fundamentally wrong in the sense that it needs to be fundamentally Changed, not just a regime change.
fundamentally wrong in the sense that it needs to be fundamentally Changed, not just a regime change.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
I think the biggest problem with the government is that its design was for a totally different era.
Its like a tire that has been patched over and over to keep it running.
Its like a tire that has been patched over and over to keep it running.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
I think the problem is that the world has changed so much since our governments inception and even since the civil war that as time goes on its going to get harder and harder to keep the government functional.
It has happened to every government in history.
So your solution is to "Get rid of the absurd and destructive rules allowing for corporations to influence the political system so much with their money." and everything else will be peachy dandy good.
Where the hell do you live? Not in the USA!
Throckmorton
Lifer
- Aug 23, 2007
- 16,829
- 3
- 0
The problem is that a president can appoint a lumber lobbyist as head of the Dept of the Interior, an industrial lobbyist as head of the EPA, etc. Republicans are anti-government, and since Reagan they have done all they can to sabotage it while simultaneously blaming it for being ineffective.
The saving grace of the federal government is bureaucracy, which makes it difficult to completely change it based on politics of the day. It has a built in check and balance system, and it has momentum and a large number of dedicated people who just want to serve America, so it's protected somewhat from politicians.
The saving grace of the federal government is bureaucracy, which makes it difficult to completely change it based on politics of the day. It has a built in check and balance system, and it has momentum and a large number of dedicated people who just want to serve America, so it's protected somewhat from politicians.
The benefits to getting rid of that money, which pays for enormous propagandizing of the public opinion, would be broad and enormous, in my view. I live exactly in the USA.
You have to get rid of the corruption of the propaganda from that money before you can even have much useful debate. Look in the mirror and at your post for an example why.
According to Fareed Zakaria, yes. Here is a very good article published recently. A bit long but worth the read and very relevant to the topic: http://www.realclearpolitics.c...of_american_power.html
ranmaniac
Golden Member
- May 14, 2001
- 1,940
- 0
- 76
Indeed, Corporatism, or Italian Fascism under Mussolini is almost as close to what we have, except this is more of a global phenomenon than just what the US is experiencing. Interesting how China embraces big business but still maintains a strict authoritarian government. This is the kind of future that is in store for the US, a police state backed by a corporate-government union. The military-industrial complex has expanded to the hiring of mercenaries like Blackwater and other thugs to do the dirty work, and they share no accountability compared to the regular military.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
Not sure if anyone said it, but yes, there is one primary problem with your goverment, and most modern democracys.
Polictical Donations. And lobbying.
Our goverments are so corrupt and 90% of the problem is donations. If Halliburton gives a million bucks to Bush how can you say with a straight face that he isn't going to look after their interest.
You think if a church donates millions to a president he's not going to protect their agenda, even if it goes against his own? THat's the problem with donations, it turns good men it whores. All politions are whores, and hence corrupt.
How much money do you think the HMO's and pharacutical companys give the capitol hill? Billions?
Another problem is the Millitary industrial complex. Its a complete failure of the democratic system. When you mixe public and private enterprise like that you end up with bullshit like no-bid contracts. Great...
In Australia some states are already talking about banning donations, or at least making them anonimous, which would be a start.
Polictical Donations. And lobbying.
Our goverments are so corrupt and 90% of the problem is donations. If Halliburton gives a million bucks to Bush how can you say with a straight face that he isn't going to look after their interest.
You think if a church donates millions to a president he's not going to protect their agenda, even if it goes against his own? THat's the problem with donations, it turns good men it whores. All politions are whores, and hence corrupt.
How much money do you think the HMO's and pharacutical companys give the capitol hill? Billions?
Another problem is the Millitary industrial complex. Its a complete failure of the democratic system. When you mixe public and private enterprise like that you end up with bullshit like no-bid contracts. Great...
In Australia some states are already talking about banning donations, or at least making them anonimous, which would be a start.
Man, good luck trying to ban lobbying. You'd have to amend the first amendment and take out the part about the right to petition gov't.
It's not a first amendment issue. That's just the bullshit the lobbiest hide behind.
A private citizen has the right to petition.
It's not in the constitution that businesses can give money to politician to help them get elected.
Hlafordlaes
Senior member
- May 21, 2006
- 271
- 2
- 81
I can associate "fundamentally wrong" with either the issue of governmental design (democracy or other form, federalism, etc. which I won't debate for now) or an issue of governance (legal abuse, corruption, incompetence).
I do not think there is anything wrong with the fundamental design of the US government (although I'd like to see an objective Supreme Court redefine the limits and purpose of executive orders as per the Constitution.) That said, I wonder if any form of government can be "right" or mostly so when combined with such a tremendous concentration of economic and military power.
I do think there are abundant examples of poor governance, and to avoid listing policy or implementation, there is a key weakness outside of government that originated with earlier policy. That is, the progressive deregulation of broadcast and print media has led to the whitewashing that passes for most of that type journalism today. Internet or not, broadcast media are still greatly influential in general elections. A weakened free press means no one is blowing the whistle loud enough, long enough and hard enough.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
That's a slippery slope we don't want to go down. No entity should ever be denied the right to participate in government. The problem are the "rules" that make corporations first-class citizens and the rest of us individuals into second-class citizens. Or more properly, the fact that corporations, as juristic persons, are considered citizens at all. That's the problem. Neither you, I, nor anyone else can possibly compete against the collective power of even a small corporation, once granted the same rights of citizenship that an individual has. Because of this power, they don't "influence" the political system, they own it.
There is nothing wrong with the basis for the US government The Constitution. It has served us brilliantly over more than 200 years.
The problem as I see it is that the various players, The Executive, The Legislative, The Judiciary are not currently fulfilling their roles. Our system of government is based on a 3 legged stool. Each leg must perform its role to work.
Currently the Executive is trying to amass all the power it can in to its hands. No problem, that is what the other two branches are about.
Problem is that the Judiciary is busy being sycophants instead of trying to rein in the Executive and gain more power for itself.
Meanwhile Congress under the Republicans was bowing to King George and the Democratic Congress seems afraid of its own shadow.
If history proves correct, Congress will get off its ass and rein in the Executive, and some more forceful and useful folks will be put on the Supreme Court to stop the Executive's current abuses and all will be back to what the Founders intended, chaos with movement toward the center and protection for the minority.:thumbsup:
Read the David McCullough [sp?] biography of John Adams if you want a clearer understanding.
The problem as I see it is that the various players, The Executive, The Legislative, The Judiciary are not currently fulfilling their roles. Our system of government is based on a 3 legged stool. Each leg must perform its role to work.
Currently the Executive is trying to amass all the power it can in to its hands. No problem, that is what the other two branches are about.
Problem is that the Judiciary is busy being sycophants instead of trying to rein in the Executive and gain more power for itself.
Meanwhile Congress under the Republicans was bowing to King George and the Democratic Congress seems afraid of its own shadow.
If history proves correct, Congress will get off its ass and rein in the Executive, and some more forceful and useful folks will be put on the Supreme Court to stop the Executive's current abuses and all will be back to what the Founders intended, chaos with movement toward the center and protection for the minority.:thumbsup:
Read the David McCullough [sp?] biography of John Adams if you want a clearer understanding.
ericlp
Diamond Member
- Dec 24, 2000
- 6,139
- 236
- 106
Hmmm, well.......
I think that there should be a basic test you know. No more then 10 minute test tho, you could take up to 20 minutes for the slow people.
But, I think it should be a basic requirement that you know the basic arithmetic and maybe a few really no brainer easy algebra questions. You know solve for X BS.
That would be the first 5 minutes ... then the last 5 minutes would be basic reading and comprehension .... All in English, no translations. I mean, hell... if you can't comprehend basic English, then how the hell are you going to know about how one candidate stands. Anyway, nothing hard just basic BS for the next 5 minutes... No speak / read engrish, no comprenda no votie. That simple!
I feel this test would weed out the goofballs that just want to screw and tilt the vote in favor of one candidate over another....
My two cents worth....
Edit:
I wonder if bush could pass the test to have voted for himself?
I think that there should be a basic test you know. No more then 10 minute test tho, you could take up to 20 minutes for the slow people.
But, I think it should be a basic requirement that you know the basic arithmetic and maybe a few really no brainer easy algebra questions. You know solve for X BS.
That would be the first 5 minutes ... then the last 5 minutes would be basic reading and comprehension .... All in English, no translations. I mean, hell... if you can't comprehend basic English, then how the hell are you going to know about how one candidate stands. Anyway, nothing hard just basic BS for the next 5 minutes... No speak / read engrish, no comprenda no votie. That simple!
I feel this test would weed out the goofballs that just want to screw and tilt the vote in favor of one candidate over another....
My two cents worth....
Edit:
I wonder if bush could pass the test to have voted for himself?
Why? Because we are split evenly over our political beliefs?
I think the problem is the lack of leadership. We couldn't do anything about Bush this last election but we did change the Congressional landscape and what has that accomplished?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter