271–280 of 446 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
China doesn't have flip-flopping like this with its attendant massive waste. Instead it has endemic corruption which siphons off funds all over the place, perhaps with the exception of the big projects that command the full attention of central leadership.
One of the reasons why "democracy is the worst system of government, except for all the others".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That state of affairs is seen as a bug, and is being fixed. [1] 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society That aside: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/21/trump-cou... Edit due to rate-limiting: that makes two of us.
If Trump defies 1 in 3 of the court orders against him, that still means judges successfully stopped him 2 times out of 3. I'm not interested in a discussion where we equivocate between what's true today and worst case scenarios that could become true in the future, sorry.
>raises the possibility that the order halting construction will ultimately be held to be arbitrary and capricious.
But guys like Trump aren't arbitrary or capricious.
There's a pretty good consensus that he would have to be a lot more sensible by nature to reach that level of sophistication.
posted this at ars forum: (it should be clear I think it was a stupid move by the WH, but I am trying to think what might have "informed" it) Steelmanning the risks, its the link to mainland as a weakness in supply chain of power, compared to onshore sources possibly. But, the construction is in close water, well inside the exclusive economic zone. You would think passage of a craft capable of causing a power shock w…
The pretext for the suspension was radar noise.[1] [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/business/energy/trump-offshore-wind-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a country changes course every four years, how can the success of a long-term project be ensured? Sadly this is an inherent weakness of the US constitution. It's old and it was written at a time where we didn't have enough experience with democracies. In a modern parliamentary democracy you vote parties which form coalitions and settle on one of the party leaders (in general the one with most votes) as prime min…
> Sadly this is an inherent weakness of the US constitution. It's old and it was written at a time where we didn't have enough experience with democracies. (I'm not even American and I know this) The constitution was meant to be a living document, adjusted over the years as the world changes. But the very opposite happened, it became Holy Scripture, unchanging and never evolving. The whole American system was based o…
So you end up talking with individuals where "the 2nd amendment says I can have guns, it's in the constitution" and "my favorite president should go for a third term, the 22nd amendment is just a technicality".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That could be a problem in itself. It certainly is here in the UK. If you have two parties that have much the same policies you do not get necessary change and voting becomes meaningless.
For that, you need to look to the press. Political parties are mostly relatively small and under-funded huddles of second-rate individuals, who get told what to do by billionaire-owned media. It's interesting how many and varied "minor parties" which are more genuinely grassroots have persisted in the UK despite the difficulty in scrounging up funding from the actual public, and despite FPTP being theoretically stack…
The US seems to restrict the ability of minor parties to stand for election far more than the UK does. It varies by state but from what I have read you need thousands of signatures just to stand in many states.
FTTP does also favour parties with a geographically concentrated base such as the Scottish and Welsh nationalists and the NI parties. Geographical variations in the US seem mostly to be about which of the two big parties people back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the reasons why "democracy is the worst system of government, except for all the others".
There are countless examples of democracies with endemic corruption. Democracy is not a cure to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Long term" means decades when it comes to energy strategy, major infrastructure initiatives, and decarbonization. Four years is woefully inadequate for strategic planning, you’re operating on a tactical level at best.
There is no reason to do long term projects with public funds. Private companies are not subject to the vagaries of democracy and can plan as long-term as they want.
If these projects ultimately end up canceled they’ll be the largest “mostly done” infrastructure projects to be cancelled. A huge waste. And a monument to US incompetency.
US corruption.
Incompetence would've been a good news here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US president just today said that Republicans should "nationalize the voting" in future elections.
That sounds like a call to get rid of the electoral college...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Long term" means decades when it comes to energy strategy, major infrastructure initiatives, and decarbonization. Four years is woefully inadequate for strategic planning, you’re operating on a tactical level at best.
There is no reason to do long term projects with public funds. Private companies are not subject to the vagaries of democracy and can plan as long-term as they want.
Unless, of course, you assume (the ideal to be) an entirely anarchist business environment where whoever-with-resources can do whatever. Democracy, though, is not that.