General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat is our core problem? An invitation for discussion.
What problem should be our main concern? Im truly conflicted, and I've been thinking about this a lot.
We obviously have myriad problems in this country, the list could go on and on, but if you were to put your energies into a real core issue, what would it be?
For me, corporate control of our government, especially legislation, policy and regulation, is one of the root problems. We could tackle climate change and other environment concerns, lack of job creation, an out of control military industrial complex, failure to expand renewable energy, rebuilding our infrastructure, and many other issues if we could kick the lobbyists out of Congress, and the corporate lackeys out of the government.
However, were never going to get the corporations out of government until we take the money out of politics.
We cannot get our current Congress or the SCOTUS to get the money out of politics, in fact, they are making the problem worse on an almost daily basis. Electing one or two or twenty more Democrats wont change this; they are all beholden to big money. Citizens United was the straw that broke our political backs.
So in my thinking, the underlying, core, root problem is overturning Citizens United, which means we need to first define a person in our constitution as a living, breathing human being (without getting wrapped up in a debate about embryos and fetuses).
So should we be directing most, if not all, of our energies at getting a Constitutional amendment that corporations are not people? A very simply worded amendment, I think, would be something even most right wing people would support, or at least not actively oppose. The corporations would howl bloody murder, but thats to be expected. Am I missing an even deeper structural problem?
What do you all think?
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)Getting Citizens United overturned and true finance reform would be the beginnings of a new era in American politics. Simply overturning CU will not do it. We were experiencing ever greater corporate control long before that terrible decision. However, it must be overturned in order to institute real reform. I would remove all private funding from elections. There should be a pool of money distributed equally to all legitimate candidates. Obviously representatives would need less money than senators who would need less money than the presidential candidates. Primaries could be covered under a separate fund perhaps.
Until such a time as we remove that private money, the country will continue to collapse under the weight of the abuses by those in control.
CanonRay
(14,121 posts)I'd love to remove all private funding from elections, but Congress won't do it, and SCOTUS says that would be unconstitutional. However, if Corporations were not "people" and therefore had no right to free speech, Citizens United in undermined and essentially overturned.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)would end corporate control of government you are ignoring the past 50+ years of our political process. It will take a constitutional amendment to overturn CU and another to institute public funding. In fact, we could ignore CU and simply push for a constitutional amendment to make election finance a matter of public funding.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)as such, til 100% of all people are treated as equals
in 100% of the country, and the southern division strategy envoked by George Wallace, Richard Nixon,
Ron and Rand Paul, David Duke and the John Birch Society is forever no more.
also, to stop the isolationism from creeping back in.
that and to rid the streets 100% of all individuals from having guns/bullets, with only exception being
ON-DUTY law enforcement.
It is a sin that in 70 years, nothing has changed in Sanford Florida.
From the time a mob came after Mr. Jackie Robinson, to Mr. Trayvon Martin being killed in cold blood.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)In France, Greece, Spain, Turkey and other countries, they vote and get out in the streets when they need to. Here, half the voters or more can't be bothered to even VOTE, much less do anything more.
If our voters were engaged enough and informed, all the problems would eventually be cured. They would realize the need for the appropriate measures and demand action, like a anti-Citizens United constitutional amendment, campaign finance reform, etc etc.
demosincebirth
(12,545 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)I wrestle with both all the time.
Here's a mind-fuck:
Which nation is leading the world by example to a potential Green future?
Which two nations give the world the most heartburn with their aggressive militaries and racism?
libodem
(19,288 posts)Monopolies not unions.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)More democracy.
We have a democratic republic. We democratically elect people to sit in a republic organization which leads our government.
There is now one just House Representative for every 700,000 people.
That is what is wrong.
