What are the practical obstacles to a limited Federal Government?

[avatar4321]

What is keeping us from following the Constitution? I dont mean the politicians or the parties or anything like that. I mean as a people. What keeps us from keeping the government in check?

[SassyLady]

What is keeping us from following the Constitution? I dont mean the politicians or the parties or anything like that. I mean as a people. What keeps us from keeping the government in check?

Apathy.

Frog in boiling water theory.

[KarlMarx]

Social Security and Medicare are two of the biggest items in the Federal budget. Constitutionally, however, they aren't kosher. However, you can't just dismantle Social Security and Medicare and leave millions of elderly Americans without that monthly check, since many of them depend on it. I've thought about how to solve the Social Security mess and think that the only things we can do *practically* is to increase the eligibility age, lower benefits, and perhaps increase the SS tax rate. People below a certain age won't be eligible for it and there should be a moratorium to having any new people getting into the system.....

Of course, giving illegal aliens the right to Social Security does not help, either.

[Kathianne]

Social Security and Medicare are two of the biggest items in the Federal budget. Constitutionally, however, they aren't kosher. However, you can't just dismantle Social Security and Medicare and leave millions of elderly Americans without that monthly check, since many of them depend on it. I've thought about how to solve the Social Security mess and think that the only things we can do *practically* is to increase the eligibility age, lower benefits, and perhaps increase the SS tax rate. People below a certain age won't be eligible for it and there should be a moratorium to having any new people getting into the system.....

Of course, giving illegal aliens the right to Social Security does not help, either.

I've said for years, means testing would be a first step; but first all contributors get back all they've paid in. I also think it should be easy enough for those willing to not take it to do so. I know more than a few people that have already done so, but at this point it doesn't matter, the Congress is spending it.

Put an end date to social security, say anyone 25 and older will not get more than they are forced to put in. When those 25 year olds, hit the eligibility age, SSI stops with them. Once they get back their own contributions. Raise the age of eligibility, means test both assets and pensions. If a person/couple have the means to care for themselves-they get back over time, what they've put into the system, when they hit that amount, it stops. For those with less, they continue as it was promised.

[avatar4321]

Those definitely are pretty big.

I think we need to do what we can to get people off those as much as possible. If we don't, alot of people will be dying when the system collapses.

[Little-Acorn]

People have become used to getting unconstitutional goodies, such as Social Security, money for roads and schools, welfare, etc. So they will regard any effort to restore constitutionality, as robbery or "heartlessness" or whatever the liberals (in both parties) manage to convince them it is.

The fact that restoring the nation to constitutional limits, will be painful, is the greatest single obstacle. And the people whose jobs and livelihoods depend on government largesse, will do everything the can to make it as painful as possible.

[fj1200]

Frog in boiling water theory.

Yep, we are our own primary obstacle.

Too many of us have become slowly dependent on government programs. Social Security starts out as one thing but turns into a retirement program sucking away the necessity of planning for yourself. So if you are for a limited government don't take away MY Social Security.

[revelarts]

People have become used to getting unconstitutional goodies, such as Social Security, money for roads and schools, welfare, etc. So they will regard any effort to restore constitutionality, as robbery or "heartlessness" or whatever the liberals (in both parties) manage to convince them it is.

The fact that restoring the nation to constitutional limits, will be painful, is the greatest single obstacle. And the people whose jobs and livelihoods depend on government largesse, will do everything the can to make it as painful as possible.

Pain and fear.
Many people really don't think they (or others) know how to operate without many gov't programs. The loss of so many federal jobs would cause a huge wailing and moaning. The big corporate boys wouldn't like it so much either, it would open to many options for other companies and individuals, if many unconstitutional regs were taken away.

[DragonStryk72]

What is keeping us from following the Constitution? I dont mean the politicians or the parties or anything like that. I mean as a people. What keeps us from keeping the government in check?

Good intentions. I swear, I'm not kidding, and if you really think about it, it makes sense. Medicare is supposed to help the poor get medical assistance, Welfare is intended to help those who aren't able to support themselves, and even the bailouts were an attempt to "save" the economy.

All of these are meant to help, but the fact is, that the saying "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" is pretty apt. The problem is that good for one is not good for all, and as for Medicare/welfare, they don't take into account that people who have fallen on these hard times need someone pushing them to get them back on their feet. When you remove the incentive to progress, people stop. It's the same as predator animals in the wild, if you feed the bears or wolves, they'll stop hunting because they know they can get the food without it.

[Insein]

I've said for years, means testing would be a first step; but first all contributors get back all they've paid in. I also think it should be easy enough for those willing to not take it to do so. I know more than a few people that have already done so, but at this point it doesn't matter, the Congress is spending it.

Put an end date to social security, say anyone 25 and older will not get more than they are forced to put in. When those 25 year olds, hit the eligibility age, SSI stops with them. Once they get back their own contributions. Raise the age of eligibility, means test both assets and pensions. If a person/couple have the means to care for themselves-they get back over time, what they've put into the system, when they hit that amount, it stops. For those with less, they continue as it was promised.

Realistically, people don't get what they put in now. I stated it awhile back but for SS, its real simple.

- For those that are 55 or older, you will continue to receive SS as promised. You will pay in for your remaining working years and will receive SS when you retire.

- For those 50 to 54, you will have the option of continuing to pay into SS and receiving it at retirement or stop paying in with the understanding that you will never receive any SSI.

- For those 49 or younger, you will immediately stop paying SS with the understanding that you will never receive SSI. An option for a Retirement Savings Plan similar to the government Thrift Savings Plan for Federal Employees will be offered with an optional contribution amount.

- In addition to this, education on finance, how the stock market works and how to properly save money will become mandatory in all schools starting from Grade 7 on.

Just my idea on how to make it as quick and painless as possible.