Rambling Political Thoughts by Seth Hollist
The constitution makes it clear that the Federal Government should not be doing many of the things it is today.
While we certainly have the constitutional grantee to speak our minds and peaceably assemble, do not believe that the 1st Amendment found in the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution is a guaranteed protection to Artistic Expression, lewd displays, or remarks of a slanderous or endangering type, I also do not believe that the Federal government has the right to enforce punishments for any such activities. This is, thanks to the 9th and 10th amendments, is clearly a State matter.
If we want to allow the Federal Government to enforce such laws, we need to pass a constitutional amendment, that clearly defines how and under what circumstances the Federal Government is allowed to act on such things. This help keep everyone clear about what to expect, and what is acceptable.
Social Security falls under this category as well. Instead of simply passing a law, FDR should have sought his second bill of rights as constitutional amendments that clearly defined things such as, money being put into Social Security can only be used for the purposes of paying out SS benefits. Preventing the funds from being spent else where, except for some reasonable administrative fees, and not allowing them to be invested in, borrowed from against any government issued bonds; which clearly creates a conflict on interest. It could also provide guidelines for allowing people to partially op-out; especially if they are already investing elsewhere, and are willing to accept that they will not receive any future payouts. For example, if you are investing into a 401K, Roth IRA, or other long term investment, then you could keep half of your normal social security taxes.
Medicare and Medicate are also in similar situations, however, I don't think the Federal Government needs to be involved in such things at all. They need to be given over completely to the states, and the states in turn need send any funding straight to the counties and communities, if they have the ability to pay for them.
I certainly wish I could do more to help others, and provide additional donations to help those in need, but considering the high levels of price inflation we've seen over the last few years, and that it would be unwise for me to go into debt to be able to give, I simply cannot. I believe the best thing I can do to help out my country and my neighbors is to run for office, and in doing so be as good an example as I know how to be to other politicians who are caught up in the bureaucracies and corruption that is currently rampant throughout the Federal Government.
I would also suggest that going into debt to help others is not only a bad idea, but right down foolish and unsustainable. I wouldn't recommend that anyone to take out a loan, or even co-sigh (unless your married and/or sharing finances) on a loan for someone else. This only puts you into a much worse position, and makes you less able to help in the future. If the person needs help that desperately, obligating them to a loan, or even making them indirectly responsible for it, will not help them in the long run.
Likewise, having the Federal Government accumulating massive, unchecked debt (as if the Federal debt ceiling had any real meaning with how easily it gets raised time and time again), as if it was all somehow meaningless. While interest rates are low, and the borrowed money seems cheep today, much if it is done as short term bonds that will come due at a time when interest rates are not so likely to be so low. Suddenly just paying the interest on the debt could consume a great deal of the tax revenues for the Federal Government, and then how easy will it be to pay for Obama Care, or Social Security benefits?