Freddie
(9,275 posts)I doubt if the Constitution was intended to perpetuate the tyranny of the minority we have today, between the outsize influence of unpopulated states in the Senate, and the lack of true representation in the House, subject to gerrymandering. The artificial limit of 435 in the House--set during Prohibition to limit the influence of Eastern states--means that some people (low population areas) are better represented than others. I've read several places that a large problem for the Democratic Party is that we tend to be concentrated in urban areas. Why is that a problem? Isn't this country one person, one vote? Instead of keeping Congress small, the Wyoming Rule (1 Congressperson for every # of people equal to the size of the least populated state, currently Wyoming) or a modified version needs to be adopted.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Why others don't get behind this and fight for more representation befuddles me. It is so simple. I've been saying it for years and some people find every reason to deny the fact that in a representative democracy, less is better.
The cure for an ill democracy is more democracy. More people making decisions is always better than less people making decisions. Put another way: Two heads are better than one.
1-Old-Man
(2,667 posts)I believe that would take us up to a bit over 700 Representatives and eliminating the Gerrymandering might go a good ways toward those Representatives actually being representative of their constituency.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Last edited Sun Jun 2, 2013, 02:31 PM - Edit history (1)
You gave me an idea, old man, let's Keep It Simple Stupid.
Divide in half each congressional district.
That would mean 435 new faces in DC, come 2014.
Exactly what we need
New blood in DC.
Dignitarian
(3 posts)The deepest structural problem is not what has emerged, but what we have lost...
Consider the following
The Social Gospel
Then-
"Yet when years have rolled past and when the blazing light of truth is focused on this marvellous age in which we live - men and women will know and children will be taught that we have a finer land, a better people, a more noble civilization - because these humble children of God were willing to suffer for righteousness' sake." MLK
Today-
Martin Luther King Jr. was a fraud! According to his own statements, "Reverend King" denied the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection, and the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Martin Luther King Jr. is burning in the flames of Hellfire this moment, because he died in his sins without Jesus Christ. 2nd Thessalonians 1:8 warns: "In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."
King preached a false social gospel which was not based upon the Truths of God's Word; but rather, upon a Communist social agenda that was employed to bring about the moral destruction of America (i.e., abortion rights, homosexual rights, et cetera). Evidence of this is the fact that King's widow, Coretta Scott King, spent the remainder of her life campaigning for homosexual rights. King may have had "a dream"; but he certainly didn't have God. -Crazy Baptist
Government
Then-
In our personal ambitions we are individualists. But in our seeking for economic and political progress as a nation, we all go up or else all go down as one people. FDR
Today-
Well first of all, tell me, is there some society you know of that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? Milton Friedman
Rights
Then-
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." Eisenhower- Supreme Commander of Allied Force
Today-
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
Ronald Reagan- Professional Actor
Laelth
(32,017 posts)That's the best explanation I have for the current insanity we're seeing from the right.
We ignore the wailing and gnashing of teeth to our peril. What to do about this problem, I have no clue. We certainly can't go back in time, nor am I suggesting that it would be wise to do so.
-Laelth
randome
(34,845 posts)It would not take long to have reaped the benefits of more cash in Treasury coffers, which could then be used to fund infrastructure, education, climate change adjustments, etc.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
bhikkhu
(10,725 posts)You have to read it carefully, but the largest tax break is the one that allows employers to offer health insurance as a benefit before taxes. Otherwise it would be considered part of your compensation package, as taxable income.
The next largest ones are those allowing a company to contribute to your retirement or pension plan, again without it being considered taxable compensation. Then there is the mortgage interest deduction that seems to be generally popular and beneficial, especially to the middle class.
Then there is the deduction for state and local taxes paid, so that you don't have to pay taxes on money that you used to pay taxes with.
Then there are the tax credits for earned income and children. And for charitable contributions...these are all the largest tax breaks.
Looking at the big picture, capitalism inherently redistributes income from the whole to the few; government has to balance that, largely through the tax code. Our tax code isn't progressive enough, and most of the deductions and subsidies are there to make it more progressive.
Monkeying with the tax structure is a good idea, but its very easy to screw things up worse, or to make blanket recommendations that result in bad outcomes. The libertarian idea of a flat tax is absolutely the worst, but it often starts with an argument like you made above.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Everything follows from there -- rightwing "mainstream" media, corrupt elections, perpetual war on behalf of U.S. business, environmental degradation, for-profit healthcare, unaffordable education, crumbling infrastructure, and on and on.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)and that's completely understandable. But over time we have allowed our natural preference to overwhelm good sense.
