United States of Entropy

[U2NativeSon]

Both of the parties that represent the people of the U.S. look immature, clueless and lack moral obligations. It is time to set term limits, these extended vacations, extraordinary benefits they enjoy and pay increases need to be brought under control. They never get anything done and wait until the last minute knowing that these issues must be dealt with.

I do not like the Affordable Care Act, I think it will only create more problems in this country for those that are already insured, and will become a large burden of debt, it may have been designed with the less fortunate in mind but it is a tax. It is socialized medicine and the government taking control of the people.

The democrats are bullying the American people and congress with everything they want and not willing to negotiate on anything. The POTUS is not a leader. A president puts aside his affiliation and leads both parties, especially if he has been elected to his 2nd term. People wanted change and they are seeing, the "Fundamental Transformation of America"

I don't agree with everything the Republicans are doing, but they do want fiscal responsibility, the debt is out of control, there is no budget only continuing resolutions, the debt ceiling is outrageous, luckily we print more money. The cost of "Obamacare" changes everyday, with estimates of up to $6T over the next 15 years. People thought things were bad when it was $4T, then Bush added about $5T... now it is pushing $17T, these numbers most people can't even think of.

Polls indicate that the American people do not approve of the job Obama is doing (over 60%), the congress has even lower numbers on approval (under 40%), Obamacare most people don't want (over 60%) When exactly are these representatives going to listen to the people they represent ?

I don't belong to a party, I have never voted, I live outside of D.C., and these idiots are screwing with the American people. They accept no responsibility and can only blame each other, point the finger and name call.

I just don't get it, someone explain it like I am a 2 year old.

 

[Kieran McConville]

How much of the US budget is consumed by defence? Let's say defence and intelligence.

What exactly are we talking about here? What is the real status of food stamps or whatever, in the picture.

Incidentally, the Affordable Care Act is nothing like socialised medicine. (Somewhat) Socialised medicine is the UK National Health Service or the Australian Medicare. No comparison.

 

[LJT]

Socialised medicine is the best thing that ever happened in this country. You wish to seek profit from others suffering? I know it is more nuanced than that, but fundamentally that is capitalist medicine.

I do not understand the disconnect, its OK for a few large companies which you have no say in, to control your health decisions, but the government voted for by the people can not have any input?

I know the NHS has its fair share of issues, I work in it every single day as a nurse, but it's a damn sight better value for money and for the greater good than how healthcare operates in the US, I would venture it is much more Christian philosophically than the US approach.

Anyway don't actually most people approve of most of the measures implemented in the ACA, but when labelled "Obamacare" people feel worse about it? People voted Obama in knowing about Obamacare right? That is his mandate, he should stick with it.

What I think we need to is get ordinary people much more involved in government, tie people into the decision making process, otherwise I think we are going to continue to get this scenario of people treating those they vote in as some sort of weird fish in the pond, rather than people whose purpose is to do something beneficial, instead of seeing the corporations and markets as the holy grail.

 

[Irvine511]

Both of the parties that represent the people of the U.S. look immature, clueless and lack moral obligations. It is time to set term limits, these extended vacations, extraordinary benefits they enjoy and pay increases need to be brought under control. They never get anything done and wait until the last minute knowing that these issues must be dealt with. I do not like the Affordable Care Act, I think it will only create more problems in this country for those that are already insured, and will become a large burden of debt, it may have been designed with the less fortunate in mind but it is a tax. It is socialized medicine and the government taking control of the people. The democrats are bullying the American people and congress with everything they want and not willing to negotiate on anything. The POTUS is not a leader. A president puts aside his affiliation and leads both parties, especially if he has been elected to his 2nd term. People wanted change and they are seeing, the "Fundamental Transformation of America" I don't agree with everything the Republicans are doing, but they do want fiscal responsibility, the debt is out of control, there is no budget only continuing resolutions, the debt ceiling is outrageous, luckily we print more money. The cost of "Obamacare" changes everyday, with estimates of up to $6T over the next 15 years. People thought things were bad when it was $4T, then Bush added about $5T... now it is pushing $17T, these numbers most people can't even think of. Polls indicate that the American people do not approve of the job Obama is doing (over 60%), the congress has even lower numbers on approval (under 40%), Obamacare most people don't want (over 60%) When exactly are these representatives going to listen to the people they represent ? I don't belong to a party, I have never voted, I live outside of D.C., and these idiots are screwing with the American people. They accept no responsibility and can only blame each other, point the finger and name call. I just don't get it, someone explain it like I am a 2 year old.

