I'm sure malodery would rather talk about terminology (than the merits of socialism vs. capitalism), but I'll remind us of the important point of this thread:
I'm talking about the merits. You brought in some new terminology that doesn't apply. Do you accept the advantages of our socialist power supplier?
"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for (by Whom?), it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
-- James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, 1792
What's Madison's real problem here?
You mean the suppler in violation of the EPA and DNR particulate matter limits of pollution? At what point do you accept it, mallcontent. Cheap rates plus lung disease and water pollution for it's customers?
