|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 08 2019 21:57 farvacola wrote:
Congressional salaries are more than three times the median household income, so to claim that they're a pittance isn't really accurate. Further, elected officials can't just accept money from random people or entities, they have to report everything annually and many kinds of donations are forbidden. Naturally, those reporting requirements need to be strengthened, but the real cashout for politicians happens after they've left office for a reason.
It's an irrelevant reason. The point is that the suggestion leads instantly to absolute corruption of the political system in favour of the donor class. The only way it works is by fixing the rules that prevent the buying of politicians by billionaires who would happily take care of them through a shutdown that guaranteed their interests were served.
|
On January 08 2019 22:57 Plansix wrote:
The congresses ability to defund a specific agency or section of the goverment is one of the checks the founding fathers put in place. Passing a budget is the bare minimum congress is supposed to do, so I don't know if its a good idea to low that bar even further.
Either this:
On January 08 2019 23:02 Gorsameth wrote:
Its a problem the rest of the world solved some time ago.
Failing to pass major legislation causes a governmental resignation and snap elections.
Or just change the default. Congress has the power to defund anything, but if congress doesn't do anything, stuff keeps running, instead of the current "If congress doesn't do anything, everything breaks down".
So they still have the exact same amount of power, but they need to actually do something to exercise it, so stuff keep running if congress can't actually decide on doing something. A power that gets activated by choosing to activate it, rather than not choosing not to activate it.
|
On January 08 2019 23:05 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2019 21:57 farvacola wrote:
Congressional salaries are more than three times the median household income, so to claim that they're a pittance isn't really accurate. Further, elected officials can't just accept money from random people or entities, they have to report everything annually and many kinds of donations are forbidden. Naturally, those reporting requirements need to be strengthened, but the real cashout for politicians happens after they've left office for a reason. It's an irrelevant reason. The point is that the suggestion leads instantly to absolute corruption of the political system in favour of the donor class. The only way it works is by fixing the rules that prevent the buying of politicians by billionaires who would happily take care of them through a shutdown that guaranteed their interests were served.
You’re basically describing the status quo here, so I’m not sure it applies to a change.
|
On January 08 2019 23:17 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2019 22:57 Plansix wrote:
The congresses ability to defund a specific agency or section of the goverment is one of the checks the founding fathers put in place. Passing a budget is the bare minimum congress is supposed to do, so I don't know if its a good idea to low that bar even further. Either this: Show nested quote +On January 08 2019 23:02 Gorsameth wrote:
Its a problem the rest of the world solved some time ago.
Failing to pass major legislation causes a governmental resignation and snap elections. Or just change the default. Congress has the power to defund anything, but if congress doesn't do anything, stuff keeps running, instead of the current "If congress doesn't do anything, everything breaks down". So they still have the exact same amount of power, but they need to actually do something to exercise it, so stuff keep running if congress can't actually decide on doing something. A power that gets activated by choosing to activate it, rather than not choosing not to activate it.
Our governmental system does not allow for snap elections and we can’t change that without rewriting the foundation of our federal government.
And the system is working as designed. The failure is not due to our system of government, but because of the president and weak ass congress we elected. And those politicians will be punished the longer this unnecessary crisis exists.
|
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem.
|
On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem.
I’m not convinced that it is easy to overcome the fundamental risk of democratic system, that shitty people might be elected. The job of a government is to provide stability over generations, not run on automatic when the lawmakers suck at their job.
Furthermore, all systems can be abused. Create one that runs without consistent approval from the legislature, broke, abuses systems will be allowed to persist until the legislature votes to stop them.
|
|
|
On January 09 2019 00:30 JimmiC wrote:
How about Federal workers continue to get paid and services remain as the last budget, but politicians fail to get paid until they do their job. It would suck for the few AOC's of the world that are just getting started. And I'm sure a bunch of the others despite their large incomes are also living pay check to pay check.
To me the flaw in the system is the consequence is not effecting the people creating the problem it is effecting a bunch of other people.
You could also maybe force them to work until it is done including weekends or something. I am not sure the exact solution but it appears that there is no direct consequence to the politicians which is a flaw.
As I've already pointed out, this instantly corrupts the system in favour of the richest donors. They can simply starve out whichever side of Congress is poorer and get their way every single time.
Even worse, you instantly weed out even the possibility of an AOC getting anywhere because they'd be the ones squeezed to death in such a situation.
'Sure it's bad, let's make it worse' is not a good strategy (as someone living in pre-Brexit England, I can confirm this).
|
Also, giving politicians control over each other’s pay paycheck is easy to abuse.
|
On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem.
A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United.
|
On January 09 2019 02:38 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem. A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United.
Bad leaders is not a problem exclusive to US, but shutdowns have been solved in many other countried despite. That might be an indication that this is not a completely unsolvable situation.
I'm a bit tired of these excuses, whether it be "Our country is unique!" Or in this case "Our leaders are just that bad". That doesn't mean you can't implement solutions to combat the problem in question.
|
On January 09 2019 02:53 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 02:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem. A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United. Bad leaders is not a problem exclusive to US, but shutdowns have been solved in many other countried despite. That might be an indication that this is not a completely unsolvable situation. I'm a bit tired of these excuses, whether it be "Our country is unique!" Or in this case "Our leaders are just that bad". That doesn't mean you can't implement solutions to combat the problem in question.
i think you have a bit of work to do between claiming a different handling of the process = ‘a better solution,’ especially with regards to the numerous differences in the various government structures.
nobody is claiming american exceptionalism here, if you think one of the solved cases in other governments can apply we’re all all-ears. i think we’re all collectively tired of the american exceptionalism bullshit from all parties.
|
On January 09 2019 02:53 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 02:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem. A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United. Bad leaders is not a problem exclusive to US, but shutdowns have been solved in many other countried despite. That might be an indication that this is not a completely unsolvable situation. I'm a bit tired of these excuses, whether it be "Our country is unique!" Or in this case "Our leaders are just that bad". That doesn't mean you can't implement solutions to combat the problem in question.
