That's a good point. So much time, too much time, is spent campaigning by every politician nowadays. A term limit that's not too short, not too long, might solve all three problems.
The Olive Branch -
- Thread starter WeToddDid2
- Start date
The apparent polarization in the US on many issues is a problem, although I can't tell if this forum is the least bit reflective of fairly normal Americans and how they think. Addressing real topics in relation to so called "liberals", "democrats", "republicans", or other categories ( like skin colour ) seems rather absurd and artificial on here at times.
I find if I express an opinion on here there are at least 5 guys immediately trying to slot me into a category or two. I don't fit most of them ( not American, not democrat, not republican, not a "liberal" per say, not even sure what that general term is supposed to mean ). Seems to confuse them that I don't slot into categories they can slam, so they even try for criticizing Canadians as a group.
Might just be this forum has a dozen or two really weird people posting a lot. But I'm guessing from afar that at least some of this polarizing thinking has some base in mainstream America. Note you already have some joker taking about "libtards" like that is something real. Kind of a combination mentally retarded / liberal hybrid label ?
Well said, you're right, this board is inhabited by weirdos (sure, include me). But the country's polarization is real, among those who think about policy, anyway. Our polarization is class warfare, a bit disguised, but very real, and it breaks down along ancient lines: boss vs. worker, owner vs. laborer, privileged vs. disadvantaged, leisure class vs. compelled class. This just gets worse as the middle class shrinks (or at least while the "1%" continues to pull away and gets into governing government). Our best days were when the middle class was big and strong.
Edit: ("Libtard" is a conjunction of libertarian and retard.)
I'm assuming you mean Canada.
No, I mean the USA. Though some may disagree on certain social issues during those days...
Assuming you mean the 50s and 60s, I doubt there are many non-white, non-Christian individuals who'd consider these to be the "best days".
Without looking for data, my suspicion is that our minorities, thanks to the higher rate of unionization back then, and their membership therein, benefited more from the economy then than they do today. Yes, there were social "issues".
There aren't a lot of white, Christian individuals who consider these to be the "best days" either.
Yes, and much of that boils down to one institution (which you defend to the death btw)...i.e. The Fed.
How much more "inequality" has been created in the last 7 years with zero interest rate policy, soaring food prices, soaring rent prices and stagnant wages? Meanwhile, you are too busy lapping up all that Paul Krugman has to say about the wonders of this monetary policy, but then have the temerity to say that all of these political problems are caused by "inequality".
Priceless.
Depends in large part on whether or not minorities, particularly blacks, were allowed to join.
Even so, not being able to use white water fountains, white restrooms, white restaurants, white movie theatres, etc, was a bummer. And there was the whole illegal racial intermarriage thing. And segregated schools.
So was life "better"? Depends on one's viewpoint.