Readit News logoReadit News
gwurk commented on US Ends Support For Ukrainian F-16s   ukrainetoday.org/us-ends-... · Posted by u/ctack
_heimdall · 9 months ago
Honest question (including that since its sometimes hard to tell when written) -

What additional authority doss the US legislative branch need? They have pretty wide authority to create any laws that don't violate our constitutional rights, I don't know how we could really expand that further (but my view is definitely biased since I grew up here).

I think congress would be well within its rights to change their own rules to add time limits on legislation or required expiration on proposed bills, for example.

gwurk · 9 months ago
Here is a example of an alternative system, that I would prefer: the legislative branch is the one that people vote for, (with proportional representation), and the legislative branch then elects the executive branch.

If there is ever a conflict between legislative and executive, then the legislative branch can remove the executive branch.

In other words: the president shouldn't be head of government (only head of state, sort of a figurehead).

gwurk commented on Vivek Ramaswamy on X: "Will entire agencies be deleted? Answer: yes   twitter.com/VivekGRamaswa... · Posted by u/loongloong
d35007 · a year ago
This is a pretty weak argument. Blaming the two-party system might feel good, but I don't think it gives us a better understanding of what happened in this election. People voted for the guy at the top of the ticket, and he was pretty clear about wanting to get rid of some federal agencies. I think we have to conclude that people were receptive to his message.

My hot take is that the two-party system isn't anywhere near as bad as people think it is. In countries with multi-party systems, parties often have to form coalitions in order to govern. In countries with two-party systems, parties have to do most of that coalition forming before the election. That's why we see far-left and center-left politicians in the Democratic party instead of having viable left wing parties.

One way or another, we get a coalition government. Is it better for those coalitions to be formed before the election or after? If it happens before the election, the electorate can see the results in time to change their decision. If it happens after the election, the fringe parties' arguments probably get discussed more, but there's no guarantee those parties will be part of the governing coalition.

gwurk · a year ago
you are right in it being a weak argument in this situation, and I'll refrain from arguing against a two party system in this comment.

What I should have said, is that as an outsider: I see lots of interviews with people who state that they are going to vote for trump (at time of interview), and they all seem to pick and choose from the things that trump says, some they take at face value, and others they consider to be just "the way he talk", campaign speech, or something along those lines.

Now, I don't know, maybe the majority of the people that voted for him actually want to dismantle institutions, maybe they don't and just saw it as an exaggerated way of saying that there should be some cutbacks. I don't know, I just don't think that it is an obvious conclusion from the result.

gwurk commented on Vivek Ramaswamy on X: "Will entire agencies be deleted? Answer: yes   twitter.com/VivekGRamaswa... · Posted by u/loongloong
steveoscaro · a year ago
Didn't a democracy vote in the people that are saying they want to remove some agencies? Isn't that also how the agencies came to be in the first place?
gwurk · a year ago
You are right, but america use a two party system, there were only two options, and those options differed in many ways, it is difficult to say if "removing some agencies" was what the people that voted wanted, or if they just preferred that candidate despite them wanting to remove some agencies.
gwurk commented on Trump wins presidency for second time   thehill.com/homenews/camp... · Posted by u/koolba
tarsinge · a year ago
More like it’s clear that trying to gaslight voters by using technical definitions to hide that food had increased more than 30% didn’t work. You can’t tell the people the economy is the best when they can’t afford food, no matter your technical indicators.
gwurk · a year ago
but "the economy is good" and "I have lots of money" are not the same things.

it is perfectly possible for a country to have the best economy ever while still having a massive amount of people who can't afford food.

gwurk commented on Trump wins presidency for second time   thehill.com/homenews/camp... · Posted by u/koolba
pc86 · a year ago
I can't wait until people stop saying the guy who won a majority of the popular vote is a threat to democracy.
gwurk · a year ago
In your opinion: Are those two things mutually exclusive?
gwurk commented on Trump wins presidency for second time   thehill.com/homenews/camp... · Posted by u/koolba
ywvcbk · a year ago
> there is no left in america

There is, though? It’s just no represented at all because of FTPT there is based no constituency where it can get 50%. Usually not even in Democrat primaries.

gwurk · a year ago
Yes, that was what I meant.
gwurk commented on Trump wins presidency for second time   thehill.com/homenews/camp... · Posted by u/koolba
class3shock · a year ago
The economy I think was the huge sticking point. You can't have everyone in your party saying "the economy is good, it's growing better than ever, look at all the jobs, etc." while literally no average person is seeing that. They are so out of touch that they think if finance/econ majors on tv say the economy is doing good than it's doing good.

Compared to pre-pandemic - Housing prices have shot up incredibly - Loan interest rates are two or three times higher - Every day goods are higher - Car prices are higher - Insurance is higher - Utilities are higher

And that would be fine, prices go up over time after all, but all of that is on the back of pay, that for most people, has not gone up anywhere close to enough to cover all of that, if it's gone up at all.

gwurk · a year ago
That would make it a left/right thing. As a European: there is no left in america, there is a liberal right and a conservative right.

The economy is good in america, but that just means that the amount of "resources" in the country is increasing, but, if "average joe" benefits from that or not is a question of how those resources are distributed.

Left/Right is about economy.

Being on the right means that you find it more important that the total pool of resources is increasing.

Being on the left means that you care more about how the resources are distributed.

What happened here is IMHO that the conservatives did the populist thing, they claimed that regular people would get more resources if they won, while still claiming that they would distribute less resources away from wealthy people.

They are not wrong in saying that the economy is good, it is just that since there is no left in american politics, it seems like some people have forgotten the other perspective, since redistribution of wealth have been almost an insult in america for so long. Yet, last time he was president, trump managed to send everyone a check, signed by himself, but paid for by taxes, without being called an evil communist.

I listened to a radia program where poor americans where interviewed, and that was the thing that they remembered about trump, he sent them a check.

So, in conclusion, there is a large group of poor americans, that associate the guy that wants to remove taxes for rich people with what I (according to the above definition) consider to be left wing politics.

gwurk commented on Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?   georgesaines.com/blog/202... · Posted by u/gsaines
RiverCrochet · a year ago
I don't often discuss politics with my niece; we've actually had physical altercations before. But I mustered some courage and brought this up to her, and she had the following to say:

"The two party system forces people who advocate for issue X to also have to advocate for Y and Z, when they may really only care about X. Another factor; the decay of respect of and audiences for traiditional mass media, and the rise of personal "bubble" media such as social media has also forced mass communications to be more personal if one wants to reach people, and various political forces are adapting to the new landscape."

I'm not sure if population density has any effect on political discussions more than discussions in general.

gwurk · a year ago
I think that your niece is absolutely right about this.
gwurk commented on Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?   georgesaines.com/blog/202... · Posted by u/gsaines
benterix · a year ago
It's enough to think for a couple of seconds to realize it has nothing to do with population density, otherwise you could freely discuss politics in less populated areas of the States.

The real reason is that politics, and especially the two party system in most Western countries, is based on polarization, e.g. blaming the other party for all the evil of the world.

It's not some abstract "politics". For left-leaning, it's about freedom for women to decide about their own body, about respect towards minorities and people coming from other countries, just to name a few. For right-leaning, it's about protecting families, cultivating the tradition, prosperity of the country, the right to defend oneself etc. Politics became almost a new religion.

gwurk · a year ago
Do you actually believe that most western countries use a two party system?

Do you use a different definition of two party system than I do, when I say 2 party system I mean "first past the post"-systems, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting

and for which countries use that system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting#/me...

gwurk commented on Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?   georgesaines.com/blog/202... · Posted by u/gsaines
graemep · a year ago
Not just the US though. It is also true in the UK (maybe not as bad - yet) but we have the polarisation. The hatred of the other side is more on-sided here - its more a characteristic of the "left": you hear "I hate Tories" rather than "I hate Labour voters" or even "I hate socialists" (nor did you even before socialism died). It seems to be the same in other Anglophone countries.

There has also been a shift in the focus of politics away from economic policy and the running of government services (as was very much the case in the UK up to the 1980s) to social issues as a result of a centrist consensus on what were important issues - disagreement about them is now purely theoretical and off the table in terms of what might actually change.

It think the problem has also been inadvertently illustrated by people in the comments discussing specific American culture war issues with a great deal of anger.

An aspect of this is the lack of willingness to compromise. Take abortion. It is much less of an issue in most of Europe because it is allowed, but with short term limits. It means many of the arguments for it are not relevant, but it also undermines many of the arguments against it because of lack of functioning brain tissue, or the state of development comparable to a premature baby. Anglophone countries are much more all or nothing - long term limits or not allow at all.

We also do not (even in the UK) have the American alignment of party politics with social issues. Can you imagine the Republicans being the party that allowed same sex marriage?

I think the moving of discussion online has primed people to be more aggressive about their views in general. I was thinking the other day about the people I know IRL who have blocked me on FB: my ex, a friend of hers, one of my ex's sisters (emigrated to the US and is a stereotype Trump supporter, stolen election theory etc.), a creationist (also my ex's sister, a nice person who keeps in touch with me, but does not like my comments on her FB posts), and a remainer/rejoiner.

gwurk · a year ago
I think the american to party system is the problem, which happens to also be used in the uk. You can not make assumptions of the entire west about political matters based on something happening in two countries when they differ so much from other western countries in it's political system.

u/gwurk

KarmaCake day22October 11, 2024View Original