We can look at any time in our national history and find as many examples of this we want.
What's the first rule in solving any problem? Correctly identifying the problem and its cause.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Without free and fair elections, we will not get any decent change.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)and politicians who have no accountability... what could possibly go wrong?!?
sP
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)nt
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)That's the root cause of many of our problems, everyone thinks they'll be a millionaire just as soon as they win the lottery and they don't want to have to pay their winnings to the goobermint.
spanone
(135,904 posts)Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)Until corruption is addressed:
Elections will continue to be bought
Corporations will remain un-regulated
Torturers will be appointed to head the FBI
Pipelines will continue to be built
The environment will continue to be destroyed
Foods will never be labeled
Wars for profit and health care for profit will continue.
There is no accountability and until there is things only get worse.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)This is the root cause of
- ongoing environmental damage,
- a huge negative trade balance,
- a requirement for superpower military force to protect economic hegemony, and
- the exhaustion of natural resources which will cause economic collapse sooner than otherwise.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)is of the people demanding, en mass, that politics reform the economic inequality fomented by said plutonomists. This is why Occupy is attacked so systematically.
http://our99angrypercent.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/download-citigroup-plutonomy-memos/
That answer implies that the problem is selfishness (and the fear it promotes).
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Wealthy private interests control both the media and the government. This makes changing things substantially more difficult. It cannot be accomplished through the existing system.
Can't. Cannot. It is impossible.
"So should we be directing most, if not all, of our energies at getting a Constitutional amendment that corporations are not people? A very simply worded amendment, I think, would be something even most right wing people would support, or at least not actively oppose. The corporations would howl bloody murder, but thats to be expected. Am I missing an even deeper structural problem?"
Amendments may be proposed by either:
two-thirds of both houses of the United States Congress; or
by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the states.
To become part of the Constitution, amendments must then be ratified either by approval of:
the legislatures of three-fourths of the states; or
state ratifying conventions held in three-fourths of the states.
Congress has discretion as to which method of ratification should be used.
A government and media that is owned by wealthy private interests is never going to allow a constitutional amendment removing the power from their owners.
The only solution is world revolution.
bhikkhu
(10,725 posts)where within structurally very similar economies you have, for instance,
Which shows that in the US, wealth concentrates on the top, where it does few any good, while in Sweden (for instance; most european countries are good examples) wealth is more evenly distributed. Everyone benefits to some extent.
One big factor is tax policies, which are more progressive in most developed countries. Capitalism is an economic structure that redistributes wealth from the whole to the few. Government is a balancing mechanism. Tax policies are necessarily progressive, and ours aren't sufficiently so. The rise in taxes on the wealthy and capital gains last year was an excellent measure, but more is needed.
As far as "what can I do", there are also corporations that are better than others. Some pay their employees fairly in comparison the their management, others don't. If you patronize those that favor income equity, you are voting with your wallet in a very powerful way. If you don't buy from those that treat their workers badly, and that lobby against tax and wage reforms, then you are voting loudly for improvement and change.
If you doubt that corporations are concerned with sales and profits and their reputations, then you don't know much about corporations!
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)The essential dysfunction of the American government is the result of one thing, pretty much: the overly powerful Senate, and the fact that states which collectively represent some twenty percent of the population have the representation in the Senate to block legislation they don't like. The American system of government is fundamentally broken.
tblue
(16,350 posts)Bill Moyers, in a talk he gave in Cupertino, said that's our #1 problem, the root of all others. Solve that, and we can start moving forward again. Until then, we are at the mercy of the PTB. He said we may not see real campaign finance reform in our lifetime, but it's our duty to work toward that goal, just as abolitionists worked for their goal even though it was decades away from being reached and never guaranteed.
airplaneman
(1,240 posts)Repeal citizens united.
Massive antitrust breakup of all large corporations.
-Airplane
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Which leads to the "Father Knows Best" sort of apathy and non-participation in a democracy.