It is not about who you want to vote for, it is about who is running and what they will do…I agree with you wholeheartedly. Neither side has put up candidates for president that I could vote for in the last 4 elections.
It is not about who you want to vote for, it is about who is running and what they will do…I agree with you wholeheartedly. Neither side has put up candidates for president that I could vote for in the last 4 elections.
That's true. But, are we really to believe that those who have been on the ballots are the Best suited for the job? Are those who have been on the ballots really the best LEADERS of each political party?It is not about who you want to vote for, it is about who is running and what they will do…
Grooming. Frustration while filling your lawn mower builds the case for the electric mower.What was accomplished by eliminating the gasoline can vent ?
I remember a Political Science course I took at IU Bloomington back in the mid 1970's.This slide started probably about the time of the first progressives back in the early 1900’s.
"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted." - Frank HerbertThat's true. But, are we really to believe that those who have been on the ballots are the Best suited for the job? Are those who have been on the ballots really the best LEADERS of each political party?
For many years (since I've been able to vote, 25yrs) I haven't gotten any real warm fuzzy feeling about anyone on the ballots being true leaders or national problem solvers. Just two options that come down to who do you think you can tolerate more.
Herbert has a caution for conservatives, also:"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted." - Frank Herbert
"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it and then only under conditions that increase the reluctance." - Frank Herbert
"Those in power need checks and restraints lest they come to identify the common good for their own tastes and desires, and their continuation in office as essential
to the preservation of the nation." — U. S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, 1956
IMO, wat you claim is the Right's failure, is a failure in your own expectations. It is not the Right's job in particular or the Government's job in general to "fix things". Attempts by Government to fix things invariably lead only to different and often worse problems. The best thing Government can do is nothing, barring that, the next best thing they can do is undo past mistakes (ie. Roe).As I see it both sides have serious deficiencies.
True, the far left tries to adjust things to a massively woke position. Hypersensitivity to EVERYTHING! Transsexuals, gays, police abuse, treatment of immigrants. They try to stick their noses into everything and blow it up well beyond its deserved importance.
But the right does NOTHING! There isn't a real problem the right tries to fix with any meaningful nuance. High crime? Answer = lock em up - forever. Forget trying to learn the causes, just go for a solution that hasn't worked in a thousand years. But it makes them feel like they've done something.
The right has overturned Roe. Great. So what do you do about unwanted pregnancy? Uh... Don't have sex? Nope. That solution hasn't worked in... well... ever. So what is the rights solution? There isn't one. Now that Roe is gone they are only beginning to look deeper at an extremely varied and nuanced problem.
A river is polluted, severely. The left wants to shut down ALL industry. The right ignores the problem in the name of industry.
Obamacare was the best example of this ever. Prices were, and still are, insane. No one can afford to fix a simple broken bone and do a monthes PT on their own. Only a very small percentage could even consider paying their own way. So what happens? The right ignores the problem entirely. This leaves the door wide open for Obama to come in and do stupid crap that doesn't help.
Trump pushed a border wall. Okay. Fine. The liberals scream. But the wall does not address the need for legal immigration reform. What does the right propose to streamline the process for a decent, hardworking, industrious person to become a citizen? Answer = not a damn thing. Just build a wall and we'll be happy. Has the right considered how much it will cost to man the wall? Because a wall without guards is nothing more than a very minor speedbump. Answer = uh...
So the left is triggered by the wall the and right giggles at their frustration, but neither side does squat about the issue of real immigration reform so that desirable people can become American citizens in less than a decade.
I don't know what the answer is. I do know that the answer to any real problem is extremely complex and no matter what we decide it won't fix 100% of the problem. It never does. Real problems are complex, and thus cannot be solved with simple answers. This requires both sides to sit down, discuss, argue, walk away, think, and come back tomorrow to begin again. Sadly, neither side is willing to do this. So the problems remain and the frustration grows, on each side.
Regards,
Doug
The right keeps up the drug war. Probably the most efficient mechanism ever devised for transforming the constitution into toilet paper.As I see it both sides have serious deficiencies.
Doug
IMO, wat you claim is the Right's failure, is a failure in your own expectations. It is not the Right's job in particular or the Government's job in general to "fix things". Attempts by Government to fix things invariably lead only to different and often worse problems. The best thing Government can do is nothing, barring that, the next best thing they can do is undo past mistakes (ie. Roe).
You're absolutely correct that problems are often complicated, far too complicated for Government to fix. Even if the politicians didn't serve more than one master and none more so than themselves, expecting them to solve problems that they have knowledge of and no stake in is not a sound idea. Worse, many of them do have a stake in "solving the problem" which is often far worse. It's a rare problem that personal responsibility won't solve though and relying on one's self to solve your own problems is likely to be far more effective and far less damaging than expecting Government to do so. Expecting Government to be omnipotent enough to give you everything you want and benevolent enough to give you nothing you don't is foolhardy at best.
