Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

ReidRansom posted:

Communism can't fail, it can only be failed.

In the end, the fact that humans are lovely ruins any political arrangement.

OP, we've lasted this long... the structure of the country is probably generally ok, focus on fixing human douchebaggery.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Locke Dunnegan posted:

Being that I didn't bring up any popular talking points (that I know of) aside from reducing the power of central government somewhat, especially considering the increase in central power in the last fifteen years or so, I don't understand how someone can argue that I seem to be a member of those parties.

I believe you are mistaking the co-opting and corruption of federal power by massively monied interests with an increase in the power of federal power. We are not seeing an increase in centralized power, we are seeing rampant abuse of that power due to the abdication of responsibility by the electorate.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Typo posted:

To be fair federalization in the US is pretty suboptimal (see the Wyoming having 2 senators and 1 congressmen) and a big switchup of the components of fedrealization or making it more like the Canadian/UK system might be better.

I think I would just settle for a pure proportional House. You can keep the senate just how it is and it can be the bastion of state equality or whatever.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

My Imaginary GF posted:

We have a House proportional to population, with decentralization: the states are free to regulate how they choose to divvy up that proportional representation within their administrative bounds, in accordance with the will of the people.

Proportional*

Population per house seat based on 2010 census
Montana - JUST under 1M
Rhode Island - A bit over 500k

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Nintendo Kid posted:

Congress could expand itself at any time to address this, they just need to pass a new reapportionment bill.

Look, if you want to keep things as close to the way they are written, I'm all for enforcing Article 1 Section 2 and having 2 U.S. Code § 2a subsection (a) declared unconstitutional, but an 11k House might bring its own problems.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Motherfucker, a difference of 0.15% is more than merely adequate.

Maybe, but it is still not proportional. Plus, is it not rather irrelevant to compare the difference to the population of the country at large when considering proportionality in representation, because that 0.15% difference is still 100% more.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

My Imaginary GF posted:

What are you waiting for, OP? Help empower your community right now and acquire the access necessary to understand the stressors of public service from your humbly elected servant's perspective.

This part right here is very good advice.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Hitlers Gay Secret posted:

So what can we do to shift the balance towards good? How do we paint the government in a positive light?

Teach critical thinking skills and encourage people to watch less television?

  • Locked thread