I'll challenge that statement. Show me one form of government that works better than the one we have right now.Ultimately, it boils down to our form of government. The representative democracy had a good, long run, but, it is finally in its death (I think).
Our Constitution doesn't say anything about this. The Constitution does not define what regulations should be put on business, nor does it mention political parties.Our constitution needs reform, because our current government gives more incentive for politicians to do what the rich and powerful want, and less protection to the lesser ones. This makes many politicians go all the way to the side of the corporations (Republicans) and the others go all the way to the side of the unions (Democrats).
Not powerless. The President doesn't always get what he wants, but he has power. Veto power, for one. The current president is one of the most willing to compromise out of any in recent memory - for good or for bad.The President is absolutely powerless to stop the insane politicians because of how our constitution works, yet all the blame will be pinned on him.
Yes, disturbing. I think it's more of an issue of people becoming so absorbed in certain things that they can't take a step back and look at the big picture.I don't know if anybody else heard the Republican debate, on CNN I think, but the crowd was cheering for the government to let a hypothetical man die rather than pay for his health care. Is this America, or are we spectators to the making of an empire? Was this a question over how to handle health care, or some sick gladiatorial game? I do not know the answer, but it is looking more and more like the latter.
Well, first of all, the British have a solid alliance with the United States, i.e. their prime minister pretty much does whatever the US president tells them to. Example: Tony Blair was perhaps Bush's strongest ally on the Iraq War in the beginning, and he was LABOUR! I could just imagine David Cameron sanctioning Bush about not invading Iran.One government that works better--something like Britain, where there is more incentive for multiple parties, forcing compromises, and more moderate ideologies.
The constitution doesn't say anything about the parties, which is exactly the problem. The politicians work for the "people", but need to get their attention. How do they get their attention? Money. Who has the money? The rich and powerful. I don't know how to do it, but something should be in the constitution about it.
The President is so weak of a position because he can't start anything. He wants a bill passed. Congress says "Eh, later". He can only scold them, but by the time the voters get rid of the do-nothing Congress, the US may have already defaulted, say.
I am not saying our system is bad, but it must be tempered with others if it is to survive.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests