Focus Fanatics Forum banner

55 MPH Speed Limit

  • For 55 MPH Limit

    Votes: 87 6.3%
  • Against 55 MPH Limit

    Votes: 1,167 84.3%
  • I'm fine with whichever

    Votes: 130 9.4%

  • Total voters
    1,384
121 - 140 of 503 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
I just wish you could explain to me how you think that saving resources is Un-American. Second no they aren't unconstitutional, government funding is seen all over, including in the forms of grants to colleges to further our education. Third, look up what the government is requiring dairy farmers in New Mexico to do, they REQUIRE them to find better ways of disposing of the cows waste to PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. Sounds a bit like forcing to me, but if you look at the results it is little pain for lots of gain.
 

·
Busy Monkey
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
I just wish you could explain to me how you think that saving resources is Un-American. Second no they aren't unconstitutional, government funding is seen all over, including in the forms of grants to colleges to further our education. Third, look up what the government is requiring dairy farmers in New Mexico to do, they REQUIRE them to find better ways of disposing of the cows waste to PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. Sounds a bit like forcing to me, but if you look at the results it is little pain for lots of gain.
I never said saving resources was un-American. Don't put words in my mouth.
I said unconstitutional government control was un-American.

I also never said government funding doesn't happen. I said it's unconstitutional.
And like I just said:
MisterJohnson said:
There are tons and tons of things our government does that it's not allowed to, and citing those things does not make a valid argument to do more wrong.
P.S.
Cow's waste is a naturally occurring substance and is used for fertilizer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Yes but look at they way they are using it, there is too much waste and they can't use it all so they over use or dump in fields and then contaminate the water and plant life. I didn't put words in your mouth, don't put them in mine. All I said was that if you think its such a big problem write a letter. I really think you should do some more research before you decide to argue your points with me. The government taxes, it wasn't originally there to do it. Is that unconstitutional, it seems like the government controls a lot of things. Maybe you should go to Canada if you don't like it that much but just know that their taxes are worse.

EDIT:
REGARDLESS of how either of us feels lets end this pointless argument, we both have our views and we are both entitled to them.
 

·
Busy Monkey
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
First of all, show me where I put words in your mouth.

You are calling me uneducated, but you won't refute anything I say.

You said I'm making unfounded statements, what did I say that's unfounded?

Yes, our government taxes, and the way they do it is wrong. They control things they have no business controlling. I don't want to leave the country, I want to repeal the unconstitutional laws that have a stranglehold on our country and let free capitalism save our economy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
As you can see, I didn't call you uneducated, I called your arguments uneducated. There is a difference, smart men can say dumb things. Unfounded in the fact that you have no proof this funding is unconstitutional. It is NO WHERE in the constitution. The supreme court has not found it unconstitutional and it is NO WHERE in the amendments. Right there your argument falls apart. It really seems to me that you have more of a problem with a government that what this threads actual subject is supposed to be about...
 

·
Busy Monkey
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
As you can see, I didn't call you uneducated, I called your arguments uneducated. There is a difference, smart men can say dumb things. Unfounded in the fact that you have no proof this funding is unconstitutional. It is NO WHERE in the constitution. The supreme court has not found it unconstitutional and it is NO WHERE in the amendments. Right there your argument falls apart. It really seems to me that you have more of a problem with a government that what this threads actual subject is supposed to be about...
I am continuing this for the purpose of education, as you don't seem to understand the objective of the Constitution.

The US Constitution's purpose is to limit federal government control over private citizens, not to list all our specific rights as individuals or of private sector businesses. The Constitution describes certain things the government can do, such as create and maintain a national defense. The government is only allowed to exercise such powers as are specifically granted to it by the Constitution. Any power NOT granted by the Constitution are, in effect, illegal for our government to attempt to enforce.

The Constitution does not need to say the federal government can't give colleges funds. The government simply was not granted the power to do that.

Our founding fathers didn't see fit to add a provision to the Constitution saying we could drill for oil for the simple reason that the government was not granted the power to ban drilling. They just run roughshod over the Constitution and ban it anyway and no one cares until oil hits $130 a barrel.

I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a US government. I have a problem with our government stepping outside the boundary set by the Constitution.
They are not allowed to ban drilling, and because of their intervention we are paying $4 a gallon for gas.

The technology for alternative fuel isn't quite there yet, but in the meantime we do have enough oil, we just need to go get it.
 

·
Scuba Edition
Joined
·
1,694 Posts
I think getting rid of the gas tax is retarded and is the wrong way to go. Its only 30-40 cents a gallon. Thats really not that much and that money, for the most part, is going toward road construction and maintenance which isn't something we can do without for very long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Ya the gas tax does bring in a lot of money for the government so its a hard one on that. And as for the constitution. It does not limit the governments power, it regulates it (there is a difference although regulating can mean limiting). The constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. I have taken law classes man, don't argue with me this is something I know a lot about. There are also things known as the State Constitutions. These basically regulate things based on states as long as it does not go against what the constitution says. Unconstitutional is defined as things that go against the constitution. The only people that can declare something unconstitutional are the Supreme Court Justices. So you saying, thinking, and feeling that something is unconstitutional does not make it so. The government has the right to regulate and control businesses. Trusts are an example of this. Go back to Theodore Roosevelt, also known as the trust buster. He destroyed business practices that where not necessarily illegal but harmful. However Taft took the opposite route and destroyed all Trusts (example of the government using its powers in an unregulated environment). Since then Trusts have been made illegal by the Sherman Antitrust Act.

I know you will say that the government has NO RIGHT to regulate business but if it doesn't lets ship your 9 year old kid (just as an example even if you don't have one) to work in a factory. Rules and regulations put in place BY THE GOVERNMENT prevent this and it is completely constitutional and was fought for by the people. I rest my case.
 

·
Busy Monkey
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
I think getting rid of the gas tax is retarded and is the wrong way to go. Its only 30-40 cents a gallon. Thats really not that much and that money, for the most part, is going toward road construction and maintenance which isn't something we can do without for very long.
Only the state gas tax goes towards roads, the half which is federal just vanishes into the vast black hole of the national budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Haha ya in Britain they where proposing some really strange things regarding having people pay for driving at certain times of the road instead of their road tax. I have to admit I don't fully understand the British system so this proposal was probably defeated in its early stages.
 

·
Busy Monkey
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
Ya the gas tax does bring in a lot of money for the government so its a hard one on that. And as for the constitution. It does not limit the governments power, it regulates it (there is a difference). The constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. I have taken law classes man, don't argue with me this is something I know a lot about. There are also things known as the State Constitutions. These basically regulate things based on states as long as it does not go against what the constitution says. Unconstitutional is defined as things that go against the constitution. The only people that can declare something unconstitutional are the Supreme Court Justices. So you saying, thinking, and feeling that something is unconstitutional does not make it so. The government has the right to regulate and control businesses. Trusts are an example of this. Go back to Theodore Roosevelt, also known as the trust buster. He destroyed business practices that where not necessarily illegal but harmful. However Taft took the opposite route and destroyed all Trusts (example of the government using its powers in an unregulated environment). Since then Trusts have been made illegal by the Sherman Antitrust Act.

I know you will say that the government has NO RIGHT to regulate business but if it doesn't lets ship your 9 year old kid (just as an example even if you don't have one) to work in a factory. Rules and regulations put in place BY THE GOVERNMENT prevent this and it is completely constitutional and was fought for by the people. I rest my case.
I've taken Constitution classes too, and I question the classes you took since they mislead you into a fundamentally wrong view of it.

The Constitution IS a government limiter. Period. Just because you took some podunk class at a junior college doesn't mean you are right.

And you are correct, I do say the federal government has no right to regulate business. That was left up to the state by the Constitution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Yes, but obviously these regulations weren't found to be unconstitutional as they are in State laws. And as I mentioned before, and if you really took these constitutional classes you speak of, you would know that in order for it to be in the State Constitution or in ANY form of state law (the regulation of businesses that is) it has to be constitutional so you just proved my point for me...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
I can tell I have won this dispute. You resorted to insulting me directly, a sign that you know you have lost. It isn't cohesive because you are obviously tired. Anyway it was a good dispute.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
687 Posts
Face facts, we can't control the governments control over our control. Government should not ban oil drilling, and should immediately support an oil drilling operation in the us territories. Removing taxes would be impossible, would be nice, but not really helpful. Removing taxes from fuel sales would leave the local, state, and federal government with large deficients. I work for a local government agency, and we operate much differently then corporations do. We spend money before we even know how much we get in our budget, this is due to usually not having a finalized budget and things like that. This means that projects, like paving roads are authorized assuming we have funds to complete them in the future. So if we all of a sudden stop supplying income to a government agencies budget, we would be in big trouble. Now here in California we get taxed a lot for roads and EPA, and on bridge tolls. I think a commuter tax refund or credit would be a nice insensitive, such as giving back say $200 for gas and road taxes. This would make many Americans happy. Also the main problem with the government is the mis-usage of funds and budgets, not so much the lack of funding. Poor management can be reasonable for many failures obviously, a similar government agency that parallels the one i work for in a different area gets a similar budget as we do, and perform all the same tasks and operations. But they have used up all they're funds and have no reserve funds, on the other hand the agency i work for has a surplus of funds in the millions. It all has to do with how the budget was used. Also there is different monies for different things. Like we have money that we can only use for some projects or we lose it, or we have money that we can only get if we spend more then what we got last year, or there is money we can use or keep depending on what we decide on using it for or not for. The other agency I was talking about, has had a lot of personnel turn over and severe project cost overages. We operate on the same level and capacity as them with as little as 300 employees, they had 1000 employees, and ended up firing a lot of them. For instance, we have 2 full time carpenters and 1 full time electrician. They had 10 carpenters and 8 electricians. This is really dumb, because they are salary employees, they get paid whether or not they are actually doing jobs, so if you have 7 electricians and 8 carpenters doing nothing, that's about $1,600,000 a year going down the drain.

Anyways just a thought.

Also you guys don't need to attack each other intelligence levels, your information and understanding of what your taking about proves you are both quite smart, but then we you start throwing kiddy blows at eachother that just takes it to a "dumber" level of conversation. There is no need to be derogatory if you don't agree, just agree to disagree, and believe in what you believe until you decided who is right on your own, just my two bits, otherwise ignore my drunk arse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Ah ya I like that drilling in America. Imagine how much that would actually lower the cost of gas. Well, it honestly probably wouldn't too noticeable at first but it would at least get our dependence off of oil from the middle east which I think is a bit dangerous.

And yes, dullishpage, maybe drunk but smart lol. MisterJohnson I'm sorry for anything I said to directly insult you. Our argument was foolish and some of the things we said were pointless. I'm willing to forgive and forget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
I think more importantly than reducing the highway speed limit is reducing traffic congestion. Cars that sit idling for long periods of time in rush hour traffic are getting close to 0 MPG, which is far worse than going 10 MPH faster.

For me, I get between 33-35 MPG regardless of whether I drive 60 MPH or 75 MPH. So, I'm against the 55 MPH limits again. Buy efficient vehicles, support local economies, and turn your heat/AC down/up a few degress.[poke]
 

·
Busy Monkey
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
And yes, dullishpage, maybe drunk but smart lol. MisterJohnson I'm sorry for anything I said to directly insult you. Our argument was foolish and some of the things we said were pointless. I'm willing to forgive and forget.
Same here, sorry for calling you a retard. I still claim victory though [hihi]

(now in response to guitarseth)
Removing the ban on drilling for oil would cause an immediate and fairly large drop in the price oil. I mean, look at how much it dropped just because we're TALKING about allowing drilling.
OPEC wants our money. If we start getting our own oil we'll be buying less of theirs, so they'll have to increase oil production to lower the price and stay competitive.
I've heard people in the oil industry say that oil from wells already drilled on land could hit the market within months, and if we start drilling off our coasts the oil could hit the market within 2 years.

We don't NEED more efficient cars, we need more oil. It's out there, we just need to go get it.
 
121 - 140 of 503 Posts
Top