A Q for the Wealth Creators
Comments
-
Not at all. I've seen the errors in my thinking. In deeper reflection, I've come to see how great government can be with the right person in the presidency. We need to continue to the right (lol) thing and elect Hillary Clinton in 2016.AZDuck said:
I know you're being sarkasmic, but... huh?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Agree wholeheartedly. It's time to get this country back. We've made some progress in this administration and we need to make the institutional changes to cement these victories for generations to come.AZDuck said:The structure of first-past-the-post inexorably leads to a two-party system. It's baked into the cake.
California, Texas, Florida, and New York should have more say than Wyoming. Let's say those states get 4 Senators. Washington, and other middle-range states should get 2 or 3. Wyoming, Vermont, and the other dinkies get one, which is more than they deserve by sheer proportion of poulation, which I think helps them represent their interests - after all, Wyoming doesn't have 1/4 of CA's population. And DC should be represented in Congress.
The question was about what I think - I think the Supremes got it wrong WRT political speech. I also think that the Supremes do a bit more legislating from the bench than they should - lib and conservative. I think that a lib court would be more likely to craft a ruling that I would agree with, but I would rather this issue be handled explicitly by the constitutional document. In most countries elections are managed by the legislature as representing the will of the sovereign (the people) rather than the people that think they know best (the judges).
"wide disparities" - I don't think the Founders thought that we would have this much disparity between the states. I also don't care. It's undemocratic as hell. -
Clinton/Pelosi 2016!!!!!!GrundleStiltzkin said:
Not at all. I've seen the errors in my thinking. In deeper reflection, I've come to see how great government can be with the right person in the presidency. We need to continue to the right (lol) thing and elect Hillary Clinton in 2016.AZDuck said:
I know you're being sarkasmic, but... huh?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Agree wholeheartedly. It's time to get this country back. We've made some progress in this administration and we need to make the institutional changes to cement these victories for generations to come.AZDuck said:The structure of first-past-the-post inexorably leads to a two-party system. It's baked into the cake.
California, Texas, Florida, and New York should have more say than Wyoming. Let's say those states get 4 Senators. Washington, and other middle-range states should get 2 or 3. Wyoming, Vermont, and the other dinkies get one, which is more than they deserve by sheer proportion of poulation, which I think helps them represent their interests - after all, Wyoming doesn't have 1/4 of CA's population. And DC should be represented in Congress.
The question was about what I think - I think the Supremes got it wrong WRT political speech. I also think that the Supremes do a bit more legislating from the bench than they should - lib and conservative. I think that a lib court would be more likely to craft a ruling that I would agree with, but I would rather this issue be handled explicitly by the constitutional document. In most countries elections are managed by the legislature as representing the will of the sovereign (the people) rather than the people that think they know best (the judges).
"wide disparities" - I don't think the Founders thought that we would have this much disparity between the states. I also don't care. It's undemocratic as hell. -
Mostly disagree.AZDuck said:All this said, the root cause of government waste is based elsewhere, not in the constitution itself.
1. The two party system is baked into the cake, and the Founders knew it. Hence all the debate about parties in the Federalist papers.
2. "One man one vote" is a basic principle of democracy. I think the structure as it is tilts the playing field too far, and has fueled corruption in small states. Think Robert Byrd in WV.
3. The individuals don't lose any rights. The corporation as a legal fiction never had them.
4. Like I said, I don't like term limits. I just think that system which incorporates proportional representation would be a better fit, and get more voices into Congress than we currently have. I'm all for a system that does not favor incumbency to the degree that ours does currently. I'm open to lots of different ways to structure it. Right now Congress runs to the political middle and then to K Street. Its a problem that stems directly from the structure of how we consitute our Congress. I think a good litmus test for Congress is the % of lawyers. We should have more people from different backgrounds in Congress. Right now it is all lawyers.
5. 15 years is an arbitrary number, OBK style. I'm not married to it. It should be well longer than a given Presidency so that the judge is not beholden to the President that appoints him/her, but not lifetime. 15 was my wild-assed guess.
Still not following on the waste part. You're saying corruption what makes up most of the waste?
I would put incompetence in front of corruption.
Anyway..good debate. Doubt we will ever solve it. We're just fucked.
-
I'm pretty sure I would kill something if a Clinton/Pelosi ticket won.
-
Clinton or Pelosi?Swaye said:I'm pretty sure I would kill something if a Clinton/Pelosi ticket won.
-
And I am sure @NSADawg is all over this thread now.
-
Stop for a minute and really think about how good the last 6 years have been. Do you want the progressive cause to end in 2016? Sure, we might not all identify ourselves as progressives, or even Democrats, but it's clear the Obama-led progressive wing of the Democratic party is truly acting in the best interests of every person on American soil.Swaye said:I'm pretty sure I would kill something if a Clinton/Pelosi ticket won.
-
They just need more time is all. People forget that America was 0-12 in 2008.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Stop for a minute and really think about how good the last 6 years have been. Do you want the progressive cause to end in 2016? Sure, we might not all identify ourselves as progressives, or even Democrats, but it's clear the Obama-led progressive wing of the Democratic party is truly acting in the best interests of every person on American soil.Swaye said:I'm pretty sure I would kill something if a Clinton/Pelosi ticket won.
-
Very funny Purp. But like I said, the time for government cynicism has passed. The time for hope is now. Join us, will you?PurpleJ said:
They just need more time is all. People forget that America was 0-12 in 2008.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Stop for a minute and really think about how good the last 6 years have been. Do you want the progressive cause to end in 2016? Sure, we might not all identify ourselves as progressives, or even Democrats, but it's clear the Obama-led progressive wing of the Democratic party is truly acting in the best interests of every person on American soil.Swaye said:I'm pretty sure I would kill something if a Clinton/Pelosi ticket won.