Try voting.

 

[U2DMfan]

I just don't get it, someone explain it like I am a 2 year old.

I can try. But I don't know about a 2 year old understanding this, but an adult should be able to. Democrats and Republicans want to stay in office more than anything. Every single thing they do is dictated by this.

Everything they do has a plausibly denied alternative explanation. Thus, everything they do is political. This is not conspiracy, it is strategy. And it works, so they keep doing it. Complicated by the fact that there are, indeed, some genuinely held positions in either party. But practically none of the people voting on these issues are willing to lose their re-elections.

Exacerbated by the fact that most, not all, but most of the people voting have been 'trained' by the two-party hyper partisan system. Us vs Them. The people endorse the system, continually sending morons to office as 'change agents'. And the morons reinforce the hyper partisan system. And the cynical politicians (the majority, those smart enough to know the hyper partisanship is only a political ploy) use it to their advantage to stay in office but also to get their way (as they do all have genuinely held positions). And people like Rush Limbaugh understand the cynicism and make tons of money off of it, by perpetuating this cycle of partisanship. But it's not just Rush Limbaugh, it's almost all of the national media. The difference being most of the rest of them don't understand how they add fuel to the fire. All in the name of making money, for their respective media outlets.

And so they don't compromise. It's always about elections and re-elections. This is how 90% of Americans (in multiple polls) support sensible firearm regulation and NOTHING (no exaggeration) gets done.

People blame the NRA but the NRA has no power if the politicians disregard them. But they won't because the NRA can buy enough influence to defeat these politicians in their own primaries. And that's it. Does that mean there aren't politicians that genuinely oppose all firearm regulation? No. But they are the minority. The majority know better but they have a plausibly denied explanation for voting the way they vote. And the reason they vote that way is because lobbies like the NRA determine their political future.

As Santorum admitted in a Rep. debate in 2011...it's a team game. And the Republicans have such a small natural appeal to the majority of the country, they have to play hardball more often, becoming much more cynical (i.e. convincing poor people to vote against their best interests). In addition to this, there is a fair amount of flat out ignorance pulled into the party because of this appeal towards certain types of voters. Democrats are more idealistic and live in a fantasy world, loving to hand out benefits without much mind to fiscal responsibility. But also, in general, just not dealing with the reality at hand. Idealistic fools.

Both serve as caricatures for the other party to prop up and beat into shreds. This is the main device of the two-party hyper partisan machine. Perpetual conflict. The Democrats fit into those shoes, because they are worried about staying in office, and while in those shoes, the Republicans can beat them into a rhetorical pulp. And obviously this is true vice versa. It never ends because it works and it can't be easily reformed because the people paying the most attention, actual voters, buy right into it.

Republicans opposed Clinton every step of the way. Democrats opposed Bush every step of the way. But each time there is a new President, it's supposed to be some version of "the worst ever" (either the President himself or the treatment of said President), because that in and of itself is a political scheme by the respective party. Or in Obama's case, this idea of the race card is played when it wouldn't have mattered at all otherwise. Great example of how the crowd that considers themselves intellectual (say, Rachel Maddow) are completely duped by this system. Because of their own ideologies. Watch what happens if/when HRC becomes President. We'll be hearing about the gender card and Dems/liberals will be saying she's receiving the worst treatment ever and Reps/conservatives will say she's the worst president ever. Predictable like clockwork. What else is new?

As for genuinely held positions, which we all have (including elected politicians), they are all polluted by this system. Nothing can get done because ultimately you can't rely on a politician that is owned by lobbies and special interests to do the common-sense thing. The shining example of this, which most super liberals in FYM should even be able to recognize is the Affordable Care Act aka Obamacare. The bill is a turd. Everyone hates it and we ended up with that legislation because of pure politics. For one, Obama had spent ALL of his political capital to do it in his first year in office. Quite simply, he had no choice but to pass SOMETHING. And two, because of this, the Health Insurance industry themselves wrote the bill behind closed doors. "Change" you can believe in? It was always impossible. I said as much 5 years ago here in FYM. And I'm sure people thought it was all conspiratorial wank. But to wrap this up, just know, in order to explain or understand the issues themselves, (such as economics) people have to understand all of this first.

The system is cynical, therefore any explanation of the system reads cynical.

This is all true. If someone wants to remain in denial, then they'll truly never get it. They'll always be confounded and playing into the vicious cycle "look at the terrible thing they're doing now!" I am never really surprised. At least not very often. It's highly predictable. Same shit, different year. Don't think that it's not.

 

[Irvine511]

Is "terrorists" actually too kind?

http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/a/SB10001424052702304526204579103192640919478?mg=reno64-wsj

 

[anitram]

How much of the US budget is consumed by defence? Let's say defence and intelligence.

What exactly are we talking about here? What is the real status of food stamps or whatever, in the picture.

There is one and ONLY ONE way out of the current debt situation (both personal and national) and that is inflation. We won't see it for the next 5 years or more likely 10 for a number of reasons but the truth is that it's really the only chance we've got.

All this talk about cutting spending, etc does nothing to address the structural issues, which have to be solved by inflation.

 

[INDY500]

Should we talk about the massive subsidies oil gets that keep our prices significantly lower than anywhere else in the developed world?

Talk about propping up and industry.

We should talk about them, or to be more precise, the falsehood of their existence.


What subsidizes or tax breaks does "oil" get? Be specific.

How much do they amount to?

Do other industries receive the same tax treatment in the federal tax code?

Who pays a higher effective tax rate; Big oil companies or Google or G.E or Apple?

 

[Irvine511]

http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/crsr42374.pdf

 

[INDY500]

It's not so much subsidies as a lack of a meaningful gas tax (current federal rate is like 18 cents/gallon).

How disingenuous of your argument to not include state taxes on gasoline which add an additional 8 cents (lowest) to 50 cents (highest) to a gallon of gas with an average about in the middle.

It is good and SIMPLE economics (INDY, hope you're paying attention) to apply a gas tax because it's economics 101 that price should reflect cost.

Speaking of economics 101.

Which income group would disproportionately be hurt by increasing the taxes on gasoline. Yup, again, it's the middle class, especially those that commute to work. The middle class that will pay at the grocery store and everywhere else as higher fuel costs are passed on to the consumer. And the same middle class who have seen their standard of living decrease the past decade.

Except with gasoline, extraction cost does not provide an accurate picture due to the high social costs that come along with the use of gasoline (air pollution, Middle East politics, etc). Hence, what makes good economic sense is to apply a gasoline tax in order to offset social costs introduced by the use of gasoline. Such a tax would also have an indirect benefit of stimulating R&D of clean and alternative energies.

What makes good sense is to use our own fossil fuels thus stimulating our own economy rather than subsidizing terror states in the Middle East.
Now as Digitize pointed out, this was an argument for Cap & Trade but as the case for man-made global warming falls apart so does the argument. Except with the orthodox that is.
Nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons are pollutants. Not CO2.

It is politically unfeasible in the US to raise the taxes. The solution should be to raise them incrementally. But you just need to sniff a post by INDY to tell you why such a rational move, based on plain ol' economic good sense, can't even be debated lest you be accused of being a communist.

Assuming your argument was solid do you really think higher taxes on gasoline wouldn't just end up flushed down the same suckhole that has given us $17 trillion dollars of debt?

 

[INDY500]

http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/crsr42374.pdf

Do other industries receive the same tax treatment in the federal tax code?

