6 ms·

For better and worse, this is pretty much what I'd expect. It's not a serious attempt to genuinely govern or otherwise make reasonable policy, it's sending up a

For better and worse, this is pretty much what I'd expect. It's not a serious attempt to genuinely govern or otherwise make reasonable policy, it's sending up an ideological flag, and since the fundamental ideology is actually opposed to the idea of well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability...

wustangdan 4y ago
I'm sorry I'm not following you. Are you saying that what the US has now is well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability? Since they oppose this by trying to pull funding from them.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  Republicans have run on a platform of "Government is terrible at it's job" for 50 years, and every time they get elected they work really hard to prove it.
  - wustangdan 4y ago
    I have a hard time combining this sentiment with my lived experience in California.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
      Regardless, what's the alternative? Have corporations run everything and only majority share holders get any say? How do you think that'll work out? Yet, that's exactly what the "government doesn't work" crowd seems to be pushing for. It's great if you're a billionaire neo-feudalist and terrible if you're literally anyone else.
      - kodyo 4y ago
        I can imagine alternatives that aren't one of a) unlimited fascist oligarchy (present) and b) unlimited corporate oligarchy (your proposed alternative).
      - wustangdan 4y ago
        I'm not following you. Are you saying we implement this alternative by removing income tax and replacing it with consumption tax, that corporations will run everything and only share holders get a say? I'm not sure what this tax issue has to do with the right to vote? Don't follow the fact that only billionaire feudalists are allowed to think their government isn't working well? Why can't ordinary citizens be unhappy?
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
        No, I'm not talking about the IRS specifically, just the general "government doesn't work" sentiment. > Don't follow the fact that only billionaire feudalists are allowed to think their government isn't working well? Why can't ordinary citizens be unhappy? You can think a government isn't working well, but the solution is not "dismantle the government" (which would lead to corporate rule and kind of already has), it's "elect a better government".
        kodyo 4y ago
        You can't vote your way out of an oligarchy. You can destroy and replace it, or you can secede from it.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - wwweston 4y ago
      If California were particularly terrible, it wouldn't be so damn popular, and most of its problems would go away. California does have some specific policy problems, but most of what it has are popular place problems. It also doesn't pass muster with my own lived experience. I've loved all of the 15 years I've spent in both Northern and Southern metro California, and I'd do it again.
      - bb88 4y ago
        Thousands of Californians left this last year or two and moved to Idaho. This sparked a housing crisis here in Boise, Idaho. I would assume these are left and right of center folks looking for cheaper housing and a better life. At one point last year the median household income was $75k/year. The median house price was $525k or so. Basically this created the situation if you couldn't afford a house before the housing crisis, the $1500 to $2000 rent payments were going to eat into your income and make it harder to buy a house. The NIMBY politics surrounding housing has got to go in California. We're beginning to get that here.
        wwweston 4y ago
        > This sparked a housing crisis here in Boise, Idaho. How interesting. Presumably as enlightened examples of the opposite of California governance, they wouldn't have any such thing as a housing crisis caused by popularity. Or... it could be they've had the luxury of not having popular-place problems thus far, and like everyone else are suddenly discovering that actual governance is hard.
        bb88 4y ago
        They came here to escape California governance, I guess, but in the end just made life worse for everyone else living here. My property taxes have more than doubled over the last decade.
        mixmastamyk 4y ago
        NIMBYs are everywhere while the population is always growing. Did you think you would escape it, or just want to blame city slickers who like a roof over their head?
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > > Republicans have run on a platform of "Government is terrible at it's job" for 50 years, and every time they get elected they work really hard to prove it. > I have a hard time combining this sentiment with my lived experience in California. I have no problem at all reconciling it with my 45 years of lived experience in California. About the only good thing California Republicans did for government in that time is provide such a flagrant display of how a minority dedicated to scoring political points with no concern for the general warfare could abuse supermajority requirements as to motivate California voters to change the Constitution to make the state somewhat practically governable despite the existence of the California Republican Party by removing the legislative supermajority requirement for the annual budget.
      - wwweston 4y ago
        Amen. And don't forget that some of the formative policies people are critical of now (cough Prop 13) actually stem from periods where conservatives had the pull to win elections and ballot initiatives in California. And California's progressive lock arguably isn't even really old enough to drive.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- wwweston 4y ago
  The US is astoundingly well-functioning and most US citizens astoundingly lucky by historical and/or global standards, and certain kinds of minimally functional mutual accountability are part of the reason why we've gotten this far. There's also plenty of room for improvement of course (including learning from other industrial social democracies as well as recent internal issues), so that's relative, but the most reasonable perspective to start from is that we're all ridiculously lucky. Without substantial appreciation for that fact we're quite likely to wreck institutions that have gotten us here.
  - trilbyglens 4y ago
    Astoundingly well functioning maybe if you ignore literally every single other developed nation on the planet.
    - wwweston 4y ago
      See the parenthetical in the 2nd paragraph of the comment you're replying to.
    - keewee7 4y ago
      You're probably correct if you don't consider Southern Europe and Eastern Germany to be developed.
  - kodyo 4y ago
    The US government is the bloodiest, most indebted, and most imprisoning institution on the planet. And I agree, it is astoundingly well-functioning at it.
prottog 4y ago
> since the fundamental ideology is actually opposed to the idea of well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability A charitable interpretation of Republican "fundamental ideology", as it were, would be that they prefer more well-functioning social institutions at lower levels of government, closer to the people those institutions are meant to serve. It would make sense than beyond just a publicity stunt to lower federal taxes and have states and localities tax more. I can't take you seriously if you're claiming that one of the two major parties in this country isn't interested in the well-being of the country.
- wwweston 4y ago
  There was a point where I would have held the charitable reading of Republican ideology and I still know some people who identify with the party who probably understand their own position this way. But at this point, no, I don't believe that's actually what's animating it. Selective election denialism is as nihilistic about local institutions as it is about national ones, while theories about state legislatures overridding citizen ballots sure isn't moving things closer to the people. Whether you can take me seriously isn't any particular concern of mine, whether you can take the actual underlying topics seriously is the primary matter of concern.
  - bb88 4y ago
    Republicans have mostly lost their ideological way it seems like. They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. The J6 response from the Republicans is the hallmark about power and politics in the party these days. Law and Order is fine long as it's only applied Biden's son or Hillary Clinton.
    - slowmovintarget 4y ago
      > They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. This. This was the problem with Democrats for a long time. They weren't for anything, they were just against Republicans. Republicans in government used to be well-educated and their main ideological thrust was based on a set of principles of limited government, free-market capitalism, and maximum agency of the governed. They fell short of this ideal, but the ideal was there. Not any more. They're doing stupid symbolic things like this resolution to "get them Democrats" not to actually fix anything, and not as a matter of principle. Part of the problem is any conservative leaning person of any intelligence or reasonable level of education doesn't go into government, they go into business. We end up stuck with bozos like we have now. This move to abolish the IRS is as much theater as the move to "abolish" daylight savings time in the U.S. which never goes beyond submission of a bill. If they'd backed this with something like a flat tax, that would have been a bold move, even semi-realistic. But this is circus fare.

wustangdan 4y ago

I'm sorry I'm not following you. Are you saying that what the US has now is well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability? Since they oppose this by trying to pull funding from them.

mrguyorama 4y ago
Republicans have run on a platform of "Government is terrible at it's job" for 50 years, and every time they get elected they work really hard to prove it.
- wustangdan 4y ago
  I have a hard time combining this sentiment with my lived experience in California.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
    Regardless, what's the alternative? Have corporations run everything and only majority share holders get any say? How do you think that'll work out? Yet, that's exactly what the "government doesn't work" crowd seems to be pushing for. It's great if you're a billionaire neo-feudalist and terrible if you're literally anyone else.
    - kodyo 4y ago
      I can imagine alternatives that aren't one of a) unlimited fascist oligarchy (present) and b) unlimited corporate oligarchy (your proposed alternative).
    - wustangdan 4y ago
      I'm not following you. Are you saying we implement this alternative by removing income tax and replacing it with consumption tax, that corporations will run everything and only share holders get a say? I'm not sure what this tax issue has to do with the right to vote? Don't follow the fact that only billionaire feudalists are allowed to think their government isn't working well? Why can't ordinary citizens be unhappy?
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
        No, I'm not talking about the IRS specifically, just the general "government doesn't work" sentiment. > Don't follow the fact that only billionaire feudalists are allowed to think their government isn't working well? Why can't ordinary citizens be unhappy? You can think a government isn't working well, but the solution is not "dismantle the government" (which would lead to corporate rule and kind of already has), it's "elect a better government".
        kodyo 4y ago
        You can't vote your way out of an oligarchy. You can destroy and replace it, or you can secede from it.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - wwweston 4y ago
    If California were particularly terrible, it wouldn't be so damn popular, and most of its problems would go away. California does have some specific policy problems, but most of what it has are popular place problems. It also doesn't pass muster with my own lived experience. I've loved all of the 15 years I've spent in both Northern and Southern metro California, and I'd do it again.
    - bb88 4y ago
      Thousands of Californians left this last year or two and moved to Idaho. This sparked a housing crisis here in Boise, Idaho. I would assume these are left and right of center folks looking for cheaper housing and a better life. At one point last year the median household income was $75k/year. The median house price was $525k or so. Basically this created the situation if you couldn't afford a house before the housing crisis, the $1500 to $2000 rent payments were going to eat into your income and make it harder to buy a house. The NIMBY politics surrounding housing has got to go in California. We're beginning to get that here.
      - wwweston 4y ago
        > This sparked a housing crisis here in Boise, Idaho. How interesting. Presumably as enlightened examples of the opposite of California governance, they wouldn't have any such thing as a housing crisis caused by popularity. Or... it could be they've had the luxury of not having popular-place problems thus far, and like everyone else are suddenly discovering that actual governance is hard.
        bb88 4y ago
        They came here to escape California governance, I guess, but in the end just made life worse for everyone else living here. My property taxes have more than doubled over the last decade.
        mixmastamyk 4y ago
        NIMBYs are everywhere while the population is always growing. Did you think you would escape it, or just want to blame city slickers who like a roof over their head?
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > > Republicans have run on a platform of "Government is terrible at it's job" for 50 years, and every time they get elected they work really hard to prove it. > I have a hard time combining this sentiment with my lived experience in California. I have no problem at all reconciling it with my 45 years of lived experience in California. About the only good thing California Republicans did for government in that time is provide such a flagrant display of how a minority dedicated to scoring political points with no concern for the general warfare could abuse supermajority requirements as to motivate California voters to change the Constitution to make the state somewhat practically governable despite the existence of the California Republican Party by removing the legislative supermajority requirement for the annual budget.
    - wwweston 4y ago
      Amen. And don't forget that some of the formative policies people are critical of now (cough Prop 13) actually stem from periods where conservatives had the pull to win elections and ballot initiatives in California. And California's progressive lock arguably isn't even really old enough to drive.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
wwweston 4y ago
The US is astoundingly well-functioning and most US citizens astoundingly lucky by historical and/or global standards, and certain kinds of minimally functional mutual accountability are part of the reason why we've gotten this far. There's also plenty of room for improvement of course (including learning from other industrial social democracies as well as recent internal issues), so that's relative, but the most reasonable perspective to start from is that we're all ridiculously lucky. Without substantial appreciation for that fact we're quite likely to wreck institutions that have gotten us here.
- trilbyglens 4y ago
  Astoundingly well functioning maybe if you ignore literally every single other developed nation on the planet.
  - wwweston 4y ago
    See the parenthetical in the 2nd paragraph of the comment you're replying to.
  - keewee7 4y ago
    You're probably correct if you don't consider Southern Europe and Eastern Germany to be developed.
- kodyo 4y ago
  The US government is the bloodiest, most indebted, and most imprisoning institution on the planet. And I agree, it is astoundingly well-functioning at it.

prottog 4y ago

> since the fundamental ideology is actually opposed to the idea of well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability A charitable interpretation of Republican "fundamental ideology", as it were, would be that they prefer more well-functioning social institutions at lower levels of government, closer to the people those institutions are meant to serve. It would make sense than beyond just a publicity stunt to lower federal taxes and have states and localities tax more. I can't take you seriously if you're claiming that one of the two major parties in this country isn't interested in the well-being of the country.

wwweston 4y ago
There was a point where I would have held the charitable reading of Republican ideology and I still know some people who identify with the party who probably understand their own position this way. But at this point, no, I don't believe that's actually what's animating it. Selective election denialism is as nihilistic about local institutions as it is about national ones, while theories about state legislatures overridding citizen ballots sure isn't moving things closer to the people. Whether you can take me seriously isn't any particular concern of mine, whether you can take the actual underlying topics seriously is the primary matter of concern.
- bb88 4y ago
  Republicans have mostly lost their ideological way it seems like. They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. The J6 response from the Republicans is the hallmark about power and politics in the party these days. Law and Order is fine long as it's only applied Biden's son or Hillary Clinton.
  - slowmovintarget 4y ago
    > They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. This. This was the problem with Democrats for a long time. They weren't for anything, they were just against Republicans. Republicans in government used to be well-educated and their main ideological thrust was based on a set of principles of limited government, free-market capitalism, and maximum agency of the governed. They fell short of this ideal, but the ideal was there. Not any more. They're doing stupid symbolic things like this resolution to "get them Democrats" not to actually fix anything, and not as a matter of principle. Part of the problem is any conservative leaning person of any intelligence or reasonable level of education doesn't go into government, they go into business. We end up stuck with bozos like we have now. This move to abolish the IRS is as much theater as the move to "abolish" daylight savings time in the U.S. which never goes beyond submission of a bill. If they'd backed this with something like a flat tax, that would have been a bold move, even semi-realistic. But this is circus fare.