You won't hear any argument from me that states rights was abused and abused very badly

However I feel the pendulum has now swung the entire opposite direction where every little thing is being determined by Washington. Thats not how the system was intended to work and its my belief one of the biggest reasons we have so much divide. We are 50 different states. That is ok

(11-12-2016 05:31 AM)solohawks Wrote:  You won't hear any argument from me that states rights was abused and abused very badly

However I feel the pendulum has now swung the entire opposite direction where every little thing is being determined by Washington. Thats not how the system was intended to work and its my belief one of the biggest reasons we have so much divide. We are 50 different states. That is ok

yup...about time this has finally been realized....

we'll find out in a handful of years if some of those wrongs can be righted....

some have used the drinking age/i-system funding.....and that is easily a simple example how the gov'ts overreaching arm has leverage...

it's going to be interesting how marijuana/hemp laws are also challenged under this admin....allowing hemp back into the mfg cycle would be one of greatest undeveloped assets that becomes realized under Trump....it beats the shite out of subsidizing corn/ethanol

that's the cool thing about Trump....he's a six sigma black belt even though he's a green belt when he opens his mouth at times....

(11-12-2016 07:22 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-12-2016 05:31 AM)solohawks Wrote:  You won't hear any argument from me that states rights was abused and abused very badly

However I feel the pendulum has now swung the entire opposite direction where every little thing is being determined by Washington. Thats not how the system was intended to work and its my belief one of the biggest reasons we have so much divide. We are 50 different states. That is ok

yup...about time this has finally been realized....

we'll find out in a handful of years if some of those wrongs can be righted....

some have used the drinking age/i-system funding.....and that is easily a simple example how the gov'ts overreaching arm has leverage...

it's going to be interesting how marijuana/hemp laws are also challenged under this admin....allowing hemp back into the mfg cycle would be one of greatest undeveloped assets that becomes realized under Trump....it beats the shite out of subsidizing corn/ethanol

that's the cool thing about Trump....he's a six sigma black belt even though he's a green belt when he opens his mouth at times....

Hemp could play a key role in his 4% growth projections

(11-11-2016 10:48 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  If we left it up to the states, we would still have segregation.

When all else fails, call people racists

(11-11-2016 11:04 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 10:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 09:24 PM)john01992 Wrote:  drinking age is based on federal funding. not a states rights issue.

Federal Funding for what, and where does the money for that Federal Funding come from?

What I mean is it's a self-serving issue. All the feds have to do is decide to raise taxes and the apportion the money back to the states 'if you play by my rules'. Far too often it becomes like the expanded medicaid funding... They fund it up front and then it goes away... and the states have to now pay for something the feds designed.

the interstate highway system...

My point was too obtuse. I didn't want a specific answer because it really doesn't matter.

What I'm saying is that the feds can decide to associate ANY 'coercion' with ANY funding. Do what I want and you get money. Don't and you don't. The fact that they took much of the money they're giving back from the very people they took it from only makes the blackmail more vile.

Could the states decline to pay taxes to the feds if the feds don't increase the national speed limit to 80?

Nope.

Well drinking and driving are closely related from a legislative standpoint. Yet you want to talk about being obtuse.

If the state doesn't want to do it, no one is forcing them. The states chose to conform because of the $. That was their choice and their choice alone.

(11-11-2016 11:12 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 10:48 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  If we left it up to the states, we would still have segregation.

Sent from my SM-T357T using CSNbbs mobile app

You mean like Northern liberal states.

This argument is as old as the country itself.

There is nothing new here to consider.

(11-12-2016 01:30 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Well drinking and driving are closely related from a legislative standpoint. Yet you want to talk about being obtuse.

You understand I said I was apparently too obtuse?

Did it HAVE to be John?

Yes... you're either just not getting it or you're just being argumentative for no purpose. I understand that politicians TRY and do such things, but there is no reason why they must. High correlation between drinking and promiscuity... you could have tied it to abortion funding. You could have tied it to education. You could have tied it to healthcare. You could have tied it to police. All are arguably related to drinking.

It's not as if those highway funds were earmarked for 'drunk driving reduction'.

And again, where did the money come from? Oh yeah... the states. If you want some of your tax money back, do what we say.

It's not about the specific policy, John. It's about the Feds 'bribing' the states to force their will. Just because this isn't the worst use of such power doesn't mean that the use of such power is a good idea. You realize that 'your side' doesn't have control right now... would you like it if the feds used education dollars to force their will on the states w/r/t pot? I wouldn't.

You don't want to talk about any of that... you just want to talk about whether the drinking age and highway funds have any relationship, which doesn't matter at all.... much in the way that The Affordable Care act, Republicans say isn't affordable, and Democrats NOW say isn't about care, but about insurance.