Interesting piece on the rise of a person like Trump to be a nominee.

[charby]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

Basically I have learned a new term, Urban Privilege.

I grew up in a town that lost several big manufacturing companies in the early 80s farm crisis, and a few more over the years. Has really killed the economic power of the citizens. Only so many service or professional jobs to go around.

Town I live in now it still struggling economically from a loss of a couple factories, shithead city council denied a pork processing plant that was going to pay $42k for most of the floor workers. Another rural community is going to get it now.

[Hawkmoon]

Good article. It shows that, even though our Founding Fathers set up a republic in the hope of avoiding the "tyranny of the masses," they didn't (and no doubt couldn't) foresee the extent to which megacities would come to dominate the political spectrum. That county map of Illinois is a perfect example, and somethng I read just yesterday suggests that a map of New York (the state) would show the same thing -- all red except for NYC, but NYC prevailed.

[MillCreek]

^^^This is why liberal Seattle and King County, comprising over half the state's population, dominates Washington state politics.

[Perd Hapley]

I'm surprised he didn't say anything about the irony of a NYC boy representing the flyover folks.


I find, lately, I'm interested in some sort of structural change, so that fly-over country is more equitably represented. The Framers sought a compromise, so that the less populous states were not over-run by the New Yorks and Virginias. We have a similar problem now.

[makattak]

I'm surprised he didn't say anything about the irony of a NYC boy representing the flyover folks.

Plenty of the comments did... proving he understands his audience quite well (and that many of them would simply ignore his points.)

[wmenorr67]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

Basically I have learned a new term, Urban Privilege.

I grew up in a town that lost several big manufacturing companies in the early 80s farm crisis, and a few more over the years. Has really killed the economic power of the citizens. Only so many service or professional jobs to go around.

Town I live in now it still struggling economically from a loss of a couple factories, shithead city council denied a pork processing plant that was going to pay $42k for most of the floor workers. Another rural community is going to get it now.

Floor worker, as in someone that registers just above mouth-breathing to do the job?  Hell $42K works out to just over $20 an hour for just 40 hrs a week.  I just took a new job and bumped my pay from $18.70 to $19 an hour and you actually have to think to do both jobs.

[Firethorn]

Floor worker, as in someone that registers just above mouth-breathing to do the job?  Hell $42K works out to just over $20 an hour for just 40 hrs a week.  I just took a new job and bumped my pay from $18.70 to $19 an hour and you actually have to think to do both jobs.

I'd say that a "floor worker" is the people who actually do the work.  IE they're out on the floor.  In a factory they're the people working the assembly line.  In a machine shop it's the people who work the equipment all day.  In a store, they're the cashiers, stockers, and such.

Who they aren't(generally) is the accounting and billing staff, management, etc...

[charby]

Floor worker, as in someone that registers just above mouth-breathing to do the job?  Hell $42K works out to just over $20 an hour for just 40 hrs a week.  I just took a new job and bumped my pay from $18.70 to $19 an hour and you actually have to think to do both jobs.

That was with overtime included, so probably 48hrs weeks.

[230RN]

Good article. It shows that, even though our Founding Fathers set up a republic in the hope of avoiding the "tyranny of the masses," they didn't (and no doubt couldn't) foresee the extent to which megacities would come to dominate the political spectrum. That county map of Illinois is a perfect example, and somethng I read just yesterday suggests that a map of New York (the state) would show the same thing -- all red except for NYC, but NYC prevailed.

What's interesting and relevant to that is there's a push for more equitable distribution of power in terms of constitutional amendments here in Colorado.  (Amendment 71.)

The ads specifically mention the over-riding influence of Boulder and Denver on what (State) constitutional amendments can be put on the ballot.

Not that I haven't been screaming about that for decades... to overthrow the tyranny of the urbanites.

The trouble here, of course, is that the power of Boulder and Denver will probably defeat the proposed amendment.  Same old problem.... political power is self-aggrandizing: "Got some, want more.  Got more, want it all."

Terry, 230RN

REF (Exemplary only, not to start a discussion of the specific pros and cons of Colorado's amendment):
http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/16/voters-to-decide-whether-to-toughen-requirements-to-amend-colorado-constitution/

“Coloradans are tired of seeing their constitution pummeled with the latest fad ideas and bloated with permanent, unworkable schemes,” campaign co-chair and Summit County Commissioner Dan Gibbs said.

[De Selby]

It's an outrage that majority of votes decided an issue in a democracy.  I mean, how can America be democratic when it doesn't take into account the views of the minority?

[Ben]

It's an outrage that majority of votes decided an issue in a democracy.  I mean, how can America be democratic when it doesn't take into account the views of the minority?

Gross oversimplification. Geography counts. Hence one of the reasons we're a Confederated Republic and not a Democracy.

[dogmush]

It's an outrage that majority of votes decided an issue in a democracy.  I mean, how can America be democratic when it doesn't take into account the views of the minority?

Which is exactly why we aren't a democracy. And why no sane person wants to live in one.

[230RN]

It's an outrage that majority of votes decided an issue in a democracy.  I mean, how can America be democratic when it doesn't take into account the views of the minority?

Sarcasm?

I won't take the blame this time for thread drift.  I was only quoting Hawkmoon, so blame him.

Anyhow, I'd like to see a ten-party* system.

"But nothing would get done !"

Right.  Unless a coalition of minorities could get together and take a common stand.  Quite possibly the most fair way to have a representative government... and I don't mean minorities in the ethnic sense, but I'm not excluding that, either.

A ten-party* system has its disadvantages, of course, but there's a lot to be said for it.

The two-party system is broken.  I suppose it's supposed to be fair with the "checks and balances" system in place, but at present, all three branches of the checks and balances system are in cahoots with one another.



Terry, 230RN

* Or any N greater than, say, five.

[BlueStarLizzard]

Good article.

[Scout26]

Sarcasm?

I won't take the blame this time for thread drift.  I was only quoting Hawkmoon, so blame him.

Anyhow, I'd like to see a ten-party* system.

"But nothing would get done !"

Right.  Unless a coalition of minorities could get together and take a common stand.  Quite possibly the most fair way to have a representative government... and I don't mean minorities in the ethnic sense, but I'm not excluding that, either.

A ten-party* system has its disadvantages, of course, but there's a lot to be said for it.

The two-party system is broken.  I suppose it's supposed to be fair with the "checks and balances" system in place, but at present, all three branches of the checks and balances system are in cahoots with one another.



Terry, 230RN

* Or any N greater than, say, five.

What most people fail to realize is that the founders set it up so that very little to nothing WOULD get done.    With the People represented in one house and the States in the other, they wanted to gum up the works bad enough to make it damn near impossible to pass any law unless practically the entire country was behind it.  And don't forget the president could veto any legislation that he felt deserved it and the entire process would start over.

Government was specifically designed NOT to work...

[Perd Hapley]

What most people fail to realize is that the founders set it up so that very little to nothing WOULD get done.    With the People represented in one house and the States in the other, they wanted to gum up the works bad enough to make it damn near impossible to pass any law unless practically the entire country was behind it.  And don't forget the president could veto any legislation that he felt deserved it and the entire process would start over.

Government was specifically designed NOT to work...

Mostly true. The executive was intended to be able to act quickly, and decisively, in matters of war and national defense.

But, yeah, you're right. The feds are not supposed to be constantly blessing us with their brilliance and compassion.

[230RN]

^

Mostly true. The executive was intended to be able to act quickly, and decisively, in matters of war and national defense.

Huh?  Sarcasm?  I thunk war was supposed to be declared by Congress, but with the advent of intercontinental ballistic missiles in the middle of the last century, Congress handed that function over to the Executive (the Commander-in-Chief) to facilitate the necessary quick response in a MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) situation.  Excepting it wasn't supposed to be called "war" anymore... or something.

My sarcasm sensor has been broken for two or three days, but I recognize your "mostly true" qualifier.


Maybe I just need more coffee this AM.

[Perd Hapley]

Terry,

The Constitutional Convention debated whether to place the executive function with a committee, or some other arrangement. They chose a single executive, with a relatively long term, because they didn't want every foreign policy decision to require a protracted debate.