221–230 of 382 posts
Our political parties are failing us so badly, I wouldn't be surprised if the guillotine came back into fashion over the next decade. I hope congress can get its act together and serve its constituents better before it comes to that, but it feels naive.
Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…
Trotsky explained this nearly a hundred years ago in arguing the dictatorship of the proletariat to Karl kantskys point of contention to the revolution of the working class. the Princeton study could best be summarized as scientific evidence of his conclusion disclosure: I am a communist and find little value in capitalist reformations.
Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…
I like the idea of "blind" or anonymous congressional voting. It feels counterintuitive, but donors might be less willing to "buy" votes if they can't confirm that they're getting what they pay for. And a representative who has accepted lots of corporate money might feel safer "betraying" those donors. I think representatives would still feel pressure to vote in line with the interests of their constituents and get r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does paying a politician MORE than 3x median US pay make them less out of touch with the average American? We don't need politicians 15x out of touch with the median American's lifestyle. In NYC governor's last election, there was a question about how much the median house costs in Brooklyn, and two high level candidates gave absolutely bonkers answers like $90k and $120k, when it's actually $900k. You only want…
Part of the problem is that if the job doesn’t pay well, it attracts people who are independently wealthy and who are more likely to represent the interests of the wealthy. For most wealthy politicians, the bulk of their wealth comes from a business they own that pays out hundreds of thousands of dollars (or millions of dollars) per year, not their 100K-ish government salary. The upshot of this is that when “the peop…
Just don't elect them. When running for office in most places, being considered wealthy or coming from a wealthy family is a considerable hurdle to overcome (as is being extremely poor).
Hear me out... few people want to run for federal office already. The pay isn't great and it's hard work. If the US was a company, there'd be no question that we'd need to pay our leadership much better to attract top talent. We pay senators $170k a year to manage our country with a $20 trillion economy. So what we end up with is activists who crave power and elites from rich families for whom $170k a year is a round…
I agree with you so much that it's difficult for me to convey. The magnitude of both the upside of good governance as well as the downside of bad governance is so great that it amazes me that we have so few pro-society incentives for competent and well intentioned individuals to serve on the highest governing bodies. If I could wave a magic wand and change things, here's what I would do: 1. Increase pay for senators…
Otherwise totally agree. I'd even go so far as to say permanent ban on any employment with a step down salary/pension for life, halving with each multiple of the time in office.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd take it further: $1M/year for life, have to divest all investments they own coming in to office (i.e., turn them to cash). Accepting any third party payment during or after being elected (and during campaigns) is treason. If their kids accept their inheritance, the rules apply to them too. The rules always apply to spouses. Let them invest in whole-market funds / ETFs, but only allow withdrawls 5 years after leav…
I increasingly think something like this is the way. You can only get money out of politics by putting money into politics. We have to align incentives correctly, and money is the way to do it. Nobody would every run a business where they pay their leaders $170k but allow those same leaders to make millions from outside stakeholders by leveraging their job role in ways that don't align with the company's goals. That'…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trotsky explained this nearly a hundred years ago in arguing the dictatorship of the proletariat to Karl kantskys point of contention to the revolution of the working class. the Princeton study could best be summarized as scientific evidence of his conclusion disclosure: I am a communist and find little value in capitalist reformations.
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Better Idea: $300k base and a performance bonus up to 100% more based on sponsored laws and an additional 100% for passed laws with an extra 100k for no votes missed or abstained. So a perfectly performing congressperson gets a mil.
How about 2M per year, but at the end there's a vote and if you have less than 50% approval you have to give it back?
Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…
I'm sure its not an original idea but I always thought a more "fair" system would be all 18+ citizens would automatically be entered in a lottery every year that would fill 1/5 of the seats of a unicameral legislature of 500 seats. The winners would be given something insane, like $1 billion dollars for each member, at the end of 5 years of service with a yearly stipend of $1 million a year during their service. This…
I actually think it's a wonderful thought puzzle at the least.
The two problems I have with it though, are reflected in Lincoln's 1st inaugural address:
* His criticism of the idea that only the Supreme Court can determine constitutionality: the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal
* His assertion that rule by a minority leads to tyranny or despotism.
If the thought puzzle could be extended by substituting the current closed party primary system with random selection initially - but still have a general election to choose among those candidates, you might find a way of creating a random-democracy hybrid.
Our political parties are failing us so badly, I wouldn't be surprised if the guillotine came back into fashion over the next decade. I hope congress can get its act together and serve its constituents better before it comes to that, but it feels naive.
This is an example of one political party actually trying