Why nothing will improve in the US

FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
edited July 2012 in A Moving Train
If you want to know why nothing will change for the better in the US it all boils down to these 4 major issues below. Whether it's immigration, foreign policy, economy, environment or similar... in no order:

- Poor government oversight backed by policies which are exclusionary to make necessary changes which are wanted and needed by all.
- No participation by citizens to keep the government and big business in check
- Big business's control over policy, lobbying and government
- Government not giving a crap about the citizens (self-interest)
- Media being owned and run by big business so people are ill-informed and become more polar in beliefs. Less educated, shorter attention spans and the similar.

Time and time again our society has shown to sit on its hands and just become too complacent and comfortable. We live in the height of the technology and information age but it's used for the most destructive things compared to improve the world around us. People have become more polarized and taught to be less accepting of others ideas and beliefs. I certainly always hope things will get better, but to be honest,I have zero faith in my fellow man...and the quicker people wake up to realize these core problems, the sooner they'll get fixed, but no one really wants to bother or be bothered.
CONservative governMENt

Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1345

Comments

  • markin ballmarkin ball Posts: 1,075
    It is basically one issue for me.

    Apathy.

    We've had it so good for so long, really, that we as a people really won't get to the bottom of all these issues until it is so bad that we have no other choice. We are just one big "functioning alcoholic" of a nation, living in denial, that hasn't hit rock bottom yet.
    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win ."

    "With our thoughts we make the world"
  • Contrary to what is presented in the media, free enterprise must be encouraged, rather than stifled, if we want to dig out of this hole. The more restriction and regulation placed on the common man, the less inclined he is to produce and succeed. Everyone is pro-socialism until they are living under it.

    How does one define "big business"? Anyhow, it's MORE and BIGGER government which scares me.

    Free enterprise is not without it's responsibilites, but when left in the hands of the disciplined, it produces abundance. You want the opposite (Soviet Union)?
    Bristow, VA (5/13/10)
  • Free enterprise is not without it's responsibilites, but when left in the hands of the disciplined, it produces abundance. You want the opposite (Soviet Union)?

    But therein lies the problem... While more government hasn't really been the answer, but we've seen time and again discipline in the business world (especially the bigger it gets) always seems to take a back seat to profit.
    Everyone is pro-socialism until they are living under it.

    The same can be said for completely free markets... it sounds great, until pollution runs rampant, worker safety/rights are gone, product safety is ignored, etc...
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    I think capitalism is the main culprit, next to apathy.
  • Newch91Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    The economy is definitely improving since Obama took office.
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • Jeanwah wrote:
    I think capitalism is the main culprit, next to apathy.

    Remember that capitalism didn't by itself put us in this mess. The government placed on the banks the burden of financing EVERYONE for homes. Most of these people had no business borrowing fortunes they could never pay back. Meanwhile, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae insured the mortgages, and you have the situation we're in.

    Every system has flaws, but capitalism is a damn sight better than all of us fighting for the last sausage downtown, which is what we would have under the alternative. It's easy to sit back and criticize our system while we're soaking up the freedom it produces.
    Bristow, VA (5/13/10)
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I think the point is either too much hands on or too much hands off is bad. Extremism basically brings the worst out in all forms.

    Also, one of the main issues when it comes to free enterprise is the idea that it's free. The common man is f'ed in most areas of society - the cards are stacked against them, it's why we see the shrinking of the middle class for decades and the greatest separation of wealth in our nation since the time of robber barons. We don't live in a free market society, we live in an oligarchy which is incorporated with government...and solely because some do succeed doesn't make our system fair, just, equal or viably successful as a whole. In fact, when it comes to development of 2nd and 3rd world nations, we don't employ all the ways we became powerful and successful, we install methods we have never used in order to make others reliable on our ways, not their own well-being and stability.
    Contrary to what is presented in the media, free enterprise must be encouraged, rather than stifled, if we want to dig out of this hole. The more restriction and regulation placed on the common man, the less inclined he is to produce and succeed. Everyone is pro-socialism until they are living under it.

    How does one define "big business"? Anyhow, it's MORE and BIGGER government which scares me.

    Free enterprise is not without it's responsibilites, but when left in the hands of the disciplined, it produces abundance. You want the opposite (Soviet Union)?
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • markin ballmarkin ball Posts: 1,075
    Jeanwah wrote:
    I think capitalism is the main culprit, next to apathy.

    Remember that capitalism didn't by itself put us in this mess. The government placed on the banks the burden of financing EVERYONE for homes. Most of these people had no business borrowing fortunes they could never pay back. Meanwhile, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae insured the mortgages, and you have the situation we're in.

    Every system has flaws, but capitalism is a damn sight better than all of us fighting for the last sausage downtown, which is what we would have under the alternative. It's easy to sit back and criticize our system while we're soaking up the freedom it produces.

    Just remember, the goal of pure unadulterated capitalism is to acquire everything and the more you have, the more advantage you have in the system. We need enough capitalism to incentivise but we also need some regulation here and there, too, don't you think?
    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win ."

    "With our thoughts we make the world"
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    Absolutely, there's no such thing as the invisible hand to keep things in check anymore. Adam Smith's model of economy does not exactly correlate to today's world of global economy and trade as it was originally written and meant to be applied. To have either no government or no business oversight on either end of the spectrum leads to bad things for a society.
    Just remember, the goal of pure unadulterated capitalism is to acquire everything and the more you have, the more advantage you have in the system. We need enough capitalism to incentivise but we also need some regulation here and there, too, don't you think?
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    People are becoming lazier and lazier, They let the gov do whatever they want and accept it as them being protected. I actually think the only way for us citizens to gain and improve is with a violent attack on the gov. The gov should fear the people. And right now the what the people care and fear is if their hair isn't the same style to their favorite sex and the city star.
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    FiveB247x wrote:
    If you want to know why nothing will change for the better in the US it all boils down to these 4 major issues below. Whether it's immigration, foreign policy, economy, environment or similar... in no order:

    - Poor government oversight backed by policies which are exclusionary to make necessary changes which are wanted and needed by all.
    - No participation by citizens to keep the government and big business in check
    - Big business's control over policy, lobbying and government
    - Government not giving a crap about the citizens (self-interest)
    - Media being owned and run by big business so people are ill-informed and become more polar in beliefs. Less educated, shorter attention spans and the similar.

    Time and time again our society has shown to sit on its hands and just become too complacent and comfortable. We live in the height of the technology and information age but it's used for the most destructive things compared to improve the world around us. People have become more polarized and taught to be less accepting of others ideas and beliefs. I certainly always hope things will get better, but to be honest,I have zero faith in my fellow man...and the quicker people wake up to realize these core problems, the sooner they'll get fixed, but no one really wants to bother or be bothered.


    while I don't agree with your pessimistic approach that nothing will ever improve, I do agree that some changes need to be made to the current system in order to further thrive as a country. The most important of which is term limits.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • Jeanwah wrote:
    I think capitalism is the main culprit, next to apathy.

    Remember that capitalism didn't by itself put us in this mess. The government placed on the banks the burden of financing EVERYONE for homes. Most of these people had no business borrowing fortunes they could never pay back. Meanwhile, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae insured the mortgages, and you have the situation we're in.

    Every system has flaws, but capitalism is a damn sight better than all of us fighting for the last sausage downtown, which is what we would have under the alternative. It's easy to sit back and criticize our system while we're soaking up the freedom it produces.

    Just remember, the goal of pure unadulterated capitalism is to acquire everything and the more you have, the more advantage you have in the system. We need enough capitalism to incentivise but we also need some regulation here and there, too, don't you think?

    I'm not opposed to some regulation, it's absolutely needed. However, the line between regulation and communism is at times a bit thin.
    Bristow, VA (5/13/10)
  • Newch91Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    HeidiJam wrote:
    I actually think the only way for us citizens to gain and improve is with a violent attack on the gov. The gov should fear the people. And right now the what the people care and fear is if their hair isn't the same style to their favorite sex and the city star.

