Who pulls the government's strings?

[fmccap]

That's nice, but to expect representatives to read every page of every bill is still foolish.

Why is it foolish???? That is there job. If they don't have to read bills what are they supposed to do?

[RangerM]

That's nice, but to expect representatives to read every page of every bill is still foolish.

Just curious SUV, when you got your Chrysler 300, did you read the loan papers? If so, why?

 

(Intellectually) I understand where you're coming from, in that it would be difficult to digest 1000+ pages of text, however when we're talking about what would affect the lives of every person in the country, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect that the person voting to decide to implement it or not has read (and completely understands) the text? How easy is it to alter the meaning of a passage by changing something as simple as a period to a comma? (example: 100.000 is not the same as 100,000)

 

People lament when contracts have small print, indicating that people understand "the devil's in the details", but I see a diminished concern for this in your post regarding something as important as national law.

 

Please explain.

[suv_guy_19]

Just curious SUV, when you got your Chrysler 300, did you read the loan papers? If so, why?

 

Nope. I went through them, so that I understood the points though.

 

My point is that reading the entire bill is the job of certain parts of congress and probably more of the senate. Someone has to read it, bot not everyone. People in government have far too much to do to be able to read every bill.

[RangerM]

Nope. I went through them, so that I understood the points though.

So, when you signed your name promising to fulfill the obligations contained within the loan papers, how did you know that there was nothing with which you disagreed? What (or who) did you put your faith in?

People in government have far too much to do.......

What do people in government (specifically the legislature who votes on these bills) have to do that is more important than knowing what they're voting for? Isn't making law their purpose for being there?

[suv_guy_19]

What (or who) did you put your faith in?

 

I believe it was the Royal Bank I put my faith in that particular time.

 

What do people in government (specifically the legislature who votes on these bills) have to do that is more important than knowing what they're voting for? Isn't making law their purpose for being there?

 

 

Yes, making the law is their purpose for being there. They also have many other things that need doing. They have constituents to take care of, lobbyists to keep happy, etc. There are already committees set up to study the bills. The representatives have staffs that study the bill and inform them of the things they will and won't like. For them to sit down and read it would be redundant.

[fordxer]

Nope. I went through them, so that I understood the points though.

 

My point is that reading the entire bill is the job of certain parts of congress and probably more of the senate. Someone has to read it, bot not everyone. People in government have far too much to do to be able to read every bill.

Again, I rest my case.

[suv_guy_19]

You can rest whatever case you want. I've spent a long time studying government.

[Floyd Lawson]

You can rest whatever case you want. I've spent a long time studying government.

How much is a long time?

[suv_guy_19]

I consider 7 years to be a great deal of time.

[Floyd Lawson]

I consider 7 years to be a great deal of time.

It's all in your perspective.

[suv_guy_19]

I suppose it is. I spend a great deal of the day on subjects of interest though, and political happenings and government are at the front.

Edited July 31, 2009 by suv_guy_19

[RangerM]

I consider 7 years to be a great deal of time.

Given that it's about one-third of your life, I can understand.

 

Of course, the lack of life experience is also a hindrance.

[fmccap]

Yes, making the law is their purpose for being there. They also have many other things that need doing. They have constituents to take care of, lobbyists to keep happy, etc. There are already committees set up to study the bills. The representatives have staffs that study the bill and inform them of the things they will and won't like. For them to sit down and read it would be redundant.

"lobbyists to keep happy" LOL They should write a bill to get rid of them.

 

For having 7 years of studying under your belt makes me wonder from whom you studied. It took me 2 minutes of studying to find out you were wrong.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

 

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

 

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

 

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

 

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

 

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

 

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

 

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

 

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

 

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

 

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

 

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

 

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

 

To provide and maintain a Navy;

 

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

 

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

 

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

 

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.

[suv_guy_19]

Where does it say that they have to read bills line by line?

[Edstock]

It's all in your perspective.

It certainly is. Depending on the mind, seven years can be used to acquire extensive knowledge, while another mind that has been around longer may not have absorbed much at all; that's why attempts at patronizing by inquiring length of study can be viewed as evasive obfuscation, and not really germain to the point of discussion. Capice?

 

Seven years is a long time to study any subject. Law school is 3 to 4 years, 10 months per year, roughly. So, from a non-patronizing perspective, it appears that SUV, to judge by his erudition and logic, has indeed studied a long time, longer than most who post here, judging from the brain-damaged twaddle that gets posted.

[fmccap]

Where does it say that they have to read bills line by line?

Your right. Now let me ask you where it says that other people write the bills causing them to have to read them? If they wrote the bills there would not be a need for all the reading because they would almost know it all.

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.

 

Where do these enormous bills come from anyway???

[RangerM]

It certainly is. Depending on the mind, seven years can be used to acquire extensive knowledge, while another mind that has been around longer may not have absorbed much at all; that's why attempts at patronizing by inquiring length of study can be viewed as evasive obfuscation, and not really germain to the point of discussion. Capice?

 

Seven years is a long time to study any subject. Law school is 3 to 4 years, 10 months per year, roughly. So, from a non-patronizing perspective, it appears that SUV, to judge by his erudition and logic, has indeed studied a long time, longer than most who post here, judging from the brain-damaged twaddle that gets posted.

Don't you think you might be laying it on a little thick?

 

Not to patronize SUV, but he's 20 years old. If you assume that he's studied for the last 7 years, he likely started before puberty.

 

He's not had time to graduate with a bachelor's degree, much less a J.D., and you're comparing this to Law School?

 

That's not to say he's ignorant. He seems to be a well-adjusted, and educated young man. But there is nothing wrong with taking into account his youth, when considering his views.

[Floyd Lawson]

It certainly is. Depending on the mind, seven years can be used to acquire extensive knowledge, while another mind that has been around longer may not have absorbed much at all; that's why attempts at patronizing by inquiring length of study can be viewed as evasive obfuscation, and not really germain to the point of discussion. Capice?

 

Seven years is a long time to study any subject. Law school is 3 to 4 years, 10 months per year, roughly. So, from a non-patronizing perspective, it appears that SUV, to judge by his erudition and logic, has indeed studied a long time, longer than most who post here, judging from the brain-damaged twaddle that gets posted.

You should know about brain-damaged twaddle. And if you go back and look you'll see that suv injected the term "a long time", not me, I'm just trying to determine how long that was. Capice?

I'm sure this young man appreciates you defending his "extensive" background of historical studies.

[suv_guy_19]

He's not had time to graduate with a bachelor's degree,

 

 

Actually, i started what you would call College at 17, and so if I had continued on that course, I would have been finished a bachelors degree (3 year by now. Instead, I have a certificate in Occupational Health and Safety. I find politics and government interesting, and I spend as much time on them as on my chosen career field.

[Floyd Lawson]

Actually, i started what you would call College at 17, and so if I had continued on that course, I would have been finished a bachelors degree (3 year by now. Instead, I have a certificate in Occupational Health and Safety. I find politics and government interesting, and I spend as much time on them as on my chosen career field.

So you are employed in the health and safety field?

[suv_guy_19]

No, I just finished my practicum...in fact, I only received my certificate on Wednesday. I'll begin my job search on the 26th of August.

[RangerM]

Actually, i started what you would call College at 17, and so if I had continued on that course, I would have been finished a bachelors degree (3 year by now. Instead, I have a certificate in Occupational Health and Safety. I find politics and government interesting, and I spend as much time on them as on my chosen career field.

I started my College career at 17, as well. But I took 5 years because I partied a bit too much as a freshman/sophomore.

 

Congratulations on your certificate (graduation?). OH&S is a field with a future, so your job search will likely bear fruit. Best of luck to you.

 

I would not deny your interest or your knowledge in government or politics (even if I don't share your liberal views), however wisdom and judgement aren't attributes that are learned from school.

 

I'm old enough to know your life (and your views) will likely transform from what they are now over the next 10 years.

[mettech]

I started my College career at 17, as well. But I took 5 years because I partied a bit too much as a freshman/sophomore.

 

Congratulations on your certificate (graduation?). OH&S is a field with a future, so your job search will likely bear fruit. Best of luck to you.

 

I would not deny your interest or your knowledge in government or politics (even if I don't share your liberal views), however wisdom and judgement aren't attributes that are learned from school.

 

I'm old enough to know your life (and your views) will likely transform from what they are now over the next 10 years.

 

+1

[goinbroke2]

I started my College career at 17, as well. But I took 5 years because I partied a bit too much as a freshman/sophomore.

 

Congratulations on your certificate (graduation?). OH&S is a field with a future, so your job search will likely bear fruit. Best of luck to you.

 

I would not deny your interest or your knowledge in government or politics (even if I don't share your liberal views), however wisdom and judgement aren't attributes that are learned from school.

 

I'm old enough to know your life (and your views) will likely transform from what they are now over the next 10 years.

 

+100 and don't be suprised when you work for a while and pay taxes and have massive bills/debt, that your liberal left views change a bit. :shades: (oh wait, that's kind of saying the same thing huh, I guess I really mean it! LOL)

 

Who said "if your a conservative before 30 your a pessimist and if your a liberal after 30 your a fool"?

(I think that's how it went, maybe I'm paraphrasing, regardless it's true)

[suv_guy_19]

Well, I realize I don't know everything, but I don't see myself forgetting why I'm a liberal any time in the future. Retro obviously hasn't, and neither has Ed....or many other people. Conservatism is a more common path in your country than mine, and I don't expect that it's a path I'll go down. We're different people....with equally valid views on many things. All different kinds of views are necessary for a country to run.