Reduce the power of the govt to regulate things at the federal level and instead move that power to the states. This will return power to the people, and people will naturally move to states that are delivering for them (whatever that is that they're looking for).
Across 50 states, this makes it 50 times harder (literally) to practice regulatory capture, and 50 times as likely that they'll be caught out by it, and because news travels at the speed of light today (unlike in the Constitutional era), 50 times as likely that the other state residents will find out about it.
Everything becomes fifty times better once we just return to the principles of federalism: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (Tenth Amendment)
Decentralization still works. Push the power back downward to the people who care the most -- you and me. Even though it's one of the rare examples of a federal governing agency that is mostly apolitical and actually functions semi-effectively, the FTC, for example, is a largely pointless, neutered entity that pales in comparison to state powers. For example, the state Attorneys General were able to effectively destroy Big Tobacco. The federal government didn't even come close.
People cannot move so easily. Some states have more influence than others. It also makes the decision of 'where' to move more complex.
Do I choose a state where my daughters have few rights or one where corporations control everything or where the pollution is so bad my kid's IQ will suffer?
This just doesn't work because MOST companies are multi-state. Hell, most are multi-national in the new globalized world. So you have to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
It seems like most of the problems with abortions are seeking one when you want one and don’t need one and also live in a state that outlaws them. In fact recently I read an article where the Drs refused a medically necessary abortion and even the judge said they were cleared given the situation.
when will people stop being controlling and learn there’s two sides to this?
Because there aren't actually two sides to this, because even an anti-abortion stance doesn't save lives in the long run.
Also, yeah duh Doctors are scared. That's called a "chilling effect", and it's 100% intentional by the legislature.
Most "pro-life" politicians are completely anti-abortion, including in extreme cases such as rape. They're also almost always anti-contraception, which is hypocritical but also obvious.
> Because there aren't actually two sides to this, because even an anti-abortion stance doesn't save lives in the long run.
No really there is just two sides, wanting to kill an unborn child and wanting to protect it.
> Also, yeah duh Doctors are scared. That's called a "chilling effect", and it's 100% intentional by the legislature.
You missed the point. Given the laws they were authorized to perform an abortion. They chose not to do it to make a point. If they were honoring their oath they’d do what’s necessary and be judged later as their oath requires.
> Most "pro-life" politicians are completely anti-abortion, including in extreme cases such as rape.
All are. How about we solve rape instead of using it as an excuse to kill unborn children?
> They're also almost always anti-contraception, which is hypocritical but also obvious.
Citations needed. Some are sure, but you’re conflating an anti abortion stance with religion which is flawed.
Huh? Why can't you just regulate the flow of private funds to public servants and leave it at that? Not sure why you seem to be arguing that passing one bill expands the power of government as a whole.
The supreme court has said that partisan gerrymandering is a-okay, making it totally viable for states with 50-50 populations to end up with supermajorities in their state legislatures and house delegations.
The federal senate is not allocated according to the population and does not directly reflect the will of the majority.
Efforts to limit access to the franchise have been upheld by the courts and key protections from federal legislation like the voting rights act have been undone.
Even when the federal government does pass laws or regulations, the courts step in to strike them down through increasingly spurious reasoning.
I was at breakfast this morning and overheard a conversation at the table next to me.
This conversation was about how a recent thunderstorm had small hail accompanying the rain. And then that this small hail was the leftover seeds from "the jet planes spraying that stuff to control the weather."
Yes the American system is based on the admirable but false idea of the intelligent citizen.
It probably worked a lot better when all the voters were wealthy land owners.
This is emotional manipulation and not an argument.
> There are countries significantly more democratic and happy than USA.
Red herring. None of those countries are near the size of the USA. Policies and governance systems are not scale-invariant, and there are many naive ideas that sound good on paper (and may work for small groups of people and/or short timescales) but do not stablely scale to 100 million+ people.
I was at a coffee shop a couple weeks ago and I heard two guys going on about how the moon landing never could have happened because it seems impossible. They didn't have any supporting data. They just kept saying things like "all the footage looked so totally fake." My favorite was "and how did they even get back to Earth? I don't remember ever seeing video of then launching a rocket off the moon, do you?"
The astronauts drew straws, and Sandy Koufax had the bad fortune to draw the short straw. He would stay behind to roll tape while Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were to return home. The two astronauts would remain suited for the ascent. Buzz Aldrin would monitor the instrument consoles while Neil Armstrong was to remain tethered to the open hatchway in what was later termed "a daring attempt" to recover the film canister thrown by Sandy Koufax. Unfortunately Neil Armstrong was unable to recover the canister. He described it whizzing past his gloved fingers merely inches away during the docking maneuvers with the command module. No one knows what became of the footage. To this day it is likely tumbling around the cold dark expanse of space, perhaps as a new lunar satellite.
... and that's why we don't have footage of the lunar ascent.
As for his heroic efforts, Sandy Koufax was posthumously inducted into the baseball Hall of Fame, and to this day continues to be known for the "shot that went around the moon".
I'm a boomer, the best thing is for my generation to die out. We are the most selfish and ignorant generation ever in modern times. And yet we had access to the most information! My kids don't like me to talk like this, my reply is always, "prove me wrong". (I'm referring to the mess we have caused the world, not necessarily the mankind helping accomplishments.)
Ah, well don’t be too rough on yourself. My parents are boomers, they are allright, I’m sure you are too.
I won’t say your generation didn’t make some mistakes politically. But in any group it is the kind and introspective that feel guilt about the group’s negative actions, while the selfish just go on happily being selfish. You don’t have to make up for the selfish folks who happen to have been born around the same time as you, but if you want to, live a long happy kind life.
I'm not sure how we get out of this situation without it getting way worse.