    :?:
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    In my opinion term limits has very little to do with anything. They're not too long or too short... just right. In fact, one of my favorite quotes: "Who wields power is not important, provided that the same hierarchical structure remains always the same." - George Orwell
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    while I don't agree with your pessimistic approach that nothing will ever improve, I do agree that some changes need to be made to the current system in order to further thrive as a country. The most important of which is term limits.
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • I'm not opposed to some regulation, it's absolutely needed. However, the line between regulation and communism is at times a bit thin.

    Isn't the problem though is that everyone's thin line is in a different place? One person might think that much more regulation is needed in an industry to keep the public safe, but someone else will say that just about any regulation is too much government intervention.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    FiveB247x wrote:
    In my opinion term limits has very little to do with anything. They're not too long or too short... just right. In fact, one of my favorite quotes: "Who wields power is not important, provided that the same hierarchical structure remains always the same." - George Orwell
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    while I don't agree with your pessimistic approach that nothing will ever improve, I do agree that some changes need to be made to the current system in order to further thrive as a country. The most important of which is term limits.
    But an established hierarchy is what has led to the gridlock we see each day in the news. Power corrupts and I don't see any reason why someone should be in power more then 8-12 years, less yet 50+ years.

    I doubt Senator Rangel left the Korean War with his eyes set on taking bribes and bilking the American public. But 40 years later after he first took office, we find a man with tremendous influence and his hand is caught in the cookie jar.

    I'll have to do some research to see what the average term served by senate committee chairmen.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    Yeah but the system and procedures is truly what doesn't change, people do. Lobbying, influence, and similar is what keeps the system impenetrable to real change regardless of voting results, campaigns or new representatives.
    Jason P wrote:
    But an established hierarchy is what has led to the gridlock we see each day in the news. Power corrupts and I don't see any reason why someone should be in power more then 8-12 years, less yet 50+ years.

    I doubt Senator Rangel left the Korean War with his eyes set on taking bribes and bilking the American public. But 40 years later after he first took office, we find a man with tremendous influence and his hand is caught in the cookie jar.

    I'll have to do some research to see what the average term served by senate committee chairmen.
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    OK, here it is. I’ve listed the 16 standing senate committees with the chairperson, years served, and the year they were elected to office. For reference sake, please keep in mind that Top Gun was released in 1986.

    Ag, Nutrition, Forestry - Blanche Lincoln – 12 years (1998)
    Appropriations – Dan Inouye – 48 years (1962)
    Armed Services – Carl Levin - 32 years (1978)
    Banking, Housing, Urban Affairs – Chris Dodd - 30 years (1980)
    Budget – Kent Conrad – 24 years (1986)
    Commerce, Science, Transportation – Jay Rockefeller – 26 years (1984)
    Energy & Natural Resources – Jeff Bingaman – 28 years (1982)
    Environment & Public Works – Barb Boxer – 18 years (1992)
    Finance – Max Baucus – 32 years (1978)
    Foreign Relations – John Kerry – 26 years (1984)
    Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions – Tom Harkin – 26 years (1984)
    Homeland Security – Joe Lieberman – 22 years (1988)
    Judiciary – Patrick Leahy – 36 years (1974)
    Rules and Admin – Chuck Schumer – 12 years (1998)
    Small Business and Entrepreneurship – Mary Landrieu - 14 years (1996)
    Veterans’ Affairs – Daniel Akaka – 20 years (1990)

    Average years spent in office by the chairperson of the 16 standing senate committees = 25.375 years.

    What is the average age of a college graduate? 22 years?

    I think amending the term limits would be a wonderful start to improving our system.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    FiveB247x wrote:
    Yeah but the system and procedures is truly what doesn't change, people do. Lobbying, influence, and similar is what keeps the system impenetrable to real change regardless of voting results, campaigns or new representatives.
    Exactly - Lobbying and influence prevent the system from changing. Lobbyist have developed deep ties with those that have served and survived the longest. You can break those ties by eliminating influential people that have served in office longer then I've been alive.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    FiveB247x wrote:
    In my opinion term limits has very little to do with anything. They're not too long or too short... just right. In fact, one of my favorite quotes: "Who wields power is not important, provided that the same hierarchical structure remains always the same." - George Orwell
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    while I don't agree with your pessimistic approach that nothing will ever improve, I do agree that some changes need to be made to the current system in order to further thrive as a country. The most important of which is term limits.


