|
HorseLord posted:It would be cool if the US stopped being a federation, and was instead abolished. I think the US should be reassembled as the United Soviet States of America. quote:I'm sorry dude but federalization is one of the few things the United States has undoubtedly correct. And there's more than 2 centuries of infrastructure and interdependence laid down that will fall the gently caress apart if any sort of breakup is done. I can kinda see why people would want a more decentralized government in the US, if for no other reason than because policy making at the national level is so dysfunctional. Typo fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Apr 14, 2015 |
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The UK system is horrible poo poo, what would make you think any of it would work? Why? The problem with the US system is amount of veto power that every component of the political system gets, which means that you get what you have today: political gridlock and badly needed reforms don't get passed. The last time the US passed a budget is what 1997? The UK system is much more decisive and capable of implementing policies, i.e if the Parliament don't pass a budget it is dissolved and a new election is called. It allows things to be done and a mechanism (vote of no confidence) for the electorate to judge those policies by. Also far greater technocratic input on areas that ends up being settled through lawsuits in the US (i.e a bunch of environmental issues) but that has nothing to do with federalization.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The UK system of half assed devolution is horribly broken, as is the life time appointment upper house. Furthermore they maintain FPTP despite being a parliamentary system, which basically is awful. There is no reason to reduce the US to a system where the majority of the country uses the congress for what are state level laws now, with the residents of the remaining states maintaining state government also voting on the national congress' issues for the un-state-ified remainder. You don't have to copy the feature precisely, you can have the senate as oppose to the house of lords being the upper house for instance. FPTP is terrible, but it's also the one used in the current American system so it's not any better or worse.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Dude, you're the prick for whining about how people make fun of your bad ideas. Look, you're spouting off on stuff that I already learned as bogus in 9th grade government classes. No, he's right about this. Being condescending is a lot less effective than actually arguing your points.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Locke Dunnegan posted:This thread is way more tense than it was meant to be. Keeps things exciting. Look you seem like someone who is genuinely interested in a good discussion, but I think D&D is really the wrong place for this type of debate. I think the reason why people end up being hostile to you comes down to the fact that your OP comes across as libertarian/state's right soapboxing, I know that's not your intent, but people are pretty hostile to that. There are a lot of other forums which are more welcoming and friendly, but the debate culture in D&D can be pretty horrible sometime and you get people who are basically just masturbating over how smart they think they are. I totally get what you are saying about how things are inexplicably and unnecessarily tense, but that is what the general culture on this board is like. Typo fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Apr 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:I don't understand what you think we need from the British system then. Parliamentary systems don't really work correctly when you have FPTP, and once you replace FPTP a presidential republic works just fine. Honestly both the Canadian and British systems are super broken, and it's lunacy to demand them in whole or in part. FPTP doesn't get rid of the amount of veto power that's available to congress, the courts, the executive over each other, and state governments over the federal government (and vice-versa) or the tendency to either screw around with federal agencies for political purposes or neuter them altogether. Those are built into the US system on a level more fundamental than FPTP as part of checks and balances. It would be a move in the right direction though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
tsa posted:Pretty much op, I would try GBS or perhaps e/n they seem to do good things with threads there. Really? I think it was much worse a few years ago when D&D had some sort of Marxists wanting to purge everyone else frenzy going on. Now it actually seems more moderate, or maybe its because I only read certain threads nowdays.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:*cant stand heat* I never understood why D&D posters seem to have this machoism attached to hostile internet postings.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:because it raises the level of overall discouse to something barely more tolerable than youtube comments I go on other forums which has better discourse than youtube comments all the time without the deeply ingrained hostility towards any opinions right of a certain point. quote:d&d has this weird reputation of being full of angry ultra leftists which isn't true but it's useful because generally the people who are scared to post in d&d have really dumb opinions and rarely show any insight, so it's better for everyone involved if they don't post here
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:lol ok man ikr
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Lotka Volterra posted:My simple three step solution to saving America: They shall henceforce be defined as the "Western United States Empire" and the "Eastern United States Empire". Centuries later, the western part will fall apart and come under the influence of the barbarians from Canada, fracturing into a series of kingdoms sharing a common American heritage. The eastern half will eventually be conquered by newly strong Cuba, who will seize NYC and declare the new Cuban empire. And there will be a bunch of crusades launched by the west to save the east from the Cubans but will eventually ironically sack the eastern capital of NYC and thus destroying it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Locke Dunnegan posted:
Yeah that's the thing a lot of people don't seem to understand that there are other people who post on this forum for enjoyment and a discussion which begins and ends with telling them to digest a few textbooks and maybe a few thousand pages of das kapital is not fun.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
chairface posted:I'm going to storm into the mathematics symposium with a crackpot idea and when they tell me to learn calculus and suggest textbooks for that I'll get mad. D&D is not a mathematics symposium. You are taking this forum way too seriously. But then again Eprisa threads are fun so there's that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:I don't think expecting people to have understood middle and high school level government/social studies classes is such a high bar to be quite honest. OTOH OP actually seems to be willing to learn and doesn't think of himself as smarter than everyone else. To put it another way, I did my degree in Computer Science and if some guy with a lovely understanding of CS (but is willing to learn) comes in and talks to my professors about his great new sorting algorithm which runs at n time, at least some of them would appreciate his interest and passion and at least sit down to tell him why he's wrong in a polite, non-condescending way. I don't think ignorance is so much a barrier to discussion as ignorance+conviction that you are right and refuse to anyone else. OTOH this board did have a couple of those types of people on the -left- and were super obnoxious on top of that and nobody ever called them out for it because they adheres to the correct set of political orthodoxies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:If he was so willing to learn he wouldn't pitch a fit like a baby and go "I'm not going to chat because you guys were SO MEAN". But that's the thing though. It's fair and valid to ask for a civil discussion without insults being thrown around because this is how the vast majority of enjoyable human interactions go.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:
Or you can stop taking this forum so seriously and adhere to this belief that hostile internet posting environment amounts to some sort of machoism. If you can't have a discussion without being civil, the problem is really with you and how you choose to interact with other people.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Dude you're the one taking this forum seriously by ranting about ethics in lefitst journalism quote:and how mean people are to whatever apparently dumb views you apparently have are. This is the problem, you don't, or at least don't want to, understand the value of a civil discussion to debating. Have fun I guess, I just hope this isn't the way you choose to interact with people irl.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
nm
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Locke Dunnegan posted:That's not the point you're being elitist about So just to give you an example of something the federal government does better than state governments, it's the issue of externalities. An externality would be something like pollution, it's a cost or benefit which comes as a result of a transaction between two parties, but affects more people than just the two parties in question. So something like me buying electricity from the power plant, only for the coal burned by the power plant to generate acid rain in a neighbouring state is an example of an externality. Because there is a side effect to the transaction which isn't taken into account in the pricing of the good by either side, nor is the third party affected being compensated. Environmental externalities are likely to be one of the biggest issues of the 21st century, and it's not handled very well by smaller government entities. By its very nature, larger entities are better at internalizing externalities (the federal government would for example regulate the power plant above whereas a state of Virginia wouldn't care all that much about causing acid rain in Montana or w/e). This even more significant when it comes to the issue of climate change which probably need transnational governance or legislation to resolve. There's also the issue of the collective actions problem which is less of an issue for the federal government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action#Collective_action_problem). Environmentalism is something which is handled much better at the federal level than local state level.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Except the opposite was true during the Reagan years, where the Federal government was the one trying to deregulate and remove environmental protections, and the states were fighting them. This repeated again with the "California Waiver" under George W. Bush, where Bush pressured the EPA to deny California the right to create stricter standards for climate change-related emissions. The structure of the federal vs. state definitely means that states have less incentive to address environmental effects that pass-down, but you have to take into account a lot of other things too, like politics and who is in control at the federal and state level. In effect, federalism can act as a brake, and while it may retard progress, it also retards backsliding. I actually have the 3rd edition of the book, looking it up I don't see this one being mentioned anywhere in it. The book doesn't seem to touch on the environmentalism much at all. I mean, I think you are right about the facts, I just don't see them in the book.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
I think the problem of decentralization in the US is that politically it seems to be really tied up to the concept of "state's rights" and all the baggage that comes with it. I can't imagine devolution in the UK or decentralization in Germany being an ideological subject.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2015 01:31
|
|