MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

Post by breatheoften » Mon, May 22, 2017, 3:54 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #206

accountyaccount wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but there's no regional intermediary. Government scales from city, to county, to state... then straight to federal.

> Sure, but there's no regional intermediary. Government scales from city, to county, to state... then straight to federal. There are only 50 states. The median state is larger than Greece. The true problem is that the federal government is responsible for spending three times as many tax dollars as all the states put together. The county government knows they need to fix the bridge, but the feds took all the money t…

Post by blackbagboys » Mon, May 22, 2017, 3:58 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #188

alistairSH wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you? With the American primary election system, legislators are driven to cater to their most extreme constituents. With transparency, they can't work across the aisle AND also win a primary. At least with pork barrel, they get a tangible thing to point to while campaigning to attempt to appease constituents.

Legislators are driven by extreme positions because of the perception that these positions represent enough voter sentiment to influence elections. In fact most constituents are more centrist, which factual reporting standards would highlight.

Post by seppin » Mon, May 22, 2017, 4:00 PM UTC

324343245 wrote: post #21

nunez wrote: post #4

While I don't think the US is, de jure, a third-world country, I completely believe that it is, de facto, for many. I am on my way back from Memphis and onto Detroit, and both of these cities and their home states have plenty of areas that look unbelievably impoverished. Based on what I've seen from my years of traveling the country, it would not surprise me if most of the country had this problem. It's really sad.

What countries don't have any impoverished neighborhoods?

Post by gnaritas » Mon, May 22, 2017, 4:04 PM UTC

wtbob wrote: post #88

jstewartmobile wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our problem is the rural/urban split, and how the rural areas have a much more powerful per-person sway over policy and election outcomes. Two senators per state is pretty kick-ass if you live in North Dakota.

Our problem is the cities, and how they have many more people. Representation in proportion to population is pretty kick-ass if you live in New York. It's a little less kick-ass if you live in North Dakota, and wonder why a few coastal congressmen are able to pass laws which interfere with your lifestyle. More seriously, our problem is a metastasised federal government. Very little should actually be a federal issue…

Post by gnaritas » Mon, May 22, 2017, 4:10 PM UTC

Kaizyn wrote: post #84

kristofferR wrote: post #2

Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? The first version of something is rarely the best version, and while the US constitution contained a lot of fantastic elements and freedoms that every educated American knows about, it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness…

First of all, it is a republic and not a democracy. The difference is quite important. Secondly, to attribute the problems to the constitution is mistaken. That founding document is the only thing standing in the way of a complete and total disaster for the country. Nearly all the problems can be traced back to where politicians are ignoring the constitution in part or in full and thereby eroding the public protectio…