politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Turns out the federal government is actually pretty efficient. Who would've thought!
Every time there's a World War, a bunch of industries are put under the control of the government in a process called Nationalization, or a "War Economy"...
...this is because it's highly efficient. This is an excellent argument against free market libertarian types. They don't put business in charge of government (like is being done now, eg. Privatization) they put the government in charge of business/industry.
My societal dream is that the government would nationalize industries once they reach the monopoly or oligopoly stage. Like, congratulations Comcast/Verizon, you won the game of capitalism. Now move over and let the government actually provide services to the people at a reasonable cost.
But I know this is just a dream.
Honestly I'd prefer that the government set up government corporations to provide basic needs. The private corporations could still operate but they would control the higher end market. The gov. corps. would just make sure basics were affordable, not high quality.
Need a car? The gov corp car is $15,000 brand new and is basic as hell, but it gets the job done.
Need Internet? The gov corp fiber network is mid range speed and connects to everyone. As a bonus for profit corps and but rights to the dumb pipe fiber network that the gov corp set up and off higher speed at a higher price.
Basic clothes, basic toiletries, basic food, etc. you want designer or high end stuff, get it from the for profit corps. But basic necessities should be made at cost by the government for the citizens. It is the job of the government to care for it's citizens after all.
I mean, the poison is already in your pitch - "private sector gets the high end". What happens when the government fiber turns out to be faster? What happens when the government cheese is actually better? What happens when the government clothes turn out to be higher quality than the shit we wear today?
What is Verizon going to do? Cry to Congress that they need to go out of their way and pay more to artificially slow down gov fiber. Kellogg will cry free healthy food is ruining demand for overprocessed corn syrup products. If they don't kill it in the cradle they're all going to chip away at it, one bit at a time
How about the government produces the basics and the infrastructure, and corporations get fucked? Let small local business take over, and use the infrastructure at cost. Let competition thrive, and we use antitrust like the pro-active protection against oligarchy it was meant to be
I get what you're saying, but government fiber speeds could be capped, products wouldn't be high end, ect.
I am by no means an economist, or an expert in these matters, and I apologize if I was presenting as those I was. I just feel like you should put those kind of ideas out there for others to iterate on.
But there's the root problem - why are you capping the speed at all? Why are you making inferior products?
To leave room for others to make money. That is the taint in the idea... Why do they need to make money if they can't provide a better service than what the government can do at cost? Or lower even, for the essentials
It's looking at it backwards. People don't need to make money - money is the sign that you're providing value to society. If you can't beat out the government, which is presumably focused on the things everyone needs, why does someone deserve money for it?
It's ok if the government becomes the largest food distributor, hopefully that means everyone eats. It's ok if telcos go out of business, so long as people pay less to get online
Companies should be able to challenge the government, but that doesn't mean they should be given special privilege - making money is a sign you're doing something valuable. If you're carving out room for people to make money you're doing it wrong
I have been approaching this from a middle of the ground standpoint. Basically I know that a large enough percentage of Americans would reject this as "evil socialism" so putting caps on the government industry at first would be a Trojan horse to get a footing and get society comfortable with the idea.
Ultimately I would like to see companies have to compete with government offered products and services, but I just don't see it being feasible in our current political climate. Sadly I think it will either take generational change to get it done, or a more kinetic change that would harm the country and take far longer to recover from.
That's the kind of middle ground with fascism the Democratic party is engaging in...
You can make compromises, you can find a middle ground. But that ground has to be stable, it can't be compromised from the get go - that's how you get Obamacare, a payout to insurance companies that has a few positives baked in
If it's compromised from the start, you haven't done anything positive - you've just opened the floor to bastardize it further
I guess I'm just stuck in the 90's mindset of trying to find compromise. I know that idea was on the decline then, but I still, maybe foolishly, hold on to it.
I mean, the 90s are what got us here...
You can't try to meet the opposition halfway, especially not when they're ideologically opposed to your goals. Especially when they're dishonest. Especially when they stretch and exploit the rules to get their way.
Even if their strategy wasn't to rig the system and manipulate the game, they are oppositional on near everything.
It just ends up in you starting the negotiation halfway, before they compromise 75% in their favor, and they might squeeze another bit here and there
The 90s were not a good time politically - it was a civil time. It was also constant pull to the right, we dismantled our social safety nets, we let worker protections get whittled down, we let corporations grow too powerful to reign in. We even removed banking regulations that allowes the 2008 recession, and it all culminated in citizens united.
Our problems now are because of that attitude... Congress used to occasionally erupt into fist fights, and it was better for it. You need the push and pull, or you get the uni party the GOP and Democratic party became - two faces squabbling over social issues as they cooperated to sell out the people
Well in my defense I was a young kid and I was left unattended so I could be indoctrinated by the media to believe cooperation was happening.
I just want to try and find a peaceful way to bring about change, because I fear the only way to make things better will be us having to suffer though a bloody civil war and decades of domestic terrorism from the losers.
Well I mean I can respect that desire, but compromising on our ideals isn't the way there. Look at healthcare - Obama care was a compromise, and then from there we compromised further, crippling the good parts and leaving in the concessions
Where is our free healthcare?
If we had gone single payer or Medicare for all, people would've seen the savings directly. Because it is cheaper, cheaper for individuals and the government too.
That's the thing - the people overwhelmingly want what we're selling, they've just been convinced it wouldn't work. You think they're going to shoot up a nightclub because their medical bills were forgiven? No, they'll let go of the misplaced anger because their life is getting better and they feel less desperate
And as far as a peaceful transition - we need to organize on the left. Farmers, the elderly, the auto unions, veterans... All the top maga groups are being fucked too fast, too hard, and too directly to pull the wool back over their eyes.
People hate musk and Doge. There's been attempts on his life, they're vandalizing Tesla dealerships and vehicles all over, even republican representatives are starting to speak up about it
There's a chance, when everything is crashing and burning, when the federal government is fully in ruin, where we can build something better peacefully. With the world uniting against our leadership and calling us a shit hole, there will be an opportunity
That or we just keep declining more slowly, with less safety and less opportunity...
But civil war? That can only happen if the military fractures in neat halves along the command structure. We're too interconnected - if they stop stocking the grocery stores people aren't going to care nearly as much about which team you're on. There's already schocastic violence, there would just be more.
And ultimately, it's not the left vs the right, it's the billionaires and their corporation against everyone else. Both sides know this, the independents know it, they just call them "the elites" on the right
So what we need isn't compromise, it's to be able to explain simple solutions that most everyone agrees with. And we need to sell it in a million flavors just like the right - we need to be able to win over racists and centrist and each other.
We need to do it by finding simple and concrete next steps we hold in common, not compromising
There is no point in capping fiber speeds. Either that capacity is in use or it isn't. It isn't like water, where a resource is depleted from usage.
Aside from that, I agree with your concept of the government providing all the essentials. Capitalism is great for providing products that suit a person's individuality, but it sucks at ensuring the survival and wellbeing of people.
Ok, now that I've had a bit of sleep (,3rd shifter here) how about the government owns the fiber a sells access to the for profit companies. But there is no monopolies so there is competition and every company is required to offer a basic package that is low cost and has enough bandwidth for the average work from home video meeting. Oh yeah, and no data caps.
After that they can increase prices and offer more services. And if somewhere like farm country isn't being served by any of the for profit companies, then the government corporation could set up an ISP and serve those citizens.
That is local loop unbundling. Anyhow, as I said, no point in capping data speed. Society benefits from faster internet - less congestion, transactions like stocks, purchasing goods, and Zoom meetings are all faster or more reliable. It is a type of infrastructure that benefits civilization, in ways far more beneficial than raw money itself. Time is the most valuable thing for every human, since you can't buy more and it is always depleting. The less time people spend on slow internet, the more they can use it for other things.
Money should not, must not, be the purpose of civilization. That is just enslaving humans to it. We invented it to save time, and shouldn't lose sight of that.
I have been approaching this from a middle of the ground standpoint. Basically I know that a large enough percentage of Americans would reject this as "evil socialism" so putting caps on the government industry at first would be a Trojan horse to get a footing and get society comfortable with the idea.
Ultimately I would like to see companies have to compete with government offered products and services, but I just don't see it being feasible in our current political climate. Sadly I think it will either take generational change to get it done, or a more kinetic change that would harm the country and take far longer to recover from.
Honestly, I don't think the middle path works. At least, not when it comes to major turning points in society. Elon is chainsawing our social security, just to run up his high score. I think people will be ready for a different way, now that the billionaires have been mask off. In my opinion, people prefer clear leadership over something ambiguous. They want to feel confident in their leaders, which is why Trump, despite being evil, took the lead against a deteriorating Biden and a weathervane Harris. Pit him against someone of greater conviction like Bernie or AOC, and I expect they would take the lead of any conversation.
In any case, we will see within 5 years what way the wind blows. Hopefully towards a better place than where we are headed right now.
I honestly don't think even bold leadership would work at this point. Washington has spent so much time brainwashing the public to fear socialism that any bold leader on the left who suggests a plan like that without first kneecapping it would be killed in the polls because someone on the right would scream socialist and enough of the population would turn on them. And no amount of reminding the public about public roads, police, firefighters, libraries, ect. would change their minds. In my option it will take generational change to get past that mindset.
Like they do for snail mail? The government gets an envelope through in one or two days for a dollar or two, the corporations do it in two or four days for ten or fifteen... Because they're high end?
It is the job of the government to care for it's citizens after all.
This is where some people would have a difference of opinion.
While I disagree with those that feel differently, that's what this country is supposed to be about, finding a middle ground in differing opinions. Sadly we seem to have largely lost that mentality.