Who pays a higher effective tax rate; Big oil companies or Google or G.E or Apple?

In addition, would you repeal all those listed including the ones that benefit chiefly small and mid-sized oil companies?

Would the loss of any of these actually result in less revenues as risky and less profitable wells are abandoned?

If I started a thread on this would participate and debate?

 

[Irvine511]

no time to really post, so i'll let someone else:

I’ve been trying to think of something original to say about the absurdity now transpiring in Washington, DC. I’ve said roughly what I think in short; and I defer to Fallows for an important dose of reality against the predictably moronic coverage of the Washington Post.

But there is something more here. How does one party that has lost two presidential elections and a Supreme Court case – as well as two Senate elections - think it has the right to shut down the entire government and destroy the full faith and credit of the United States Treasury to get its way on universal healthcare now? I see no quid pro quo even. Just pure blackmail, resting on understandable and predictable public concern whenever a major reform is enacted. But what has to be resisted is any idea that this is government or politics as usual. It is an attack on the governance and the constitutional order of the United States.

When ideologies become as calcified, as cocooned and as extremist as those galvanizing the GOP, the American system of government cannot work. But I fear this nullification of the last two elections is a deliberate attempt to ensure that the American system of government as we have known it cannot work. It cannot, must not work, in the mindset of these radicals, because they simply do not accept the legitimacy of a President and Congress of the opposing party. The GOP does not regard the president as merely wrong – but as illegitimate. Not misguided – illegitimate. This is not about ending Obamacare as such (although that is a preliminary scalp); it is about nullifying this presidency, the way the GOP attempted to nullify the last Democratic presidency by impeachment.

Except this time, of course, we cannot deny that race too is an added factor to the fathomless sense of entitlement felt among the GOP far right. You saw it in birtherism; in the Southern GOP’s constant outrageous claims of Obama’s alleged treason and alliance with Islamist enemies; in providing zero votes for a stimulus that was the only thing that prevented a global depression of far worse proportions; in the endless race-baiting from Fox News and the talk radio right. And in this racially-charged atmosphere, providing access to private healthcare insurance to the working poor is obviously the point of no return.

Even though the law is almost identical to that of their last presidential nominee’s in Massachusetts, the GOP is prepared to destroy both the American government and the global economy to stop it. They see it, it seems to me, as both some kind of profound attack on the Constitution (something even Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts viewed as a step too far) and, in some inchoate way, as a racial hand-out, however preposterous that is. And that is at the core of the recklessness behind this attack on the US – or at least my best attempt to understand something that has long since gone beyond reason. This is the point of no return – a black president doing something for black citizens (even though the vast majority of beneficiaries of Obamacare will be non-black).

I regard this development as one of the more insidious and anti-constitutional acts of racist vandalism against the American republic in my adult lifetime. Those who keep talking as if there are two sides to this, when there are not, are as much a part of the vandalism as Ted Cruz. Obama has played punctiliously by the constitutional rules – two elections, one court case – while the GOP has decided that the rules are for dummies and suckers, and throws over the board game as soon as it looks as if it is going to lose by the rules as they have always applied.

The president must therefore hold absolutely firm. This time, there can be no compromise because the GOP isn’t offering any. They’re offering the kind of constitutional surrender that would effectively end any routine operation of the American government. If we cave to their madness, we may unravel our system of government, something one might have thought conservatives would have opposed. Except these people are not conservatives. They’re vandals.

This time, the elephant must go down. And if possible, it must be so wounded it does not get up for a long time to come.

The Nullification Party � The Dish

race isn't the whole story. but it's part of the story.

 

[anitram]

But there is something more here. How does one party that has lost two presidential elections and a Supreme Court case – as well as two Senate elections - think it has the right to shut down the entire government and destroy the full faith and credit of the United States Treasury to get its way on universal healthcare now?

Perfect summary of the GOP's outrageous behaviour.

The American people (whom the Tea Party constantly claims it represents) had their opportunity to vote in an election which gave every chance to the Republicans to win the House and the Senate. Aside from the blatant gerrymandering by Republican governors, you also had very vulnerable Democratic senators. It isn't their fault that Republicans fielded insane candidates who had more interest in a woman's hooha than in the economy and who believed that women's ladybits can prevent conception during rape.

The Republicans blew it and lost. And after fielding something like 40 separate bills to get rid of the ACA (all of which failed) and a constitutional challenge which also failed due to the action of that communist John Roberts, they are yet again attempting the absurd.

Try winning an election, folks.

 

[Irvine511]

just to add, the Democratic Reps in the House have more aggregate popular votes behind their victories than the Republican Reps.

thanks, gerrymandering.

 

[digitize]

communist John Roberts

 

[Pearl]

I think it was CNN who ran a poll where only 10% of Americans have a favorable view on Congress.

Boy, what a mess.

 

[LemonMelon]

How recent is that data? I'd like how they got higher than 0% after this clusterfuck.

 

[Pearl]

I saw it on my CNN app the other day. Yeah, I'm amazed too

 

[digitize]

I think it was CNN who ran a poll where only 10% of Americans have a favorable view on Congress. Boy, what a mess.

That will likely be the case as long as Congress isn't controlled by one party.

 

[INDY500]

race isn't the whole story. but it's part of the story.

I guess the biggest racist would be Barack Obama then.

The White GOP House has only voted to delay Obama care, it's the president that has actually delayed for at least a year important portions of the law. With zero legal authority to do by the way.

 

[Irvine511]

I guess the biggest racist would be Barack Obama then. The White GOP House has only voted to delay Obama care, it's the president that has actually delayed for at least a year important portions of the law. With zero legal authority to do by the way.

INDY, can you tell me, when it comes to the Establishment GOP vs the Tea Party, who are the Sunnis and who are the Shiites?

 

[Popmartijn]

The White GOP House has only voted to delay Obama care, it's the president that has actually delayed for at least a year important portions of the law. With zero legal authority to do by the way.

So, what are these important portions that the president has delayed? Are you referring to the mandate on employers to ease the paperwork burden on those companies that already provide health insurance, thus reducing the administrative load and bureaucracy? Or are there other important portions that are delayed.

 

[martha]

I guess the biggest racist would be Barack Obama then.

You never surprise, nor disappoint.

 

[AEON]

That will likely be the case as long as Congress isn't controlled by one party.

It's usually a good thing - it forces the president of either party into the center (think Reagan's success and Clinton's success after 1994).

But the political environment today is so acerbic and re-election driven, neither side wants to compromise because when they run for another term, the challenger from their own party will portray them as a "traitor" to their cause.

 

[Diemen]

But the political environment today is so acerbic and re-election driven, neither side wants to compromise because when they run for another term, the challenger from their own party will portray them as a "traitor" to their cause.

Actually, this is pretty much only a problem in the Republican Party at the moment. The Democrats have no such purity test like what the Tea Party is intimidating Republicans with. Which is why you're seeing such a deafening silence from moderate Republicans - they're afraid that if they don't toe the Tea Party line, they'll get replaced by someone who will.

The Tea Party is acting like mob "protection" within the Republican Party right now. Walking into the friendly neighborhood shops of its politicians and telling them "you know, it'd be a shame if something happened to your shop..." Which is appallingly brazen when it's contained to just one party, but unfortunately the Republican Party, unable to control the beast they've created and desperate to appear unified, have acquiesced to the extremists in their party and used the same extortionist methods on the rest of the country.

 

[anitram]

Also, right now there are very gerrymandered congressional districts, thanks to Republican governors. While this obviously hurts Democrats and it's part of the reason why the Dems actually won the popular vote but not control of the House, interestingly enough it has come to hurt the Republicans as well.

The Republican members of congress in these gerrymandered districts are all uniformly terrified of being primaried by the craziest tea party member around. And when a district is so gerrymandered, you actually reduce the proportion of moderate republicans (or independents in cases where they can participate in the primary) who will be voting, thus essentially ceding that district to the biggest crazy around. Interesting dynamic.

At this point the only salvation I see is for the Tea Party to split off and form its own third party.

 

[digitize]

Also, right now there are very gerrymandered congressional districts, thanks to Republican governors. While this obviously hurts Democrats and it's part of the reason why the Dems actually won the popular vote but not control of the House, interestingly enough it has come to hurt the Republicans as well.

Exactly. This is an enormous problem with electoral dynamics at the moment.

 

[Irvine511]

this is amazing:

If It Happened There ... the Government Shutdown

By Joshua Keating

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 30:

This is the first installment of “If It Happened There,” a regular feature in which American events are described using the tropes and tone normally employed by the American media to describe events in other countries.

WASHINGTON, United States—The typical signs of state failure aren’t evident on the streets of this sleepy capital city. Beret-wearing colonels have not yet taken to the airwaves to declare martial law. Money-changers are not yet buying stacks of useless greenbacks on the street.

But the pleasant autumn weather disguises a government teetering on the brink. Because, at midnight Monday night, the government of this intensely proud and nationalistic people will shut down, a drastic sign of political dysfunction in this moribund republic.

The capital’s rival clans find themselves at an impasse, unable to agree on a measure that will allow the American state to carry out its most basic functions. While the factions have come close to such a shutdown before, opponents of President Barack Obama’s embattled regime now appear prepared to allow the government to be shuttered over opposition to a controversial plan intended to bring the nation’s health care system in line with international standards.

Six years into his rule, Obama’s position can appear confusing, even contradictory. Though the executive retains control of the country’s powerful intelligence service, capable of the extrajudicial execution of the regime’s opponents half a world away, the president’s efforts to govern domestically have been stymied in the legislature by an extremist rump faction of the main opposition party.

The current rebellion has been led by Sen. Ted Cruz, a young fundamentalist lawmaker from the restive Texas region, known in the past as a hotbed of separatist activity. Activity in the legislature ground to a halt last week for a full day as Cruz insisted on performing a time-honored American demonstration of stamina and self-denial, which involved speaking for 21 hours, quoting liberally from science fiction films and children’s books. The gesture drew wide media attention, though its political purpose was unclear to outsiders.

With hours remaining until the government of the world’s richest nation runs out of money, attention now focuses on longtime opposition leader John Boehner, under pressure from both the regime and the radical elements of his own movement, who may be the only political figure with the standing needed to end the standoff.

While the country’s most recent elections were generally considered to be free and fair (despite threats against international observers), the current crisis has raised questions in the international community about the regime’s ability to govern this complex nation of 300 million people, not to mention its vast stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

Americans themselves are starting to ask difficult questions as well. As this correspondent’s cab driver put it, while driving down the poorly maintained roads that lead from the airport, “Do these guys have any idea what they’re doing to the country?”

Potential government shutdown: How would the U.S. media report on it if it were happening to another country?

 

[AEON]

Actually, this is pretty much only a problem in the Republican Party at the moment.

Because the Democrats have the presidency. I don't believe for a moment that the Democrats (referring to the ones in the House and Senate) are so virtuous they would support a Republican president in today's climate. Maybe at moments in the past - but not today.

 

[Irvine511]

Because the Democrats have the presidency. I don't believe for a moment that the Democrats (referring to the ones in the House and Senate) are so virtuous they would support a Republican president in today's climate. Maybe at moments in the past - but not today.

does the behavior of the Democratically controlled house form 2006-2008 under GWB compare to what is going on today?

does the behavior of the Democrats from 2001-2006, when they were in the minority in both houses and didn't have the presidency, compare to what's going on today?

when we seek to appear neutral or unbiased, despite one party's objectively unprecedented and unhinged conduct, we lessen the consequences of such conduct. there has to be opprobrium leveled at the extremism we see, lest it becomes normalized through equivocation. and then it gets more extreme and more extreme, and the parties seeking to be unbiased stray further and further from common sense.