Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you're not understanding the point: Different isn't stupid. Working effectively at cross-purposes to yourself is stupid.
French Canadian friends my own age in Montreal have complained that they don't speak English fluently enough coming out of school to get the better jobs. They start out economically repressed because of French language laws. It's great for bilingual Quebeccer's. Not good for Francophones.
I have to ask, why not? Why is the federal government so powerful in the US? Why shouldn't more power be given to individual states? Why shouldn't states have control over healthcare, economics, education and welfare and the federal government give transfer payments to handle these costs like in Canada? For instance, the federal government can make an economic plan and it's up to individual states whether they participate.
What's unreasonable about this? Why can't you give specific powers to states and trust them to handle it on their own?
I'm all for it. That's the way it was intended to be.
Obama's health bill is so much more specific than Canadian federal law. It takes into account individuals employment situation, income level etc... That's not going to make sense from state to state. Or HCOL area to LCOL area. It's too broad. I wouldn't be happy if the Canadian federal government got this specific. These are the details that should be left to provinces to decide. If this happened in my country, I'd be throwing a fit too.
It has to be specific like that because this country is full of idiots that think healthcare must be tied to employment. If healthcare was separate from employment, it would be much more simple to put together.
1) Because we've already tried that, and it didn't work. Most of the really regressive, discriminatory laws that existed in the US were states laws. Jim Crow laws that mandated racial segregation are just the most famous example. Had we left that up to the states, millions of people in this supposedly "free" country would still be legally regarded as second class citizens.
2) Because state governments are even more corrupt and beholden to corporate power than the federal government. Only really big players like the financial sector and GM can really bullly the feds. But pretty much any corporation can bully a state government. As it is, companies play states off against each other all the time, seeing who will give them the biggest subsidies, the lowest taxes and the cheapest workforce. The decentralization you envision would only make this worse.
So the only solution is to babysit States?
The second point opens up another issue. How do corporations manage to wield power over a developed nation? They don't seem to have the same amount of control here or in Europe. What can be done to fix things so corporations aren't so easily able to corrupt state government?
We can see this model today as southern states continue to pursue a "race to the bottom" form of economic development. Instead of developing new and innovative industries the south has grown its economic development by poaching on industries from more prosperous states.
Ironically, the south's model of economic development is being pursued with greater vigor by developing nations that can even outbid the south's lax regulatory schemes. (See the American garment industry)
That's what happens when states like California practice de facto communism, the business there want to get out and they move to pro business states like Texas.
I'm all for it. That's the way it was intended to be.
Canada wasn't supposed to have as much Provincial freedom. That wasn't the intention of the founding fathers. However, when things have gone to the courts, Judges have repeatedly ruled in favour of the Provinces.
Canada wasn't supposed to have as much Provincial freedom. That wasn't the intention of the founding fathers. However, when things have gone to the courts, Judges have repeatedly ruled in favour of the Provinces.
That's what happens when states like California practice de facto communism, the business there want to get out and they move to pro business states like Texas.
California was pro-business enough for these businesses to start out in. I don't think this is really a win for Texas. Businesses that start and stay in the same State are a win IMO.
Most of my experience is from Canada, I can't help if that's the lens I look at it through.
I find it odd that the original intent in the US was for most of the control to go the states, but that doesn't seem to be what happened. The exact opposite was the intention in Canada. It was supposed to be federalism. But that's not what I see happening. Intentions don't seem to have much impact on outcome it would seem.
French Canadian friends my own age in Montreal have complained that they don't speak English fluently enough coming out of school to get the better jobs.
That sort of thing happens in even a more federal union like the United States. There have been local initiatives that have fostered some Americans to remain firmly attached to the language of their ancestor's national heritage, and that had negative impact on those individuals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monemi
So the only solution is to babysit States?
Or become 50 third-world nations (really, roughly 45 third-world nations, and 5 developed nations).
Quote:
Originally Posted by monemi
How do corporations manage to wield power over a developed nation?
By the corporation being worth more money than the state itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monemi
They don't seem to have the same amount of control here or in Europe.
The United States is driven by money to a grievous fault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monemi
I find it odd that the original intent in the US was for most of the control to go the states, but that doesn't seem to be what happened.
To be clear, that specific intent was deliberately and explicitly changed, approved by 2/3 of the state legislatures to become the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
