2 ms·
That’s more strong evidence that the system really doesn’t work as advertised. If it did then the people that supposedly have the power of the purse and control
by User23 6y ago
That’s more strong evidence that the system really doesn’t work as advertised. If it did then the people that supposedly have the power of the purse and control trillions of dollars in spending might vote themselves enough budget to do their jobs.
- naravara 6y agoThey might, but a significant chunk of that body (and of the electorate) is philosophically opposed to the idea of them doing their jobs. Also fundraising, public communications, and case-work are all bigger determinants of them getting reelected than legislative acumen or policy-making skill so big surprise what kinds of people the job selects for.
- User23 6y agoWhy do the people who control an organization that can vote trillions of dollars a year into existence need to fundraise? Philosophically opposed, whatever that means, is an obvious fig leaf. The system observably can’t actually be functioning as advertised. Whatever the conditions of the actual operationally descriptive system are, they select for people who vote as they’re told in exchange for a minuscule fraction of the loot.
- salawat 6y agoThey certainly voted themselves out of the legislative work of actually understanding technology. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessm...