[kenberg]

Trinidad, on 2013-October-04, 05:15, said:

As far as I know, there is this "wisdom" in US politics that it is a good idea to have a president from one party and a congressional majority for the other "to keep a political balance".

Might it be a good idea to point out now that it also leads to political stalemates, "political hostage taking" and a dysfunctional government?

Bridge players know (or should know) that a pair will be more successful playing one bad system than two different good systems. Wouldn't it be better to have a well functioning government that globally reflects your political ideas, even if on details their ideas may be different from yours?

Rik

If I bid Precision and my partner bids SAYC it may not go so well, that's true. But I like Drury and don't care much for Bergen raises. Possibly we can come to an understanding such as 1♠-Pass-3♣ is Bergen, while Pass-Pass-1♠-Pass-3♣ is fit showing and Pass-Pass-1♠-pass-2♣ is Drury. This would assume that partner and I trust each other and see it as in our best interests to work something out.

As to the current political mess, I see in the morning Post that John Boehner says he won't let the country slide into default. I wish it would have been said a long time ago, but it is welcome news (to me). I don't think all Republicans are crazy, I have some conservative ideas of my own, I would like to see some serious discussion. Also in the morning Post, Krautmammer is explaining why it's all Obama's fault. If Krauthammer slips on the ice and lands on his butt, it's Obama's fault. Possibly we will be hearing more from conservatives who are more in touch with reality. Michael Gerson's column today would be an example of this.

http://www.washingto...b57f_story.html


The crazies have been allowed to have influence that is totally out of proportion to either thier numbers or their logic. "Do as we say or we destroy everything" is not a position, it's a tantrum.

[Winstonm]

It used to be in this country that shallow-minded extremists who held silly ideas would be shouted down, embarrassed, and driven from the public stage before their poison could do much damage other than rally other silly extremists to attend privately sponsored side shows - remember the "Clinton had x,y,z killed bunch"? Now, instead of being ridiculed, they are elected.

[Winstonm]

kenberg, on 2013-October-04, 06:54, said:

If I bid Precision and my partner bids SAYC it may not go so well, that's true. But I like Drury and don't care much for Bergen raises. Possibly we can come to an understanding such as 1♠-Pass-3♣ is Bergen, while Pass-Pass-1♠-Pass-3♣ is fit showing and Pass-Pass-1♠-pass-2♣ is Drury. This would assume that partner and I trust each other and see it as in our best interests to work something out.

As to the current political mess, I see in the morning Post that John Boehner says he won't let the country slide into default. I wish it would have been said a long time ago, but it is welcome news (to me). I don't think all Republicans are crazy, I have some conservative ideas of my own, I would like to see some serious discussion. Also in the morning Post, Krautmammer is explaining why it's all Obama's fault. If Krauthammer slips on the ice and lands on his butt, it's Obama's fault. Possibly we will be hearing more from conservatives who are more in touch with reality. Michael Gerson's column today would be an example of this.

http://www.washingto...b57f_story.html


The crazies have been allowed to have influence that is totally out of proportion to either thier numbers or their logic. "Do as we say or we destroy everything" is not a position, it's a tantrum.

Krauthammer is a leading neo-conservative who holds to a belief system that elitist should rule and those same elites lying to the public to attain their goals is both necessarry and desirable - but he forgets that the first step in being elite is being smarter than the average man-on-the-street - simply looking like a penguin and regurgitating talking points doesn't cut it now that the who-really-shilled-for-the-Iraq-War cat is out of the bag.

[billw55]

kenberg, on 2013-October-04, 06:54, said:

John Boehner says he won't let the country slide into default. I wish it would have been said a long time ago, but it is welcome news (to me).

I wonder what this means. Does it mean he will do the responsible thing and get the government going again? Or does it mean when the default comes, he will say democrats let it happen?

kenberg, on 2013-October-04, 06:54, said:

The crazies have been allowed to have influence that is totally out of proportion to either thier numbers or their logic. "Do as we say or we destroy everything" is not a position, it's a tantrum.

Yep.

[barmar]

billw55, on 2013-October-04, 07:40, said:

I wonder what this means. Does it mean he will do the responsible thing and get the government going again? Or does it mean when the default comes, he will say democrats let it happen?

Does he have the power to accomplish the former on his own? The latter is a promise he can keep.

[PassedOut]

barmar, on 2013-October-04, 10:06, said:

Does he have the power to accomplish the former on his own? The latter is a promise he can keep.

John Boehner does have the power right now to restart the government. He, the speaker, is not allowing the House to vote on a clean Continuing Resolution even though it does have enough votes to pass, counting both democrats and moderate republicans pledged to vote for it.

[mike777]

The shutdown has been a great civics lesson. It shows just how many of us in so many ways are dependent on the Federal government. The Federal government really touches our lives. As other posters have pointed out in a short few years we will view Obamacare as a huge part of our lives that we could not think of living without.


As so many posters point out a tiny minority is trying to stop this when the rest of us want more. As Winston puts it:

"holds to a belief system that elitist should rule and those same elites lying to the public to attain their goals is both necessarry and desirable - but he forgets that the first step in being elite is being"

[kenberg]

I have in fct been surprised by the variety of small ways tis has come up.

At the Y today I was chatting with a guy who has a small plane. He was supposed to file some paperwork with the FAA. The office in question was closed. I came home to work on a report for the National Science Foundation. FastLane, their website, is down. Yesterday there was an incident near the capitol requiring police. The police are working but their pay, at least for some, will not be coming for a while. These items are not exactly paralyzing the nation but it's three items in 24 hours. My understanding is that Congress is getting an earful. I recommend that they listen.

[mike777]

kenberg, on 2013-October-04, 14:49, said:

I have in fct been surprised by the variety of small ways tis has come up.

At the Y today I was chatting with a guy who has a small plane. He was supposed to file some paperwork with the FAA. The office in question was closed. I came home to work on a report for the National Science Foundation. FastLane, their website, is down. .... My understanding is that Congress is getting an earful. I recommend that they listen.

Yes, the shutdown shows just how much economic power as well as political power is being concentrated in just a few hands in DC.

This has been a good lesson on just how dependent we all are becoming on the Federal government. This may be the end of the Republican Party as many posters point out as we all want more benefits and entitlements and the budget to grow not shrink. Perhaps the largest group is single Moms. I see story after story how single moms are being hurt by the shutdown. I bet this entire voting block will go Democratic and put Republicans out of office.

[Scarabin]

Trinidad, on 2013-October-04, 05:15, said:

As far as I know, there is this "wisdom" in US politics that it is a good idea to have a president from one party and a congressional majority for the other "to keep a political balance".

Might it be a good idea to point out now that it also leads to political stalemates, "political hostage taking" and a disfunctional government?

Bridge players know (or should know) that a pair will be more succesful playing one bad system than two different good systems. Wouldn't it be better to have a well functioning government that globally reflects your political ideas, even if on details their ideas may be different from yours?

Rik

To an outsider this seems to describe the position admirably. The whole situation is surreal, the participants bigoted and intransigent, and the government dysfunctional. With the Republicans fulfilling the role (of restraining the President's spending) assigned them under the constitution even though economic circumstances indicate expansionary policies are required.

To me it seems the system is at fault, and the government only functions when the players agree to break the rules.

I agree all this sounds weird - even surreal!

[kenberg]

Having expressed deep pessimism, I now am looking at this with a bit more hope. I think the next few days offer some promise, but I also think that if we don't soon grab the opportunity it will be gone.We shall see.

[mike777]

I think the shutdown has woken many to the economic power as well as the political power of our current government.

At this point posters do not seem concerned but this kind of stuff will just repeat. When you keep putting more and more economic and political power in just a few hands, this stuff happens. AT times you will be happy it happens, but often you wont. At this point the voters want it.

[FM75]

Winstonm, on 2013-October-03, 18:09, said:

No, the population of the combined districts represented by tea-party members makes up 18% of the total US population is my understanding.

Exactly! Which is just about identical to their proportion in Congress. So the "gerrymandering" reference really made no sense, since that suggests that they have been somehow given undue influence. Unless you are saying that the folks you disagree with should have been treated via gerrymandering in such a way as to under-represent them.

So here is the dynamic from their perspective. They were elected in areas where their views represent the majority of their electorate. They don't believe that the US Government should walk away from its obligations. But they also believe that the US government is spending too much, by taking money out of the pockets of voters AND out of the pockets of people, some yet unborn, in the future. Taxation without representation might once have been tyranny, but today it is just good politics for PROFESSIONAL politicians. Today, the best way to get elected is not to espouse the American Dream, but rather promise (pander) to the broadest electoral base, promising benefits that someone else will pay for.

Opium is addictive. OPM (Other People's Money) buys votes.

Is not raising the debt ceiling the way to go? You tell me. Sequestering failed to address the biggest underlying problem in government spending (TAXATION - they don't create money, they just take it from the public - hopefully for you OPM), which is the entitlement budget. It also has turned out not to be the horrible problem envisioned. Perhaps it is now time to dig into the major part of the US budget.

Beating addiction is painful. Gaining strength is painful - No Pain - No gain.

Somebody up-thread said "does any other government have a debt ceiling? I don't think so". Facts are probably better than opinions (thinking). Denmark has a debt ceiling. Effectively the Euro nations did as well, until the weaker ones just ignored it. They are not doing so well right now, and the populace of the countries bailing them out are not happy about it either.

The value of the debt ceiling is not important - except that it is written into US law. The error made - politician lawyers are neither mathematicians, nor economists, is that the debt limit should have been some fraction of a macro economic variable such as GDP. But even there, and comparing only to highly developed countries, we are in worse shape than all but Japan (20 years of gloom) and Italy.
http://www.usnews.co...h-the-most-debt

Forget the surreal label. Propose how we can become a strong nation economically, not borrowing nearly our annual production. We aren't a startup!

No, our debt is not like a mortgage where we borrow to make a capital purchase, and pay it back ourselves (not our heirs).

[mike777]

FM75, on 2013-October-04, 22:36, said:

Exactly! Which is just about identical to their proportion in Congress. So the "gerrymandering" reference really made no sense, since that suggests that they have been somehow given undue influence. Unless you are saying that the folks you disagree with should have been treated via gerrymandering in such a way as to under-represent them.

So here is the dynamic from their perspective. They were elected in areas where their views represent the majority of their electorate. They don't believe that the US Government should walk away from its obligations. But they also believe that the US government is spending too much, by taking money out of the pockets of voters AND out of the pockets of people, some yet unborn, in the future. Taxation without representation might once have been tyranny, but today it is just good politics for PROFESSIONAL politicians. Today, the best way to get elected is not to espouse the American Dream, but rather promise (pander) to the broadest electoral base, promising benefits that someone else will pay for.

Opium is addictive. OPM (Other People's Money) buys votes.

Is not raising the debt ceiling the way to go? You tell me. Sequestering failed to address the biggest underlying problem in government spending (TAXATION - they don't create money, they just take it from the public - hopefully for you OPM), which is the entitlement budget. It also has turned out not to be the horrible problem envisioned. Perhaps it is now time to dig into the major part of the US budget.

Beating addiction is painful. Gaining strength is painful - No Pain - No gain.

Somebody up-thread said "does any other government have a debt ceiling? I don't think so". Facts are probably better than opinions (thinking). Denmark has a debt ceiling. Effectively the Euro nations did as well, until the weaker ones just ignored it. They are not doing so well right now, and the populace of the countries bailing them out are not happy about it either.

The value of the debt ceiling is not important - except that it is written into US law. The error made - politician lawyers are neither mathematicians, nor economists, is that the debt limit should have been some fraction of a macro economic variable such as GDP. But even there, and comparing only to highly developed countries, we are in worse shape than all but Japan (20 years of gloom) and Italy.
http://www.usnews.co...h-the-most-debt

Forget the surreal label. Propose how we can become a strong nation economically, not borrowing nearly our annual production. We aren't a startup!

No, our debt is not like a mortgage where we borrow to make a capital purchase, and pay it back ourselves (not our heirs).

sorry but I think you miss the more important point.


What is the role of government.

governments default all the time.
governments go away all the time.
IN the short time countries go away...

Let us start that the government can go bust and go away....now what?
IN the USA governments get deposed all the time...common.
\in the USA huge companies go away often...common.
---------------



For some reason you forget companies go bust and party in rule go bust often.

[blackshoe]

FM75, on 2013-October-04, 22:36, said:

Forget the surreal label. Propose how we can become a strong nation economically, not borrowing nearly our annual production. We aren't a startup!

mike777, on 2013-October-04, 22:49, said:

sorry but I think you miss the more important point.

What is the role of government.

Actually, I think you're both right. Answering Mike's question is part of answering FM's.

[mike777]

blackshoe, on 2013-October-04, 22:55, said:

Actually, I think you're both right. Answering Mike's question is part of answering FM's.

fwiw I think people forget for some reason.


governments in usa are thrown out all the time...common.


But I think the comments that it leads to confusion...true....and ok


Usa style=debate/confusion/anger/etc. Not easy

[akwoo]

I don't care so much if we are a strong nation economically. We are rich enough, and we would be rich enough if we only had half our GDP.

I want us to be a virtuous nation, and any religion will tell us that part of virtue is providing generously for the needy (which of course includes the sick).

Some people might think that welfare is a relatively novel idea. It isn't. The poorhouse and other expenditures for poor relief was a significant part of the budget of every town in colonial America. And the poorhouses were taken down in the 19th century because they were felt to be inhumane ways of providing poor relief, not because states and municipalities thought they could legitimately drop the expenditure. Tax burdens back then were high too; they just happened to be in the form of property taxes rather than income taxes, which made sense since most income came from agriculture.

[mike777]

akwoo, on 2013-October-05, 00:42, said:

I don't care so much if we are a strong nation economically. We are rich enough, and we would be rich enough if we only had half our GDP.

I want us to be a virtuous nation, and any religion will tell us that part of virtue is providing generously for the needy (which of course includes the sick).

Some people might think that welfare is a relatively novel idea. It isn't. The poorhouse and other expenditures for poor relief was a significant part of the budget of every town in colonial America. And the poorhouses were taken down in the 19th century because they were felt to be inhumane ways of providing poor relief, not because states and municipalities thought they could legitimately drop the expenditure. Tax burdens back then were high too; they just happened to be in the form of property taxes rather than income taxes, which made sense since most income came from agriculture.

so? at this point you say nothing.

[kenberg]

akwoo, on 2013-October-05, 00:42, said:

I don't care so much if we are a strong nation economically. We are rich enough, and we would be rich enough if we only had half our GDP.

I want us to be a virtuous nation, and any religion will tell us that part of virtue is providing generously for the needy (which of course includes the sick).

I care a great deal about whether we are economically strong. Of course I acknowledged in an earlier post that I hold some conservative ideas, but I seriously doubt that this view is held only by conservatives. Some conservatives in fact seem more devoted to ideological purity than to economic or other strength. At any rate, I greatly favor economic strength.

As far as helping those in need of help, I see this as greatly intertwined with economic strength. First, and again I think I am not at all alone here, I find it to be a lot easier to be generous when I have some spare cash around. But further, effectively helping people can increase our economic strength. It is true that in some cases the disadvantaged will never be able to contribute much or anything to society. They are entitled to assistance too. But many more can become productive but need a little help in getting there. It's in our best interests to help them, and in fact it is in both our interests and their interests that this help be done effectively. There is room for disagreement, an open mind, and negotiation over the best approach.

It wouldn't surprise me if you agree with a lot of this, I don't want to take your statement about not caring about economic strength too literally.

[kenberg]

"What is the role of government?"


At the risk of egocentrism, let me quote myself on recent events.

kenberg, on 2013-October-04, 14:49, said:

I have in fact been surprised by the variety of small ways this has come up.
At the Y today I was chatting with a guy who has a small plane. He was supposed to file some paperwork with the FAA. The office in question was closed. I came home to work on a report for the National Science Foundation. FastLane, their website, is down. Yesterday there was an incident near the capitol requiring police. The police are working but their pay, at least for some, will not be coming for a while. These items are not exactly paralyzing the nation but it's three items in 24 hours. My understanding is that Congress is getting an earful. I recommend that they listen.

Let's look at these.

FAA filings. Overly intrusive big government? I can't say exactly what had to be filed. I take my car, even whenit is running perfectly, in for a mandatory exhaust check-up to hold down pollution. I suppose the FAA filing, while probably not about pollution, has something to do with public safety. We are opposed to this?

Cops responding to a mentally deranged driver attempting to crash through barriers at teh White House. I prefer having the police handle this rather than private citizens, and I would like to see them be paid w/o having to wait for the check or beg for the check.

My filing with the NSF. Ok, perhaps you object to the NSF funding mathematics and science. This goes back a ways. I was 18 when the Russians launched Sputnik and this led to a substantial increase in government funding for science. I had an NSF fellowship in grad school, I was also supported by grants, both in grad school and afterwards. But really it precedes even this. At the time of Sputnik I was attending a state university (the University of Minnesota) which was generously supported by the tax payers of Minnesota. And by federal grants. We object to this, do we? My father finished eighth grade, my mother had a little high school, I have a Ph.D. Government support of education had something to do with that.

As an adopted child, I can say that government "interference" in my life goes back to my birth. I don't mind.

It's easy to bitch about the heavy hand of the government. I simply haven't found it to be all that oppressive Less ideology and more practicality in addressing our issues would suit me just fine.