Devolving America

Quote:

Original post by walkingcarcass Here in the UK devolution is a fairly big thing lately. If you ask me it's being taken too far in some places (and not far enough in others) but that's a different topic.

You'd get support from me. Historically, America has believed in a weaker central government but has steadily been moving towards a strong one. I guess the events of the 20th century totally accelerated that. Major wars, a great depression that required massive government intervention... they all moved us toward a stronger U.S.

The thing is: I don't really see how a strong federal government in the United States benefits me as an American. Am I *really* better off as a citzen when my country has a strong military? I'm skeptical. I certainly reap less reward from my tax dollars. And on an individual basis, the government winds up being actually less representative of me.

The problem in the US(ignoring the culture) isn't neccessarily the federal government as a concept. The problem is the implementation.

I think we need an engnieer as president, a modern renaissance man even, that knows how to get things working efficiently with extremely limited resources. That way, we could all get huge tax breaks and keep all the great services provided by the government. Or, even better IMO, all that extra money could be put toward socialist programs to make health care cheaper for all and such like that.

I think the states should be more like...states.

Quote:

Original post by Rixter I think the states should be more like...states.

Odd, that's what the Constitution thinks, too.

Personally, I think the nation should be more like a nation. As it is, the US is the worst of 50 countries and 1.

Actually, Scotland devolved from British Parliament just a few short years ago (1999 I believe). Parts of eastern Europe appears to devolve after wars (see USSR), but then everyone joins the EU so its not as big a deal :)

I'd say devolution is a good thing, but it just means more countries to remember ;)

I don't see a problem with it. Sort of get the best of both worlds. A huge country with small localized laws. And because we are free to move about the country, you could live where the laws and government met your ideals. It sucks that they way things are now if 49% of the people want it their way and 51% want it theirs there is no room for a middle ground. The 49% lose out. Also, my coworker has a good idea too. Have 2 presidents. 1 focus on foreign affairs and one demestic. Both would have a cabinet of experts to advise them and then make the final call. I really think our government has out lived its usefullness and judging from the lack of voters I think there are alot of others who feel that way too.

Yeah, there is a strong argument for it, though I doubt it would ever happen. Look how hard Lincon fought to keep it from splitting. But right now the country is divided almost exactly in half. Both sides are extremely polarized and don't understand where the other side is comming from. And Bush being elected to a second term, where he doesn't have to worry about reelection and can push all the conservative agendas he wants, is not going to make things any better. Not that Kerry would unite the country either, but he probably wouldn't divide it as much as Bush has.