Results 41 to 45 of 45
Thread: The 2010 Republicans
-
08-27-10, 10:51 AM #41Re: The 2010 Republicans
The job market for law professors at top law schools is certainly competitive, so I assume that by "competitive market," you mean a field that's subject to market pressures and economic competition. By your criteria then, if I'm correct, firemen, police officers and military personal are also all out.
-
08-27-10, 01:19 PM #42
Re: The 2010 Republicans
The problem you have isn't with the individuals, it's with the system. No matter who is in power, whether it is the current members of Congress or regular business people, both are going to face lobbyists and have others write laws. The current difference is members of Congress are usually educated in law or similar background, whereas regular business people aren't. Just like I'd rather have a doctor fresh out of medical school to treat me instad of a random person off the street, I'd rather have educated people run the government.
I am not arguing against you on this because I necessarily disagree with you, though, but because I feel you are focusing your disdain on the wrong thing. I agree that Congress is not very representative now and there is quite a bit of corruption, but you should be blaming our system that allows it. It is outdated and focuses power in individuals instead of groups. You can yell and scream about the current people in Congress right now all you want, but the problems will manifest with whoever you put in there, even regular people off the street. We need to fundamentally alter our Congress, but the only way that will happen is with Congress passing and amendment to the Constitution and having the states ratify it. Good luck getting enough people in Congress to agree to give up their power, though.
-
08-28-10, 09:45 AM #43
Re: The 2010 Republicans
Public servants.
@ fove Yes the system is corrupt. My thoughts are it should be run more like a business providing a service. Maybe it does need to be restructured. I agree good luck with that. The scale of the United States has caused the power to be shifted from the people. My complaint is the people no longer have the same voice. The US is still an experiment, perhaps that is what we are seeing, the effects of population on our current system.
I see it like owning stock, I have a congressman who attends the shareholders meeting and votes for me. Do what is best for the business to grow and prosper.
Somewhere between the senate and the house we need change. That and the two party system... tired of choosing R or D. Be nice to see a few more L and I or hell Q, M, G, whatever, mix it up. pipe dream...
-
08-28-10, 01:20 PM #44Re: The 2010 Republicans
I agree with you Flame. Part of the problem with our system and third parties is that, unless the third party is a true cenrist, then people who vote for the third party are "taking votes away" from one of the main candidates. It becomes a questions of the lesser of two evils. It's one advantage (there are disadvantages) of the Parliamentary system in many other countries, where if your party gets x% of the votes, then you get x% of the seats. This allows for many smaller parties to have some representation, instead of biggest takes all, as we have here. That way, if the Libertarians took 5% of the votes, and ht Republicans had 46%, then they could still have a majority where they agreed, but the libertarians wouldn't have some power to pull their votes.
It has another big advantage of not necessarily binding unrelated issues into one group. For example, what if you're socially liberal but economically conservative? Currently, neither party really supports your stance, but you kind of have to pick one. In the parliamentary system, you could have a party that sided with the Democrats on social issues and the Republicans on economic issues. Of course, then you don't have state-by-state representation, and smaller states may be even less well-represented.
-
08-28-10, 07:31 PM #45
Re: The 2010 Republicans
I have plenty of issues that split me between both parties. I do not have a problem with gay marriage, but I do have a problem with abortion. Neither party represents my thoughts, and representatives just vote with the party. It is truly voting lesser of two evils. If a representative votes opposite the party he loses power within the party and eventually is forced out.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks