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.
Well, for one thing, it's unprecedented to CUT taxes in a time of war (or two wars, lol), like Bush did. How exactly are we supposed to pay for these wars that the neocons and the Obama admin want to wage? it's irresponsible..end the wars first.
Shoot they would break down in tears, Just take away their expense accounts, medical insurance , limos, lobbyists, etc. They would'nt know what to do.
Just a thought. How about annual review by the public each year. In Jan each year, the public sends in their suggested pay rate for Reps and Sens for the coming year, along with the performance bonus suggestion for the past year. Those suggestions then averaged and hence you have what compensation they get. Most of our representatives are independently wealthy, so could care less. But, some are not, and would care much. I wonder if that would have any impact on Congress?
There you go. There's no faceless inhuman entity called "the government". The government is made up of specific individuals, and with the rare exception, they are all rich.
None of the people making the rules and deciding how the money is to be spent has money issues himself or herself. They don't know what it's like to have to choose between food and electricity.
Some years ago one of the newspapers here in Jersey did an experiment where they had a couple of the state politicians go to a supermarket and shop for a month within the food stamp allotment. None of them could do it--they all had to put stuff back.
I think it would be a start that while Congress is in session, they have to reside in DC in dormitory-style housing and eat on the food stamp allotment, use public transportation, and get paid at minimum wage.
That would be a treat. Back before the tax cuts in 1981 the rich and the poor lived in more or less the same world. Or a lot closer. Now they just don't have a clue. Both side of the other. I read a book that had an image in it that illustrated what we have going on now and where it could end up. The book was Dangerous Liaisons published in 1782 I think it was.
The seen was there was a person in the book that wanted to get it on with another person. So he was trying to impress her. He had his man go and find someone that was going to be thrown out on the street for back rent. The person (family) was found and he went to help out. I forget the exact amount of money but it was like $0.50 that was needed to keep them in their place. He said he felt so good at having saved then with $0.50 that he gave them $15. What he had in his change purse. He had several times the amount of money that the family would make in a year in his pocket. He was supper rich.
That disparity of pay is in place in America today. They just don't get it. “They have no bread.” “Let them eat cake.” that is the disparity of pay that lead to the French Revolution.
That's so weird! I could have swore they are elected by the people for the people. To serve their constituents, not their personal interest.
You didn't understand the post, much less what the job of your representatives is. Constituent interests dominate when they are on the table. If your state or district produces a lot of cotton, then you vote local when cotton subsidies are up for a vote. If the feds are looking to do a new urban transportation demo project, then you try to get it located in your state or district or at least to secure some nice contracts for potential suppliers who are in your state or district. When it comes to things like health care or financial regulation or a foreign assistance appropriations bill, what would make your ideas worth listening to? What would you know about such things that your represenatives don't already know and then some. You want them chained in their voting to the opinions of a bunch of people who are much less well-informed than they are? Does that make sense to you?
Keep in mind that the founders did NOT create a direct democracy. That was the furthest thing from their minds. They took steps to shield the governmental actors they were creating from the vagaries and easily-influenced opinions and passions of the populace. That's just something you will have to learn to live with.
You didn't understand the post, much less what the job of your representatives is. Constituent interests dominate when they are on the table. If your state or district produces a lot of cotton, then you vote local when cotton subsidies are up for a vote. If the feds are looking to do a new urban transportation demo project, then you try to get it located in your state or district or at least to secure some nice contracts for potential suppliers who are in your state or district. When it comes to things like health care or financial regulation or a foreign assistance appropriations bill, what would make your ideas worth listening to? What would you know about such things that your represenatives don't now and then some. You want them chained in their voting to the opinions of a bunch of people who are much less well-informed than they are? Does that make sense to you?
Keep in mind that the founders did NOT create a direct democracy. That was the furthest thing from their minds. They took steps to shield the governmental actors they were creating from the vagaries and easily-influenced opinions and passions of the populace. That's just something you will have to learn to live with.
Theroy meets reality.
What you've got is everyone trying to do what is best for them and not what is best for everyone. Micro Vs Macro.
I think it would be a start that while Congress is in session, they have to reside in DC in dormitory-style housing and eat on the food stamp allotment, use public transportation, and get paid at minimum wage.
Doesn't happen so much in the Senate, but plenty of people in the House are just plain folks. They're not wealthy, and considering most of them have to support two households, the pay they get as against the cost of living in DC forces plenty of people to live the way college students do. They double-up in tiny apartments with next to no furniture, they walk to work, they cut coupons out of the Sunday paper. Then they work 14-hour days on some of the toughest problems there are in the world. People with attitudes like this don't make the job any easier.
Wrong . the job of my congressman is to represent the thoughts and belief of my district or state. It is not their job to represent what Nancy Polos wants. we elect them from our state or district to represent our views and not to go veggie and do hat Nancy Harry and Obama tell them to do
Take a government course sometime. Specifically, the US government. You have some catching up to do...
Ok maybe I am expecting too much, but it would seem to me the goverment is totally blind of what is important to most of America.
I just dont get it, they just want to raise taxes without even thinking about cutting the pork out of the budget. Most people are bearly hanging on and I am not asking the goverment for any help other than look at themselves and what they have done to create thses budgets, before they look at the people to bale them out of another budget shortfall because they dont know how to manage things.
I don't know, maybe I am way off base on this one.
When it comes to things like health care or financial regulation or a foreign assistance appropriations bill, what would make your ideas worth listening to?
Wow. Simply wow. Though these bills are usually 1000 pages long and very complex, the matter behind them is usually quite simple. The 1000 pages are simply the red tape that surrounds making a decision.
The fact that you can't even comprehend that it is the duty of Americans to be educated is astounding. Even more so is that you can't comprehend that all people are going to have different reactions and motivations on various bills. Simply discrediting "the common folk" as their opinions aren't worthy of being heard makes me question whether or not people truely understand the concepts that this country was founded on.
The very name of one of these people casting the vote, "Representative", should clue you in as to what their job title is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Keep in mind that the founders did NOT create a direct democracy. That was the furthest thing from their minds. They took steps to shield the governmental actors they were creating from the vagaries and easily-influenced opinions and passions of the populace. That's just something you will have to learn to live with.
No, that is not why they didn't create a direct democracy.
They did however install a REPRESENTATIVE republic. You know, where the people elect a single individual to represent them in the legislative process.
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.