    being in the senate for 60 years is way too long...Once you become a career politician you are more worried about getting re-elected than doing the job you need to do. You lose touch with the reality of what is happening to your constituency. You develop relationships with lobbiests, other politicians, and big business leaders. the higher turn over would ensure that no one particular person becomes entrenched in the system. If you are only able to work for 6 years at the job, you just might be more motivated to get your work done for all six years, rather than only working for 4 years and campaigning for the other two for yourself, and constantly for other people. ** also because you are going to have to go back and live in the world you have helped shape**
    It isn't the system of democracy that is the problem, it is the current career politicians that are keeping the outsiders out. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be much better than it is now.
    Term limits is an answer, certainly better than letting the same jackasses keep their jobs for far too long

    A lot of the lobbying and special interest groups gain their influence because of relationships forged over years, klobuchar probably isn't too influenced at the moment, but 4 more terms would change that for sure.

    edit**
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I do understand your point, but I think it's naive to think solely by changing the leaders, we'd get different results. In fact, the reason we see no change isn't because of term limits, but lack of citizens pressure and participation to the legislatures and government in general. So we can change the leaders of the committees and similar, but without the other more important facet of this equation, the result won't really vary.

    And lobbying doesn't rely solely on a specific person or party, but more importantly the long term continued relationship between private business interests and policy - and no matter who the party or the leader, 99.9% of our leaders have shown to be willing to participate to play in these games which keep them in office and the money machine running. Our system is corrupted from the inside out and outside in... garbage in and garbage out.. not solely outside forces pulling strings like lobbying. It takes all of their combined efforts to keep it flowing and changing just one doesn't work.. the only one thing that could or would change this system is the people's voice and constant participation.. which is also what the government and private interests count on.. our lack of effort which we continually reinforce.
    Jason P wrote:
    OK, here it is. I’ve listed the 16 standing senate committees with the chairperson, years served, and the year they were elected to office. For reference sake, please keep in mind that Top Gun was released in 1986.

    Ag, Nutrition, Forestry - Blanche Lincoln – 12 years (1998)
    Appropriations – Dan Inouye – 48 years (1962)
    Armed Services – Carl Levin - 32 years (1978)
    Banking, Housing, Urban Affairs – Chris Dodd - 30 years (1980)
    Budget – Kent Conrad – 24 years (1986)
    Commerce, Science, Transportation – Jay Rockefeller – 26 years (1984)
    Energy & Natural Resources – Jeff Bingaman – 28 years (1982)
    Environment & Public Works – Barb Boxer – 18 years (1992)
    Finance – Max Baucus – 32 years (1978)
    Foreign Relations – John Kerry – 26 years (1984)
    Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions – Tom Harkin – 26 years (1984)
    Homeland Security – Joe Lieberman – 22 years (1988)
    Judiciary – Patrick Leahy – 36 years (1974)
    Rules and Admin – Chuck Schumer – 12 years (1998)
    Small Business and Entrepreneurship – Mary Landrieu - 14 years (1996)
    Veterans’ Affairs – Daniel Akaka – 20 years (1990)

    Average years spent in office by the chairperson of the 16 standing senate committees = 25.375 years.

    What is the average age of a college graduate? 22 years?

    I think amending the term limits would be a wonderful start to improving our system.
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    FiveB247x wrote:
    I do understand your point, but I think it's naive to think solely by changing the leaders, we'd get different results. In fact, the reason we see no change isn't because of term limits, but lack of citizens pressure and participation to the legislatures and government in general. So we can change the leaders of the committees and similar, but without the other more important facet of this equation, the result won't really vary.

    And lobbying doesn't rely solely on a specific person or party, but more importantly the long term continued relationship between private business interests and policy - and no matter who the party or the leader, 99.9% of our leaders have shown to be willing to participate to play in these games which keep them in office and the money machine running. Our system is corrupted from the inside out and outside in... garbage in and garbage out.. not solely outside forces pulling strings like lobbying. It takes all of their combined efforts to keep it flowing and changing just one doesn't work.. the only one thing that could or would change this system is the people's voice and constant participation.. which is also what the government and private interests count on.. our lack of effort which we continually reinforce.
    I think we agree in our assessment of some major issues (Lobbyist; Corrupt Politicians) but I'm not sure why you would be opposed to term limits. What are your thoughts on limiting lobbyists?

