streaker 0 #1 December 31, 2012 Geez...Whatever happened to moderate Democrats and Republicans? Is every decision we make based on extreme views of the left or right? Surely there must be middle ground positions. Senators and Congressmen you're getting pay raises.....Do your friggin' job! Feed up with the lot of you!Have a yippee ki ya day! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #2 December 31, 2012 They're all just too self-centered and self-indulgent to give a crap about 'We the people'. They have their positions living fat and don't give a crap about us. Just wait till the next election rolls around and see how thry are, You're not the only one who is fed-up! The next time they run for office... we don't vote for them. Fortunately, Obama is out of chances. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #3 December 31, 2012 Middle ground positions? The whole "fiscal cliff" IS a middle ground position that they agreed to last year. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 379 #4 December 31, 2012 Quote Middle ground positions? The whole "fiscal cliff" IS a middle ground position that they agreed to last year.I thought the "fiscal cliff" was intended to be a position that was so draconian that it would force the committee to come up with an alternative plan. Except of course that underestimated the power of entrenched suspicion and love of power. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #5 December 31, 2012 Quote Quote Middle ground positions? The whole "fiscal cliff" IS a middle ground position that they agreed to last year.I thought the "fiscal cliff" was intended to be a position that was so draconian that it would force the committee to come up with an alternative plan. Except of course that underestimated the power of entrenched suspicion and love of power. Don Yep. But nonetheless a compromise. Haven't compromises brought us here in the first place? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 379 #6 December 31, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Middle ground positions? The whole "fiscal cliff" IS a middle ground position that they agreed to last year.I thought the "fiscal cliff" was intended to be a position that was so draconian that it would force the committee to come up with an alternative plan. Except of course that underestimated the power of entrenched suspicion and love of power. Don Yep. But nonetheless a compromise. Haven't compromises brought us here in the first place?Are compromises universally bad? Do you always dictate how to spend your free days, does your (reportedly) hotter-than-the-sun wife always dictate, or do you sometimes discuss and agree on things you both want to do? Politics is a human interaction, not quantum physics that operates according to invariant formulas, and mutual respect (compromise sometimes, or at least collaboration) is important for the long term success of any human interaction. Any cuts or tax increases are inherently political in nature; what is a boondoggle to one person is an essential service to another. Unless one party has a supermajority and can impose its will on the other, there will have to be (and should be) give and take concerning how to achieve goals in reducing deficit spending. The problem, it seems to me, has not been that one side is willing to give a little credence to the other. It has been that neither side has (until now, hopefully) seen any political mileage to be gained in actually cutting spending, as opposed to talking a big show but voting for unfunded wars and pet projects. As long as the parties can agree to a significant cut in deficit spending as a goalpost, I'm fine with give-and-take about how they actually get there. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #7 December 31, 2012 Quote Are compromises universally bad? No. In fact, I think that compromise is nearly universally good. So long as it’s the interest and pockets of the people compromising who are doing the compromising. When playing with other peoples’ money, the usual rules are off. Quote Do you always dictate how to spend your free days, does your (reportedly) hotter-than-the-sun wife always dictate, or do you sometimes discuss and agree on things you both want to do? None. Our kids usually dictate my free time – even at 2:00 in the morning. In other circumstances, she gets first pick. (She wanted to sleep in on Saturday morning so I had both with me at a bagel shop that morning. Comments on my bravery were met with, “Their mom wants sleep. This is the easy out.”) Quote Politics is a human interaction, not quantum physics that operates according to invariant formulas, and mutual respect (compromise sometimes, or at least collaboration) is important for the long term success of any human interaction. Politics is the interaction of some regarding what to do with the many. Let’s say that you want to spend a week with my wife. I don’t want you to spend any nights with you. We could argue away and try to reach some deal or compromise, but isn’t it my wife we’re talking about? Isn’t it easier to strike a deal for other people and compromise than it would be negotiating solely with her? Sure, I can say, “I have my own interests in this” and you could say, “Here’s $100k to agree.” And I’d say, “She’s worth way more than that.” Which is the way politics works, actually. Politics is about human interaction and mutual respect – among the bargainers. It’s about disrespect for the ones who will pay the costs, and that’s my problem with “compromise” by those who are not vested in the results. Quote It has been that neither side has (until now, hopefully) seen any political mileage to be gained in actually cutting spending, as opposed to talking a big show but voting for unfunded wars and pet projects. This is because they are playing the game with other peoples’ money. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 379 #8 December 31, 2012 Quote None. Our kids usually dictate my free time – even at 2:00 in the morning. Been there, done that. They do grow up eventually, though. Quote Politics is the interaction of some regarding what to do with the many. ... Politics is about human interaction and mutual respect – among the bargainers. It’s about disrespect for the ones who will pay the costs, and that’s my problem with “compromise” ...I guess you are a lot more cynical about the process than I am. Since we vote for these people and send them to office, at some level we ("the ones who will pay the costs") are not disconnected from the office holders. To the extent that there is a problem, it is self-inflicted. If we didn't allow politics to be such a contact sport, and if we chose people based on reflective consideration of their policies and qualifications rather than superficial sound bites or depth of the purse backing them, maybe we'd get better results. I'd love to get rid of the party system altogether, but I don't see that happening. Quote This is because they are playing the game with other peoples’ money.Whose money should they be playing with? Who would ever run for office, if the only source of revenue for the government was the personal bank accounts of the elected politicians? It would be far beyond the scope of this thread, but some day I'd be curious to see a list of the activities that you think are legitimate for the Federal government. Is there even one thing that they do that you could support, or agree to pay taxes to support? I suspect that for most people (not you), they actually enjoy the myriad services the government provides. They just don't think they should have to pay for them. Who should pay? Well, somebody else. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #9 December 31, 2012 Turns out the House won't be voting tonight, anyway. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #10 December 31, 2012 Quote Turns out the House won't be voting tonight, anyway. I wonder whether that's Boehner being a dick, or Boehner having trouble herding his cats. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,571 #11 December 31, 2012 Quote Politics is the interaction of some regarding what to do with the many. Let’s say that you want to spend a week with my wife. I don’t want you to spend any nights with you. We could argue away and try to reach some deal or compromise, but isn’t it my wife we’re talking about? Isn’t it easier to strike a deal for other people and compromise than it would be negotiating solely with her? Sure, I can say, “I have my own interests in this” and you could say, “Here’s $100k to agree.” And I’d say, “She’s worth way more than that.” Which is the way politics works, actually. Politics is about human interaction and mutual respect – among the bargainers. It’s about disrespect for the ones who will pay the costs, and that’s my problem with “compromise” by those who are not vested in the results. I think there are two problems with this. Number 1: Ok, so compromise is off the table. As I see it, the alternative is that in those times when one party has been successful enough in the polls that they can simply batter through any legislation they want then they get everything and the other side gets nothing, and at all other times neither side gets anything. Is that better? Problem 2: In your analogy you are (I hope) 100% certain that you want your wife to only spend her nights with you and 100% certain you don't want her to spend her nights with Don. While that may be a parallel for some of my, your and your elected representatives political and economic opinions, I hope to god it's not a parallel for all of them! Anyone who is absolutely sure that their plan for the economy is the one and the only fair and viable plan and that no-one on the other side has any input that either better or at the very least not harmful is probably not the best person to be making those decisions.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #12 December 31, 2012 Quote In your analogy you are (I hope) 100% certain that you want your wife to only spend her nights with you and 100% certain you don't want her to spend her nights with Don. Right. The variable I was getting at is, "What about what she wants?" Which isn't included. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,571 #13 December 31, 2012 Quote Quote In your analogy you are (I hope) 100% certain that you want your wife to only spend her nights with you and 100% certain you don't want her to spend her nights with Don. Right. The variable I was getting at is, "What about what she wants?" Which isn't included. She has one opinion. The public have three hundred million. What do they want? One way of at least vaguely finding out is to tell 'em what your plan is and see if they vote for it, and by that measure support for either plan is near as damn it 50:50. So fuck compromise, hey?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #14 January 1, 2013 Quote Just wait till the next election rolls around and see how thry are,... Sorry, man. That has been whistled about since time immemorial and rarely is anything meaningful accomplished at election time. 'Mericans, as a whole are even more divided than the politicians are. You can't get enough of them together at the same time to make positive changes.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #15 January 1, 2013 Quote Quote Just wait till the next election rolls around and see how thry are,... Sorry, man. That has been whistled about since time immemorial and rarely is anything meaningful accomplished at election time. 'Mericans, as a whole are even more divided than the politicians are. You can't get enough of them together at the same time to make positive changes. Well... it was a thought. Looks like we're gonna have a tough row to hoe. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,558 #16 January 1, 2013 Some of each, and probably a realistic evaluation of the likelihood of the Senate finishing in time for the House to have an honest vote according to their processes, rather than a hurry-up-that's-all-the-time-you-left us vote. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
