Not by me. There's nothing about the current system that promotes free markets. It's effects cause booms and busts, bubbles and collapses because the currency doesn't reflect the national production.
Is there anything "free market" about the Federal takeover of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
Typical of our government to put a band-aid on one unconstitutional move with another.

Xandufar,
The purpose of our Federal government was not to "promote the general welfare". That phrase appears in the preamble to establish the tone, but preambles are not law. The Constitution as written does not allow for the current system or your proposed solution.

__________________
"Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain"- Iowa state motto
-Proof-hunter

Ventura/ Paul '12

You're avoiding my questions TOTALY
I did not borrow the f^%*#g money, and as I explained earlier in this thread, numerous banks denied my loan request for a property I bought. so while I'm trying hard to control my temper here, what f&^%g money are you talking about? are you high?!!! and to the 15 a$$&^*s who voted on "we should pay back" in this poll, same questions apply to you all, what money I owe to who? get the ^%*& out of here.

__________________
Obama, Bob Gates, Colin Powel, Hillary Clinton and other war criminals from Bush administration… Yes, it's a change we can forget about, because do not forget, it was a candidate brought to you by a non democratic media, while any real candidate has been obscured by it.

You will not see any change until you unite for democratic media.

To me, saying that is treason. The Preamble is the very definition of our government. It is not only law, it is above law. It is the standard to which all of our laws are bound.

__________________
"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits." FDR-First Inaugural Address

Xandafur,
Don't know what to tell you. If you know your Constitutional law, you *know* that preambles never override statutes. They give a clarification to the purpose of statutes, but one of our favorite national pasttimes is to read statutes *out of existence* by preambles.

In the case of our Constitution, it is a collection of laws. Non-negotiable, binding edicts on what our government must always or may never do. The moment people start looking at the preamble and say "we can do whatever we want (even though the statutes forbid it) so long as it conforms to the preamble" it defeats the purpose of the whole thing.
So it is with the Constitution. You might want to think that over and get back to me.

__________________
"Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain"- Iowa state motto
-Proof-hunter

Ventura/ Paul '12

We borrow from ourselves. Mostly from Social Security and other 'intergovernmental holdings', so the entire premise is empty.

__________________

On the contrary, statutes can never override the Preamble; not legally. We have a Supreme Court bound by the Constitution to see to it. Those men in robes are not perfect, and some of them are, and have been very bad, but when they are good, they must look to the Preamble to decide. I should add that happily, the constitution in its entirety conforms to the Preamble.

__________________
"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits." FDR-First Inaugural Address

This is crazy, people just keep talking and avoiding my points, but it's fine, you all pay your trillions and get your arses wooped trying to come up with those trillions the 'smart way by liberating' countries, I will be watching from the side.
OK, good investment
congratulations

__________________
Obama, Bob Gates, Colin Powel, Hillary Clinton and other war criminals from Bush administration… Yes, it's a change we can forget about, because do not forget, it was a candidate brought to you by a non democratic media, while any real candidate has been obscured by it.

You will not see any change until you unite for democratic media.

I didn't invest in it, they stole the money

__________________

uhm,
If the thief steals the money....and some other crooks let the thief take more of the money to invest (lending whatever)....
uhm..

Then Sir, I say it is patriotic to be anti thief, and we should work in making sure that that thief loses, because the thieves loss means a new beginning, the only thing is, what follows below is the most important:
We have to be sure that who ever replaces the thief, is not just another thief, and we can be sure that the non democratic media which brought us the thief will not provide a solution.

There is an interesting chart on page 2? of this thread, showing Japan, owning most of our debt, followed by China, UK....

I will start a new thread for the solution of our debt

__________________
Obama, Bob Gates, Colin Powel, Hillary Clinton and other war criminals from Bush administration… Yes, it's a change we can forget about, because do not forget, it was a candidate brought to you by a non democratic media, while any real candidate has been obscured by it.

You will not see any change until you unite for democratic media.

There's also a video in my sig that goes into much greater detail than the chart on page 2.

__________________