It isn't like your country is magic. You goverment agencies can be defunded just like our. Your goverment could pass a budget with zero dollars for public transit salaries because there is some labor dispute and your politicians are completely bitches. It just hasn't happened recently and you folks riot when it does. Or when France tries to tax fuel. When you say you all solved the problem, is more that a parliamentary system is required keep paying the bills when the government is in flux and new elections are happening. Your country is on autopilot until the election is over. There are likely a number very stupid things each of your governments does that would never exist in the US system.
|
we're all stupid and awful (or have the potential to be so) in our unique, exceptional ways
|
The existence and nature of the Brexit referendum comes to mind. The US does not allow a political party to stage some nation wide vote to leave NAFTA just to make a faction within their party happy. An idea that terrible cannot exist in the US system.
|
|
|
On January 09 2019 03:34 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 00:41 iamthedave wrote:On January 09 2019 00:30 JimmiC wrote:
How about Federal workers continue to get paid and services remain as the last budget, but politicians fail to get paid until they do their job. It would suck for the few AOC's of the world that are just getting started. And I'm sure a bunch of the others despite their large incomes are also living pay check to pay check.
To me the flaw in the system is the consequence is not effecting the people creating the problem it is effecting a bunch of other people.
You could also maybe force them to work until it is done including weekends or something. I am not sure the exact solution but it appears that there is no direct consequence to the politicians which is a flaw. As I've already pointed out, this instantly corrupts the system in favour of the richest donors. They can simply starve out whichever side of Congress is poorer and get their way every single time. Even worse, you instantly weed out even the possibility of an AOC getting anywhere because they'd be the ones squeezed to death in such a situation. 'Sure it's bad, let's make it worse' is not a good strategy (as someone living in pre-Brexit England, I can confirm this). Yeah but in the US both parties are super well funded so waiting out one or the other would take forever. I also suggested have them working non stop till it was fixed. I'm pretty sure some of these people wouldn't have been willing to skip going home for Christmas. What the mechanism is I'm not set on. But that these is something that makes it uncomfortable on those who have the power to fix it makes sense.
How do you force the Senators, the House Reps and President to work through the holidays exactly?
|
On January 09 2019 02:53 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 02:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem. A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United. Bad leaders is not a problem exclusive to US, but shutdowns have been solved in many other countried despite. That might be an indication that this is not a completely unsolvable situation. I'm a bit tired of these excuses, whether it be "Our country is unique!" Or in this case "Our leaders are just that bad". That doesn't mean you can't implement solutions to combat the problem in question.
Your use of the word excuses, especially the follow-up sentence at the end, implies that you think it’s possible for us, the posters, to solve this problem.
Do you really think it’s our fault? What can we do that we haven’t already done?
|
Norway28908 Posts
On January 09 2019 03:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 02:53 Excludos wrote:On January 09 2019 02:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem. A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United. Bad leaders is not a problem exclusive to US, but shutdowns have been solved in many other countried despite. That might be an indication that this is not a completely unsolvable situation. I'm a bit tired of these excuses, whether it be "Our country is unique!" Or in this case "Our leaders are just that bad". That doesn't mean you can't implement solutions to combat the problem in question. It isn't like your country is magic. You goverment agencies can be defunded just like our. Your goverment could pass a budget with zero dollars for public transit salaries because there is some labor dispute and your politicians are completely bitches. It just hasn't happened recently and you folks riot when it does. Or when France tries to tax fuel. When you say you all solved the problem, is more that a parliamentary system is required keep paying the bills when the government is in flux and new elections are happening. Your country is on autopilot until the election is over. There are likely a number very stupid things each of your governments does that would never exist in the US system.
I can't remember the great riots of norway, when was that?
|
On January 09 2019 03:58 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 03:09 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2019 02:53 Excludos wrote:On January 09 2019 02:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 08 2019 23:57 Velr wrote:
If your system is breaking down due to "president" and "weak ass congress" i would argue that it is an error in your system. The reason that it comes to this is pretty sad but it would be pretty easy to set up a system that doesn't have this problem. A system is only as good as the people that are part of it. When you elect a moron to lead one branch and another branch is full of spineless cowards who are willing to cover for said moron and also disregard the impact their actions (or rather, inaction) has on the country because they're really only accountable to their donors because of Citizens United. Bad leaders is not a problem exclusive to US, but shutdowns have been solved in many other countried despite. That might be an indication that this is not a completely unsolvable situation. I'm a bit tired of these excuses, whether it be "Our country is unique!" Or in this case "Our leaders are just that bad". That doesn't mean you can't implement solutions to combat the problem in question. It isn't like your country is magic. You goverment agencies can be defunded just like our. Your goverment could pass a budget with zero dollars for public transit salaries because there is some labor dispute and your politicians are completely bitches. It just hasn't happened recently and you folks riot when it does. Or when France tries to tax fuel. When you say you all solved the problem, is more that a parliamentary system is required keep paying the bills when the government is in flux and new elections are happening. Your country is on autopilot until the election is over. There are likely a number very stupid things each of your governments does that would never exist in the US system. I can't remember the great riots of norway, when was that?
They are looking into the future when oil gets replaced 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
