|
|
Post by Morreion on Apr 21, 2014 20:07:53 GMT -5
There's so much wrong with the federal government that this thread could last a month!  It might come down to an Article V Constitutional convention...you never know. |
|
|
|
Post by Laethaka on Apr 22, 2014 0:01:09 GMT -5
over-regulation and big government are not the problems. We have the lowest tax rate in the developed world and one of the most progressive income taxes (fair, given the income inequality). The problem with our government is that the capital-gains taxes are super low, enabling CEOs and heiresses to pay lower rates than my graduate student sister and gradually turning the whole country into an oligarchy.
What is this Amish milk thing? Are you really comparing it to problems caused by under-regulation? Crazy, catastrophic, recent problems like the 2008 financial meltdown or the electricity crisis here in California in 2001?
Government is not nearly so corrupt here as people are encouraged to think by corporate-backed deregulation candidates. My mom works for a federal congressman and they have to report EVERYTHING, constantly, and be meticulously careful that their constituency service office has nothing significant to do with the campaign office. Overcynicism about government is a uniquely American stupidity left over from past centuries. Look at the Scandinavian countries- they trust their government and it treats them wonderfully!
Sometimes I really think this country is just too big. Our visions for society are so different. The coasts should split off and join Canada and Japan and you red staters can join Latin America and run up your Gini coefficients and gun deaths and meat industries all together.
|
|
|
|
Post by Morreion on Apr 22, 2014 8:35:54 GMT -5
Sometimes I really think this country is just too big. Our visions for society are so different.Agree with that! Power corrupts, that's an old observation that the Founding Fathers recognized and tried to do something about with their divisions of government power. They knew their Greco-Roman history intimately, how democracy became mob rule, how populists and demagogues and dictators would become emperors...it's a problem of human nature, really. 'They should do something!' said by the many begets the acquisition of more and more power for the few. I've never understood the view that condemns corporations that made money by supplying something people wanted while at the same time lauding a federal government that increasingly tells you what to do and takes more freedoms away. Exceptions: those corporations that make a bundle through crony capitalist preferential treatment by government are part of the whole corrupt process (hello, General Motors, hello Solyndra, hello Wall Street bailouts). And I can't think of anything more oligarchical than the Bush and Clinton political dynasies, ugh! The terribly sluggish economic growth in this country is due in part to the large proliferation of government regulation (think of how the Affordable Care Act has altered the number of hours worked and the number of employees businesses have) as well as the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world (unless you donate to your congressperson to get an exception written into the IRS code). Uncertainty is a bad thing economically (once again, look at how the ACA law is altered at the whim of the executive branch). Jobs don't seem to be a big concern to the government these days. That's bad news. Government not corrupt? You realize that the insurance industry wrote a good portion of the Affordable Care Act, right? It's mandatory now to buy our product, woohoo! Let's make 'em buy EVERYTHING across the board! There's more abuse coming from the hands of a large and powerful government that takes in lots of money in 'campaign contributions' and then that government decides what is 'fair' and 'just' for everyone. By the way, those esteemed members of the federal government tend to become rich while serving the people ('they came to do good and ended up doing well'). Curiously, I bet that what they decide is 'fair' and 'just' has more to do with what their campaign contributors want (Silicon Valley needs cheap coders, now!). Anyone thinking that there's much difference between the 2 big parties in this regard are mistaken IMHO. The feds can tell you what to do at all sorts of levels, and the recent NSA revelations would make the KGB envious. Just for fun, Google 'three felonies a day'. Corruption is human nature, the less there is in the way of spoils the better, IMHO. California has some really big problems due to one-party rule, which breeds corruption (check out the recent news there!) and the application of using other people's money on a large scale for 'fairness' (or was that buying votes?)...not to mention public employee unions and the resulting jaw-dropping pension crisis. Blue states are finding that taxpayers are more and more voting with their feet. Certainly there are some lessons to be learned there. The Scandinavian countries- you'll find some interesting market-oriented reforms going on in Sweden, brought about by necessity. The coasts should split off and join Canada and Japan and you red staters can join Latin America...For a contrarian view- Canada reformed government spending policies in the recent past, making their system much more sustainable. I think that's something that our ruling class definitely wants to avoid. Japan- there's a word they have for the corruption that binds the financial system and the government there, I can't think of it right off-hand. Latin America, as in Venezuela, a 'people's dictatorship' that's jailed opponents and is running low on basic goods such as food and toilet paper and there are huge protests in the streets? That's not a small-government model at all! Actually, that's where our country is headed if we're not careful. One last observation- what do the following subjects have in common? the war on poverty the war on drugs the high cost of health insurance the housing bubble the higher education cost bubble the war on terror Hint: what you subsidize, you get more of. And it goes on and on. Anyway! It'll be interesting to see how all of these problems shake out! I'm not a big optimist on the subject!
|
|
|
|
Post by Regolyth on Apr 22, 2014 15:58:47 GMT -5
Since this thread is getting a little political-debatey, which tend to get heated very quickly, I'll preface my post with this is just my opinion. I still like you all and harbor no bad feelings or ill-will towards anyone.  What is this Amish milk thing? Are you really comparing it to problems caused by under-regulation? Crazy, catastrophic, recent problems like the 2008 financial meltdown or the electricity crisis here in California in 2001? Read the article Amish farmer targeted by FDA raids shuts down raw milk business. Basically the man was arrested (at gun point by S.W.A.T. members) by the FDA for selling raw milk across state lines. Raw milk was legal to sell in both states, but the FDA arrested him for transporting it across state lines (he transported the cow, not the milk). This is ridiculous on several levels. First, the man didn't need to be arrested by S.W.A.T. for selling raw milk (it was the FDA flexing their muscles). Secondly, it should be of no concern to the federal government what the people are drinking if they are doing it willingly of their own accord, knowing fully what is in their beverage. Third, it's a waste of manpower and the taxpayers' money. The FDA spent a year undercover to bust this man selling milk. It is an example of the government overstepping their bounds and over regulating things that doesn't need to be regulated in the first place. It's wasteful uses of resources, time and money. All of that could have been better spent getting drugs and criminals off the streets. over-regulation and big government are not the problems Big government is a huge problem! The federal government was never intended to be what it is today. It was meant to keep the states together and have minor duties between them. It was the intention of our country's founders to let the states rule. Therefore if you didn't like how your state was running matters, you could up and move to another (or you could help change the legislation). Speaking on taxes, if we truly wanted to make it fair for everyone, we could implement something like the fair tax, where all are taxed equally (and get rid of unlawful state and federal income taxes). IMO anyways. Anyway! It'll be interesting to see how all of these problems shake out! I'm not a big optimist on the subject! You and me both. |
|
|
|
Post by Morreion on Apr 22, 2014 18:14:21 GMT -5
I'm cool with disagreements too- and I like you all. Heck, both of you played DAoC, you guys rock! That doesn't mean we can't disagree  I think Rego hit the nail on the head with the role of the states in a federal system of government- the states are 50 laboratories of democracy, if you don't like what your state is doing, you can move to one of the other 49 if you fail to change things at the polls. That is a healthy system of governance. When the federal government wants to make everyone in all 50 states do the same thing- that's not good at all, because if (for example) the Affordable Care Act turns out to be a bad thing, all of America is screwed. If it was just in one state like Romneycare in Massachusetts, that's fine, because the other states can watch and see if it works or not and can act accordingly. And, honestly, a lot of things the federal government does is stupid- the feds are far removed from the people they rule over, and more susceptible to lobbyists and the elite Washington scene. At the state and local level, the governed are closer to their governing politicians, which is better for everyone. And, most importantly, the states have to balance their budgets by law. They can't spend the country into bankruptcy like the federal government is doing. There's a lot to be said for more state and local governmental power versus the federal behemoth and their one-size-fits-all approach to making everyone do what 535 people in Washington D.C. tell them to do. And finally- if you like a powerful central government telling other people what to do, a day will certainly come when the people in charge will want to make you do things you are vehemently against. Too much centralized power is bad for everyone sooner or later. I'd rather let people do what they want to do at the state and local levels. Live and let live. I don't understand the mindset of those who want everyone to do what they want them to do. It frankly seems like a bad-vibe power trip to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Regolyth on Apr 23, 2014 15:39:46 GMT -5
I'd rather let people do what they want to do at the state and local levels. Live and let live. I don't understand the mindset of those who want everyone to do what they want them to do. It frankly seems like a bad-vibe power trip to me. I don't get that either. If you don't like painting things blue, then don't do it. But don't tell me not to paint things blue. I like blue. As long as my blue things don't infringe on your red things, then there shouldn't be an issue. You can try to talk me in to painting things red if you like. You can tell me all about how awesome red is, but if I want to keep my stuff blue, then let it be. |
|
|
|
Post by Laethaka on Apr 23, 2014 20:38:02 GMT -5
ugggh I'm writing all this on my cell phone...
the Amish thing was one guy. The 2008 collapse was a systematic failure of the free market on a massive scale involving dozens of banks under thousands of managers and affecting trillions of dollars. I don't understand how the policy trade-off isn't clear. Regulating investment bankers from making fractally precarious derivative deals that jeopardize the whole banking system isn't a matter of live-and-let-live values.
(which, by the way, after living in China and South Africa I consider myself abnormally focused on live&live pluralism, despite American libertarian reflections)
Likewise, comparing the ACA to the war on drugs etc. doesn't fit. The drug war is a result of moral panic and propaganda that reached critical self-feeding mass and grew into a misguided bureaucratic hell. The ACA is a desperate, specific measure to control a broken entitlement system that was ballooning out of control and, thanks to obstructionist fearmongering by the same insurance companies you say wrote it, had been going on completely untreated for 50 years. The difference is a matter of necessity. The drug war addresses no threat. But without the reform, the old healthcare system was almost guaranteed to destroy America within my lifetime.
"If you want a fair tax we should have a flat-rate non-income tax." Man... Progressive income taxation has been an easy, democratic way to efficiently pay for government services for the last century of modern society around the developed world. I don't get this radical internet political theorizing. I can start declaring that the founding fathers never intended us to have international financial and military entanglements and I can demand that ALL overseas goverment activities be COMPLETELY stopped TODAY. It's not any less detached from reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laethaka on Apr 23, 2014 21:25:07 GMT -5
double post corollary that I am concerned about many of the same things you guys are. So much of our economy and culture has been ramped up so quickly in the last few decades. I think you'll agree with me that America needs to pause and wait to see what's sustainable and what isn't before pusing into yet another war, great society project, cultural warpjump, etc., or we could walk into a disaster. But getting to a point of balance is a very delicate matter and a lot of the stuff on the right these days sounds so dogmatic and pissed-off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Morreion on Apr 23, 2014 22:14:34 GMT -5
The financial meltdown in 2008- allowed by regulators who were as corrupt as the industry themselves, heck they came from the industry- was bailed out to the tune of vast amounts of taxpayer money- and people across the political spectrum, from Occupy to the Tea Party were ticked off at that. I understand fully that the system was on the brink of collapse and people were petrified, but 'too big to fail' bailouts meant that the people (those big contributors to and buddies of politicians) who should have failed under a free market system made out great while savers saw their interest rates decline to near zero due to rock-bottom federal reserve rates. And the economy limps along for years instead of taking very hard medicine and purging those who failed the system quickly. The thing is, don't fall into the trap of equating Wall Street only with 'those evil rich Republicans', because they've shoveled huge amounts of money to the equally-rich and divisive Democrats and our current 'Hope and Change' president as well- both major parties are corrupt and sucking up the big money in exchange for taking care of the donors. Some of the people on this board have recently been dismayed at the Comcast-Time Warner merger, guess who the Comcast CEO is a golfing buddy and huge contributor to? Yes, Mr. Hope and Change again. Don't get suckered by the big government elites of both parties who say one thing and do another! double post corollary that I am concerned about many of the same things you guys are. So much of our economy and culture has been ramped up so quickly in the last few decades. I think you'll agree with me that America needs to pause and wait to see what's sustainable and what isn't before pusing into yet another war, great society project, cultural warpjump, etc., or we could walk into a disaster... Agree totally! My worry is that we're doing crazy things at the federal level covering the whole country which could have irreversible consequences, and we're burying ourselves in debt- if the world loses confidence in the dollar, we are done- economic collapse could result. That's happened many times before (Germany, Argentina etc.). Nobody wants that to happen but our actions virtually guarantee it. We have to stop spending! The federal government cannot control itself, and things are looking bad...I'd rather see the states deal with important issues, because they have to balance their budgets by law so they have to deal with reality, and they are more responsive to smaller populations. Anyway, I think the more hyperpartisan things get, the more insane stuff happens because STICK IT TO THE OTHER SIDE WOOOO! that's crazy train stuff, and we're in danger of running off the tracks. |
|
|
|
Post by Regolyth on Apr 24, 2014 8:53:53 GMT -5
the Amish thing was one guy. The 2008 collapse was a systematic failure of the free market on a massive scale... I'm not comparing those two things. They're completely separate issues. My point about the raw milk raid was an example of just how wasteful our government is and how wrong their priorities are. There's another an instance going on in one of the western states (Colorado I think) where the government has spent some three million dollars trying get one million dollars in fines from some rancher. Do these minor things compare on a scale with the financial meltdown and other crises we're facing? No. They're completely different fish. However they do show just how crazy, wasteful and nonsensical our government continues to be with the responsibilities we have given them. If you can't properly manage your daily lunch money, how can you manage purchasing lunch for the whole cafeteria? Likewise, comparing the ACA to the war on drugs etc... I can start declaring that the founding fathers never intended us to have international financial and military entanglements and I can demand that ALL overseas goverment activities be COMPLETELY stopped TODAY. It's not any less detached from reality. I think you're mixing a few different posts and thoughts together that weren't being compared. "If you want a fair tax we should have a flat-rate non-income tax." Man... Progressive income taxation has been an easy, democratic way to efficiently pay for government services for the last century of modern society around the developed world. I don't get this radical internet political theorizing. I don't think the Fair Tax is really that radical. It rakes in about the same amount of money as the current system of taxing does, but it makes it so that everyone pays in, not just the poor and middle class. The rich get a lot of tax breaks and write-offs because of how they maneuver their money. I am not one for taxing the rich more than the poor. A lot of them worked hard for what they have and I don't believe they should be taxed to a higher degree because of their success (for the record, I'm no where near rich). I believe that people should be taxed the same whether they make $10,000 a year or $1,000,000 a year. And the way to do that, in my opinion, is to tax the sale of goods at a higher rate. The Fair Tax proposes to tax purchased goods and services at a higher rate than it currently is. That way whether I buy a new video game to play or I buy a Ferrari, I pay the same percentage in taxes. There would be no more taxing my income that I'm not spending. Also basic necessities are not taxed. Plus it gets rid of the unconstitutional IRS. It's a pretty simple and easy system. The current taxing system (at both the state and federal levels) is overly complex, insufficient and unfair.  The Fair Tax Plan |
|
