4 ms·
If you're in the US, it's often not a bad bet to backburner compliance with ill-conceived, fuzzily-defined law that is going into effect 2+ years in the future.
by megaman22 8y ago
If you're in the US, it's often not a bad bet to backburner compliance with ill-conceived, fuzzily-defined law that is going into effect 2+ years in the future. Chance are good that a new crop of House of Representatives members will have been voted in during the intervening time, possibly flopping the majority, and the provisions of the statute in question will either be reversed, endlessly delayed, or mangled out of all recognition from their original form.
From that perspective, this whole trainwreck makes considerably more sense.
- oblio 8y agoWe have a ton more parties and the majority are not religiously/fanatically opposed to each other. Also, they tend to shift over time, nobody battens down the hatches as the Democrats or the Republicans do. They have to be flexible to survive. In the US one of the sides could start killing people in the street and they'd still end up in Congress... What this means is that for many topics it's easier to reach consensus and the opposing party, now in power, is much more likely to continue a policy the general population likes.