Russia Just Invaded Ukraine

[Sighisoara]

Endless taxes and giving taxpayer money to foreign countries isn't in the constitution either, yet Democrats love them both of those things.

Um, it kind of is, too. Also, I hate to break it to you, but Democrats don’t have the market cornered on spending money other people’s money like drunken sailors.

[Tgo01]

Um, it kind of is, too.

No.

[Gelston]

No.

Can’t blame democrats for that. Both parties do.

[Sighisoara]

Article 1, I think it’s section 8; fuck, i’ll have to look it up.

ETA: Yep, section 8, first power regarding the taxes, commerce with foreign nations is a little lower.

[Tgo01]

Can’t blame democrats for that. Both parties do.

I can and I will.

rabble rabble!

[Suppressed Poet]

I personally don't think abortion would be codified by legislation at their federal level, but it's a great example. Every six years we elect senators, so let's say that the right confluence of events happens to give a party control of Congress and the Whitehouse and they were to make abortions illegal federally. The immediate impact would be felt nationwide and the benefits or ramifications would be felt. As a result, the party responsible for the changes will have a tighter grip on power or would be replaced.

As it stands now, compromise legislation has become increasingly impossible outside of reconciliation. Why? 60 senators have to not only agree, but overcome punishment by their party for breaking party ranks. The last time this happened on a truly monumental piece of legislation was the Affordable Care Act which passed with 60 votes and politicians have been threatening to roll it back for a decade, but haven't. Why? Because it's had such significant benefits to state's that Republicans won't touch it.

Progress or regression is subjective to the beholder, but without experiencing the things that our Congress has been asking for, the American public don't get to make an informed decision on the success of change.

On your first point of eliminating the filibuster would indeed allow for a high probability of drastic legislative and policy changes, the public would feel those immediate ramifications, and a likely result would be each party would be more accountable to the voting public and more carefully consider their positions…. I see your point and actually agree with you on those things happening if the filibuster ended. I am not, however, willing to be subjected to those radically different changes instituted by each party. Each party would each absolutely make sweeping changes when they gained power until they learned to play the long game, and that would be a painful experience for you & I (mass American public) both.

I don’t discount that we’re essentially a less effective / efficient federal government as a result of having the filibuster. I accept that inefficiency because quite frankly our federal government fucks things up ALL the time. Why do they deserve more power given our history?

If we boil down our fundamental political differences…. You are liberal or left leaning in the traditional American definition of that word because you believe the federal government is an instrument for solving many of the problems we face today. I’m conservative or right leaning in the American definition of that word because I believe the federal government should be small / mostly limited to foreign policy / defense / etc. and that decentralized local government & communities are a better instrument to solving many of the problems we face today. I’m not going to change you, you won’t change me…but I think there is still a lot that both sides can find middle ground on.

[Tgo01]

ETA: Yep, section 8, first power regarding the taxes, commerce with foreign nations is a little lower.

It says the federal government has the power to collect taxes and lists some reasons for why those taxes may be needed, it doesn't say the federal government can just tax the shit out of everything to pay for each and every one of their little pet projects.

Just like the constitution clearly states that each house of Congress can make their own rules, yet when the Senate does just that Seran throws a bitch fit and says "But the constitution doesn't specifically mention a filibuster!!"

[Seran]

So what do you think is the point of a bicameral legislature, dumbass?

I'm sorry who are you?

[Seran]

On your first point of eliminating the filibuster would indeed allow for a high probability of drastic legislative and policy changes, the public would feel those immediate ramifications, and a likely result would be each party would be more accountable to the voting public and more carefully consider their positions…. I see your point and actually agree with you on those things happening if the filibuster ended. I am not, however, willing to be subjected to those radically different changes instituted by each party. Each party would each absolutely make sweeping changes when they gained power until they learned to play the long game, and that would be a painful experience for you & I (mass American public) both.

I don’t discount that we’re essentially a less effective / efficient federal government as a result of having the filibuster. I accept that inefficiency because quite frankly our federal government fucks things up ALL the time. Why do they deserve more power given our history?

If we boil down our fundamental political differences…. You are liberal or left leaning in the traditional American definition of that word because you believe the federal government is an instrument for solving many of the problems we face today. I’m conservative or right leaning in the American definition of that word because I believe the federal government should be small / mostly limited to foreign policy / defense / etc. and that decentralized local government & communities are a better instrument to solving many of the problems we face today. I’m not going to change you, you won’t change me…but I think there is still a lot that both sides can find middle ground on.

I don't think either set of voters would disagree with more accountability from their elected officials, whether it's through holding them accountable for campaign promises or shortening the Senate term limit to something closer to 4 years. But honestly with as fucked up as the polarization of the country right now, some legitimate bipartisanship is needed. Three Republicans breaking ranks to vote for soon to be Justice Brown was a good start. Real rest will be how things shift if Republicans actually get either or both houses. I'm willing to bet we'll see a government shutdown before 2024.

[Bryce]

In my opinion we should have a flat sales tax to make it fair to everyone’s. The only legal tax is sales tax and property tax. I am fine with a corporate tax as well. This is my problem with taxes

City, State, County Property tax
City state county Sales tax
State and federal Income tax
Payroll tax
Gift tax
Fuel tax
iExcise tax in the United States
Short term capital gains tax
Long term capital gains tax

The list is fucking never ending and I am sure I forgot a bunch


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk