PurpleWhiteBoy said:

Your clarifications are correct. I was writing about legislators and executive branch - the politicians.
It is probably heresy to some, but we need more than two political parties.
Instead we're saddled with entrenched extremists on both sides who prioritize their uncompromising agendas (and themselves) ahead of the nation.

The first flaw to correct is to allocate the federal House of Representatives based on percentage of the vote for each party in each state.
This would enable minor political parties to establish a foothold in the largest states and go from there.
Of course, the two existing parties will never allow it - as the money pours in and they enrich themselves fighting the same stupid battles eternally, backed almost entirely by corporations and wealthy donors.

Click to expand...

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other on this. While there are things about the two party system that are maddening, I also see other countries with multiple parties forming coalitions once elected. In a sense, you could argue that our system just forces them to build their coalitions before the election. But again, I would be open to hearing arguments for changing our two-party system.

Hungry Jack said:

That's Progressivism in a nutshell: good vibes and good intentions, followed by craptastic ineffectual policy that just makes things worse.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that statement personally, but I will point out that this PARTICULAR issue doesn't much follow a standard left-right divide and you will find plenty of small-c-conservative change averse pearl clutchers in both parties on this particular issue.

That at hardball politics. We have a decent number of Republicans in MN who religiously oppose gambling and a decent number of Dems who oppose it based on what you're describing, but the big reason is the native tribes have a permanent gambling monopoly and are decisively powerful Dem funders. They haven't been able to iron out a final structure they like yet, so it's blocked cold. Very very close for a couple years now after a few years of hard opposition though.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Purple Pile Driver said:

Bias sometimes results is poor logic on a topic,

Click to expand...

No poor logic here. I'm enjoying winning basketball. The local team here won the first game of the next round and the other winner yesterday was led by UConn stud and true GOAT Breanna Stewart!

(Actually, I'm not that much of a UConn women's bball fan, but it is fun playing the foil on this thread....)

TheC said:

Let's make sure we're clear. Government is often incentivized (or better yet, forced) to be fiscally responsible. I have a government job and I absolutely can't spend past my budget. However, you are right that politicians aren't necessarily incentivized to be fiscally responsible.

I've often said that we have a terrible system where we allow our government to be run by politicians, but I can't think of a better way to do it.

Click to expand...

It’s very clear which side of the political spectrum pretty much every frequent poster lies on. So, this scope creep you talk about happens all the time. When I see people complain about the “ignorant” or “snarky” comments it is always misaligned with the complainers beliefs. Hardly a surprise. The political system has worked pretty well in this country up until the last couple of decades. Now it is about winning and towing the party line even if that isn’t what the people want. There are so many lies from all sides and promises that will never be kept that it nauseates a bunch of people. Hence, don’t like to talk about it.

Career politicians are rarely a good thing, but this countries best and brightest would never subject themselves to the scrutiny and abuse that comes with being a public figure. The political commercials make me sick, but I hope people in this board are smart enough to make their own opinions without being influenced by you or me.

TheC said:

Let's make sure we're clear. Government is often incentivized (or better yet, forced) to be fiscally responsible. I have a government job and I absolutely can't spend past my budget. However, you are right that politicians aren't necessarily incentivized to be fiscally responsible.

I've often said that we have a terrible system where we allow our government to be run by politicians, but I can't think of a better way to do it.

Click to expand...

Your clarifications are correct. I was writing about legislators and executive branch - the politicians.
It is probably heresy to some, but we need more than two political parties.
Instead we're saddled with entrenched extremists on both sides who prioritize their uncompromising agendas (and themselves) ahead of the nation.

The first flaw to correct is to allocate the federal House of Representatives based on percentage of the vote for each party in each state.
This would enable minor political parties to establish a foothold in the largest states and go from there.
Of course, the two existing parties will never allow it - as the money pours in and they enrich themselves fighting the same stupid battles eternally, backed almost entirely by corporations and wealthy donors.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

I think I paid an extra $2.50 to do it by phone actually.

Hkjb said:

I for one will be relieved to have this board actually be about NU basketball again, rather than an overexposed Io_a alum.

Click to expand...

It was always only a matter of time imho. Once the summer league ended, there wasn't any other hoops to really talk about. It doesn't hurt that Clark is a phenom and it seems reasonable that she'll be talked about again on this board next summer.

But we're largely killing time here until the college season picks up some steam.

I for one am glad we had something basketball related to chat about over the long down time.

EagerFan said:

I also picked up my parking tickets last week and thought the price was fairly steep. But since I'm driving in from the western suburbs generally towards the end of rush hour, I am willing to pay the price for the "guarantee" of a parking space in close walking distance.

I do wonder what the traffic will be like for conference games as the out of town folks stack up trying to buy game day parking, and theoretically being refused.

Click to expand...

Have to admit I was pleasantly surprised they didn't charge a handling fee lol.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

I also picked up my parking tickets last week and thought the price was fairly steep. But since I'm driving in from the western suburbs generally towards the end of rush hour, I am willing to pay the price for the "guarantee" of a parking space in close walking distance.

I do wonder what the traffic will be like for conference games as the out of town folks stack up trying to buy game day parking, and theoretically being refused.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

PurpleWhiteBoy said:

I don't think of the lotteries as gambling per se - it obviously isn't "sports wagering" - but your complaints are valid.
State-run lotteries are essentially a tax on ignorance most of the time.

The main problem with our system of government is that no one is incentivized to be fiscally responsible.
In fact, politicians are incentivized to be fiscally irresponsible.

Click to expand...

Let's make sure we're clear. Government is often incentivized (or better yet, forced) to be fiscally responsible. I have a government job and I absolutely can't spend past my budget. However, you are right that politicians aren't necessarily incentivized to be fiscally responsible.

I've often said that we have a terrible system where we allow our government to be run by politicians, but I can't think of a better way to do it.

Purple Pile Driver said:

Well the whole concept being proposed by some is aligned with regulation of the industry. Government is the regulator. I am not sure how you discuss the topic without bringing in the government enforcement and ability to regulate which on other “sin” topics have been less than successful.

Click to expand...

Yes, government has a role in the conversation, but it is possible to talk about government without juvenile, and quite ignorant generalizations about political philosophies and snarky comments about the upcoming election. That is when government crosses into politics, complete with the same tone and disrespect that makes people generally hate talking about politics.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.