[unreality]

It's fast approaching! Discuss, vote, etc

Edited September 14, 2008 by unreality

[Brandonb]

The only way to "change" America is to disrupt the 2 party system and put in place a 4 or even 6 party system. And to make term-limits for Senators. Now that's a paradox if I ever saw one! They are the ones in charge of voting to decrease their own power... I wonder why they keep voting "no" on term-limits...

On the contrary. I believe the problem we have is the fact that the senators must keep running and being re-elected. This is what causes the problems. Individuals must get big money from big companies in order to be elected. Then once in office, they must pass legislation to "pay back" their donators with favorable tax status and the like. This causes an huge expansion in government influence into the private sector. Once they have paid them back, they don't do too much in the government. This is a good thing. It means that the power of government isn't expanding. Then couple years later, they must run again to maintain their jobs. Thus begins the same cycle all over again.

Forcing term limits upon the senators, and forcing them out of office, just means that the Senators who had enough money to finance most of their own campaigns, and therefore owed less favors, get the boot. In their place, new people with less money take their place. These people owe many more favors and therefore expand Government interference even faster and bigger than their predecessors.

I believe the true solution is not only to ban term limits. But to eliminate the laws for required re-election. Only after having a favoritism rating drop below a certain point should a senator get the boot. And then elections can be held for someone to replace them. Otherwise, they should go their entire lives without the need to run another campaign, and accrue more debts to companies and thereby bastardize the legislation being passed.

[itachi-san]

On the contrary. I believe the problem we have is the fact that the senators must keep running and being re-elected. This is what causes the problems. Individuals must get big money from big companies in order to be elected. Then once in office, they must pass legislation to "pay back" their donators with favorable tax status and the like. This causes an huge expansion in government influence into the private sector. Once they have paid them back, they don't do too much in the government. This is a good thing. It means that the power of government isn't expanding. Then couple years later, they must run again to maintain their jobs. Thus begins the same cycle all over again.

Forcing term limits upon the senators, and forcing them out of office, just means that the Senators who had enough money to finance most of their own campaigns, and therefore owed less favors, get the boot. In their place, new people with less money take their place. These people owe many more favors and therefore expand Government interference even faster and bigger than their predecessors.

I believe the true solution is not only to ban term limits. But to eliminate the laws for required re-election. Only after having a favoritism rating drop below a certain point should a senator get the boot. And then elections can be held for someone to replace them. Otherwise, they should go their entire lives without the need to run another campaign, and accrue more debts to companies and thereby bastardize the legislation being passed.

I'm also in favor of the popularity rating idea. Actually, what you have said makes a lot of sense, and I'll need to think about it more. Would you say the same about the Executive Branch?

Also, forgive me for being extremely general but the National Healthcare Obama is talking about is awful as Bb pointed out. Just think of how many Americans want something for nothing. Then think of how fast that system will be abused - maybe 1 week and every other American we will be at the hospital with common colds. Bb's article was awesome.

Also, I believe and prefer alternative medical treatments which wouldn't be included in Obama's plan. The reason I like homeopathic remedies is because I have found that they actually work and are symptom free. This of course is the opposite of what the pharmaceutical cos., FDA, insurance cos., and govt. wants so I will never get financial support from them. Again, they only care about their power and money and not the people.

Another dig at Obama is that he proposes over a trillion dollars in govt. run programs, and then says he will only increase taxes on the top 5% of people. 2 things: the tax on the top 5% doesn't amount to that much... so where's he going to get the money from? And also, if you tax the rich guess what? They will increase the price on whatever products they own and we all will wind up paying more money anyway. Like Bb said, Obama's economic plans are garbage.

[Brandonb]

I'm also in favor of the popularity rating idea. Actually, what you have said makes a lot of sense, and I'll need to think about it more. Would you say the same about the Executive Branch?

The Executive branch, though similar, is another story. The Executive branch does not pass legislation. Although it may have some influence over what gets put in, the main power in the executive branch is to pass/veto the legislation, and to control the military. (I think we can agree this translates to mean that the overriding power is just a form of check/balances, the executive branch is mostly concerned with the military aspect). That said, I don't believe the military is a great place to have the same person serve forever. (Ex. Castro or any other militant dictator). But if a president is doing things well, then why boot them after 8 years? So I think the Executive branch should maintain the 4-year rule. However, the 2-term max should be eliminated.

BTW, I kinda misspoke/miswrote The Congress should be the way that I suggested.

However, the Senate should go back to the way that it was originally. In which the members were selected by the heads of each state government. And likewise removed by the heads of the states governments. As it is now, the states truly have no say in the federal government. Because they do not elect the senators anymore. This is why the Federal government has overstepped on so many rights that were guaranteed to the states in the constitution.

Also, forgive me for being extremely general but the National Healthcare Obama is talking about is awful as Bb pointed out. Just think of how many Americans want something for nothing. Then think of how fast that system will be abused - maybe 1 week and every other American we will be at the hospital with common colds. Bb's article was awesome.

Thank you very much Itachi. I'll admit that I didn't put a whole lot of research into that idea. Mainly because I wanted to see if I could create something original without being influenced by other opinions. My main bit of research for creating that article was the movie Sicko. I'll admit that the movie does a fantastic job with pointing out the flaws in our current system. Though on the other hand it deliberately drops the ball on all negative aspects of government run healthcare. So it helped me to identify the roots of our own problems. I had to do other research to find the problems with government run healthcare. Thankfully, there is an abundant amount of info on that too. Just not too many movies about it.

[Guest]

This election is a tough one! I don't know enough about either of the candidates, and that's my fault. I fear that McCain will continue current Bush policies, and that definately needs to change. But on the other side, from what I've read about Obama, he is charismatic but possibly lacking experience. The major parties pick the candidates they think can win. That doesn't mean they will be the best president.

I live in Louisisana, which has a really bad political reputation! Years ago, we had a choice between Edwards and David Duke. What a choice! We put Edwards back in office... He's in prison now

[Guest]

Thank you for that article BB, it was very interesting. To be fair, I don't know a whole lot about health care or politics in general, mainly because I'm not incredibly interested in it at the moment.

[Brandonb]

Thank you for that article BB, it was very interesting. To be fair, I don't know a whole lot about health care or politics in general, mainly because I'm not incredibly interested in it at the moment.

I completely understand. I never followed it closely until after I dropped out of college. At that point I became more and more interested as I realized that it had more and more of an impact on me. Early on I just unquestioningly listening to those around me... bad idea. Because the people around me, just regurgitated the stuff that they had heard from other people around them... and so on.

Through my few years spent as a construction worker, I listened to many podcasts and various talk radio views. Because my job didn't require a whole lot of thought, I spent many hours of every day learning in this way. From talk radio I learned about Libertarian stances from Neal Boortz, right winged stances from Sean Hannity, and Left wing from Alan Colmes (of course they all have a generous amount of overlap between them). I also learned Statist, and Anarchist market philosophies from the many podcasts that I downloaded and listened to at work when those aforementioned hosts weren't on the air. After a few years I learned to pick and choose the parts of each that I hold true, and have put the pieces together the best way I can. Thus, I have drawn my own conclusions about many topics. And believe me... I'm now in a whole different universe from the time when I just listened without questioning.

So in short, I guess what I have to say is:

1) No need to be interested right now. Have fun doing fun things while the interference of politics doesn't apply.

2) Listen to what others have to say, but don't hold it as a truth. Apply your own logic.

3) You will not learn any of this in school. Only through your own independent learning will you find anything meaningful.

OK, rant concluded sorry, I'm just full of hot-air today I guess.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Brandonb

[Guest]

2) Listen to what others have to say, but don't hold it as a truth. Apply your own logic.

I think I've started doing that recently more. You can't always believe what people tell you.

[Guest]

I put McCain in the "who will you be voting for" catagory only because I wanted to see the results of the poll. I'm still undesided, but right now I'm leaning toward McCain, it may change though

[Guest]

I put McCain in the "who will you be voting for" catagory only because I wanted to see the results of the poll. I'm still undesided, but right now I'm leaning toward McCain, it may change though

You can always just click the "View Results" button without voting.

[unreality]

Thanks Bb and Itachi, your posts have been very enlightening and I've learned a lot

[Mekal]

Thanks Bb and Itachi, your posts have been very enlightening and I've learned a lot

what about me jk..

anyway... so i really wonder who will win... it seems so close...

[unreality]

While it seems that people, foreigners included, think Obama is the best choice, so far more are for McCain... hmm..

edit: also, about economics, you can't trash Obama's plans until you know McCain's plans. What has McCain come forward with for economic plans?

Edited September 15, 2008 by unreality

[akaslickster]

Proud to say I dislike both lesser of two evils. I must pick one schmuck over the other schmuck. I have a crazy reason for the one I will pick. Let's face it, we're doomed either way. I am perturbed about not having better choices.

I still am not positive who I will vote for. I also will not tell why because people get crazy trying to change your opinion.

[itachi-san]

While it seems that people, foreigners included, think Obama is the best choice, so far more are for McCain... hmm..

edit: also, about economics, you can't trash Obama's plans until you know McCain's plans. What has McCain come forward with for economic plans?

Firstly, I think it's fine to trash something without hearing the alternative. Trash is trash , but so may be the other guy's plan. Here's McCain's plan which I think is appropriate and possible for the times right now. -much more so than Obama's govt. will solve everything plan. The link I gave you is pretty propagandist, but I got frustrated trying to find one that isn't. It's pretty tame compared to most political policy pages I saw.

I am for The Fair Tax or at least something very similar. Neither candidate wants this of course. Basically what I want is the IRS dissolved along with all its taxes. The tax dollars we spend then go onto what we buy. Instead of buying a pair of jeans for $20, they are now $22 bucks (whatever is the fairest percentage, I'm just throwing random numbers out here). It equates perfectly to economic status. For instance, if you can afford a $20,000 car then you can afford a $22,000 car especially considering there will be no other taxes. Then for the rich, if they afford a $200,000 car, they can afford a $220,000 car, so they will pay that and then they're tax free. The govt. gets it's money based on fueling the economy and fairness for personal wealth basically. Everyone pays taxes on what they buy right then and there and that's it.

[unreality]

Great idea, but of course it will never happen ;D Sweet if it would...

I talked to my dad, the source of all knowledge in my life (lol jk ) and he explained how backwards our nation's health care system is compared to other rich countries that have socialized health care - Japan and many European countries - and how well off they are. Sure it sucks in England and Canada, but I think socialized health care with the right public spin (like Bb's idea) can work, though hell I don't know much about anything and I can't vote anyway

[Brandonb]

also, about economics, you can't trash Obama's plans until you know McCain's plans. What has McCain come forward with for economic plans?

That's the thing. McCain hasn't come forward with much at all aside from tax cuts for everyone. That's the best thing I could possibly hope for.

He's not pushing to increase government welfare programs

He's not pushing to increase the minimum wage

He's not pushing to raise taxes

He IS pushing to cut spending

Obama is basically running on the exact opposite economic platform.

-Government welfare programs are flat out Marxism. The theft of one's own life and giving it to someone else. I won't go into all that right now

-The increase in the minimum wage... well, there's a reason that we had a record increase in unemployment between June and July. The reason is that two years ago the Congress passed a national increase in the minimum wage. They post-dated it to take effect in July 2008. The minimum wage is proven to cause unemployment, which it did again... what a surprise. Obama simply wants to put you out of a job and make you dependent on his welfare programs. That's about as simple as I can put it.

-Increasing taxes causes alot of problems. Especially if directed at the richest 5%. These are your big business owners. Don't complain when they move their businesses (and your job) out of the USA in order to escape the tax consequences.

-Then there's the spending... where to begin? I guess the simplest thing is to reread my earlier comment about paying back campaign favors. You are the one footing the bill.

--------------------------------------

Now the big one. Our current economic situation is a result of an increase in the price of oil. It is a commodity that is used in all aspects of manufacturing and transportation. Therefore when the price of oil goes up, the price of everything goes up because everything must cover the cost of the oil in order to maintain a profit (this is a prime example of the trickle-down economics that I was talking about earlier, the thing that Obama doesn't believe in). So our situation in the economy is that everything is getting more expensive (inflation) while the economy is slowing down (which it is world-wide. Japan is officially in a recession, as is England. China is slowing down like the USA though it's definitely not a recession) this again is a result of Oil going up so high. There's more to it... but you get the idea at this point I hope.

The way to fix this is through energy independence. Again, as I said earlier, Obama has changed his stance on most of his issues. He now kinda supports drilling. So he can't really be nailed on that issue anymore. Well he can... since he only changed his stance in order to not look like a complete fool for again not grasping the economics in his decisions. But still, as an economic issue, McCain has supported drilling. Now we can get into the argument that there are other forms of energy and we need to harvest them yada yada yada... but it's not something that can be effective in our economy RIGHT NOW. But drilling is.

So uh... yeah, that's pretty much what came to mind initially to answer your question.

[Guest]

I cant pay attention to this!

How in the h^^l could anyone vote for McCain?

Seriously? Wow WTF????????

The guy is a total joke!! And Sarah has NO clue!!!

If Mc Cain wins my partner and I are moving to England.

[Brandonb]

How in the h^^l could anyone vote for McCain?

Seriously? Wow WTF????????

The guy is a total joke!! And Sarah has NO clue!!!

Wow, I'd never thought of it that way before.

[itachi-san]

I cant pay attention to this!

How in the h^^l could anyone vote for McCain?

Seriously? Wow WTF????????

The guy is a total joke!! And Sarah has NO clue!!!

If Mc Cain wins my partner and I are moving to England.

no offense, but this post contains no information... why is he a total joke? why does Sarah Palin have no clue? -she's the only one there who's run anything (small business, mayor, governor)

I'm guessing you like Obama. Why?

[unreality]

I disagree about the drilling - we need to move away from oil dependence and focus on alternate energy. Look at what T Boone Pickins is doing (is that his name? lol)... it shows that if you put in the cash, you can get results, and make a profit too. This is a totally different discussion though

Back to politics - I checked out more of Fair Tax, and it's interesting that only one Democrat supports it

[Brandonb]

Back to politics - I checked out more of Fair Tax, and it's interesting that only one Democrat supports it

Yeah, I think once upon a time I may have started a thread about it...

Basically, Dems publicly do not support it because it eliminates the power of government.

While Republicans privately do not support it for the same reason.

[itachi-san]

I disagree about the drilling - we need to move away from oil dependence and focus on alternate energy. Look at what T Boone Pickins is doing (is that his name? lol)... it shows that if you put in the cash, you can get results, and make a profit too. This is a totally different discussion though

Back to politics - I checked out more of Fair Tax, and it's interesting that only one Democrat supports it

I think Huckabee wanted the fair tax and I know Ron Paul did. I don't think either of them would made good Presidents, but they're right in that regard.

Pickins says we need to drill also. We need to drill to start momentum here. In addition to going nuclear, all the natural gas and energy programs (tide, solar, wind). They're trying to get a bill passed right now in congress about doubling the land oil companies can drill on, but now there's a whole issue of them not having the drills to make it happen, it's a very weak back and forth. I say "shame on our country for not doing this 30 years ago and shame on T. Boone Pickins for making every last cent off oil and then trying to come across as a humanitarian when it's really the only way he can keep making money." He should have started this back in the 90's if he was so for America's prosperity.

edit for clarification

[unreality]

Bb: From your posts so far, and in other topics (weren't you pro-Bush?), I'm guessing you're a registered Republican? Just a curious question, no need to answer if it's personal

Edited September 15, 2008 by unreality

[Mekal]

I cant pay attention to this!

How in the h^^l could anyone vote for McCain?

Seriously? Wow WTF????????

The guy is a total joke!! And Sarah has NO clue!!!

If Mc Cain wins my partner and I are moving to England.

you know... that is a great view... You should be a policy analyzer.

anyway... what i think is that the people who have actually done a lot of research are moving towards McCain, I think that the media is affecting the poll though. They were slightly pushing towards Obama and he got more votes, and then when they started leaning towards McCain he moved up in the poll. So the trick is to do reaserch from multiple sites... I was for Obama before i did research on multiple sites, then i started to like McCain. My dad is actually for Obama...

[unreality]

For the people that said that religion will affect your vote, do you mind coming forward? How exactly does it affect your vote, and toward which candidate?