The cliff

The fiscal cliff, what will happen? Who will lose? Dems, GOP or USA?

They will put America first and reach a compromise.
1
3%
They will put America first and reach a compromise.
1
3%
They will make a deal at the very last second.
4
11%
They will make a deal at the very last second.
4
11%
The R's will be the winners: No tax increase.
0
No votes
The R's will be the winners: No tax increase.
0
No votes
The dems will be the winners: More tax for the rich
1
3%
The dems will be the winners: More tax for the rich
1
3%
They reach a deal that postpones matters, somehow.
6
17%
They reach a deal that postpones matters, somehow.
6
17%
They won't agree, but austerity is what the US needs.
0
No votes
They won't agree, but austerity is what the US needs.
0
No votes
They won't agree: Welcome to a new depression.
4
11%
They won't agree: Welcome to a new depression.
4
11%
Other (please specify).
2
6%
Other (please specify).
2
6%
 
Total votes: 36
User avatar
Leah
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 3:14 pm
SL Name: Liara Edring
Role: Rebel
Owner: My Internet Connection
AkA: Lailah, Lia, Liara
Location: Somewhere in Eorzea
Contact:

Re: The cliff

Postby Leah » Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:46 pm

Kaitlin wrote:The idea of checks and balances has been thrown out the window with circumventing and obstructionist tactics like gerrymandering, lobbying and cloture. The entire political process has been hijacked by the people who are supposed to represent the will of the people but instead represent corporations. Carter is right. It is fucked up and it would likely be illegal in many countries. I think the authors of the constitution must be rolling over in their graves.


Leah wrote:The system is designed to provide a series of checks and balances to keep any one part of the government from taking total control. But it's only as good as the people within it.
This isn't fucking Survivor. We aren't a tribe.

If I won't put up with an in-character owner trying to control my OOC life, what makes you think I'll put up with you trying to do that?

My Store: https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/165499
Resolver Bouchard
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:26 am

Re: The cliff

Postby Resolver Bouchard » Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:47 pm

Thomas Paine wrote:The circumstances of the world are continually changing, and the opinions of man change also; and as government is for the living, and not for the dead, it is the living only that has any right in it.


It's quite simple, you follow the thinker that inspired your founding fathers and change it. And ditch the second ammendment as well!
Carter
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:52 pm
SL Name: ***

Re: The cliff

Postby Carter » Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:31 pm

Resolver Bouchard wrote:
Thomas Paine wrote:The circumstances of the world are continually changing, and the opinions of man change also; and as government is for the living, and not for the dead, it is the living only that has any right in it.


It's quite simple, you follow the thinker that inspired your founding fathers and change it. And ditch the second ammendment as well!


That is an interesting point.... now my grandfather was a congressman (CT) he said to me that American political concepts were as archaic and as relevant to (he has now died) the 20th Century American society as the Magna Carta is to British society.

Given this situation, never considered, never envisioned.. is the American political system still living in a quaint, pre industrialised community of quakers, puritans and revolutionary anti monarchist environment.

Would be ironic really to think of America clinging to a past of traditions and archaic view points in a world so changed since the 1700's
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: The cliff

Postby Glaucon » Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:35 pm

Resolver Bouchard wrote:
Thomas Paine wrote:The circumstances of the world are continually changing, and the opinions of man change also; and as government is for the living, and not for the dead, it is the living only that has any right in it.


It's quite simple, you follow the thinker that inspired your founding fathers and change it. And ditch the second ammendment as well!


Asside from the slight historical inaccuracy (they weren't all that much inspired by Paine, who was a bit too much of a radical revolutionary for most)... Paine had a point. The 'founding fathers' never intended to be whorshipped as 'icons' and for their constitution to be regarded as a secular version of the bible, which seems to be the way many in the US regard them and that piece of paper now. And Carter's grandfather was right as well, I think.

But even if the US system isn't all that great (and certainly NOT the cause for the 'success' of the US as a nation, and not PERFECT just because a fairly smart set of guys thought it up), or... just 'weird' as Carter calls it... it IS what it is. It can't be changed. It is hard to change, democratically. Politically, it is impossible. (Even a new amendment would be nearly impossible at this time). And given the legal culture in the US, changing it would go against everything people are taught. It is just unthinkable.

My point is that IF House Republicans are going to cockblock anything coming from the White House or the Senate, hold the US hostage to get the stuff they believe in... than that is just too bad. The democrats are just going to have to deal with it. And if that means giving in to the republicans, then that is what it is. Going for far-fetched loopholes to circumvent the US system/constitution is not just fighting fire with fire, it is fighting fire with petrol. If people in the US dislike the republicans being totally uncooperative most of the time, just saying 'no' to everything (and spending their time in creating their own rival proposals that they know won't get the approval of Congress in general instead), I don't think that they are going to like the democrats any better for trying to find ways to subvert the existing political system, so they can bypass the fu... I mean, the House Republicans. I knew Kaitlin would like the proposals (the more committed liberals seem to generally like these 'tricks' a lot), but I think they are sacrificing their own credibility with their voters if they pursue these quazillion dollar coins and 14th amendment section 4 'coups'-plans.

Even using it as 'leverage' against their opponents won't work. The republicans will probably dare them to try and go ahead with these plans, saliva dripping from their lips.

It is silly, and the USA already has too much silly in politics.
Resolver Bouchard
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:26 am

Re: The cliff

Postby Resolver Bouchard » Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:45 pm

Oh they loved and worshipped Paine for his first few books, not so much when he started talking about restricting firearms, sorry religion. :lol:
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: The cliff

Postby Glaucon » Sun Jan 13, 2013 11:02 pm

Eh? Such vehemence... and all because I didn't get your sarcasm.

I think I did get it on the cliff... my prediction came true, didn't it? (Your's too, but it was the same prediction).

And I am not even saying you are wrong (assuming I am not missing any sarcasm again)... the democrats shouldn't just accept what the House Reps dictate to them, I agree. If they were to force a government shut-down or a government default on interest payments on bonds and such, it would reflect badly on those republicans. Who knows? It might even cost them their House majority in 2 years (however unlikely that is due to the way the districts get gerrymandered). But they should make some serious concessions (it is probably necessary to cut spending anyway, and they got a modest tax increase before).

Anyway... I am glad that you find those silly plans silly. And I'll join you in hoping that the democrats won't try to seriously pursue them.
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: The cliff

Postby Glaucon » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:56 pm

Kaitlin wrote:The idea that the debt ceiling increase should be matched dollar for dollar by spending cuts of their choosing is ridiculous.


It is. Even if it wasn't of their choosing, it would be ridiculous, because everyone knows that if they got handed supreme dictatorial powers as of today, they would hit the debt ceiling too.

Besides... what the fuck... the US already hit it. And went through it. Early this month. And with it being postponed, it will have gone through it even more clearly. So... what's to talk about? What is the alternative policy? NOT going through it? But when it comes up again, that is hardly an option... because it is a done thing, then. And republicans aren't really suggesting that the government should not pay private parties their bills. After all, they are not communists.

So, by letting it the thing get postponed, they are letting something symbolic (except to people that don't get what the debt ceiling is) get turned into something symbolic AND absurd. It's like telling your child that you are postponing your decision of whether they can stay up til 10 PM to watch a TV show until 11 PM, and that they are allowed to stay up in the meantime. :o.O:

Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron