
Gridlocked Out - isb
http://www.nationaljournal.com/features/restoration-calls/young-innovative-and-gridlocked-out-20120315
======
crusso
Congress has no incentives to work better since voters don't hold them
accountable for bad governing. That's because voters aren't held directly
accountable for casting votes for politicians who govern badly.

The whole system seems more likely to collapse than it is to fix itself.

The less power these children have, the better. That's why my first principle
is "more individual liberty, less government". Liberty has its problems too,
but having these know-nothing masterminds control us is just not the answer.

I know that my "less government" rant doesn't resolve the immigration issue
directly. But maybe if those DC clowns had less to worry about, they could
deal with the few issues (like immigration) that the Constitution enumerates
as their powers. Certainly if they did less we could monitor their progress
more closely.

~~~
dfc
_"That's because voters aren't held directly accountable for casting votes for
politicians who govern badly."_

The above seems more like an argument against democarcy than an argument for
"smaller government." More over if we found ourselves under your "smaller
government" how will that solve the problem that voters are not held
accountable for "votes for politicians who govern badly"?

~~~
crusso
It's an argument against allowing democracy to engulf too many aspects of our
lives, especially when it comes to the "one size fits all" democracy of the
Federal government.

Why should voters in Wisconsin get a say in what chemical substances I put
into my body where I live? They shouldn't. It's unnecessary and just opens our
government up to all sorts of abuses of the system.

So many things in our lives should be left to us, not decided upon by
politicians in DC who were put there by voters in other states who are
completely ignorant of our lives and circumstances.

~~~
uiri
The problem is: Where do you draw the line? How do you determine what should
be left to us as individuals and what should be decided via the force of
majority-rules democracy? Potentially everything could be left to the free
market so there is no line to draw which wouldn't be to some extent,
arbitrary. We could argue that the majority can decide what the limits of the
government could be, but that would be government deciding its own limits. Not
the best idea if you want a small government.

~~~
crusso
The US Constitution had some great lines drawn and it required much more than
just majority rule whims to change it. Unfortunately, it's been butchered by
politicians and the courts and that butchering has effectively become law
through practice and precedent. The US Constitution had a good run, but it's
fairly ineffective now.

If you're just asking a philosophical question about where to draw the line --
Libertarians have put a great deal of thought into this matter. The non-
aggression principle (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle>)
may not work in absolute terms, but it would be nice to move toward it to
battle the continual feature creep of the federal government.

Societies, governments, and businesses have life cycles. America had a great
start with the idea of Liberty being central to everything (except the ironic
scourge of slavery). That notion of Liberty attracted people all over the
world who helped turn the US into the super power that it was. Over time,
though, the success and ends that Liberty created became more powerful than
the core message of Liberty itself.

Now here we are. The Takers have infected our society to such a degree that
all of our societal "safety nets" are headed for near-inevitable bankruptcy.
Unless people wake up pretty soon and realize that we have to act responsibly,
we're pretty much doomed to suffer a great amount of financial upheaval in the
next 25 years. With the new season of Dancing With the Stars underway, though,
I doubt anyone will have time to worry much about Liberty.

------
jefe78
I have to wonder; what makes a lot of these people qualified to do this sort
of thing? I'm not saying it isn't a noble goal, but do they have any
experience in behavioral pharmacology or classroom education? And yet they're
dictating what should and shouldn't be scored? I cringed a little when I read
they would be ranking various criteria, such as 'teamwork'.

And after all the articles on introverts on here, lately.

~~~
jefe78
Psychology _

------
isb
For people not following the immigration bill that is being discussed in this
article, it eliminates archaic per-country limits on issuance of green cards.

It has been incredibly frustrating to see such a common sense "fix" - which is
supported by a majority in both parties and the industry - get stuck due to
pure politics. I guess the lesson here is that it is the Senate rules that
really need to be reformed.

~~~
dfc
It is quite a stretch to take a perceived solution to an alleged problem with
one issue and generalize it to apply to all senate activities.

What would you change?

------
dfc
Wow, has anyone ever seen coralcdn give a 403 error?

[http://www.nationaljournal.com.nyud.net/features/restoration...](http://www.nationaljournal.com.nyud.net/features/restoration-
calls/young-innovative-and-gridlocked-out-20120315)

The mobile site is timing out for me.

------
astrofinch
"We want those brains in our country"

This seems like an awfully nationalist perspective. (Can we start using
nationalist as a derogatory term like racist or sexist?)

If the United States really has the best universities, I have a hard time
imagining a better use for them than spraying highly educated people all over
the world.

Of course, startups are a somewhat different issue...

~~~
dfc
Why would we start making up new definitions for words. How about jingoism?

