|
Musicmystery -> RE: "Repeal" Amendment (11/22/2010 7:44:37 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
Can you imagine the unmitigated good that would come from this?
The western and appalachian states would band together to repeal mining safety regulations because the mining corporations really can be trusted to keep their workers safe. West Virginia and Wyoming's state legistlatures are completely independent on the issue, really.
A coaltition of "business friendly" states coming together to repeal all federal consumer protection laws would stimulate "business" and "only" harm lawyers. Just trust the state legislators paid for by GM, GE, the utility industry and the importers of cheap crap made in China they wouldn't support the repal if it was bad for the common folk.
Maybe after this passes we can start letting individual states enter into treaties and otherwise conduct their own foreign affairs.
So, you trust the Federal Government, but you don't trust any of the State governments?
Firm
That's not at all what he said.
Policies have consequences. So does the lack of policies. Problems don't vanish because the solutions aren't perfection or don't suit everyone's ideal preferences. That's simply governing. I wish there were some "It's a Wonderful Life" scenario where you could lose the Federal government and live with the consequences--you'd wake up screaming "Clarence! Take me back! I want a government!" No point in draining a swamp to create a desert.
Among these consequences are with every cut at the federal level, for years now, burdens are added to the states. Despite the mantra, federal government compared to population is smaller relatively, while state and local governments have ballooned. Unfunded mandates have been passed down as well (thank Bush for that too) in the name of "fiscal conservatism" that's only using one credit card to pay the other. And yes, he'd be wise to be wary of trusting state governments, which have created their own fiscal deficits by ignoring the need to fund their obligations in favor of short term gains and political favors (not every state fell into this trap). Or California, where voters refuse cuts but also refuse funding. That's your populist system, and it's ungovernable on its road to fiscal disaster.
I can imagine a Conservative States of America shutting off trade and learning that damn, goods are expensive, and shit, why aren't there jobs when we're making all this stuff ourselves, and crap, what are we going to do about all this poverty, not to mention the sick and dying people with no money, and oh yeah, the crumbling roads and bridges? You know, like back in the good old days. What would actually happen, though, is the CSA would get an abrupt and harsh lesson in the reality of the multinational corporation that doesn't need to pay attention to arbitrary barriers. Or that the good people of the CSA don't just automatically behave without police, master skills without teachers, or act in the public good without regulations.
For all its problems, this is the greatest country in the world. We are neither starving nor going down the tubes. Our GDP is twice that of China's. Twice! Three times the size of Japan's. Four times the size of India's. Five times the size of Germany's, and multiples of any other European country. And despite our bonehead foreign policies sometimes, we are a force for peace and safety in the world. Know why global shipping works? The U.S. Navy. Period.
Bullshit like this is crack for the indoctrinated conservative believer. Conservative leaders, incidentally, don't practice any of that--it's just the candy they feed supporters. They know the federal government is the main game, and their aim is to control it--and the funding it can control. But they need people to vote for it, and the new strategy is apparently to become the Party of Theatrical Stunts. Impractical, even ridiculously impossible, but with a hungry audience soaking up the performance, no one will point out that they have nothing to offer in the way of any workable plans. Other than plans to regain power for power's sake.
|
|
|
|
