Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nivim]

 You've seen a lot more optomistic dipictions of history than me, GlyphGryph. It was not the people blindly messing around into the future that has improved our lives, but the occasional people who had a pretty good idea of what the future would be like, and worked to improve it; partly by countering the efforts of those blindly messing around. There's also the fact that if your state of living is comfortable or happy, you are in a very small minority, and your state of living is most likely fueled by the suffering of countless others. You're predictions seem to assume that a majority of those in power are going to make logical and rational decisions, when in fact such decisions can be more accurately simulated by dice rolls. Perhaps dice weighted slightly to the greedy and shortsighted side of things.

The furniture in my room right now is almost all stuff my parents have been saving since I was 5 years old, so that I'd have a little something when I went to college.  I don't own towels... just some little washcloths.  My mother has passed down the secret of repairing zippers missing teeth, a piece of "women's lore" from the Great Depression.

Would you be willing to share this secret, Vector? The internet wont tell me.

 On the subject of rationing and hoarding, we have a moderate stock; about two closets full of non-perishable food, but without supplement it is unlikely to last very long in the case of a full economic collapse.

[RedKing]

News that a deal is being hammered out.

The skinny so far: $2.8 trillion in cuts, in two stages. Debt ceiling raised at least through the end of 2012. No new taxes of any kind. Not even closed loopholes, as far as I can tell.

So once again, the rich got away scot-free, and the rest of us are going to bend over and take it without lube. For all the posturing and political theater, the GOP won. They got what they wanted -- massive budget cuts and no new taxes. I'll never understand how the Democrats always wind up being the GOP's bitch even when they're in charge.

[Phmcw]

Because that circus is for you alone. Just that, Dem and GOP work hand in hand to rob you.
They play good cop and bad cop (for both their electorate, which is hilarious).

[mainiac]

So once again, the rich got away scot-free, and the rest of us are going to bend over and take it without lube. For all the posturing and political theater, the GOP won. They got what they wanted -- massive budget cuts and no new taxes. I'll never understand how the Democrats always wind up being the GOP's bitch even when they're in charge.

Because the republicans take hostages and there is no mechanism by which they are punished for it.  If the dems played hardball to that extent, they would face an independent backlash.  The republican coalition is very narrow and ideological coherent and the democratic coalition is everyone who feels squemish about that agenda.  Thus the democrats can stand for anything without alienating someone while the republicans stand for whatever they want.

Meanwhile a bunch of people who see themselves as cynics, centrists and pragmatists will try to say that the democrats are just as pathological as the republicans, thus preserving the system.  All the while they beat their breasts and pull their hair about how much they dont like it.  Phmcw is a good example but it takes about two seconds for one to enter a political debate in this country.

[Africa]

Democrats can't beat the Republicans in this kind of fight because a) they're nutless and b) they're convinced that behaving reasonably will eventually bring everyone else in Congress around to also behave reasonably. In this case, behaving reasonably consisted of trying to compromise, which the Teabaggers saw as weakness so they hardened their positions and made them even more extreme. And now nobody can apparently do anything without them.

I'm still confused though. Aren't there enough sane Republicans in the House that one of the Democrats' compromise-plans could pass?

[Lysabild]

Sounds like if America could handle more than two parties these things wouldn't happen.

[Africa]

I don't think it would make a difference. The ruling coalition right now would probably be a loose confederation of Teabaggers, the religious right, neocons, less extreme financial conservatives, and social conservatives. Kind of like....the Republican party. And then the Teabaggers would have even more leverage because they could threaten to pull out of the coalition if they didn't get their way.

Hang on, I guess you didn't say "parliamentary system." I guess I can't imagine our fucked-to-hell political system ever allowing any extra parties to creep in.

[mainiac]

Sounds like if America could handle more than two parties these things wouldn't happen.

Our political mechanics are parliamentary, thus that's a no go.  3rd parties would just split the vote.

I'm still confused though. Aren't there enough sane Republicans in the House that one of the Democrats' compromise-plans could pass?

Nothing will pass unless the Speaker of the House will bring it to a vote.  And Speaker Boner doesn't want to piss off the Tea Party.

I don't think it would make a difference. The ruling coalition right now would probably be a loose confederation of Teabaggers, the religious right, neocons, less extreme financial conservatives, and social conservatives. Kind of like....the Republican party. And then the Teabaggers would have even more leverage because they could threaten to pull out of the coalition if they didn't get their way.

Hang on, I guess you didn't say "parliamentary system." I guess I can't imagine our fucked-to-hell political system ever allowing any extra parties to creep in.

