6 ms·

Try living in DC. It's a special kind of hell to live in the city where all this is taking place - where the local news IS what is going on in Congress (good a

Try living in DC. It's a special kind of hell to live in the city where all this is taking place - where the local news IS what is going on in Congress (good and bad) - and not even be able to write to a voting representative in either house.

spacefight 12y ago
If you can - take your tax money elsewhere.
- dangerlibrary 12y ago
  Unfortunately, it is not possible to solve the problem that way. There are over 600,000 people living in this city - more than the population of Wyoming and Vermont. You wouldn't just tell everyone in Vermont to move to New Hampshire because the federal government can't get its act together. I was born and grew up in this city, as were many people who happen to fall on this side of the DC border.
  - spacefight 12y ago
    I agree that it's hard to relocate, that's why I stated "if you can". Some can and some do leave the places where they grew up for reasons of unhappiness with the policies of their gov.
    - dangerlibrary 12y ago
      That addresses my complaint, but doesn't solve the problem. There will always be residents of the District of Columbia - it's a city. Just like San Francisco or Chicago. The federal buildings make up a tiny fraction of the land area - the rest is private businesses and people's homes. The people who live in those homes should be allowed to vote.
      - spacefight 12y ago
        I fully agree that everyone should be allowed to vote. Solving the specific problem is hard. I just wanted to give a small hint, that if someone is not happy with the status quo, they might try to change it. Of course I have to add, that first it would make much more sense to try to change the local sentiment first - usually done by enganging in your locale community.
        Cyther606 12y ago
        Relocating your family to an alternate tax farm wouldn't accomplish much. The social contract has been severed. In the USCIA, it's no longer possible to engage with your local community without being cognizant of government spies. After all that happened with the Occupy movement, if the criminals who oversaw these sadistic acts of torture aren't brought to justice, and it instead comes down to grassroots activism, I for one wouldn't count on justice. And here's to hoping that I can at least continue to speak frankly on the internet. I certainly foresee my use of Tor creating problems for me down the road. It's why I'm such a big fan of Bitcoin, because that's the only viable way I'm aware of to defund these psychopaths.
        spacefight 12y ago
        Thanks for your insight. As I said in the very beginning: "If you can - take your tax money elsewhere". This includes other countries.
      - lambda 12y ago
        I don't understand why they don't just change the District of Columbia to consist only of the federal buildings, and give the rest back to Maryland (I don't believe there are still any residences on the Virginia side of the river, but if so, give that land back to Virginia). Then there can be the constitutionally mandated federal district, that consists simply of the federal buildings, and everywhere that people live (outside of the White House, Number One Observatory Circle, and maybe a few other formal federal residences) would actually be within state jurisdiction. This already happened to the bulk of the Virginia side of DC in 1847 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_retrocession https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_retrocess...). I don't see why they don't just do that again with the rest.
Dylan16807 12y ago
There was one itty bitty spot in the entire middle band of this continent that people could move to and wouldn't be able to vote. So hundreds of thousands of people did. Still confuses me.
- dangerlibrary 12y ago
  I didn't move here, I was born here. I work here for a private company that has no relationship to the federal government. My home is here. The apathy about this issue is what confuses me - what harm would it do to allow DC residents to vote? What reason could you have to oppose DC citizens gaining the right to vote? The argument that federal government workers should be forbidden from voting is incredibly hollow - the vast majority of them reside outside the city. Also, this is tantamount to saying "Park Rangers in Idaho shouldn't be allowed to vote," a position I have never heard put forward.
  - Dylan16807 12y ago
    I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming your ancestors. I'm not against letting DC vote to fix the problem at this point. But this situation is ridiculous. There was no reason to start a major city in the no-voting zone.
    - eru 12y ago
      Why? Not having a vote is not a major pain point for most people.
    - TheCoelacanth 12y ago
      The no-voting zone was created around two already existing cities (Georgetown and Alexandria).
  - jfoutz 12y ago
    Historically, i think it made some sense. now with instant communication, it seems hard for locals to influence congress unduly. Personally, I have no problem with adding DC as another state. Politically, it'll never happen (imho). why would any senator give up 2% of their power to add 2 more senators? There are probably many issues blocking, but on that one at least is a monster to overcome.
discardorama 12y ago
San Francisco is similar in a way. Nancy Pelosi keeps winning with massive margins, simply because of her name and the fact that she's part of the political machine here; and no one goes anywhere in SF politics without the backing of the machine. And the machine prevents viable challengers from coming forth. For all practical purposes, we don't _have_ a representative who will represent us; she just represents the rich and the powerful.
- samstave 12y ago
  And she is corrupt to the core, maybe almost as much as Feinstein who's husband's company Bechtel was one of the top profiteers in the wars.
  - cwp 12y ago
    And yet, Feinstein was the one who did battle with the CIA to get the torture report published. Establishing that crimes were committed is the first step toward prosecuting the criminals. I'd be the last to defend corruption, but it's important to point out that these things are relative. A republic can tolerate a little graft and profiteering. It cannot tolerate torture.
    - kabdib 12y ago
      Read about Feinstein and the crypto wars. She's a lying sack of garbage. Maybe, just maybe she had an attack of conscience about the CIA thing -- my guess is that she realized it would make it out anyway, and decided it would be better to look good on that account than defend something obviously illegal.
      - kabdib 12y ago
        I should add: And then work to have any repercussions be a wrist slap. "Don't do that again, okay?" and a wink. Just watch. Nothing will happen. I wonder who the next intelligence committee lapdog is going to be?
    - 12y ago

spacefight 12y ago

If you can - take your tax money elsewhere.

dangerlibrary 12y ago
Unfortunately, it is not possible to solve the problem that way. There are over 600,000 people living in this city - more than the population of Wyoming and Vermont. You wouldn't just tell everyone in Vermont to move to New Hampshire because the federal government can't get its act together. I was born and grew up in this city, as were many people who happen to fall on this side of the DC border.
- spacefight 12y ago
  I agree that it's hard to relocate, that's why I stated "if you can". Some can and some do leave the places where they grew up for reasons of unhappiness with the policies of their gov.
  - dangerlibrary 12y ago
    That addresses my complaint, but doesn't solve the problem. There will always be residents of the District of Columbia - it's a city. Just like San Francisco or Chicago. The federal buildings make up a tiny fraction of the land area - the rest is private businesses and people's homes. The people who live in those homes should be allowed to vote.
    - spacefight 12y ago
      I fully agree that everyone should be allowed to vote. Solving the specific problem is hard. I just wanted to give a small hint, that if someone is not happy with the status quo, they might try to change it. Of course I have to add, that first it would make much more sense to try to change the local sentiment first - usually done by enganging in your locale community.
      - Cyther606 12y ago
        Relocating your family to an alternate tax farm wouldn't accomplish much. The social contract has been severed. In the USCIA, it's no longer possible to engage with your local community without being cognizant of government spies. After all that happened with the Occupy movement, if the criminals who oversaw these sadistic acts of torture aren't brought to justice, and it instead comes down to grassroots activism, I for one wouldn't count on justice. And here's to hoping that I can at least continue to speak frankly on the internet. I certainly foresee my use of Tor creating problems for me down the road. It's why I'm such a big fan of Bitcoin, because that's the only viable way I'm aware of to defund these psychopaths.
        spacefight 12y ago
        Thanks for your insight. As I said in the very beginning: "If you can - take your tax money elsewhere". This includes other countries.
    - lambda 12y ago
      I don't understand why they don't just change the District of Columbia to consist only of the federal buildings, and give the rest back to Maryland (I don't believe there are still any residences on the Virginia side of the river, but if so, give that land back to Virginia). Then there can be the constitutionally mandated federal district, that consists simply of the federal buildings, and everywhere that people live (outside of the White House, Number One Observatory Circle, and maybe a few other formal federal residences) would actually be within state jurisdiction. This already happened to the bulk of the Virginia side of DC in 1847 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_retrocession https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_retrocess...). I don't see why they don't just do that again with the rest.

Dylan16807 12y ago

There was one itty bitty spot in the entire middle band of this continent that people could move to and wouldn't be able to vote. So hundreds of thousands of people did. Still confuses me.

dangerlibrary 12y ago
I didn't move here, I was born here. I work here for a private company that has no relationship to the federal government. My home is here. The apathy about this issue is what confuses me - what harm would it do to allow DC residents to vote? What reason could you have to oppose DC citizens gaining the right to vote? The argument that federal government workers should be forbidden from voting is incredibly hollow - the vast majority of them reside outside the city. Also, this is tantamount to saying "Park Rangers in Idaho shouldn't be allowed to vote," a position I have never heard put forward.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming your ancestors. I'm not against letting DC vote to fix the problem at this point. But this situation is ridiculous. There was no reason to start a major city in the no-voting zone.
  - eru 12y ago
    Why? Not having a vote is not a major pain point for most people.
  - TheCoelacanth 12y ago
    The no-voting zone was created around two already existing cities (Georgetown and Alexandria).
- jfoutz 12y ago
  Historically, i think it made some sense. now with instant communication, it seems hard for locals to influence congress unduly. Personally, I have no problem with adding DC as another state. Politically, it'll never happen (imho). why would any senator give up 2% of their power to add 2 more senators? There are probably many issues blocking, but on that one at least is a monster to overcome.

discardorama 12y ago

San Francisco is similar in a way. Nancy Pelosi keeps winning with massive margins, simply because of her name and the fact that she's part of the political machine here; and no one goes anywhere in SF politics without the backing of the machine. And the machine prevents viable challengers from coming forth. For all practical purposes, we don't _have_ a representative who will represent us; she just represents the rich and the powerful.

samstave 12y ago
And she is corrupt to the core, maybe almost as much as Feinstein who's husband's company Bechtel was one of the top profiteers in the wars.
- cwp 12y ago
  And yet, Feinstein was the one who did battle with the CIA to get the torture report published. Establishing that crimes were committed is the first step toward prosecuting the criminals. I'd be the last to defend corruption, but it's important to point out that these things are relative. A republic can tolerate a little graft and profiteering. It cannot tolerate torture.
  - kabdib 12y ago
    Read about Feinstein and the crypto wars. She's a lying sack of garbage. Maybe, just maybe she had an attack of conscience about the CIA thing -- my guess is that she realized it would make it out anyway, and decided it would be better to look good on that account than defend something obviously illegal.
    - kabdib 12y ago
      I should add: And then work to have any repercussions be a wrist slap. "Don't do that again, okay?" and a wink. Just watch. Nothing will happen. I wonder who the next intelligence committee lapdog is going to be?
  - 12y ago