Page 1 of 2
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:54 pm
by unkbill
Normally for an Amendment it goes thru channels. Then all the states have to ratify it. How about a reverse Amendment. The states proclaim the government stop spending of all construction projects. Only enough to finance the postal service, there asses, welfare, etc. No foreign aid no more pork barrel just run the government until there is zero deficit and some surplus.
If that makes me Tea Party oh well. It is about time. It is all going to collapse someday. Why not put the foot down now?
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:13 pm
by GORDON
You sound like an advocate for states' rights.
That didn't end well last time.
That isn't Tea Party as much as it makes you a Confederate.
Edited By GORDON on 1275959666
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:47 am
by unkbill
GORDON wrote:You sound like an advocate for states' rights.
That didn't end well last time.
That isn't Tea Party as much as it makes you a Confederate.
Maybe that is what we need. Hope it doesn't come to that but something has to shake things up. Things have changed. 1% with 99% to go. So as far as I am concerned it is business as usual in DC.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 am
by Malcolm
Years ago, the feds started superseding state & local authority. Damn man, not only are the horses gone, the barn burned down. Going to shut the door ain't an option.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:28 pm
by GORDON
You would need cohorts at every level of government in order to keep the fed from bringing force to bear, especially in the fed.
The US government is such a behemoth that... I don't think it is possible to change, any more.
The most realistic path I can see is a President and congress willing to just start cutting programs, and giving up power. Things could actually get done. But when was the last President and Congress we had anxious to give up power?
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:40 pm
by TPRJones
GORDON wrote:The most realistic path I can see is a President and congress willing to just start cutting programs, and giving up power.
It's pathetic when that's the best thing to hope for.
I mean, why do people become federal politicians in the first place? Because they crave power and influence. No way is someone going to work their way up there and get what they want just to give it up.
In America 2.0, we need to do something about that. Anyone who wants to run for office should be immediately disqualified. The details of that may need some work, of course.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:56 pm
by unkbill
GORDON wrote:The US government is such a behemoth that... I don't think it is possible to change, any more.
That's it, Fantastic thought. We need MORE Government. It is already so big it is in danger of collapsing in on itself like a black hole. Lets feed the animal until it implodes in on itself and then we can start America 2.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:59 pm
by Malcolm
You'd need some sort of ingenious system which by a cadre of key politicians out-politic the rest of the chaff. The other half would come trying to implement some reforms in the quickest, most efficient manner possible.
Much as I hated J. Edgar Hoover, he had compromising info on goddamned near everyone, which in turn gave him power over lots of folk. You'd need about a dozen Hoover-clones or equivalent thereof to kick this off. Problem is that while the Hoovers of the world are spectacular at gathering info, they're the last people you'd trust with it.
The US government is such a behemoth that... I don't think it is possible to change, any more.
I'm sure someone said the same shyte about the Romans, British, the Chinese, etc., in their heyday.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:04 pm
by GORDON
Malcolm wrote:The US government is such a behemoth that... I don't think it is possible to change, any more.
I'm sure someone said the same shyte about the Romans, British, the Chinese, etc., in their heyday.
Their own policies, more than anything, brought them down.
I see a lot of similarities of path between the downfall of Rome and the current United States.
The fall of Rome caused the Dark Ages. Lets hope we don't need to do that again... but I bet we do.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:50 pm
by Troy
GORDON wrote:Malcolm wrote:The US government is such a behemoth that... I don't think it is possible to change, any more.
I'm sure someone said the same shyte about the Romans, British, the Chinese, etc., in their heyday.
Their own policies, more than anything, brought them down.
I see a lot of similarities of path between the downfall of Rome and the current United States.
The fall of Rome caused the Dark Ages. Lets hope we don't need to do that again... but I bet we do.
Considering the leaps and bounds in technology and commerce that were made in the Renaissance that followed, it'd be interesting to see what came out of that cycle.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:10 pm
by Malcolm
Their own policies, more than anything, brought them down.
Dissertations have been written on that subject. Not exhaustively, either.
The fall of Rome caused the Dark Ages. Lets hope we don't need to do that again... but I bet we do.
People still argue over exactly when the Roman Empire & Rome fell or if they ever did, really. Or whether to consider the Western & Eastern halves separately. That's just semantics, though. It's not a question of need. This country will be no more some day. If you're talking about redoing the entire notion of what we call "government", yeah, that might require some serious shyte to go down; something destructive, brutal, bloody, & long enough to stick in the society's memory beyond a couple generations.
Considering the leaps and bounds in technology and commerce that were made in the Renaissance that followed, it'd be interesting to see what came out of that cycle.
Considering the amount of knowledge we lost during the Dark Ages, I'd rather not find out again. Europe didn't have to get dragged through that shit for centuries in order to end up better off in the long run.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:59 pm
by DoctorChaos
Malcolm wrote:Considering the amount of knowledge we lost during the Dark Ages, I'd rather not find out again. Europe didn't have to get dragged through that shit for centuries in order to end up better off in the long run.
Foundation! A nice by-product is by making it a religion we can not pay taxes.
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:12 pm
by Malcolm
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
- Fightclub
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:11 pm
by GORDON
DoctorChaos wrote:Malcolm wrote:Considering the amount of knowledge we lost during the Dark Ages, I'd rather not find out again. Europe didn't have to get dragged through that shit for centuries in order to end up better off in the long run.
Foundation! A nice by-product is by making it a religion we can not pay taxes.
With Bill Gates as Harry Seldon.
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 10:39 am
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:DoctorChaos wrote:Malcolm wrote:Considering the amount of knowledge we lost during the Dark Ages, I'd rather not find out again. Europe didn't have to get dragged through that shit for centuries in order to end up better off in the long run.
Foundation! A nice by-product is by making it a religion we can not pay taxes.
With Bill Gates as Harry Seldon.
Hell, naw.
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:24 am
by GORDON
Seldon was big because he developed Psychohistory. Who is our modern day equivalent... Rush Limbaugh? Karl Rove?
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:43 am
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:Seldon was big because he developed Psychohistory. Who is our modern day equivalent... Rush Limbaugh? Karl Rove?
Double & triple hell naw. We ain't got one.
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:56 am
by GORDON
Why not; they are both right...
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:27 pm
by TPRJones
Seldon was actually intelligent.
More importantly, though, he was also operating in secret. Everyone you have ever heard of is not our modern day Seldon, unless you are the modern day Dornick.
Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:56 pm
by DoctorChaos
Why look without when we could probably produce a Seldon within this group?