• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Abolish the Senate.

MrWonka said:
View attachment 67341848

  • 80% of states receive more in federal funding than they contribute.
  • Of the states which receive more than they contribute 70% of them are Republican.
  • Of the states which contribute more than they receive, 80% are Democratic.
  • Kentucky, home of Mitch McConnell receives almost 2 1/2 times more money from the government than its citizens pay in.

Red States are using the bullshit set up of the U.S. Senate to flat out steal from liberals. Without liberals, the roads, bridges, and tunnels of Republican states would crumble.
Hell, most of the South still wouldn't have indoor plumbing or electricity if FDR didn't create the TVA to do it for them.
If the people of California, New York, New Jersey, Mass, Conn, and Illinois are the ones paying most of the taxes they do not deserve to have some piece of shit from Kentucky taking it all for his shithole state.
Click to expand...
Really? I'm telling you right now, Illinois taxes the **** out of its citizens in every way possible and the roads and infrastructure still suck.

All giving more money Democrat states will do is give them more of a slush fund to spend on cronies that will waste it. The Chicago political machine doesn't need a bigger slush fund, the one they have is gigantic.
 
SarahSun said:
I agree. Politicians take money from people who earn, give it to those who dont, then brag about helping people. Its the people whose money was taken who did the helping.
Click to expand...
Wrong, because the people who earn A.) didn't voluntarily give that money away, and B.) were only able to earn it because our society let them in the first place.
 
SarahSun said:
Its not directly in the constitution so its only a constitutional right unless the SC says it isnt. Why have it even get that far?
Click to expand...
Nothing is directly in the constitution if the Supreme Court doesn't say it is. Every single solitary word of it can be re-interpreted however lunatic judges would like it to be.
The federal government exists because it's generally harder for lunatics to get control of a large country than it is for them to get control over states. The Senate gives way too much power to tiny states with nobody living in them. They are easily overrun by lunatics.
The safest way to protect the constitution is to eliminate or radically modify the Senate entirely.
 
MrWonka said:
View attachment 67341848

  • 80% of states receive more in federal funding than they contribute.
  • Of the states which receive more than they contribute 70% of them are Republican.
  • Of the states which contribute more than they receive, 80% are Democratic.
  • Kentucky, home of Mitch McConnell receives almost 2 1/2 times more money from the government than its citizens pay in.

Red States are using the bullshit set up of the U.S. Senate to flat out steal from liberals. Without liberals, the roads, bridges, and tunnels of Republican states would crumble.
Hell, most of the South still wouldn't have indoor plumbing or electricity if FDR didn't create the TVA to do it for them.
If the people of California, New York, New Jersey, Mass, Conn, and Illinois are the ones paying most of the taxes they do not deserve to have some piece of shit from Kentucky taking it all for his shithole state.
Click to expand...
Well gee, California and New York are big producers and have been for decades - how much is due to enlightened Democratic leader ship and how much is in spite of it is up for debate.
 
CLAX1911 said:
I haven't looked at amendments beyond the 14th
Click to expand...
Well, that one shouldn't be repealed, but should be amended.
Those born in the U.S., as well as any other country, to parents neither of whom are citizens of the country where the birth occurs should have their births registered with the embassy of the country which the Mother is a citizen and/or the country which the Father is a citizen.
A child born to a Woman/Couple who have legally entered the U.S. and later become citizens, once reaching the age of 18 should be allowed the choice of then becoming a U.S. citizen and issued a Social Security number if they desire. But that's another topic for discussion.
 
it's just me said:
That still doesn't explain why people are leaving in droves. If it's so great there why do they leave?
Click to expand...
If you actually wonder, traditionally many people come to CA for the economic opportunity (i.e., to make their money), then often cashed out at retirement to live as relative nobility in less economically advanced states. The pandemic accelerated a recent trend, which is to be employed by the economic superpowers of CA with most of the same career benefits one would get by living there, but while not actually living there (thanks Zoom). Accordingly, many who previously felt that they had to live in CA to get a CA salary and CA career opportunities can now get about the same advantages while living in a far less expensive state -- hence many departures. In short, to some significant extent the pandemic has decoupled the need to live in CA from the opportunity to benefit from CA's hyper-advanced businesses and industries. When that sort of decoupling occurs, there will obviously be some shuffling, and, specifically, geographic shuffling *away* from the expensive place you previously had to physically inhabit in order to be part of the economic party.
 
