Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: What if what Dr Paul is saying that ...

Posted 8 years ago on Nov. 24, 2011, 2:26 p.m. EST by Alexman8711 (23) from Brooklyn, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

That the federal government can not only control states, but it also can't dictate how a state is run? Now before anyone bashes about me talking about Paul...I must tell you that I am not a huge supporter of him, and in fact I am quite skeptical of where he stands. I do agree with him though on at least ending the fed and ending the drug war. I am skeptical of his other philosophies, and I am unsure of how it will work out if we all guaranteed to have HSA for health insurance. But I was just wondering ... it seems that if he could change the way the US is, then he'd basically allow one state to be socialist, and the other capitalist. I am thinking maybe that's what makes him so appealing to people. Am I wrong? Though if this were then would we essentially become like old Greece where every state had a different, independent government? I am hoping that I am not on any platform here and I am only encouraging a discussion here on the possibilities of this, and just how good or bad this would be.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by nerdherd (67) 8 years ago

The 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The constitution declares state supremacy. The reason is because if the Federal government is supreme then you get a lot of one-size-fits-all policy, which is bad. I don't think I need to explain this. We'll never all agree on what the best policy is, so our country was set up so that each state is bound by the constitution (each state must respect property rights, freedom of speech, right to a fair trial, etc.), but beyond that it can decide how it wants to run. This means that you move to California if you like their policies, or you move to Utah if you like theirs, etc. This allows maximum freedom for each to decide what he/she wants.

[-] 2 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 8 years ago

He's just stating what's on the 10th amendment. I'm just saying.

[-] 1 points by Gmartine (106) 8 years ago

Anyone who understands Austrian Economics knows Dr. Paul is right. If we want wealth and freedom then we need to elect him. I occupy yet I am also a precincint committee person for the republican party. The thing about Dr. Paul supporters is that we have been battle tested and are working within the system to end the wars, end the drug war, end the federal police state and treating everyone as an individual with god given rights. If you don't believe in god that is fine, you still have the same rights under a Dr. Paul presidency.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 8 years ago

His version of States "rights" would lead to civil war.

He's in fact a Christian Reconstructionist.

His policies would not lead to a more perfect union.

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

sounds generally divisive