Writing on the matter of Obama’s 3,000 page health care bill, Charles Kesler notes that the founding fathers’ view on the law was similar to John Locke’s, who saw the law as a community’s “settled standing rules, indifferent, and the same to all parties.” To be legitimate, “a statute must be ‘received and allowed by common consent to be the standard of right and wrong, and the common measure to decide all controversies’ between citizens.”
Kesler:
This phonebook-sized law that would control a sixth of the U.S. economy cannot be a law by that definition. If you rummage through the text of, say, the House of Representatives’ version of the bill, you find scores of places where power is delegated to administrative agencies and special boards, which are charged to fill the gaps in the written legislation by promulgating thousands, if not tens of thousands, of new pages of regulations that will then be applied to individual cases.
(….)
The whole point is to empower government officials, usually unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, to bless or curse your petitions as they see fit, guided, of course, by their expertness in a law so vast, so intricate, and so capricious that it could justify a hundred different outcomes in the same case. Faster than one might think, a government of equal laws turns into a regime of arbitrary privileges.
(….)
It was against the threat of such a despotism that proper and not so proper Bostonians threw the original Tea Party….Today’s Tea Party movement sees a similar threat of despotism-of monopoly control of health care, corrupting bailouts, massive indebtedness, and the eclipse of constitutional rights-in the Obama Administration’s policies.
The whole thing here.
” Faster than one might think, a government of equal laws turns into a regime of arbitrary privileges.”
Sounds a lot like our Charter or Rights. It’s not there to ensure peoples rights but gives the government the ability to take some peoples rights away and give other people special privileges.
What, no comments yet?
More government-mandated “solutions” result in more bureaucracy, which results in more bureaucrats whose main concern tends to be their own job preservation via bureaucracy.
I know that some government workers are earnest, honest and well-meaning (I’ve met more than a few) but overall, my “feeling” is that more layers of government is probably a bad thing for the US.
It’s time to cast off European ways once and for all. On this, both Americans and Muslims would agree, but not for the same reasons.
I don’t think the issue can be about the desirability of homogeneity of a law but about the authority to make decisions against such uniformity.
After all, if it’s the law against dogs in restaurants, then, allowing a seeing-eye dog is a uniform decisions for both sets of citizens. The issue simply is about who has the authority to make decisions about the nature of the population to which a rule applies.
It can’t be the bureaucrat because this reduces a law to a personal whim. I don’t think it’s about complexity of the law either.
It’s back to the authority to make decisions. In Obama’s world, authority does not rest with the people and their representatives, who are fully accountable to those same people. In Obama’s world, authority rests with him and his unelected team (Soros, Emanual, Jarrett, Axelrod) and their acolytes of Pelosi and Reid.
In Obama’s world, the duty of his authority is to write up policies they want and impose them on the people and their representatives. This imposition may require bribes and threats to the representatives, and constant propaganda to the people to ‘stop arguing and accept what We Know is Right’.
That’s the reason for the Tea Parties, the abrogation of democracy and the imposition of an unelected and unaccountable oligarchy in the US.
Excellent article.
“the eclipse of constitutional rights-in the Obama Administration’s policies.”
That’s the money phrase. Obama has little respect for the Constitution of the United States, he believes it is an antiquated document, it’s beneath him to respect it. He is in way over his head, it’s about the people of the United States, not his legacy. This display of his ego is appalling.
ET at March 12, 2010 8:19 AM
In other words the same process which produced the UN “Goldstone Report.”
If you needed further proof that Dems do not believe in democracy here is some more:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/House-Democrats-looking-at-Slaughter-Solution-to-pass-Obamacare-without-a-vote-on-Senate-bill-87267402.html
key para:
“Each bill that comes before the House for a vote on final passage must be given a rule that determines things like whether the minority would be able to offer amendments to it from the floor.
In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House “deems” the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.”
Reconciliation was bad enough. Demanding that the senate bill be passed without letting congress see what changes would be put into the recon bill is even worse. And now they see nothing wrong with “deeming” a bill has passed – the largest bill in american, hell, world – history mind you, shows their utter regard for the reason why independence was declared in the first place.
236 days until America gets to re-declare its independence from tyranny.
And then there is this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/did-senate-parliamentarian-just-kill-obamacare
key graf:
“If this report is true, the parliamentarian’s ruling seems to nix the “Slaughter Solution,” whereby the House would deem the Senate bill passed only after the reconciliation bill is passed by both the House and the Senate.
So where do Democrats go from here? One possibility is that Harry Reid will fire the Senate parliamentarian.”
Saturday night massacre redux? ( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre?wasRedirected=true )
far-fetched? The “Slaughter Solution” was unthinkable until it was reality and before it reconciliation. I think the dem leadership will stop at nothing if it means the bill passes. America’s democracy is suffering its greatest test since Watergate, maybe since Roosevelt tried to stack the SCOTUS or perhaps even the civil war.
ET, nail meet hammer. Turk, “236 days until America gets to re-declare its independence from tyranny,” indeed!
The Slaughter solution just shows the desperation, the level of political depravity the DNC has sunk to.
It isn’t about Health Insurance reform anymore, it is about Barry’s reputation, his legacy.
Kind of like when Jean Cruton signed us up to Kyoto at 6% reduction . . . he didn’t have a clue what it meant but he thought it was a nice legacy for him. . . . a good little boy saving the planet.
“236 days until America gets to re-declare its independence from tyranny.”
There’s a truly frightening scenario that I only became aware of recently. The election is in November. The newly-elected Congressmen and Senators do not take their seats until January 3rd (?). The old Congress can convene between the election and that date and do effectively whatever they damn well please.
Consider: the health care bill, or some other obnoxious Democrat piece of garbage, languishes until November. Voters deliver a beating to the Dems at the polls, handing at least the House back to the Republicans. The Dems convene Congress after the election and, with nothing left to lose, proceed to ram EVERYTHING down Americans’ throats, probably with the help of a couple RINOs like Graham, McCain, or the idiot twins from Maine.
I don’t know what happens then but it probably comes perilously close to revolution.
Ian:
interesting point. I’m going to look into that.
sasquatch – the UN isn’t a democratic institution; its ‘representatives’ aren’t elected by the people in each nation. Sorry, there’s no comparison.
The key here, again, is the ‘contempt for parliament’, i.e., the contempt for the people, of the Obama administration. This began immediately on his election, when he insisted that His Stimulus Bill be passed by Congress, without their reading or debating it.
That is, he reduced them to a rubber stamp of His Will, rather than to representatives of the Will of The People.
Obama and his gang have continued on with this denigration of Congress and the People. Note how any dissent is rejected – their contempt for the Tea Parties, the Town Halls, FOX media etc and how the Gang’s focus is on tactics-to-get-past-Congress. Congress and the People are seen as an impediment.
Just as Obama sees the Supreme Court as an Obstacle to His Way, he sees Congress and the People as an obstacle.
“There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity”. Goerthe
For half of a century I almost thought that “guided” democracy wasn’t so bad. But, I guess all
Government requires strong checks and balances if only for the sake of sanity.
mel
Oh, and now, Obama is delaying his Asian trip by three days, to ‘work on health care’.
Why is it so vital? It’s not about health care, for the actual health care provided in this govt run plan would be reduced in quality of care.
It’s not about those not covered by private insurance, for Obama’s gang has ‘misinformed’ (aka lied) about their numbers and intentions, hiding the fact that many US citizens prefer to pay, as we in Canada did before socialized care, visit by visit, treatment by treatment, rather than paying constantly in our taxes for non-treatment or future-treatment.
It’s about the economic infrastructure. The agenda of the Obama socialists is to set up a statist infrastructure where the federal govt runs the economy, rather than private enterprise. That’s the agenda. The only agenda.
Jobs? Obama has done nothing for this; his ‘stimulus package’ created no jobs; it retained many public service jobs by handing money over to states to retain their bureaucrats. But it didn’t enable any private sector jobs, and it’s the private sector that is the basis for the economy.
The economy? Obama has moved the US into a deficit unknown in its entire history.
Foreign affairs? Obama is a disaster; he’s enabled Iran to become a nuclear nation; he’s alienated our western allies – the list is a long one.
The agenda is simple and singular – he’s using health care to insert a statist infrastructure.
Ian:
the dems now have only 59 seats in the senate. In order to pass anything in the senate they need 60 votes (that’s the genius of the senate design – Canada would do well to copy it), so legislative götterdämmerung is unlikely after nov 2.
Gord – you haven’t been following the strategies. The Democrats don’t need 60 to pass in the Senate; they are planning, or were planning, to use ‘reconciliation’ which requires only a simple majority. This – despite the fact that reconciliation was never meant to pass such a substantive bill but only minor budget items.
The agenda of The Obama Gang at the moment, I think, seems to be based on bribes and threats in the House to get their majority there. That’s what is taking the time, those bribes and threats.
From article:
In fact, that’s the point of such promiscuous laws. They operate not by setting up fences to protect each man’s liberty. They start not from equal rights but from equal (and often unequal) privileges, the favors or benefits that government may bestow on or withhold from its clients.
Herein lies the major difference between the Left’s concept of equality and the Right’s concept of equality.
The Left wants to have power over the equality of end result regardless of individual input and that means curtailing liberty.
The Right wants to ensure that individual people have equal opportunity to achieve their own result through hard work and merit while preserving individual liberty.
Fewer people are going to want to go through the hard work required to become doctors under Obama’s system.
We have a shortage of doctors here in Canada because many go to the U.S. now but in future, if Obamacare passes, fewer Canadian doctors will leave for the U.S. and fewer will want to train as doctors in the first place.
The lack of incentive is going to be very costly.
I remember at one of the town hall meetings last year an American doctor who supported Obamacare said that specialists shouldn’t make more money than GPs.
“Obama’s 3,000 page health care bill…”
“Our Founding Fathers lacked the special literary skills with which modern writers on the subject of government are so richly endowed. When they wrote the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they found themselves more or less forced to come to the point. So clumsy of thought and pen were the Founders that even today, seven generations later, we can tell what they were talking about.”
– P.J. O’Rourke, Parliament of Whores
The American people are waking up to the leviathon which has been created in their country, the “Bureaucracy”!
When given the choice, there will be more than enough doctors who love liberty and the people they serve, and they will form an underground medical system which treats people with respect and dignity and will do the “right thing” when it comes to providing health care.
It will turn into a barter/cash system and the lawyers/sharks will be feeding off each other in due time. It will take longer in the big cities to happen, but this thing is going to implode like under its own hollow weight.
Obama’s (Barry Soetoro’s) Health bill is nothing but a vast shift of fiscal liability from the insurance industry to the public treasury. The moment the bill is law, Insurance stocks will triple as their services are mandated by the state but their liabilities are subsidized by the public.
As for the constitution being “eclipsed: the constitution was “eclipsed” by federal imperialism far before Obama AKA Barry Soetoro took office. Both Wilson and FDR had issues with the constitution’s restraints on federal power and the last 3 administrations act as if the constitution does not apply to the new beltway aristocracy.
Between these 5 administrations the American people have lost their republic, their personal, national and economic sovereignty to a fascistic central government which does little more than oversee the fleecing of the public for the foreign interests which owns the federal debt. Americans are in chains of debt to the very forces the founding fathers rebelled against.
This was predicted by Franklin, Jefferson and Alexis de Tocqueville:
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” – Thomas Jefferson,
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. ” – Ben Franklin
“History affords us many instances of the ruin of states, by the prosecution of measures ill suited to the temper and genius of their people. The ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken policy.” – Ben Franklin
“A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it. ”
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money. ” – Alexis de Tocqueville
Were the founding fathers clairvoyant or did they have a profound understanding of human nature and the corrupting forces of power brokering and financing it with borrowed money from rapacious financiers.
Even the founders could not conceive of the gigantic fraud and robbery of the treasury that has been perpetrated on the American people by a criminal Wall Street cabal and the foreign imposter puppet they installed in the oval office.
Primer
SEIU: Service Employees International Union
Public health care: Delivered by SEIU members
The plan: Convince the unsuspecting public that the state can deliver health care better by demonizing private-sector insurance companies. Bankrupt the companies. Create state monopoly whose employees are SEIU members.
Any questions?
The arguments against the delegation of legislative authority were made in the 1930s, and lost. The legislators can no longer take on the burden of legislating–it’s too complicated and must be left to wise, nimble experts in the executive branch. The legislature may overrule only on egregious abuses, of which there are one or two every decade. I wish this were otherwise.
Occams……….
It would seem that the Founders did anticipate and conceive exactly that….
They built many checks and balances, which if enforced would aleviate the current situation. Impeachment for starters….and a birth certificate.
Much like the problems of gun crime would not exist if the long enacted provisions of the criminal code were enforced………
oz – I don’t think that the left wants equality of outcome; that’s just their propaganda. After all, what happens when socialism enters the picture is inequality of outcome.
Socialism sets up a two-class system, where one class, the class with power by virtue of political, ethnic (tribal), hereditary or fiscal power, take all the ‘good outcomes’ for themselves. The rest of the population are left at the LCD, the lowest common denominator.
A good example at the moment is Haiti, which is two class, with a Set of about 30 extremely wealthy families who own the ports, the major farms for export production and so on, who live in gated communities, with private schools, their own police force, etc.
And the ‘rest of the population’, who are external to this economy, who are ignored by the govt, who have no infrastructure of an economy as they have no schools, hydro, roads, water, medical care..which are all supplied by external charities.
The West poured millions in to Haiti, despite some warnings of the result. What is the result? Two months later, and the masses without homes, care, water, etc…have yet to see any govt intervention. Any ‘help’ to their plastic tent cities comes from external charities and actual US military etc.
That’s socialism.
Set You Free – I think your scenario of the ‘plan’ is absolutely correct. Nothing to do with health at all; all about power and control by the Obama Gang.
Even the founders could not conceive of the gigantic fraud and robbery of the treasury that has been perpetrated on the American people by a criminal Wall Street cabal and the foreign imposter puppet they installed in the oval office.
~Occam’s disposable blades
The founders couldn’t conceive of the influence of communism in the school system and the media.
I don’t don’t think communism had been invented yet.
sasquatch, impeachment necessitates a super majority in the senate.
oz – I don’t think that the left wants equality of outcome; that’s just their propaganda. After all, what happens when socialism enters the picture is inequality of outcome.
~et
I agree it’s just propaganda.
It’s very effective too.
Liberal voters think like children, they all want a equal slice of the bread, whether they earned it or not.
The story of the Little Red Hen comes to mind:
http://tinyurl.com/yh4dale
I don’t think Liberals tell their children this story these days.
Kate: nothing sums it up better than the speech made by this chap back in 1964, at this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt1fYSAChxs&feature=related
Re OZ:
The founding fathers were well acquainted with the theory and pitfalls of “socialism”. Ben Franklin and Jefferson were friendly with a dodering Voltaire who was the patriarch of socialists and jocobins who were formenting the French revolution. They understood how centralization of power, collectivization and redistribution of wealth were toxic to a working constitutional republic. They realized these concentrations of wealth and power would create a new aristocracy – a political and economic class much like the monarchies they rebelled against.
“Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” – Alexis de Tocqueville
“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
Occam, Jefferson was nothing short of brilliant, and said more profound things in his life than most American leaders have said in all the time since, but that particular quote about banks is at least partly false:
http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/Private_Banks_(Quotation)
Gord: the health care bill has already passed the Senate. If Pelosi can get the House to swallow it whole, that’s it. Game over. If she can’t get it done by the Easter recess, watch out for this.
re. Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
Unfortunately the “checks and balances” part of the Constitution was adopted in June 1788 twenty eight years earlier.
While it is true that socialism as a concept dates back to the 1600s, modern communism as we know it dates to Marx in 1848.
Few people thought that communists could actually take government and rule a nation until Lenin did it in 1917.
That is why there are no “checks and balances” preventing the communist takeover of the U.S.
I think that socialism and communism are not modern theories but ancient ones. I consider that tribalism is the basic socialist template.
It’s two-class, both essentially hereditary. There’s no movement between classes, which means, there is no middle class. The middle class is one where people live a lifestyle that they achieve by their own individual work. They can rise and fall in this class (lower, middle, upper) but their lifestyle is based on their work.
In a modern society, this class ought to be the largest because it obviously is the site of innovation and technological development.
In a tribal or collectivist system, which is what socialism and communism are, the lifestyle is not a result of individual work but of societal position. One class controls all resources; the other class is allotted, by ‘govt law’, portions of these resources. There isn’t any individual work!
What modern advocates of socialism and communism don’t understand is that destroying the middle class stops progress. Dead. Frozen. Finished. Because it stops work.
The old tribal societies, and this includes the European feudal era, were ‘no progress’ economies. They simply existed in basic sustenance style.
However, when the West moved out of tribalism and began to empower a middle class, this set up the era of technological devt and progress. Again, the reason is that middle class.
You will note that the current tribal societies, all of them Islamic in the ME – are non-innovative. They are parasitic on the technology of the West. They have cars, computers, guns, modern sanitation and so on – all copies from the West. They have invented Nothing. Absolutely nothing. They can’t. They don’t have a middle class.
I maintain that our world population cannot survive in a two-class tribal or socialist mode. Its population mass requires innovation and that means, it requires a middle class. The Obama Gang’s attack on the American middle class is indeed an attack, it’s hostile, it’s adamant, but, I don’t think it will succeed.
Occam’s disposable blades, great posts, and absolutely love that handle!
EBD: OR, Power to the Academy!
From a recent George Will piece, Obama in the Wilsonian Tradition. Will argues that Obama is not a radical — more a “timid progressive”.
STUNNING QUOTE:
Professor Obama, who will seek re-election on the 100th anniversary of Wilson’s 1912 election, understands, which makes him melancholy. Speaking to Katie Couric on Feb. 7, Obama said:
“I would have loved nothing better than to simply come up with some very elegant, academically approved approach to health care, and didn’t have any kinds of legislative fingerprints on it, and just go ahead and have that passed. But that’s not how it works in our democracy. Unfortunately, what we end up having to do is to do a lot of negotiations with a lot of different people.”
I think that socialism and communism are not modern theories but ancient ones. I consider that tribalism is the basic socialist template.
~et
Tribalism is the basic social template, but it wasn’t theorized on before hand, it just evolved that way.
Socialism and communism aren’t ancient theories, although they were ancient practices.
Just as fish live in schools rather than theorize about it.
After towns and cities had already just evolved and further developed into city states, some people, like Marx, began to theorize that it would be a good idea to devolve back to agrarian tribes.
Plato (428-347 BCE) wrote The Republic in 360 BCE, an idealisation of a slave society with a rigid class system, divided between philosophers, warriors and commoners. Justice and social stability were ensured because everyone was assigned to a station in life appropriate to their interests and virtues. The structure of the Republic was an image of Plato’s conception of the structure of the human being: Reason, Spirit and Desire.
Did Plato or even Thomas More envision the economics of how their visions of Utopia would be based?
No.
It wasn’t until Karl Marx that the Utopian vision had an actual economic theory to underpin it.
It seems that Obama, having never learned from history, wants to put Marx’s economic theories into practice with this Obamacare issue.
Ian:
“Occam, Jefferson was nothing short of brilliant, and said more profound things in his life than most American leaders have said in all the time since, but that particular quote about banks is at least partly false”
I concur on Jefferson’s intellect. He was the quintessential Renaissance man – a man schooled in science, literature, history, politics and finance – a man of the liberal enlightenment movement a contemporary of John Locke.
I disagree about Wkipedia’s “opinion” on Jefferson’s take on banking for two reasons;
A) Any offering from Wikipedia concerning the foundational politics and personalitiesin the US and fundamental American constituted republicanism, is likely to be revisionist pap flavored by their left wing world views and distorted retrospect. Not wise to use Wikipedia as reference on a political or theological matter unless you want the progressivist revision (interpretation) of fact.
B) When that quote is read in context of Jefferson’s position on banking as expressed on congressional record and his personal writings and his influence in the federalist essays, Jefferson saw debt financing as usury. He was aware of the European Kings who went bankrupt financing wars and projects with borrowed money.
Primarily this statement is Jefferson stating that the state should issue currency debt free – unlike currency created by private banks who attach interest to their script. Jefferson lost out in 1913 when Wilson foolishly allowed a Banking cartel create the federal reserve system.
Next to Jefferson I cite Jackson as a staunch defender of free markets and a foe of usurious banking.
The both of them would be shocked to see the corrupt, usurious, insider cesspool Domestic markets trading has become today.
me no dhimmi – isn’t that quote from Obama the image of the essential Arrogant Elite Obama – the ‘melancholy wise man’, sighing over the ignorance and moronic nature of ‘the common man’. I can’t listen to his speeches.
Again, Obama’s so-called health care has zilch to do with health care and everything to do with inserting a statist template into the infrastructure of the US.
oz – well, I think that Plato focused on the economy – with his abolishment of private property (and the family). Aristotle wrote a strong critique of Plato’s attempt to homogenize the citizens into a ‘ruled mass’ and wrote strongly in defense of the individual right to private property.
What we have in Marx is the focus on the role of industrial production in the state – and industrialism as an economic mode moves out of the family-centred agricultural economy of Plato and Aristotle and into mass production using fossil fuels rather than human and animal labour. That’s a key difference.
Remember, that for much of the history of man, the economy was local agriculturalism based around hereditary tribal land ownership. The rise of nations coincided with the population increase in W. Europe in the late medieval era – and with the economy becoming ‘national’, i.e., having to produce more goods than a local sustenance, you got theories of ‘national economies’ – something impossible in the pre-nation eras.
The key thing to focus on, in my view, is the lack of a middle class in all collectivist economies, whether tribal, socialist or communist. And that’s what’s important to note about Obama’s agenda – the destruction of the middle class.
Gord Tulk:
The Dems would not need 60 Dem votes in a lame duck Senate, as they would have the RINOs that lost as well, McCain, Snow and Graham come to mind…
“What modern advocates of socialism and communism don’t understand is that destroying the middle class stops progress.”
Yes they do – and now you are beginning to understand.
Jefferson , one amazing guy. and humbler than Obama , of course everyone in the world is.I dont think he wrote an autobiography , and especially not two volumes.
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson – political philosopher, architect, musician, book collector, scientist, horticulturist, diplomat, inventor, and third President of the United States – looms large in any discussion of what Americans are as a people. Jefferson left to the future not only ideas but also a great body of practical achievements. President John F. Kennedy recognized Jefferson’s accomplishments when he told a gathering of American Nobel Prize winners that they were the greatest assemblage of talent in the White House since Jefferson had dined there alone. With his strong beliefs in the rights of man and a government derived from the people, in freedom of religion and the separation of church and state, and in education available to all, Thomas Jefferson struck a chord for human liberty 200 years ago that resounds through the decades.
But in the end, Jefferson’s own appraisal of his life, and the one that he wrote for use on his own tombstone, suffices: “Author of the Declaration of Independence, Of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom, And Father of the University of Virginia
Occam, that link wasn’t Wikipedia. The link is to the Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia, and their research regarding that quotation (and many others) is quite well-sourced. The accurate quotes appear to be thus:
“And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” (Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, Monticello, 28 May 1816)
“Bank-paper must be suppressed, and the circulating medium must be restored to the nation to whom it belongs.” (Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, Monticello, 24 June 1813)
That’s why I only said partly false.