Setting term limits on our representatives

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: watchitburn

How about you wash your mouth after using such words?
My government can do its job. Yours is stuck in shutdown-mode for the next two years, at least.

You jokers handed your sovereignty over to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats.

Your govt doesn't even control it's own laws anymore.

And Americas sovereignty was handed over to multinational corporations and their lobbyist.

Republic..LOL it's a Corpratacracy headed up by OPEC and the oil cartel.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Its called "democracy", one person = one vote. Thats democracy.

Yep. Also known as "Mob Rule"

Good thing the United States of America is NOT A DEMOCRACY.

It's a Representative Republic. Which is a form of democracy.

It never ceases to amaze me the amount of people who show up here on ATS, some that don't even reside in the US, and try to "school" us on our own form of government........

........only for them to show just how ignorant they really are about how things work here in the US, which is sad really, since all one has to do is open up a book and educate themselves on it if they were willing to.

People here just don't seem to get how big the US is. How large it's population is. How diverse our culture within our own borders is. We don't all live in the mega cities of New York, LA, Chicago, Miami, etc, etc, etc.

originally posted by: new_here
a reply to: AmazonChitlin

When a group of people get to decide on their own salary, benefits, retirement, (lack of) term limits, it really makes it hard for those of us they supposedly work for, to change ANY of that.

Take lobbying for example. It's a very lucrative setup for those in congress. But it is nothing short of legalized bribery. "I give you this much if you vote how I want you to." It's clearly ripe for abuse, we can all see it, but we can do absolutely nothing about it, except complain to each other. The only people who can change the rules are the ones who benefit from them, so...

And sure, I know the whole "just vote them out of office" argument. Right. Because that has fixed things. /s

Somehow, the decisions on their salaries, benefits, retirement, term limits, lobbyists, etc. needs to be decided by a group that does not benefit from those decisions. Any ideas???

That's just about where I'm at with it, and I don't see any way to realistically work towards changing that. There has to be a way...maybe through the Supreme Court?

originally posted by: a325nt
a reply to: AmazonChitlin

First step? Set some ground rules on doing their job. Attendance might be a good start.

Have you seen the videos of these people working? They "listen" and push a button. Whoever actually shows up pushes theirs friends buttons- a great use of your tax dollars.

I the whole thing could be replaced with a BBS. It's pathetic, and assinine.

Anyone asking for term limits knows what I'm saying.

Limiting wage isn't the worst idea- you'd need to give them a fixed wage of the average citizen, though. Average doesn't include anyone accepting welfare.

Honestly I don't think government can be fixed without fixing the severely broken fiat currency problem first... But a huge step forward would be defunding most of said government.

I agree wholeheartedly. I'd like to see the majority of the government...or at least, it's employee's, defunded quite a bit. I think most of it needs to happen at the top end though. The average worker doesn't typically make that much money. I think the base salary for a woodland firefighter is something around $50,000 before overtime.

Any ideas how that could realistically be implemented?

a reply to: AmazonChitlin

I believe it was one of Trumps campaign promises and one I actually agree with him on (there I said it), I wish the same for the UK with the house of lords being a retirment home for already lifelong politicians who then go on working into their 90s

Even if they have been a great leader their time should be limited, they cant keep installing themselves for a lifetime in a countries running, hell there are members of house of lords who grew up in the 50s, times have changed and so should this nonsense of a job for life and beyond

originally posted by: toms54

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
..

I do find it funny that people whom are left leaning love supporting the minority... Except, when picking our leaders. Each state has an amount of representation based on population.

This amount wasn't adjusted for how long?
California: 39,000,000 people = 55 votes (in electoral college)
Delaware: 900,000 people = 3 votes
You can do the math, right?

And please explain your first two sentences, because those sound like I should love supporting minorities, except when picking "your leaders". I do not understand that.

Edit.. The Senate also helps keep every state on the same level of power.

What you are asking for is mob rule. No thanks.

Its called "democracy", one person = one vote. Thats democracy.

I suppose I can't expect you to understand American government. The United States is not a direct democracy. It is, as the name implies, a federation of supposedly sovereign states. Yes, they give some of their power to the federal government. In return, every state gets representation. We could have 1 state, 1 vote but to make it fair, we have the electoral college. If that is eliminated, why would small states like Delaware even want to be a part of the US? They would have no representation or their voice would be insignificant. The people can have 1 person, 1 vote at the state level if they want. Even there they have mostly some kind of representation by district. We are a republic not mob rule.

toms54 You said it much nicer than I was going to.
This country is not and never has been a Democracy. Thank you.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

We don't have a democracy. We have a constitutional republic.