I’m still flabbergasted that government shutdown is a thing in the US. Basically holding the whole country hostage, or at least the part that is most likely to vote against you (at least when Reps do the shutdown). Just like that.
There are two factors that make these shutdowns uniquely American:
First of all, the responsibility to run government agencies rests with the President, while the responsibility over the budget is held by Congress (subject to a Presidential veto). And those are separate branches, with separate governance, even when the same party controls them. In most other countries, the legislative and executive branches are run by the same people, and an inability to appropriate funds to executive agencies is seen as such an obvious failure that it can prompt a no-confidence vote in the government. Here, we see that as a negotiating tactic. Even when new departments and functions are created, they get to negotiate whether that new thing is “subject to yearly appropriations” or is funded automatically.
But the second factor is the anti-deficiency act, which speficially prevents Federal agencies from spending money that has not been appropriated. While that law has been on the books since 1884, it was last revised in the early 80s, and it was around that time where the Reagan administration decided that these agencies needed to shut down in the absence of appropriations. Before then, the agencies would keep functioning (and, more importantly, paying their employees), and run a deficit while the matter was sorted out.
Basically, Republicans who thought government was too big in the 80s specifically manufactured this process, putting up roadblocks in the way of spending government funds, because our system lets them do it. (No politician loses their job when it happens.) They can now pass budgets full of things they never intend to actually fund, and then hold up appropriations while still getting “credit” for passing the budget in the first place.
I kinda wish we had a system where we could just declare the government a failure, and kick out the lot in favor of a new one. There are other things I dislike about parliamentary systems, but that’s good.
Didn’t Belgium go for almost 3 years without a government a while back? Meanwhile France is on their 5th prime minister in 2 years. I think the issue is that Democracy is entirely incompatible with capitalism.
I really dislike voting for parties rather than individuals. I realize parties are inevitable, but I hate them. I want to elect an individual who I trust to fight hard for the things I want and to have the wisdom to make compromises—even painful ones—to achieve a greater good.
Like with Obama, I trust that he had to make some difficult choices and did the best he could, even when I vehemently disagreed with some of them. Literally the only President in my lifetime I feel that way about, and the party would never have made him President. Or PM, I suppose it would be.
I’m not saying the benefits of parliamentary systems wouldn’t outweigh the harms, but they definitely aren’t perfect.
I thought they elected a party and the party chooses who leads it? Have to be honest I don’t follow foreign politics as well as I should. But the same thing applies at a local level. I want to vote for individual representatives and senators. At whatever level I don’t want a bunch of out of touch rich folks deciding who best represents my individual interests.
You’re right. I had some fundamental misunderstandings of the system. My apologies. I’ll go rethink things. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.
We are hostages even when the government is working. Unless you are born into a privileged family or enough of a cunt/psychopath to live the greedy American dream lifestyle. Crabs in a bucket they figuratively rape lives to get the American dream.
They feed us psychologically marketed lifestyles and escapism to keep people guided on a path they can keep control of. Most people barely know the full spectrum of what it actually means to be a living human being here. They are more like farm animals.
I’m still flabbergasted that government shutdown is a thing in the US. Basically holding the whole country hostage, or at least the part that is most likely to vote against you (at least when Reps do the shutdown). Just like that.
There are two factors that make these shutdowns uniquely American:
First of all, the responsibility to run government agencies rests with the President, while the responsibility over the budget is held by Congress (subject to a Presidential veto). And those are separate branches, with separate governance, even when the same party controls them. In most other countries, the legislative and executive branches are run by the same people, and an inability to appropriate funds to executive agencies is seen as such an obvious failure that it can prompt a no-confidence vote in the government. Here, we see that as a negotiating tactic. Even when new departments and functions are created, they get to negotiate whether that new thing is “subject to yearly appropriations” or is funded automatically.
But the second factor is the anti-deficiency act, which speficially prevents Federal agencies from spending money that has not been appropriated. While that law has been on the books since 1884, it was last revised in the early 80s, and it was around that time where the Reagan administration decided that these agencies needed to shut down in the absence of appropriations. Before then, the agencies would keep functioning (and, more importantly, paying their employees), and run a deficit while the matter was sorted out.
Basically, Republicans who thought government was too big in the 80s specifically manufactured this process, putting up roadblocks in the way of spending government funds, because our system lets them do it. (No politician loses their job when it happens.) They can now pass budgets full of things they never intend to actually fund, and then hold up appropriations while still getting “credit” for passing the budget in the first place.
Reagan really fucked some shit up, hey?
I kinda wish we had a system where we could just declare the government a failure, and kick out the lot in favor of a new one. There are other things I dislike about parliamentary systems, but that’s good.
Parliamentary system seems superior in every single way to what we have here.
Didn’t Belgium go for almost 3 years without a government a while back? Meanwhile France is on their 5th prime minister in 2 years. I think the issue is that Democracy is entirely incompatible with capitalism.
I never said it was perfect, but it is better if only for the fact that it allows for more than two parties.
I really dislike voting for parties rather than individuals. I realize parties are inevitable, but I hate them. I want to elect an individual who I trust to fight hard for the things I want and to have the wisdom to make compromises—even painful ones—to achieve a greater good.
Like with Obama, I trust that he had to make some difficult choices and did the best he could, even when I vehemently disagreed with some of them. Literally the only President in my lifetime I feel that way about, and the party would never have made him President. Or PM, I suppose it would be.
I’m not saying the benefits of parliamentary systems wouldn’t outweigh the harms, but they definitely aren’t perfect.
At least parliamentary system allows for more than two parties.
Also, people do directly vote for their MPs in most systems.
I thought they elected a party and the party chooses who leads it? Have to be honest I don’t follow foreign politics as well as I should. But the same thing applies at a local level. I want to vote for individual representatives and senators. At whatever level I don’t want a bunch of out of touch rich folks deciding who best represents my individual interests.
You should refresh your memory on what a parliamentary system actually is…
You’re right. I had some fundamental misunderstandings of the system. My apologies. I’ll go rethink things. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.
No worries… No system is perfect, but I personally think there are a lot of benefits to it over what we currently have in the US.
Even though most countries (that I know of) have a similar personality cult, the head guy has never as much power as POTUS.
We are hostages even when the government is working. Unless you are born into a privileged family or enough of a cunt/psychopath to live the greedy American dream lifestyle. Crabs in a bucket they figuratively rape lives to get the American dream.
They feed us psychologically marketed lifestyles and escapism to keep people guided on a path they can keep control of. Most people barely know the full spectrum of what it actually means to be a living human being here. They are more like farm animals.