|
subrosaDom -> RE: Gerrymandering Florida Assholes (7/13/2014 1:11:57 PM)
|
There are multiple endemic problems. Yeats wrote regarding the apocalypse "The best lack all conviction/while the worst are full of passionate intensity" and what better describes the typical politician today? Why? Well, first consider what running for any major office means today - giving up all of you and family's privacy; having everything you've ever done in your life investigated (I can almost guarantee that if any of us ran for Congress, our being on collarspace would become front-page news as well as the profiles of the psychos and misogynists); being paid very little compared to say, being the executive of a major corporation; traveling constantly; and being involved in patter that would do Tallyrand justice. What kind of person would want this life? Only two: The very rare individual who believes he can and must change the world and who operates solely on principle, be it left or right (Paul Wellstone fits here on the left, for example); and much more frequently, the malignant narcissist, power-hungry for more recognition; desirous of being viewed as "important."
The next problem is in my view the growth of government. As government does more and more, there is more to lobby, and there are more people and corporations that others can screw to advance their benefactors. Laws and regulations are passed that benefit contributors at the expense of those who can't afford to lobby. Microsoft learned this a long time ago. They had zero presence in Washington. Today, they have an army because they were being screwed by others. Now they can do the screwing. This is only possible because of the absurd amount of power that Congress has. So it becomes a game of favorites. If Congress could not do very much, then every Congressperson would be like Ron Paul or William Proxmire -- unable to be lobbied, because there wouldn't be anything to be lobbied for. As long as the power resides there, you'll attract the second type of individual described above and the devil's circle simply grows. Only if it's impossible to play favorites will you get individuals who want what's right rather than individuals who want to bring home the bacon while screwing the pigs next door, as it were.
Third, the money. Almost everyone who runs for Congress and even more so those who run for Senator are exceedingly rich -- Republican and Democrat. That's because it's terribly hard to be a Congressperson on the $180K or so (that's an approximation, I didn't look it up) while being required to live in DC and in your hometown. Do you think John Warner, John Kerry (when he was a senator), Nancy Pelosi or Jon Corzine (when he was a senator) care about the salary? No, they're all richer than Croesus. The regular guy or gal, who might be brilliant, would never subject himself to the environment I described for this amount of money. Pay them $500K or $600K and you might get some better people because they could afford it, although it's still questionable whether they want the rest of this.
Are there other problems? Sure, but these are enough for now.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Gauge
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Not at all, Gauge, but it does render it pretty toothless for those whose primary interest is flinging partisan poo.
I sometimes wonder if our system might not be improved by shifting to a multi-party proportional representation system for the House of Representatives. Here I am in California USA, one of the most diverse places on the planet, and every one of our 53 seats in the House are either a Democrat or Republican.
Yeah, well, I don't fling partisan poo around. I believe that is 90% of the problem in this country, people would rather throw shit on each other from the huge piles of shit that are cropping up because of this stupid infighting.
"Both parties do it" is not a blank slate to just go, "Oh well, if everyone does it then it is fine." If it is wrong, then it is wrong and neither side should stand for it.
How do you fix it in order to make it fair and just?
|
|
|
|
