Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 2016 US General Election

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    Nobody knows what to do. Every last one of them, Left to Right, is utterly f--king clueless.
    Even when they've got a halfway good idea, it either gets shot out of the sky, twisted out of recognition by changes, amendments and earmarks, or backfires thanks to the Department of Unintended Consequences.

    They're all just flailing about, trying desperately to:

    A.) Get elected
    B.) Get reelected
    C.) Whatever helps accomplish A and B

    So whenever the latest Messiah comes along, I have to laugh at the grasping self-delusion of people who somehow manage to convince themselves that "Our Man (or Woman) will set things right, if we can just get them into office"

    Dream on you poor stupid fools.
    I think that is generally a sign that things are going pretty well in the US. The system is designed to slow down and frustrate proposals that don't have widespread support. 9/11 was a good example of how Washington can get it's ass in gear and take action when a pressing problem presents itself.

    But while a serious problem will quickly get a consensus behind dealing with it, a lack of real problems allows every politician to make a lot of noise while tilting at their own personal windmill.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
      9/11 was a good example of how Washington can get it's ass in gear and take action when a pressing problem presents itself.
      Therein lies the problem: Only after thousands of lives are lost within minutes or hours and billions in property damage are done, does the government (usually) start moving.

      This is purely reactive and the stakes are just too damn high to go through life in React Mode.
      “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

      Comment


      • #93
        from a conservative standpoint, though, that's precisely what's wanted, yes?

        frankly the main issue with the US is that politicians are picking their voters, and the side effects of that are seriously detrimental to the public discourse.

        populist, violent voices drown out the increasingly apathetic majority, whom feel that their votes don't matter.
        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by astralis View Post
          from a conservative standpoint, though, that's precisely what's wanted, yes?
          What are you referring to?
          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
            Therein lies the problem: Only after thousands of lives are lost within minutes or hours and billions in property damage are done, does the government (usually) start moving.

            This is purely reactive and the stakes are just too damn high to go through life in React Mode.
            A very valid criticism and I sincerely wish we would invest more in preparedness. We have a cycle of getting caught flat footed by events, over responding to make up for the fact that the response was too late, then deeply cutting that funding a year or two later when it isn't in the news any longer, thus bringing things back to square one.

            In the interests of disclosure, I work for the government in emergency preparedness so I am naturally biased. That said, I would love to see a sustained and rational level of funding rather than this stupid ping pong between feast and famine.

            A huge one time grant after every H1N1 or Ebola scare just puts us in a position where we have an unreasonably large amount of money we are required to expend before the end of the fiscal year. Then we are right back to minimal funding for sustainment but now with a bunch of extra stuff try try to maintain. If they would spread this funding out over 5-10 years or just give us a general funding bump, we could actually hire an extra staff member or two and buy gear we can afford to maintain on an ongoing basis.

            /end rant

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by astralis View Post

              populist, violent voices drown out the increasingly apathetic majority, whom feel that their votes don't matter.
              The reverse is rather true.Their votes don't matter,so they become apathetic and rise when hear what they want to hear.If there are no voices,or those voices are silenced,in time you get a population of serfs.
              Those who know don't speak
              He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

              Comment


              • #97
                TH,

                What are you referring to?
                government in reactive mode is something that's generally seen as a positive among conservatives.

                from their standpoint, an energetic, even worse...an energetic, competent government...would mean the government would be tempted to step more and more into people's lives.
                There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by astralis View Post
                  TH,
                  government in reactive mode is something that's generally seen as a positive among conservatives.

                  from their standpoint, an energetic, even worse...an energetic, competent government...would mean the government would be tempted to step more and more into people's lives.
                  I can almost see the 2nd part but the 1st part? Can't say I've ever really seen that ascribed to conservatives, at least in the sense we're talking about, i.e. disaster relief, robust infrastructure etc.

                  (Of course, a government that's good at those things would, theoretically at least, be good at playing nanny with people's personal lives.
                  “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    I can almost see the 2nd part but the 1st part? Can't say I've ever really seen that ascribed to conservatives, at least in the sense we're talking about, i.e. disaster relief, robust infrastructure etc.
                    for things like disaster relief and military operations, yes (although libertarians are wary about the latter).

                    but not for much more. robust infrastructure? that's not certainly not a conservative priority. the American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that $1.6 trillion needs to be spent on infrastructure between now and 2020. bernie sanders recently proposed a bill that would cover $1 trillion. i'll let you guess how conservatives reacted to that one :-)

                    on a similar note, france/singapore/japan are routinely ranked as having the most efficient, effective, and low cost healthcare systems in the world. problem is, they use a singlepayer universal healthcare system. the US, on the other hand, routinely ranks in the lower-middle of the rankings and usually dead last in the developed world for efficiency, effectiveness, and cost.

                    can't see conservatives push for that either.

                    to be fair, i'm sure conservatives would like a competent government. but that's relatively low on the priority list; small government is more important than competent government, let alone energetic government...let alone a PROACTIVE government.
                    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                    Comment


                    • ^Like Astralis...still don't have LIKE button.

                      Okay, I am not a conservative...but neither am I a raging liberal/progressive. (I hate fucking labels)

                      I am issue by issue.

                      As for infrastructure, I cannot see how the pro business conservatives (is that an oxymoron...seriously) are not running to work to improve the infrastructure.

                      1. Money is dirt cheap right now. Any bonds/loans would be at the most advantageous rate the government could ever hope for.

                      2. Improved infrastructure improves internal freedom of movement which is a boon to commerce.

                      3. Infrastructure improvement would mean millions of well paying middle class jobs.

                      A recent drive back and forth from Southside Virginia to Boston and back absolutely proves our roads, bridgaesa and rails are in a freakin' mess.

                      So how can conservatives not get behind this? I don't understand.

                      Conservatives like to point to the legacy of the rugged individualist who forged a settlement as he pushed Westward through the Wilderness.

                      Okay, that happened.

                      But as soon those rugged individualists got out there they wanted the Army to protect them from the Native Americans as well as infrastructure improvements (roads, canals, ertc) built and maintained by Federal funding.

                      Sure sounds like the conservative legacy is built on a foundation of government investment.
                      “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                      Mark Twain

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post

                        As for infrastructure, I cannot see how the pro business conservatives (is that an oxymoron...seriously) are not running to work to improve the infrastructure.
                        You're mistaking the Republican Party for conservatism. Conservatives in the U.S. only have one choice, liberals too. Your elected officials are neither republican nor democrat, simply professional bureaucrats. They keep you distracted arguing with each other rather than yelling at them. Hence the popularity of the Donald on one side and Saunders on the other. Neither is electable but DT is wildly popular at the moment even among Hispanics because he talks out loud about verbotten issues. Notice Saunders is now doing the same thing on immigration.
                        In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                        Leibniz

                        Comment


                        • pari,

                          You're mistaking the Republican Party for conservatism. Conservatives in the U.S. only have one choice, liberals too. Your elected officials are neither republican nor democrat, simply professional bureaucrats. They keep you distracted arguing with each other rather than yelling at them.
                          given the way politics has evolved in the country over the last 40 years, either side has less and less inclination and political incentive to work with each other. gerrymandering means it's more lucrative politically (and economically) to argue with each other as opposed to working with each other. instead of appealing to a wider audience, one appeals to the politically-motivated.

                          thus it's not a case of politicians tricking the people, it's a case of vocal/dedicated minorities DEMANDING this of their politician. see the Tea Party revolt, for instance.
                          Last edited by astralis; 30 Jul 15,, 20:27.
                          There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                          Comment


                          • Pari,

                            I understand....

                            If I were to pick a member of the field I like it is Jim Webb.

                            But he doesn't stand a stand a chance.

                            Hell, I did a write in vote for Sam Nunn in 1984!
                            “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                            Mark Twain

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              pari,



                              given the way politics has evolved in the country over the last 40 years, either side has less and less inclination and political incentive to work with each other. gerrymandering means it's more lucrative politically (and economically) to argue with each other as opposed to working with each other. instead of appealing to a wider audience, one appeals to the politically-motivated.

                              thus it's not a case of politicians tricking the people, it's a case of vocal/dedicated minorities DEMANDING this of their politician. see the Tea Party revolt, for instance.
                              yeah, this resonates with an article I've just read on Jon Stewart
                              http://www.macleans.ca/culture/telev...leaves-behind/
                              In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                              Leibniz

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
                                ^Like Astralis...still don't have LIKE button.

                                Okay, I am not a conservative....
                                Nailed it.

                                Consider that post "liked."
                                Trust me?
                                I'm an economist!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X