TRENDING NEWS

POPULAR NEWS

Would You Say That All Americans Are Treated Equally By The Federal State And Local Governments

Why is America considered one country if every state has its own set of laws?

The “United States of America” is a federal union of associated states with an overarching government, treated as a nation.People like to think this is unique or at least the first one of these.The United Kingdom of Great Britain is composed of a principality, two kingdoms and a slightly vaguely defined country, region, province or “other” joined into an overarching kingdom which is treated as another nation.So, it’s a nation because it’s been defined and agreed with the United Nations specifically and other countries in general as a nation.In fact, it wasn’t until 1783 when Britain (the preeminent nation at the world at the time) actually accepted it as a nation in its own right.Plenty of nations (in their own eyes) still do not have universal recognition across the nations of the world, and some have almost universal acceptance… but not quite (Palestine is a good example).In the final analysis: to be accepted as a nation, you need to have an agreement with a number of powerful nations, and/or acceptance across a wide range of less powerful ones to be a “nation”.If you’re big, powerful or rich enough to force others to call you a nation: you are one.If you’re not - it’s debatable.The USA certainly fits the definition… vague as it is.

In 2015, would you say that all Americans are treated equally by the federal, state and local governments?

No, in 2015,I would not say that all Americans
were treated equally by the federal, state and local governments-

JPMorgan Chase didn't spend time in jail-
but the guy who filmed the death of Eric Garner did.

Can the federal government have different laws for different states?

Federal Law, in its language, must treat all states equally; however, there are two ways in which the Federal government could theoretically "legalize" marijuana differently between various states:Through the Executive branch's innate power of discretion, the Federal authorities charged with enforcing the Federal drug laws with relation to marijuana could choose not to lower the enforcement priority of marijuana-related crimes in those states that have legalized its use.  This is essentially what a lot of city and county governments have already done - when you make such enforcement the lowest priority, there will always be something more important for the police to be doing, making the use of the drug essentially "legal".Congress or the DEA could deregulate marijuana entirely, resulting in each State being granted the ability to regulate the drug themselves.  So long as there is Federal law on the subject, the theory goes that the Constitutional powers of Federal pre-emption prevent the States from acting contrary to those laws (they can be more restrictive, but not less so).The biggest problem with #1 is that someone will eventually challenge such a scheme as a violation of their 14th Amendment Equal Protection rights, and the Feds may be forced by the court to make all enforcement priorities equal across the country.

State and local taxes are tax deductible when paying U.S. federal income taxes. To what extent does that unfairly subsidize higher taxes and spending by state and local governments — and if so, should those deductions be scrapped?

Yes, they should be scrapped for a multitude of reasons, one of which you mention.Someone who deducts $20K from their income because they live in a high tax state like California is paying roughly $7K less in federal income taxes than an individual that makes the same income, lives in Nevada and rents his property. The tax system in the US should be designed to raise the proper amount of money, make the least drag on the country and to treat all of our citizens fairly. I would contend that is not fair.This also in effect subsidizes the higher taxing and spending in some states because they know that their citizens won’t feel the full impact of the tax bill. If people have to actually pay the whole load they might demand that their state be more efficient or at least they can make an honest choice to support the additional spending.And finally, some states raise their funds through means that are not deductible. For example, there are states with no income taxes at all and higher sales taxes. Since those sales taxes are not deductible but income tax is, we are again treating different citizens differently when it comes to their taxes. This should not be the case.

Which of the following are NECESSARY services for a government to provide for its citizens?

Either local, state, or federal governments?
A. Police Force, Courts, and jails
B. Fire Fighting Service
C. National Defense
D. Food assistance for those not able to feed themselves and their families
E. Basic education grades K-12, or preschool thru college
F. Subsidized housing for those that can't afford a home
G. Healthcare for those people that can't afford insurance
H. Road, parks, and bridges

What else is NECESSARY for a government to provide for its people?

Thanks

TRENDING NEWS