WA Disabled Passes

[Metalhead47]

If private enterprise can not turn a profit on it why should the state subsidize it? Everyone, except for the totally helpless, should be paying for the government services they receive. Taxes should be based on how many government services you take advantage of not on how much income you have.

Uh huh. Well the Founders seem to disagree with you, that's why they put post roads in the COTUS, a gov't service, the modern iteration of which is the Interstate system. If the gov't subsidizes the INTERstate roads, it's logical that the states (small S) subsidize the INTRA state roads.

Now, the matter of how to pay for such is a different discussion altogether. But once again, here in the real world, some form of universal taxation will likely always be necessary. Now eliminate all the bullshiite/ILLegitimate gov't services (like education), and the VERY FEW legitimate ones that are left could easily be covered by a small sales tax.

 

[amlevin]

Now eliminate all the bullshiite/ILLegitimate gov't services (like education), and the VERY FEW legitimate ones that are left could easily be covered by a small sales tax.

Actually, Education is one of the few services that are mandated by the WA State Constitution. Courts, Militia, and very few others but Education is a mandate. They might do a better job if the money wasn't wasted on Teachers that can't teach or be fired. On layers and layers of administrative costs.

Sorry, but we in WA are stuck with Education as a Constitutional Requirement.

 

[Metalhead47]

Actually, Education is one of the few services that are mandated by the WA State Constitution. Courts, Militia, and very few others but Education is a mandate. They might do a better job if the money wasn't wasted on Teachers that can't teach or be fired. On layers and layers of administrative costs.

Sorry, but we in WA are stuck with Education as a Constitutional Requirement.

That's what constitutional amendments are for, or we'd be still be stuck with prohibition too. Of course, here in the real world, I don't see public education going anywhere either... except further down the drain. :banghead:

 

[sudden valley gunner]

C

Uh huh. Well the Founders seem to disagree with you, that's why they put post roads in the COTUS, a gov't service, the modern iteration of which is the Interstate system. If the gov't subsidizes the INTERstate roads, it's logical that the states (small S) subsidize the INTRA state roads.

Now, the matter of how to pay for such is a different discussion altogether. But once again, here in the real world, some form of universal taxation will likely always be necessary. Now eliminate all the bullshiite/ILLegitimate gov't services (like education), and the VERY FEW legitimate ones that are left could easily be covered by a small sales tax.

I love thread drift....lol....

I feel it's a bit of a stretch to say the postal clause give the gov. the right to create or maintain our whole road system other than "establish" routes on existing rds. and possibly creat a route when one doesn't exist. Madison even vetoed a roads bill even thought he thought it a good idea but as unconstitutional, he wanted congress to amend the constitution to include infra structure.

I looked up Ferry system private failure in this state seems to be State backed unions that caused them to fail and the state refusing them to raise rates.

Seems there are still a few private ferries still running too. I learn something new everyday.

 

[BigDave]

And here all along I thought this was suppose to be about open carry!

 

[amzbrady]

And here all along I thought this was suppose to be about open carry!

I would think the majority of us reading this thread and replying to it were openly carrying while doing so.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Never mind. Too funny though.

 

[Metalhead47]

I feel it's a bit of a stretch to say the postal clause give the gov. the right to create or maintain our whole road system other than "establish" routes on existing rds. and possibly creat a route when one doesn't exist. Madison even vetoed a roads bill even thought he thought it a good idea but as unconstitutional, he wanted congress to amend the constitution to include infra structure.

I looked up Ferry system private failure in this state seems to be State backed unions that caused them to fail and the state refusing them to raise rates.

Seems there are still a few private ferries still running too. I learn something new everyday.

The Congress shall have Power...To establish Post Offices and post Roads

Seems pretty straightforward to me. The fedgov establishes & maintains inter-state (post) roads, the states establish & maintain state highways, the county & so on. Now, should tax money from folks in Oklahoma be going to build new local street sidewalks in Edmonds? Of course not. Didn't say the system was not in need of reform, only that its existence is legitimate.

I love thread drift....lol....

Kinda like continental drift. Give it enough time and eventually Antarctica ends up back in the tropics.

 

[Metalhead47]

And here all along I thought this was suppose to be about open carry!

Sure it is. The fact that the roads and ferries are gov't entities means that they cannot restrict us from doing so. :banana:

 

[sudden valley gunner]

s

Seems pretty straightforward to me. The fedgov establishes & maintains inter-state (post) roads, the states establish & maintain state highways, the county & so on. Now, should tax money from folks in Oklahoma be going to build new local street sidewalks in Edmonds? Of course not. Didn't say the system was not in need of reform, only that its existence is legitimate.



Kinda like continental drift. Give it enough time and eventually Antarctica ends up back in the tropics.

But that doesn't include all the roads, just ones established by for use of post. The main reason in that clause was not to hinder mail like it was in Europe.

Madison wrote the constitution, and then later vetoed a roads bill as unconstitutional.

 

[Metalhead47]

s

But that doesn't include all the roads, just ones established by for use of post. The main reason in that clause was not to hinder mail like it was in Europe.

Madison wrote the constitution, and then later vetoed a roads bill as unconstitutional.

Right, it doesn't. Just the modern iteration of the "post road," which I see as the interstate highways. Y'know, how most mail gets from one place to another. Didn't I just say that federal funds should not be funding state/local roads?

 

[Dave_pro2a]

Right, it doesn't. Just the modern iteration of the "post road," which I see as the interstate highways. Y'know, how most mail gets from one place to another. Didn't I just say that federal funds should not be funding state/local roads?

So since the USPS is an abysmal failure.

Isn't actually a department of the government.

And will likely completely fail sometime soon.

When it inevitably fails, does that mean we can get the Feds out of the road building/maintaining business? I mean, they will have lost the pretext it seems.

 

[Metalhead47]

So since the USPS is an abysmal failure.

Isn't actually a department of the government.

And will likely completely fail sometime soon.

When it inevitably fails, does that mean we can get the Feds out of the road building/maintaining business? I mean, they will have lost the pretext it seems.

and can you point to a single successful private road here in the US, today? Didn't think so.

 

[gogodawgs]

So since the USPS is an abysmal failure.

Isn't actually a department of the government.

And will likely completely fail sometime soon.

When it inevitably fails, does that mean we can get the Feds out of the road building/maintaining business? I mean, they will have lost the pretext it seems.

Why? There are several private post services that still use those roads to deliver to all of our homes.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Right, it doesn't. Just the modern iteration of the "post road," which I see as the interstate highways. Y'know, how most mail gets from one place to another. Didn't I just say that federal funds should not be funding state/local roads?

No you did, I wasn't being clear in my response. Madison's veto of a bill wasn't for local roads it was interstate roads proposed under the 'commerce' clause he rejected it and since he wrote the constitution and knew of "postal" clause I feel he felt the clause was to be narrowly interpreted.

Under this clause the government could "establish" a state or local road as a postal road, this clarifies what they wanted to me that they simply wanted routes they could protect mail on a numbered power and authority given to them by the constitution. Some argued even early on that this didn't give power to build the roads. I think it does in a narrow sense when a route doesn't already exist to be established as a postal route. By 1800 Congress had designated 20,000 miles or so of Post roads, yet they hadn't built or maintained a single one yet.

Also the very person who added the "road" clause, Elbridge Gerry, stated in congress in 1791 Dec. 6 stated concerning this clause....

"...cannot possibly mean anything else but to point out what roads the post shall follow"

Also there is clause 17 that only gives the feds authority only with the states consent.

Of course then there was FDR who went way beyond the scope of so many constitutional limitations of government.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

and can you point to a single successful private road here in the US, today? Didn't think so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_highways_in_the_United_States:lol:

 

[ManInBlack]

In a perfect would this would be true. However, here in the real world, it just doesn't work like that. There ARE some things the gov't just ends up doing better. Such as transportation. The gov't got into the ferry business in the first place because private enterprise couldn't stay afloat.

Maybe that is a sign that a ferry system is not needed. If enough people cannot be persuaded to pay the fair (actual) price of passage, then clearly, the service is not viewed as a good value by the population. It is unfair to shift the burden of paying for service from the beneficiaries (almost all of them residing in the Puget Sound area) to the citizens of the entire state. Just because you desire a service does not give you the right to steal the property of others to pay for it.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

Maybe that is a sign that a ferry system is not needed. If enough people cannot be persuaded to pay the fair (actual) price of passage, then clearly, the service is not viewed as a good value by the population. It is unfair to shift the burden of paying for service from the beneficiaries (almost all of them residing in the Puget Sound area) to the citizens of the entire state. Just because you desire a service does not give you the right to steal the property of others to pay for it.

It seems so obvious.

 

[jbone]

My WA state disabled veterans pass is also honored in Snohomish County parks. Saved me a ton in parking fee’s last year crabbing at Kayak point.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

It seems so obvious.

It does seem obvious to me too. Let's not forget the generations of "social" indoctrination that has been going on. It's like coming to the realization you don't like your religious cult , some immediately leave quit some take a longer slower process of leaving their comfort zone, others will stay and defend it even when reason tells them they shouldn't. Of course others keep their blinders on shut down their reasoning faculties and buy what ever nonsense they were taught and kill themselves so they can ride on a celestial comet.