    As for the lack of interest by citizens, it's tough to think that your vote counts when you witness the games that are played in Washington by these career politicians. It makes me sick each year when I watch the State of the Union and see our elected officials acting like a bunch of school children at a popularity contest.

    Some Americans have given up on their vote counting for anything. Why vote when your Representative doesn't actually represent you. I still vote, but I only really think my local and state choices are making a difference at this point.

    Wouldn't it be nice to have fresh candidates to choose from?
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    being in the senate for 60 years is way too long...Once you become a career politician you are more worried about getting re-elected than doing the job you need to do. You lose touch with the reality of what is happening to your constituency. You develop relationships with lobbiests, other politicians, and big business leaders. the higher turn over would ensure that no one particular person becomes entrenched in the system. If you are only able to work for 6 years at the job, you just might be more motivated to get your work done for all six years, rather than only working for 4 years and campaigning for the other two for yourself, and constantly for other people. ** also because you are going to have to go back and live in the world you have helped shape**
    It isn't the system of democracy that is the problem, it is the current career politicians that are keeping the outsiders out. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be much better than it is now.
    Term limits is an answer, certainly better than letting the same jackasses keep their jobs for far too long

    A lot of the lobbying and special interest groups gain their influence because of relationships forged over years, klobuchar probably isn't too influenced at the moment, but 4 more terms would change that for sure.

    edit**
    That is the thought process I was trying to extract from my brain. Well said.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    It's not necessarily that I oppose term limits, I simply feel it is a back-burner issue compared to the crust of the problem. If we change term limits, it doesn't mean we will see any different results. In terms of lobbying, I feel all of it should be outlawed. In sum, lobbying is an unnecessary middle man which removes the connection between the people and the politicians. It puts the focus on outside groups and interests when it should solely be on the issues which are best for the citizens. And when it's back by private money, it completely removes the citizens from the equation. In my opinion, lobbying is unconstitutional and should be outlawed, but that will never happen. As for voting, I do vote, but do so more as I feel it is my civic duty to do so and don't actually believe or delude myself into thinking it matters. Lastly, as for "fresh candidates", there is no such thing.. there's no savior on the way folks.. this is the best we can do, care to enable and push forth. The results shouldn't be surprising to anyone.
    Jason P wrote:
    I think we agree in our assessment of some major issues (Lobbyist; Corrupt Politicians) but I'm not sure why you would be opposed to term limits. What are your thoughts on limiting lobbyists?

    As for the lack of interest by citizens, it's tough to think that your vote counts when you witness the games that are played in Washington by these career politicians. It makes me sick each year when I watch the State of the Union and see our elected officials acting like a bunch of school children at a popularity contest.

    Some Americans have given up on their vote counting for anything. Why vote when your Representative doesn't actually represent you. I still vote, but I only really think my local and state choices are making a difference at this point.

    Wouldn't it be nice to have fresh candidates to choose from?
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Jason P wrote:
    FiveB247x wrote:
    Yeah but the system and procedures is truly what doesn't change, people do. Lobbying, influence, and similar is what keeps the system impenetrable to real change regardless of voting results, campaigns or new representatives.
    Exactly - Lobbying and influence prevent the system from changing. Lobbyist have developed deep ties with those that have served and survived the longest. You can break those ties by eliminating influential people that have served in office longer then I've been alive.
    ...
    BUT... Lobbyists become the only continuity in the legislative process as Senators and Representatives come and go... the same old veteran lobbyists remain. So, what you get are Representatives and Senators with less experience making the same political deals with seasoned lobbyists. And it is not personal connections... it is money.
    Ask California how great Term Limits are. We have a Merry-Go-Round of the same people jumping from Lt. Govenor to Treausuer to Insurance Secretary to State Controller... Assemblymen and State Senators who don't know the correct processes and procedures required by law in order to pass legislation and the same lobbyists that have been there for decades are the offereing the same deals.
    Make no mistake... politicians are rich people. And rich people like money.
    Be careful what you wish for.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    being in the senate for 60 years is way too long...Once you become a career politician you are more worried about getting re-elected than doing the job you need to do. You lose touch with the reality of what is happening to your constituency. You develop relationships with lobbiests, other politicians, and big business leaders. the higher turn over would ensure that no one particular person becomes entrenched in the system. If you are only able to work for 6 years at the job, you just might be more motivated to get your work done for all six years, rather than only working for 4 years and campaigning for the other two for yourself, and constantly for other people. ** also because you are going to have to go back and live in the world you have helped shape**
    It isn't the system of democracy that is the problem, it is the current career politicians that are keeping the outsiders out. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be much better than it is now.
    Term limits is an answer, certainly better than letting the same jackasses keep their jobs for far too long

    A lot of the lobbying and special interest groups gain their influence because of relationships forged over years, klobuchar probably isn't too influenced at the moment, but 4 more terms would change that for sure.

    edit**
    ...
    Why does this apply to politicians... and not other public offices. What about District Attorneys?
    And what if the person is really good for his constituents... looks after their needs.
    The American Political sytem already HAS Term Limits... it's called THE BALLOT BOX. Maybe, if we weren't so damn apathetic... we wouldn't get the governement someone else voted in. Maybe, if we understood that the (R) or the (D) next to the name was no guarantee that this person is the best qualified.
    We are stupid people and we get the governemt we deserve. We allow radio and television to decide which team we should be on and condemn the other side as 'The Enemy'.
    Term Limits is what the lobbyists want. That makes their job easiser and their clients won't have to spend as much. If we were truely an informed electorate... instead of a partisan one... we wouldn't need to be limited on who we can vote for... we would decide... not the Republican or Democratic Parties.
    Nothing will improve until WE improve.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    The biggest issue is the government is too powerful and seems only concerned with getting itself re-elected. And it would take a monumental effort by citizens too pre-occupied with their own lives (myself included) to put forth such effort to affect meaningful change.

    I don't really call that second part apathy. I think it would take too much work and coordination over a long time period to see anything significant happen.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • Jeanwah wrote:
    I think capitalism is the main culprit

    I think that corporatism is the evil form of capitalism- Huge companies with so much power that they dictate government policies, etc.

    Capitalism itself is very healthy: Small businesses, family farms, local mom 'n pop shops are all capitalistic. These empower people and strengthen local economies.

    I wonder how we would live day-to-day without capitalism? Just barter of one item for another? A government dole giving us rations? Perhaps I have a very small imagination, but I'm not seeing a utopia without selling things for profit.
    "May you live in interesting times."
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    This all goes hand in hand though. Government sets policies for business practices, and if there's no checks and balances, the results are obvious to foresee. Also, capitalism over time merely becomes into monopolies and in system where privatization and corporatism is introduced on a larger scale, it's set in stone, which is what we see now. The basic premise of capitalism is that people and the market can freely be altered to offset inequalities, but we don't nor have ever had that. Also, in practice, capitalism over time sets up a society based on hierarchy... ie separation of wealth, greed, classes, etc. The idea/your definition of capitalism is naive as the opposite which says communism is the answer.
    I think that corporatism is the evil form of capitalism- Huge companies with so much power that they dictate government policies, etc.

    Capitalism itself is very healthy: Small businesses, family farms, local mom 'n pop shops are all capitalistic. These empower people and strengthen local economies.

    I wonder how we would live day-to-day without capitalism? Just barter of one item for another? A government dole giving us rations? Perhaps I have a very small imagination, but I'm not seeing a utopia without selling things for profit.
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • It is basically one issue for me.

    Apathy.

    We've had it so good for so long, really, that we as a people really won't get to the bottom of all these issues until it is so bad that we have no other choice. We are just one big "functioning alcoholic" of a nation, living in denial, that hasn't hit rock bottom yet.
    I agree. I believe apathy from the masses is why this country is on a bullet train to shit. And from a personal standpoint, it's just overwhelming sometimes to even think about it much less lead or take part in what's more and more seeming to look like a necessary revolution. I'm tired and lazy and I still think I give a fuck way more than the average american idiot.
Sign In or Register to comment.