If you pull out of a coalition in that scenario, then the coalition just makes a deal with someone to their left.  That's EXACTLY what we keep hoping for and getting confused because our system isn't parliamentary.

[Lysabild]

Sounds like if America could handle more than two parties these things wouldn't happen.

Our political mechanics are parliamentary, thus that's a no go.  3rd parties would just split the vote.

Then reform. Unless you want a system that keeps failing to continue in the hope that MAGIX happens someday to save you.

[mainiac]

Sounds like if America could handle more than two parties these things wouldn't happen.

Our political mechanics are parliamentary, thus that's a no go.  3rd parties would just split the vote.

Then reform. Unless you want a system that keeps failing to continue in the hope that MAGIX happens someday to save you.

The constitution is strongly biased against such reforms.

[Phmcw]

So once again, the rich got away scot-free, and the rest of us are going to bend over and take it without lube. For all the posturing and political theater, the GOP won. They got what they wanted -- massive budget cuts and no new taxes. I'll never understand how the Democrats always wind up being the GOP's bitch even when they're in charge.

Because the republicans take hostages and there is no mechanism by which they are punished for it.  If the dems played hardball to that extent, they would face an independent backlash.  The republican coalition is very narrow and ideological coherent and the democratic coalition is everyone who feels squemish about that agenda.  Thus the democrats can stand for anything without alienating someone while the republicans stand for whatever they want.

Meanwhile a bunch of people who see themselves as cynics, centrists and pragmatists will try to say that the democrats are just as pathological as the republicans, thus preserving the system.  All the while they beat their breasts and pull their hair about how much they dont like it.  Phmcw is a good example but it takes about two seconds for one to enter a political debate in this country.

Or grow some and make a third party or an hard left movement in the Dem. Why is there a Tea party but no social dems? You could play this game too, you know? After all, they have a lot of money to loose. Didn't you learn to go on strike? To block airports , harbor and highways? Why do you think we got a social security and health-care? Because if they try to take it away, we'll fucking kick their asses until they yield. As we did, do and will do again.

[Africa]

Sounds like if America could handle more than two parties these things wouldn't happen.

Our political mechanics are parliamentary, thus that's a no go.  3rd parties would just split the vote.

Then reform. Unless you want a system that keeps failing to continue in the hope that MAGIX happens someday to save you.

We can't even get a routine thing like raising the debt ceiling passed because of the reactionaries holding the government hostage. How are we supposed to reform anything? Well, anything that isn't cutting social programs for poor people and giving the money to the rich in the form of tax cuts.

[mainiac]

So once again, the rich got away scot-free, and the rest of us are going to bend over and take it without lube. For all the posturing and political theater, the GOP won. They got what they wanted -- massive budget cuts and no new taxes. I'll never understand how the Democrats always wind up being the GOP's bitch even when they're in charge.

Because the republicans take hostages and there is no mechanism by which they are punished for it.  If the dems played hardball to that extent, they would face an independent backlash.  The republican coalition is very narrow and ideological coherent and the democratic coalition is everyone who feels squemish about that agenda.  Thus the democrats can stand for anything without alienating someone while the republicans stand for whatever they want.

Meanwhile a bunch of people who see themselves as cynics, centrists and pragmatists will try to say that the democrats are just as pathological as the republicans, thus preserving the system.  All the while they beat their breasts and pull their hair about how much they dont like it.  Phmcw is a good example but it takes about two seconds for one to enter a political debate in this country.

Or grow some and make a third party or an hard left movement in the Dem. Why is there a Tea party but no social dems? You could play this game too, you know? After all, they have a lot of money to loose. Didn't you learn to go on strike? To block airports , harbor and highways? Why do you think we got a social security and health-care? Because if they try to take it away, we'll fucking kick their asses until they yield. As we did, do and will do again.

This would be step 2.  Step 1 would be bringing the labor movement back from the dead, currently representing less then 7% of the workforce, IIRC.

[Lysabild]

I know I was being unrealistic, I just find that the whole political system of America is flawed from the bottom and up.

[mainiac]

I know I was being unrealistic, I just find that the whole political system of America is flawed from the bottom and up.

These things do get fixed.  Yes a parliamentary system would probably be better but there's no such thing as a system that works on it's own.  If American levels of civic participation weren't pathetic, our system would work a lot better.  If enough people wanted the system to work and voted on that belief then Tea Party obstructionism would be an empty threat.

I think the average person understands the system doesn't work but they don't understand they can fix it by voting.