...that's what is wrong with this country...
Last Post 06/06/2014 10:23 AM by Justin jmdirt. 26 Replies.
Author Messages
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/04/2014 08:45 AM
(USA): I've heard that statement more than a few times in my 46 years, but its amazing how everyone I talk with lately says something to the effect of 'politicians are what is wrong with our country'. Its in the editorial section of the papers both from journos and letter to the editor, and the www is loaded with unhappy writers/posters. People don't discuss/argue politics anymore because they agree on a central thing, that politicians s*ck. People are becoming more and more disenfranchised. I wonder if it will actually become some type of citizen action in this country? Not the 1% camp outs from a few years ago, but a real action when people take a stand, and say 'no more'.
jrt1045

Posts:362

--
06/04/2014 08:47 AM
just pull the plug on all legislator pensions and health care, problem fixed
THE SKINNY

Posts:430

--
06/04/2014 09:03 AM
people are too content to have a good uprising. full bellies, cable tv, wifi and air conditioning make it hard to get enough people riled.
How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives.
Yo Mike

Posts:279

--
06/04/2014 09:39 AM
+1 Skinny. China is hoping this approach works as well.

IMO, MONEY is the major problem in politics, and the SCOTUS equating money with free speech was a travesty

Ride On

Posts:454

--
06/04/2014 12:50 PM
The idea of having representatives , represent us was a great concept when we could not all make it to the meeting to discuss the ideas and then vote. With the internet today, that concept of travel and time required to discuss and vote for ourselves is outdated. Move the topic vote back into the hands of the people and not into the hands of people who are suppose to represent us.
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/04/2014 01:52 PM
I think that skinny makes a good point, but its sad that people are happy as long as they have 500 channels and endless credit. I still sense that there are more people than usual unhappy with the way elected officials are letting our country slide (while filling their own bank accounts).
stronz

Posts:315

--
06/04/2014 04:16 PM
I agree with Ride on. We do not need representational gvernment anymore. We do need a judicial branch and probably an executive branch -- but legislative? not so much. There are any number of models which could be brought forth whereby we use the internet to discuss issues and enact legislation. No need for the 500+ porkers in the Congress, their salaries, their security details, their pensions, their benefits, etc.

Whats wrong with this country? To me its the very unimaginative, unintelligent and self-serving leadership that has brought us to a point where we are either unable or unwilling to identify what the important problems are (hint: female v male names of hurricanes is not one of them) and assemble the individuals capable of addressing the problems with viable solutions. I'm talking about healthcare payment, Social security solvency, foreign aide and foreign policy and general fiscal responsibility. The govt gets around 3.5 trillion dollars a year to play with. Is this really the best we can do with that?
Orange Crush

Posts:1251

--
06/04/2014 04:32 PM

Posted By carl x on 06/04/2014 09:03 AM
people are too content to have a good uprising. full bellies, cable tv, wifi and air conditioning make it hard to get enough people riled.


Its worked since Roman times and still does: bread (mig mac) and games (cable TV).

The Chinese know damn well it works. Look at what they did after Tianamen Square. Give the masses possessions and they stop rising up. What remains broiling below the surface is subsequently easier controlled.
jookey

Posts:141

--
06/04/2014 05:43 PM
Don't blame the politicians. Blame yourself, your peers, and the rest of electorate. WE vote these bums back into office year after year, scandal after scandal. It's our fault. Vote them OUT. If they knew they would have to pay the piper for their actions, they would represent YOU.
Instead, they promise to spend your money on you. WE buy it each and every time.
longslowdistance

Posts:745

--
06/04/2014 06:01 PM
We get the politicians we deserve. We vote for those who tell us what we want to hear. Pretty near impossible to tell the unvarnished truth and get elected. Demos think it's 1965 and big gov will fix it all. Repubs think it's 1981 and we just need Reagan again.
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/04/2014 07:26 PM
Good thoughts stroz.

I mostly disagree jookey and lsd. There isn't even a lesser of two evils any more. Most of the people who run for national office are already FN worthless. Vote in the incumbent POS or vote in the new POS. They are liars and money whores. "I am for the people (who have a billion dollars)". Edit: Even if a few good people could get to DC, do you think that they could overcome the system?

I have voted in every election since I registered on my 18th birthday. Locally I usually have an OK option, nationally... POS.
THE SKINNY

Posts:430

--
06/04/2014 08:35 PM
i don't mind paying taxes and i'd even pay a little more if i thought it would go towards anything but military spending. i don't begrudge them a new fighter jet or whatever but they get whatever they request whereas if your one of the unlucky slobs that need some help after you get out then you're f'ed in the a. the blue angels were sequestered for a while but they got them up and running because they are a huge recruiting tool for the navy. i bet the recruiter doesn't even mention the waiting list to get into a va hospital.
How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives.
jookey

Posts:141

--
06/04/2014 09:06 PM
Vote in the new POS. Then vote in another new POS. Sooner or later your $h!+ won't stink.
Master50

Posts:252

--
06/04/2014 09:55 PM
I read more and more how the US government is more an oligarchy than a democracy. IE the government does the bidding of the wealthiest people. the less than 1%ers.
The financial influence of lobbyists, special interest groups, the NRA comes to mind. Then the soft well paid board positions after they retire from office all create corruption of the system.
Orange Crush

Posts:1251

--
06/04/2014 10:40 PM
Well we have Harper, which is like W moved north of 49th and brought his croonies. He's pretty much been dismantling everything worthwhile.

Despite a real multi-party system we've suffered under his dictatorship for what? 12yrs now? Blame winner takes all voting system and lack of ruling by concensus rather than imposing rule.
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/04/2014 11:24 PM
jookey, that used to be my theory: if you "send the message" by not reelecting these POS then eventually a decent candidate will get in. The problem: decent people want nothing to do with it, and there seems to be a long line of POS.

Sh*t always stinks!
Dale

Posts:524

--
06/05/2014 06:12 AM

Posted By Master 50 on 06/04/2014 09:55 PM
I read more and more how the US government is more an oligarchy than a democracy. IE the government does the bidding of the wealthiest people. the less than 1%ers.
The financial influence of lobbyists, special interest groups, the NRA comes to mind. Then the soft well paid board positions after they retire from office all create corruption of the system.



This




How am I going to have equal voice to the Koch brothers?
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/05/2014 03:06 PM
More thoughts:

I'm not saying that "bad politician" is a new concept. You can read news papers from the 1800s that have quotes about politicians that are applicable today. I think that the big differences are: 1) The bad ones used to be the minority, now the are the vast majority. 2) The bad ones used to be sneaky about screwing us, now they are pretty in our face with it. 3) Politicians used to make a living through private business, now most are career politicians. 4) Most politicians used to look out for their industry and their constituents, now career politicians look out for special interest. 5) From the first day they take office, politicians start building their campaign for reelection.
stronz

Posts:315

--
06/05/2014 05:18 PM
If I could come up with one pivotal change that would make our system work more like the way it was intended it would be term limits. Get the re-election incentive out of the govt and you'll remove all the bozos who are attracted to poilitics as a career. They become relatively immune from the special interests contributing to their re-election campaign (cause there aint gonna be no re-election) and they can make decisions based on merit not on how it will get them more votes.

Maybe increase the term of service a little. But you get one term and one term only.
THE SKINNY

Posts:430

--
06/05/2014 05:23 PM
what's sad is we only get about 20% participation in voting. and even more pathetic is most of those people probably aren't making an informed choice. granted it's hard to become informed because there is so much misinformation. still sad.
How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives.
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/05/2014 06:37 PM
Agree stronz and skinny.

skinny, I too find it sad that a 25% turnout is considered a "high turnout". I attribute that to some people being so disenfranchised that they don't bother, some people being lazy, and some people being ignorant (like you said above, they are happy as long as they have 500 TV channels and a sweet smart phone). Although, some of the ignorant ones get out to vote when someone says "my opponent wants to take away your guns". Really, do you think that one person can do that? Even the prez can't do that without getting congress to agree, and that isn't going to happen.
Dale

Posts:524

--
06/05/2014 08:06 PM
And the 75% who do not vote-- what difference would it make? Likely the same people get elected. Not that I'm advocating apathy but seriously, why the big stink over people not voting?


I vote every time and generally write in someone who I think would do a good job. I wrote in Jon Huntsman last prez. election. Ticked off my girlfriend, she said I was throwing my vote away, I told her in 40 years of voting my individual vote has never swayed an election, not even in my tiny podunk town.


Here's my solution-- 535 people selected at random from the phone book to serve one term, then go home and have another batch selected.
No pension, no benefits, small stipend for serving the 2 or 6 years.


You people under 30 will just need to Google 'phonebook', I don't have time to explain
C2K_Rider

Posts:173

--
06/05/2014 08:21 PM

Posted By stronzo nonfumare on 06/05/2014 05:18 PM
If I could come up with one pivotal change that would make our system work more like the way it was intended it would be term limits. Get the re-election incentive out of the govt and you'll remove all the bozos who are attracted to poilitics as a career. They become relatively immune from the special interests contributing to their re-election campaign (cause there aint gonna be no re-election) and they can make decisions based on merit not on how it will get them more votes.

Maybe increase the term of service a little. But you get one term and one term only.


That hasn't worked in California. They just run for se other office. Even going backwards to mayor etc. the major damage is that we end up with an eternally amateur legislature and the special interests end up writing the bills they want which are then introduced by the "representative."

I'd rather have longer terms and figure out how to ensure they represent people rather than corporations.

Yes I'm dreaming. It's never been like and probably never will
THE SKINNY

Posts:430

--
06/05/2014 09:39 PM
of course this would never happen but:
have a voting tax of $1 per election per eligible voter. so for a presidential election, there is $1 per eligible voter split between the parties. no outside funding. same with senate races all the way down to dog catcher. so the average voter would have to pay maybe $20 a year depending on how many offices there are to vote for. also have a government funded channel on radio, tv and the interwebs that is strictly for political adds. there won't be any signs or people yelling in the street. if you want to know about a candidate or issue you can go to those channels provided. no point in me having to listen to that crap while 'family guy' is on. also have a fact check feature that calls out all the bs for what it is or puts it in the correct context. also make voting mandatory like jury duty. and have it on saturday and sunday. and give out ice cream. i have spoken.
How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives.
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/06/2014 09:05 AM
Dale, your post gave me a flash-back to Eddy Murphy Delirious when he did the set about drunk white guys voting for Jessie Jackson.

That is one of the disenfranchised reasons for not voting "my vote doesn't make a difference". No individual vote sways an election, but if a million people who feel that way vote they do make a difference. A better argument for your vote is that if Huntsman got a lot of votes, that sends a message. There was an election in a small community (pop. ~800) near me recently, and Donald Duck got more votes than the incumbent (something like 150 to 45). Message sent.
Yo Mike

Posts:279

--
06/06/2014 09:29 AM
+ a million to Skinny

I have a friend who I don't think has ever voted. He claims it will increase his chances of getting called for jury duty........
jmdirt

Posts:755

--
06/06/2014 10:23 AM
Mike, have you told your friend that jury duty is called from tax information not from voting information? I guess I'm assuming that all jurisdictions select the same way.


---
Active Forums 4.1