3 ms·

> has nice hair and is able to conceal his rampaging cocaine habit long enough to make himself too big to fail? You are indoctrinated into believing that democ

by guelo 4y ago

> has nice hair and is able to conceal his rampaging cocaine habit long enough to make himself too big to fail? You are indoctrinated into believing that democracy cannot work and good government is impossible.

rglullis 4y ago
> good government is impossible. At the scale of continental countries like US (or any BRIC country), it is. The decision makers are simply too far removed from the people who get to live with the policies.
smsm42 4y ago
I am indoctrinated by the reality I am observing daily. And before you are tempted to tell me "oh, it's because $not_my_favorite_political_party prevents $my_favorite_political party from achieving its true potential as the paragon of democracy" - this happens regardless of your tribal squabbles.
- guelo 4y ago
  $not_my_favorite_political_party_1 wants to destroy government besides police and military. $not_my_favorite_political_party_2 wants to increase welfare spending. Neither party is focused on good government. Mostly that is because voter dissatisfaction with government is channeled into the two competing ideological camps so that obvious, practical improvements never happen.
  - smsm42 4y ago
    There's no party that has anybody elected to Congress (or to a state Congress afaik either, though there I may be missing one or two persons) that wants to even reduce substantially, let alone destroy, government. TBH, let's not be cute and drop "substantially". No major party wants to reduce the government at all. Didn't for a long while. The only disagreement is about how fast the government will be growing and who gets the benefits of the wealth transfers that would follow from that and who gets to control these trillions and get the goodies that come from controlling trillions of other people's money. There are disagreements on other subjects, but on the subject of Big Government the consensus is clear and present. No agency ever gets reduced power (or, the horror, disbanded!) whatever party is in power, the worst could happen is that one party's functionary would temporarily disrupt the implementation of other party's schemes.

by guelo 4y ago

rglullis 4y ago

> good government is impossible. At the scale of continental countries like US (or any BRIC country), it is. The decision makers are simply too far removed from the people who get to live with the policies.

smsm42 4y ago

I am indoctrinated by the reality I am observing daily. And before you are tempted to tell me "oh, it's because $not_my_favorite_political_party prevents $my_favorite_political party from achieving its true potential as the paragon of democracy" - this happens regardless of your tribal squabbles.

guelo 4y ago
$not_my_favorite_political_party_1 wants to destroy government besides police and military. $not_my_favorite_political_party_2 wants to increase welfare spending. Neither party is focused on good government. Mostly that is because voter dissatisfaction with government is channeled into the two competing ideological camps so that obvious, practical improvements never happen.
- smsm42 4y ago
  There's no party that has anybody elected to Congress (or to a state Congress afaik either, though there I may be missing one or two persons) that wants to even reduce substantially, let alone destroy, government. TBH, let's not be cute and drop "substantially". No major party wants to reduce the government at all. Didn't for a long while. The only disagreement is about how fast the government will be growing and who gets the benefits of the wealth transfers that would follow from that and who gets to control these trillions and get the goodies that come from controlling trillions of other people's money. There are disagreements on other subjects, but on the subject of Big Government the consensus is clear and present. No agency ever gets reduced power (or, the horror, disbanded!) whatever party is in power, the worst could happen is that one party's functionary would temporarily disrupt the implementation of other party's schemes.