Sure there are things within the Government purview, but almost none of the ones you mention should not nor were ever intended to be.I agree that it is not the governments responsibility to fix 100% of our problems, but it sure isn't 0% either.
There is NO amount of personal responsibility that can reduce the insane cost of the health care industry. I'm not talking about doctors pay or nurses pay, but the top heavy administrative weight combined with massive overbilling for care. Break a leg, go to the hospital, set the bone, then go through three (3) monthes of therapy. 99% of the American population could not afford to pay for one (1) relatively simple fix. Now let's discuss cancer or traumatic care from an auto accident... Example: Some years ago I was shot in the hand. Finger bone replaced. Three (3) surgeries, 1st to clean the wound and care, 2nd to cut bone out of hip and replace in finger, 3rd to remove scar tissue. Total cost of the surgeries alone would have been about $50,000 - $60,000. Add to that weeks of therapy. I asked about paying for therapy myself. I was told the rate would have been $650 / hour IIRC. So therapy would have been another $10 - $15k.
Now, the government shouldn't dictate fees. But the government could force health care providers to publish ALL of their fees online and allow a patient to "shop around" in non-emergency situations. In effect, the government could force, to the extent possible, the free market onto the health care system. But it didn't. So now we have Obamacare with ALL of the funding tools removed.
To follow up on Epicenity above, the government could end the war on drugs, an exercise that has been a massive failure since, well, prohibition. The right could champion reducing government laws and interference with private use of drugs while keeping laws on the books about driving under the influence. But it doesn't.
Try to sue somebody for, well, any good reason. Or bad. It doesn't matter. Ask the lawyers how long it will take to actually go to a jury trial. (The lawyers are probably cringing at the thought of actually going to jury.) It will probably take well over a year. I don't know how long for criminal trial. Simple government answer to solve a problem: hire tenfold more judges and court staff. But it doesn't. And as Martin Luther King Jr said, "Justice delayed is justice denied." I know a man who was mad as hell that he had to settle with a home health care company that allowed a known drug addict to care for his disabled son, stealing his sons meds and causing his death. Why did he settle? Because that case had already drug out for almost two (2) DECADES and he wanted it to end before he himself died of olde age. There is no amount of "personal responsibility" he could bring to bear on a court system that is overburdened and understaffed.
What about immigration? The government could reform the process to become a legal American citizen instead of it taking decades. The average stay at Ellis Island was three (3) days. Then they were sworn in. Maybe it shouldn't be that short but it shouldn't take years either. How about turning away asylum seekers that don't qualify? Let's hire more judges and staff to reduce the wait time and burden on the system.
All of these problems exist today. And today the right isn't doing for any of them. It isn't even talking about them. This then leaves the left to come in and push really stupid crap that won't do anything.
Again, I agree that government isn't there to solve all the problems. How about we start with it fixing the problem IT creates?
Regards,
Doug
Where in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is the right to drink Pepsi enumerated?Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated.
Not even possible to do in most cases because the payment schemes today are so convoluted. If you have some theoretical idea that the system is going to change to a cash on the barrelhead, you are delusional. And no one has the cash to afford modern medicine anyway without insurance.Or instead of the Government being involved in "forcing" anything, the patient could take the initiative to shop around on their own. It'd be almost like the individual was taking responsibility for their own care instead of depending on the benevolence of the Government.
That is not how the constitution works. When our predecessors wanted to make alcohol illegal they, rightfully so, amended the constitution.Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated.
The reason many drugs are not “legal”, particularly in Indiana, is big pharma, not the right…And here we get to the crux of it, the Right is bad because they prevent people from escaping into drugs without legal repercussions. Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated. Personally, I'd be fine removing a lot of the laws against drugs provided sufficient measures are put in place to prevent users from abusing the system, but that's is extremely unlikely to happen. Elevating the issue of legalized drug use to the status of other, serious issues is itself highly indicative. That something so trivial could subsume far more important issues is depressing, that the far more important issues are merely used as trappings to support the legalization of drug use is even more so.
Sure there is, I know several people that always shop around before a potential medical procedure. it just requires effort. The system has already begun to make that change, a lot of providers, especially in mental health, either no longer bill insurance or only partially bill insurance.Not even possible to do in most cases because the payment schemes today are so convoluted. If you have some theoretical idea that the system is going to change to a cash on the barrelhead, you are delusional. And no one has the cash to afford modern medicine anyway without insurance.
Using the Amendment process to ban the people as opposed to the Federal Government from doing something was a horrible abuse of the process. And I thought the other drug related comments were silly...That is not how the constitution works. When our predecessors wanted to make alcohol illegal they, rightfully so, amended the constitution.
No, it is not in any significant way. I have personally dealt with this issue for years. Sure, one can use the cheaper MRI places, get prices on routine treatments, but for the most part, most folks do not know what is wrong until they get there, then their doctor prescribes the care needed.Sure there is, I know several people that always shop around before a potential medical procedure. it just requires effort. The system has already begun to make that change, a lot of providers, especially in mental health, either no longer bill insurance or only partially bill insurance.