Shireroth

Personally, I'm very upset by the results of all the races I voted in. How did the rest of you fare? GOP won just about everything I could vote for.

GOP?

GOP stands for Grand Old Party and is commonly used alternate name for the Republican Party. In case you did not know, the US Republican Party is more conservative than the US Democratic Party. In fact, by comparison, the Republican Party is probably by comparison further right than the Conservative Party of the UK. Regarding the elections yesterday, since Americans were largely concerned about recent healthcare legislation and perceived increases in spending by the Democratic Party, they came out in droves in favor of the Republicans. Now, the Republicans have a majority in the House of Representatives, one house of the US legislative branch and also the only entity that can pass the annual budget. This shift in power in the House poses a serious threat to President Obama reaching many of his most talked about objectives.

Hehehe. The US is a crazy country. Spending huge fortunes to election campaigns and at the same time complaining about the costs of health care and the economic crisis.

I can understand very well that some are afraid of things that seem 'socialist' but... I would prefer to live in my country and which gives me the assurance that I don't have to work as much as people as Greg to come around, then to live in a country where they spend huge amounts to weapons. But that's a personal opinion, of course.

By comparison, the Republican Party is probably by comparison further right than the Conservative Party of the UK.

Probably, yes. In Belgium, I can call myself a conservative. But I get the impression that I would be called a communist in the USA.

The US Democratic Party is probably somewhere in the vicinity of West European right wing or moderate parties. I very much prefer democrats over republicans, but being a socialist, it's pretty much just picking the lesser evil. Democrats want to spend money on domestic problems while republicans want to spend on foreign matters. To be honest, considering our current situation, neither of these will do us much good. There's a lot of fat to trim off of the budget that isn't doing any good and could bring us back into the black.

Jonas wrote:Hehehe. The US is a crazy country. Spending huge fortunes to election campaigns and at the same time complaining about the costs of health care and the economic crisis.

Eh, public campaign financing is really limited in the US, and for instance in this election there wasn't any involved.

You want priorities, start with the cost of war . It's too bad in a way that the US is finally pulling out of Iraq, time spent in Iraq would have been such a great way to represent the costs of choices in public policy. The direct cost of 1 month was somewhere in the range of 10 billion dollars on average. A week, then, is obviously something like two and a half billion dollars, and a day a tad above 300 million, etc.. So let's see where that puts us... building the LHC? That cost a little less than a month in Iraq. Running the NASA for a year, about 1.7 Iraq-months. The sum of all earmark spending in 2005 according to Wikipedia, gone in less than five months. Pretty much any investment on the level of a single bridge or such is going to be within the range of minutes if not seconds.

Yeah, that's the kind of fat I was talking about.

Eh, public campaign financing is really limited in the US, and for instance in this election there wasn't any involved.

The total amount I read in my newspaper couldn't be called 'limited'.

Ari Rahikkala wrote: You want priorities, start with the cost of war . It's too bad in a way that the US is finally pulling out of Iraq, time spent in Iraq would have been such a great way to represent the costs of choices in public policy. The direct cost of 1 month was somewhere in the range of 10 billion dollars on average. A week, then, is obviously something like two and a half billion dollars, and a day a tad above 300 million, etc.. So let's see where that puts us... building the LHC? That cost a little less than a month in Iraq. Running the NASA for a year, about 1.7 Iraq-months. The sum of all earmark spending in 2005 according to Wikipedia, gone in less than five months. Pretty much any investment on the level of a single bridge or such is going to be within the range of minutes if not seconds.

Am I happy that we didn't join that war (for which the US-government boycotted us, at least that's what I heard a while back).

But I wonder... you talk about the costs, but how much will the weapon industry have earned from it? And the oil industry?

Interesting to see how the debt expands and expands and expands and...

Ari Rahikkala wrote:A week, then, is obviously something like two and a half billion dollars, and a day a tad above 300 million

Also, my state's budget deficit would be covered by 12 iraq-days.

I dislike both parties, they need to be dismantled. I long for a no party system, or so many little parties that no single party can control any part of the government.

Ari is talking about public funding for campaigns, not private, which is quite large. The government will actually give you money to run for an office.

Kaiser Ometeotl I wrote:I dislike both parties, they need to be dismantled. I long for a no party system, or so many little parties that no single party can control any part of the government.

Not always the best solution. In Belgium for example: we still have no government because the several parties (we have them double because of the language communities: two socialist, two liberal, two christian-democratic parties and some other, Flemish or Walloon nationalist parties) can't reach any agreements.
It has advantages: you really don't notice that we don't have a government and the government debts are decreasing because the State doesn't have any new projects to pay. While all our neighbours are firing people to get some control over their debt, we only need to wait and sit back (alright, on the long term not so very good, but neither are the measures taken by e.g. the British).

Ari is talking about public funding for campaigns, not private, which is quite large. The government will actually give you money to run for an office.

In Belgium the parties get a certain amount of money (depending on the number of seats they have) and that they can distribute among their members. But those amounts are nothing, really nothing if you look to the American elections.

Kaiser Ometeotl I wrote:I dislike both parties, they need to be dismantled. I long for a no party system, or so many little parties that no single party can control any part of the government.

Ari is talking about public funding for campaigns, not private, which is quite large. The government will actually give you money to run for an office.

I would love a multi-party system as well. And I'm sure there are enough sects in each party to divide them up pretty well.

Also, private funding is a bitch itself. I'm going to run for state legislature in 2012, and if I have private expenditures amounting over $250, I have, like, 3 more forms I need filled out and notorized and such.

My standard answer to US bashing - you guys are just gunna LOVE IT when China starts calling the shots in a decade or two

I'm slowly starting to understand why the USA has the party system it does. Mostly, the average person can't be bothered to research the issues all that fully. It's not even political apathy - even people that really want to know what's going on would find multiple conflicting viewpoints on every issue and have to sort through all the rhetoric and false accusations to have an idea of what's really going on. For every single issue. Most people don't want to that personally involved, especially when the rest of their life demands so much time for work, keeping the household running and happy, blowing off steam on the hobby one one's choice, and a little bit of sleep. Easier to just find a party that you seem to agree with more often than not and vote their ticket and call it a day.

You Europeans are oversimplifying matters.

I'm not bashing the USA. Just critiquing it.

My standard answer to US bashing - you guys are just gunna LOVE IT when China starts calling the shots in a decade or two

Like Erik said: it's not bashing, but critiquing (perhaps for some the same). Perhaps that's one of the problems: if anyone starts critiquing you're (and you are probably not the only one) going to refer to other 'threats'. That way you don't solve anything, you just avoid the problem.

It's not like my country can't be criticised, I just told some of the disadvantages (and there are many more ). Every country has its faults, but you don't hear me talking about the Chinese to get people of my back, do you?

AryezturMejorkhor wrote:You Europeans are oversimplifying matters.

That's not always a bad thing.

In any case, I didn't vote. I don't see any point in voting. The two options aren't too pleasing and no other option stands a good chance anyhow.

And that's why they don't. If you vote for the 'other' options it boosts their numbers and improves their odds in the future.

The advantage of having to vote (in Belgium it's obligatory) is, of course, that even those who don't want to, have to go vote. That way you get a representation of all classes (I always have to laugh when a foreign election is over and the winners say that the people have let their voice heard, while around 40% hasn't showed up to vote ).

It has its disadvantages, yes: the people have to vote, so there are a lot of voters who just waist their vote. But I have the impression that extreme parties or fractions would have less chance to get elected (I don't mean just in the USA, everywhere).

How do you enforce obligatory voting?

Fining people for not voting?

That's what Australia does. Sure, some people are happy to pay a $250 fine instead of voting, but at least 95% of people vote each election. And Jonas, the real advantage of compulsory voting is that the parties don't have to waste so much time and energy in getting people to vote at all, and can spend more time actually talking about policy (in an ideal world) and why you should vote for them (in the real world).

Jonas wrote:you don't hear me talking about the Chinese to get people of my back, do you?

Yet Actually, depending on in what industry you work, it may already be an issue. Sure is in mine; one indication is the Obama import tariff on foreign tiers last year to stop the Chinese from flooding the US market.

Andreas the Wise wrote:That's what Australia does. Sure, some people are happy to pay a $250 fine instead of voting, but at least 95% of people vote each election. And Jonas, the real advantage of compulsory voting is that the parties don't have to waste so much time and energy in getting people to vote at all, and can spend more time actually talking about policy (in an ideal world) and why you should vote for them (in the real world).

Eh. I'm starting to slowly slide into the belief that frequent and public elections are not exactly directly correlated to freedom and better laws. While the party system does have an overall effect of keeping people honest since one party can't go out of control when there are two, it seems like the vast majority of politics becomes disguising and slanting issues for voting purposes instead of, ya know, doing whatever the government can to make countries stronger, safer, and better communities to live in.

I totally agree with the sentiments expressed by Harvey.

I FIND IT LULZY STILL THAT PEOPLE HARP ON WAR COSTS, SINCE THEY ARE SO TINY COMPARED TO THE AMOUNTS OF STEALTH TAXATION AND DEBT MONETISATION TAKING PLACE BY THE RESERVE BANKS. WHICH BTW ARE NOT ONLY OFF-BUDGET BUT HIGHLY REGRESSIVE.

TRUTH IS THAT NOBODY CARES. POLITICS IN JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTRY THAT IS NOT IN DIRECT CONFLICT AMOUNTS TO A SPECTATOR SPORT. LIKE EVERY OTHER SPECTATOR SPORT, THIS GAME IS RIGGED.

PROPS TO HARVEY FOR POINTING OUT THAT WE'RE ALL SCREWED IN THE END. ENJOY YOUR COMPANY ISSUED COT AND LIVING ON $2/DAY WAGE.

While it is not a panacea, democracy is still the better choice. As this old Melangian trader likes to say, "Like cleanliness is next to godliness, democracy is next to capitalism!"

I'm thrilled to see the return of gridlock. As long as there has to be consensus between the Demicans and the Republicrats, they will all have to take the blame, er responsibility.

We have too many laws already. If all they can agree on for the next two years is National Cauliflower Day, wonderful. It appeals to the Lokiness of my nature.