|
Thank you skeet, I'll try to address all of your questions
The idea of socialism is not feeding off of someone else. It's an economic principle that provides a more equal distribution of wealth and it provides incentives for the lower class to pull their weight more. I'm by no means calling for a soviet union style of government where everyone lives in a white house of the exact same design. That's ridiculas.
I would create a "living wage" for those who work full time. You know, ditch diggers and fast food workers benifit everyone and I think their hard work (regardless of those people's past) deserve more than 6 dollars an hour. Likewise, I don't think someone who has a luxury office and plays golf all day deserves 50 million dollars. I would want to put a cap on salary. And you know what, when you have more money than God, you're not going to miss a couple million.
Even Warren Buffett thinks the rich needs to pay more taxes.
If you look at primitve tribes in the middle east, africa, or the amazon - there is a equal distribution of wealth. Sure, there is a hierarchy. However, everyone from a high priest to a berry picker is highly valued. That's what we need here - everyone needs to be appreciated for their contribution to society. In turn, individuals have a higher self worth, low crime, etc.
Well this is a democracy (ok, a democratic republic...) and the people decide through their reps what direction and laws they want passed. And the government is designed to move slow to make sure laws are not passed too quickly without a lot of thought.
But with a majority rule (specifically the law making process), I think the people can make whatever laws or changes they wish (with some exceptions). If the working class is feeling financial pressure, with enough votes in congress they can somewhat alter the burden. Likewise, it works the opposite way. The republicans were able to get enough votes to pass the bush tax cut in favor of the rich. That's just the way things work with a 2 party system --- you win some, you lose some. Quick changes are pretty minor and large ones are a long time comming (national health care for example).
Welfare
When union workers get laid off, many times they have to go to the union hall and wait for charity work to be assigned to them. I would like to see something like this for welfare recipiants - whether it be at varouis locations in cities or towns, county seats, etc. I would like to see reform in the job search requirements. Jobs are out there - they might suck - but they are out there. And that is why I think a living wage and a more equal distribution of wealth will help. When you feel positive about the job you're doing and you can make living off it - your situation appears in a different light. There's no factory workers that like their jobs - but it gives their family what they need (or at least it used to).
The constitution actually is a pretty meaningless document when you consider that ammendments can be ammended. Now don't all jump me - because I'm not bashing the constitution (I'm sure it will still be interpreted that way). It's symbolic factor is very high and it does represent the current laws. The fact is that the constitution and amendments can be changed - Prohibition for example. The fact is it's easier to pass laws in other ways - and that's what happens today though --- Abortion for example. Some states have a amendment stating their constituation can not be ammended. To my knowledge, the US does not. Therefore there is really nothing concrete about the federal law.
Think about that for a minute - whether you agree with me or not.
Have a good night
|