. Hence why I said our version.

 

[buddhist]

This is really interesting stuff - you ought to start a thread - seriously.

I haven't because most have dismissed what I say, even though the evidence is there.

For the sake of discussion, let's say you're correct. Isn't the real pressing issue here the environment?

IMO the issue is that Trump, being the executive of the federation of these united States, has correctly revoked things which the federation has no authority over. If the States wish to grant it that authority, then constitutional amendments need to be enacted.

IMO each of the nation-States and their respective People are intelligent enough to handle their own environmental policies otherwise.

 

[icehorse]

I would actually agree on this assertion, I would say the environment is a massive issue in why people in my political position remain so adamant on denouncing climate change.

I don't quite understand your post, can you restate it? thanks!

 

[icehorse]

I haven't because most have dismissed what I say, even though the evidence is there.

IMO the issue is that Trump, being the leader of the federation of these united States, has correctly revoked things which the federation has no authority over. If the States wish to grant it that authority, then constitutional amendments need to be enacted.

IMO each of the nation-States and their respective People are intelligent enough to handle their own environmental policies otherwise.

At this stage, the states' economies have become closely intertwined, plus one state's pollution spills into neighbor states - it seems that even in your scenario, they'd be better off working together.

 

[Curious George]

I think you're the one that doesn't understand it. Check this out. The Articles is still Law and hasn't been repealed - it is foundational Law - along with the Declaration, Northwest Ordinance, and Constitution.

That they were originally part of the framework means naught about their current validity.

 

[buddhist]

At this stage, the states' economies have become closely intertwined, plus one state's pollution spills into neighbor states - it seems that even in your scenario, they'd be better off working together.

I don't deny that the nation-States should work together. I'm just stating that the federal government, as the child of the States, possesses no authority or mandate from those 50 national governments to do so.

 

[buddhist]

That they were originally part of the framework means naught about their current validity.

All four documents are found in the current publication of the U.S. Code. They are valid, and in force, otherwise they wouldn't be there.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I don't quite understand your post, can you restate it? thanks!

I am referring to the fact that a lot of us Anarcho-capitalists, libertarians and conservatives often deny climate change and environmental issues. I think we do it out of fear of giving legitimacy to a strong federal government.

I personally thing having a strong federal government does not change anything about it. Both parties lie and use environmental issues to manipulate their constituency.

 

[Sha'irullah]

A broken model that doesn't work. I understand we don't have a true free market, thank goodness. Hence why I said our version.

Ahhh, semantics! Nevermind then.

 

[Curious George]

All four documents are found in the current publication of the U.S. Code. They are valid, and in force, otherwise they wouldn't be there.

they are there because they are founding documents not because they are in force. The constitution superseded the articles of confederation.

 

[buddhist]

they are there because they are founding documents not because they are in force. The constitution superseded the articles of confederation.

They are there, because they are part of the current, in-force, U.S. Code.

Think of the Constitution as an Amendment of the Articles of Confederation, just like the Constitutional amendments altered the original text of the Constitution. Just because the Constitutional amendments exist doesn't mean the whole Constitution is wholly done away with, and just because the Constitution exist doesn't mean the Articles is wholly done away with either.

 

[Curious George]

All four documents are found in the current publication of the U.S. Code. They are valid, and in force, otherwise they wouldn't be there.

Well at least I am glad you are not charging down the u.s. constitution is invalid path. So, therefore you acknowledge that we needed something more than the articles of confederation gave. This was a stronger central government. Part of that was the Commerce Clause. Now the government has the authority to regulate pollution via the Commerce clause, the power to make and enforce treaties, and the power to do what is necessary and properror to enforce these powers.

 

[Curious George]

They are there, because they are part of the current, in-force, U.S. Code.

Think of the Constitution as an Amendment of the Articles of Confederation, just like the Constitutional amendments altered the original text of the Constitution. Just because the Constitutional amendments exist doesn't mean the whole Constitution is wholly done away with, and just because the Constitution exist doesn't mean the Articles is wholly done away with either.

I have heard this argument, and while the articles are certainly a valid source of guiding authority, they are not authority.

 

[buddhist]

Well at least I am glad you are not charging down the u.s. constitution is invalid path. So, therefore you acknowledge that we needed something more than the articles of confederation gave. This was a stronger central government. Part of that was the Commerce Clause. Now the government has the authority to regulate pollution via the Commerce clause, the power to make and enforce treaties, and the power to do what is necessary and properror to enforce these powers.

No, the plain reading & intent of the commerce clause is simply the delegated authority to regulate commerce (inter-nation trading & exchange of goods) between the 50 sovereign nations. Nothing more. Nothing to do with regulating pollution.