Maastricht Treaty revisions needed?

[kandrathe]

If it rained manna from heaven, why in the world would you ever till a field again?

Because I like asparagus? Besides, can you make Scotch from manna? If I were happy living on manna, why should I ever till a field again? The point is that we're in a position to do the 'manna from heaven' for real, for everyone. People continue to work because they want something more, something different. And some, scientists, authors, mountain climbers, race car drivers, etc., work because they can not not do what they do.

Yum, Manna scotch. It's heavenly. I believe that everyone should be a contributor and earn at least what they consume. There really are so many things that need to be done, and not enough people to do them. Interestingly, that question I got wrong on the Puritans holds an answer here; From Wikipedia on Ben Franklin; "The roots of American democracy can be seen in these Puritan values of self-government. These values, which were passed on to Benjamin Franklin and other founding fathers (such as John Adams), included the importance of the individual and active indignation against unjust authority. One of Josiah's core Puritan values was that personal worth is earned through hard work, which makes the industrious man the equal of kings... Hard work and equality were two Puritan values that Ben Franklin preached throughout his own life and spread widely through Poor Richard's Almanac and his autobiography." I know you don't give a crap about Puritanical roots, but culturally, it was a basis for the American culture, and has become one of our core principles, and values. I believe our underlying objective should be to have an orderly society based on the principles of justice, not one that devolves into one of war lords where those who have the power take what they want.

. . . it was the death of a thousand cuts, with the Civil War, WWI era, and WWII era being fairly large gashes.

Why does this matter? The point is that the people of the USA allowed this to happen.

Upon the signing the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, Ben Franklin is reported to have said, “We have given the people a Republic, if they will have it.” It happened, and whether or not "the people" allowed it to happen or not, is largely debatable. There are certain principles upon which our entire government, and way of life are based. Private industry(work ethic) is one of them, as is individual liberty, equal opportunity, blind justice, and the guarantee of natural rights.

Deviations from those principles have fundamentally altered the implementation of our Federal government. It has become something unintended, and has in many ways become detrimental to peoples of the US, and to the entire world. You don't like Presidents dragging us into expensive wars and nation building? Take away the power of our federal government to easily do this. You don't like the patriot act authorizing domestic spying and warrant-less wiretapping? Take away the power of our federal government to easily do this.

To be fair, in many ways the USA has become savior, caretaker, crusader, and the defender of liberty as well. I just don't believe the later roles of caretaker and worlds policeman should be one we seek to perpetuate. I'm not discounting the possible good that has been done at the point of our bayonet, but one must wonder if it might have been accomplished via other methods of coercion.

They allowed the government to expand when it needed to in times of emergency (as well as other times). They allowed the government to keep those powers when the emergency was over. So, how is the population that allowed this to happen with the framework in place to prevent it capable of preventing it without that framework?

Wouldn't it be interesting if all entitlement programs needed to be paid off, and reauthorized every 4 years? How about making federal borrowing limits directly tied to taxation?

You see, our politics is the game of experiencing the benefits, and making the next President experience the pain. Reagan got credit/blame for deregulation that began under Carter, Carter got the blame for energy policies implemented by Nixon, Bush got blamed for the mess that Clinton left him, etc. etc. etc. You know I'm not a huge Obama supporter, but he's getting hammered now for things which are mostly out of his control. But, like the inexperienced Bush Jr., he's also justly getting hammered for his weaknesses. He was (imho wrongly) elected due to his charismatic campaign rhetoric, and some hopeful legislative goals, but that is not the bulk of what the job of governing entails.

Back to the point; Our electorate needs to choose good leadership, and as we have discussed, in order to do this they need to be involved, and understand how to choose good leadership. This is predicated on choosing the best people to lead us who have demonstrated these characteristics (not just campaign rhetoric), with their obvious flaws disqualifying them. We can't continue this partisan hot potato game of pushing off the growing bundle of pain until it explodes onto the next person. Deficit spending, and a mounting national debt is not leadership. It is not leadership to avoid common world problems, like Darfur, North Korea, or Iran. I see it as the opposite, shirking responsibility.

I'm hopeful that recent grass roots movements may be starting to choose people to represent us who are good people, with leadership skills, who are not lawyers, life long government activists, and political science majors.

Lastly, when it comes to our federal government, not all solutions need to be expressed in the form of multi-billion dollar programs, or a litany of laws. President Eisenhower's "President's Council on Youth Fitness" didn't become wildly popular until Kennedy actively promoted it, and incorporated fitness into an expectation from the top down. I still remember doing calisthenics in the gym everyday in gradeschool. Obama needs to push this kind of stuff more into the forefront.