lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

There are those who recognize that we are not a Democracy, yet those same people endorse majority rule. The majority of citizens don't get to make ( or un-make ) law, yet a majority party does. Where does the Constitution state that, when a political party is in the majority in all three branches of Government, the rights of those in the minority don't matter? Where does the Constitution authorize the people's representatives to ignore the will of their own constituents, in favor of the will of party leadership or other special interests?

The American people's choices are NOT only between the left and right, yet both the left and right strive mightily to make them think it is. The fact is, both the left and right are wrong, and they're both right. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say that their voting choices were " the lesser of the two evils", thus acknowledging that BOTH choices were.............evil. What do they mean by that? Obviously, it meant that they didn't care for either choice.................but felt that they had to chose one or the other anyway..................or not choose at all.

The majority of Americans see correctness in some of the left's agenda and some correctness in the right's agenda, but are only given the option to choose one or the other, or let others do the choosing. America, the land of plenty, the birthplace of individual liberty and freedom...............except when it comes to it's government, when the choices are purposely limited to...................2, just 2, or perhaps, some version of the 2, but still..................just 2.

Partisan politics were not born with the United States, is not authorized by ( or prohibited by ) the Constitution, but developed by select groups seeking power over all Americans. The majority felt that keeping slavery when the rest of the civilized world had abandoned it - and they were wrong. The majority felt that annihilating Native Americans was just policy - and they were wrong. The majority felt that denying women the right to vote, own businesses or property was the only sensible policy - and they were wrong. The "majority" spoken of here was not necessarily the majority of the citizenry, but the majority of those in the Government.................who consistently believe that they know best, and rarely consult the very people they work for.

There are over 320,000,000 citizens here, but they will be forced to select one of two ideologies/philosophies/agendas, or have the choice made for them.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Another great post...

Canada has five parties...

We are no less dysfunctional...

Perhaps greater power should be returned to the States?

PeterS

1) A representative republic is a form of democracy.

2) If our representatives could vote without fear of what would happen if they did something that might piss us off then you could properly say that we weren't a democracy but a republic. But the simple fact that because both sides work so hard to please their constituents means that we are a democracy and not the republic that the founders intended us to be.

3) The whole premise behind a republic was that we would TRUST our representatives to make policy for the common good of the country--not that they solely try to please their constituents at home. The failing in our political system is us in that we DO NOT trust our representatives to act in our best interest--but instead, DEMAND that they vote for policies that please us--whether it is appropriate for the common good or not.

So instead of looking for the John McCains and the John Kennedys in our society, we are looking for the most radical person that we think can get elected. The goal post in today's politician is how well they match up to our ideology, not their qualifications for the office they are running for so all they have to do is say words that please us and any substance to them becomes totally irrelevant.

So we can't complain about the state of our political system since it's breakdown is our fault because we demand that our Republic operates as a direct Democracy--something, the founders never intended but we sadly, DEMANDED!!!

Morgan

I have to disagree with you on just a couple of things here Peter, while yes I fully agree whatever happens is our own fault and upon us to fix it, possibly where the problem lies is in as what Ipmajor was I believe referring to was not enough choice.

Both of you have valid points due to the fact if people don't have enough choice then where is the threat to the representative to listen to the voice of th people, if (s)he knows people will just vote their party back in? What is the incentive then to listen to the people, as we see now, they listen to their paid supporters and their base who they can count on for their vote?

At the time of our country's inception, it may have been correct to have representatives, the majority of civilians, were illiterate. Our government was geared to have the elite rule as they were the educated.

Presently most the majority of people can read, though sadly education has been on a downslide and that is something some of the people in power like to see as the people may be more easily mislead and deceived, now people are reading less and just listening to the rhetoric.

Should our president be picked then by the representation of the electoral vote?

Doesn't having parties have us continue down the manipulative party road?

When can citizens vote on some important decisions rather than as you say, go by the majority party rule?

MarvinSussman

FIRST THINGS FOR THE GREEN ECONOMY

Our Constitution’s Preamble states the purpose of our federal government: justice, tranquility, defense, general welfare, and the “Blessings of Liberty” that we must provide for Posterity. Each of these goals implies the creation of institutions of considerable magnitude. Justice and tranquility require first responders, hospitals, courts, and prisons. Defense implies forces with unlimited needs that must be provided by the nation’s industry, which implies a system of education and healthcare. General welfare and “Blessings” imply an open-ended list of things. We can put all of the above under the heading of “infrastructure”. Given that we are surrounded by hostile forces seeking to dominate us, our need for infrastructure is unlimited.

To provide for those infinite needs, Congress must plan for the world’s best infrastructure. Then it must create that infrastructure by spending whatever is needed, buying required resources at the fastest rate possible without harming with the well-being of the private sector. In practice, this means spending as much as possible without causing inflation. Ideally, our economy should be operating steadily at the onset of harmful inflation. In practice, the economy’s money supply and output fluctuate so that the best spending practice would be to aim at that ideal.

Thus, the need to combat inflation is a primary concern. With maximum spending there must be maximum taxation to remove excess discretionary income and wealth from the economy. With a liberal economy and relatively free trade, the distribution of income and wealth in the population will be top heavy. For efficient taxation of discretionary income, such a distribution requires steeply progressive federal income and estate tax brackets with no taxation of non-discretionary income and wealth. Because of the “tax-bracket creep” that occurs with rising incomes during economic expansions, steeply progressive tax brackets also have the virtue of increasing (decreasing) the ratio of tax revenue to total spending during economic expansions (contractions), thus smoothing the fluctuation of the economy’s money supply and output.

Spending on infrastructure must be matched by spending on people. Until our munitions industry and armed forces are completely robotic, wars will be waged by people in the line of fire and those behind it. And they will be waged more successfully when the people are well-educated and healthy. Accordingly, there is no rational reason to require individuals to pay for their education or for maintaining their health. There is every rational reason to provide expense-paid education for all at all levels of learning. Likewise, there should be free healthcare for all, including free nurseries, day-care, and pre-K for parents with such a need.

To fulfill the aims stated in the Preamble to our Constitution, the physical structures and personnel required for these services have a cost that Congress must bear. In effect, Congress should pay the people to provide the nation’s infrastructure and to provide both the best-educated and healthiest workforce and the world’s best military force. No other course can achieve the goals set for us by our Founders.

© 2019 Marvin Sussman. All rights reserved. Search: YouTube.com for Marvin Sussman!

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

The Congress bears no costs whatsoever, indeed, are a cost themselves, it is the citizen which bears ALL costs. The citizen, or end user, pays for everything; the Government's expenses, all taxes and fees ( many of which are included in the price of things at point of sale ), literally everything.

Morgan

I believe Marvin is more to the point of Congress allocating the direction of our funds. As to funds being more balanced to not only our security but also our well-being. I agree to money being spent to educate our future citizens, to enable us to be leaders or the very least on the cutting edge of new developments.

Our health should also not be for profit that is a conflict of interest. I have recently read amazing high statistics of the youth being rejected to join the military.

We deregulated the EPA for our own protections and the FDA has become a running joke. These are all ways and means to sabatage ourselves.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

In our infancy, America was a Republic. A democratic one, but still a republic. Now who knows. The left (see Soros) is trying to pull us farther and farther left until America is unrecognizable. The right, RINOs, conservatives (most) are just letting it happen. So you're pretty on target.

Rose42

Good post. Now how do we fix it?

I am all for more choice but it does have the potential to make things pretty chaotic. On the other hand...really shaking things up sounds exactly like what we need.