MrWonka said:
View attachment 67341848

  • 80% of states receive more in federal funding than they contribute.
  • Of the states which receive more than they contribute 70% of them are Republican.
  • Of the states which contribute more than they receive, 80% are Democratic.
  • Kentucky, home of Mitch McConnell receives almost 2 1/2 times more money from the government than its citizens pay in.

Red States are using the bullshit set up of the U.S. Senate to flat out steal from liberals. Without liberals, the roads, bridges, and tunnels of Republican states would crumble.
Hell, most of the South still wouldn't have indoor plumbing or electricity if FDR didn't create the TVA to do it for them.
If the people of California, New York, New Jersey, Mass, Conn, and Illinois are the ones paying most of the taxes they do not deserve to have some piece of shit from Kentucky taking it all for his shithole state.
Click to expand...
Maybe a better solution would be to break up the country
 
highroller said:
Ah yes, the balkanization of the United States. A true fetish of the right wing.
Click to expand...
What do you find wrong with the idea? I mean if you’re willing to abolish the Senate and that’s destroy the most important part of the compact the states made with each other, why not just use that as a chance for the states to decide whether or not they want to be part of the union?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
What do you find wrong with the idea?
Click to expand...
I don’t really see any wrong with the idea per say, but I have recognized a pattern of fetishizing balkanization since the 80s in the American Right. Maybe earlier but I’m too young.
 
highroller said:
I don’t really see any wrong with the idea per say, but I have recognized a pattern of fetishizing balkanization since the 80s in the American Right. Maybe earlier but I’m too young.
Click to expand...
The idea of splitting the United States is not an idea used by people to get sexually aroused. So you’re very juvenile use of the word fetishization reveals more about your mind than other peoples.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The idea of splitting the United States is not an idea used by people to get sexually aroused. So you’re very juvenile use of the word fetishization reveals more about your mind than other peoples.
Click to expand...
sex has nothing to do with it.

Fetishize - have an excessive and irrational commitment to or obsession with (something).
 
highroller said:
sex has nothing to do with it.

Fetishize - have an excessive and irrational commitment to or obsession with (something).
Click to expand...

That’s not the common definition
 
EMNofSeattle said:
That’s not the common definition
Click to expand...
It’s litterally one of the main definitions you get on Google. How is it not the common definition?

It’s also higher in the dictionary than your definition if we are ranking them.

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of FETISH

an object (such as a small stone carving of an animal) believed to have magical power to protect or aid its owner; broadly : a material object regarded with superstitious or extravagant trust or reverence… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com www.merriam-webster.com
 
Why not abolish both the Legislative and Executive branches of the Federal government and require National laws be passed by 34 of the 50 States.
 
Perhaps California and NY should hand back those generous Covid relief grants.

And their residents hand back those stimulus checks?
 
RetiredUSN said:
Perhaps California and NY should hand back those generous Covid relief grants.

And their residents hand back those stimulus checks?
Click to expand...
How about they just withhold the tax money they pay in ,
at least with them getting some of that money back in the form of Covid relief grants and stimulus checks the are getting a little back instead of paying in and paying in and not getting even near what they pay in back .
Have a nice night
 
CLAX1911 said:
You don't have to drink direct democracy already exists in other countries and just move there. If you want that here this clearly isn't the country for you considering it is a constitutional republic.
Click to expand...
How does one just move to another country? So if a mexican dude doesn't like mexico, should he just move to the US?
 
Why the half measure? It is clearly the goal of the corporate fascists to eliminate all democracy and eliminate what little is left of the Constitution and Bill Of Rights.
 
VanceMack said:
Most of the rat party voters recieve more in EIC than they pay in taxes....maybe we should remove their right to vote until they are economically viable.
Click to expand...
You'll need a source for that fat one.

The EIC would actually be a good topic to use CRT to assess. The tax code was written with no mention of race. Created in 1997 as a source of relief, in 2020 3/4 of white and Asian children are eligible for benefits while only about 1/2 of bipoc children are...
 
The Senate can stay. But deep six the filibuster, which is a Jim Crow relic.

No other parliament on the planet has such a minoritarian and anti-democratic maneuver available.
 
mrjurrs said:
You'll need a source for that fat one.

The EIC would actually be a good topic to use CRT to assess. The tax code was written with no mention of race. Created in 1997 as a source of relief, in 2020 3/4 of white and Asian children are eligible for benefits while only about 1/2 of bipoc children are...
Click to expand...
SHOULD the tax code be written with an emphasis on race???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom