Covid relief bill

[ajohnstone]

For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.

Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.

These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.

It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.

Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

[John McAdams]

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

This from a country where the majority voted for Brexit, and the
political elites can't make it happen.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

Let's be clear on the source of anti-Americanism in Europe:

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.

It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.

So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[ajohnstone]

I would rather you explain and justify the benefits of the US democratic
process and demonstrate its advantages over other nations' legislative
procedures. Passing laws without scrutiny appears to be in total
contradiction to the spirit of your own constitution's origins.

As for Brexit, the withdrawal deal is fifth the size of your latest
stimulus bill and is focused solely on the actual ramifications of the
secession from the EU. Unrelated and immaterial political and economic
issues are not being smuggled into it.

And that is my question. Why while declaring to be a democracy is there
this blatant lack of transparency in the exercise of democracy?

Surely, this is a serious concern for all American citizens that has to be
addressed.

It makes a mockery of the claim that the government - regardless of what
party wields power - is of the people, by the people, for the people.

[John McAdams]

Post by ajohnstone
I would rather you explain and justify the benefits of the US democratic
process and demonstrate its advantages over other nations' legislative
procedures. Passing laws without scrutiny appears to be in total
contradiction to the spirit of your own constitution's origins.
As for Brexit, the withdrawal deal is fifth the size of your latest
stimulus bill and is focused solely on the actual ramifications of the
secession from the EU. Unrelated and immaterial political and economic
issues are not being smuggled into it.

Don't you understand that the mess you have had with Brexit makes your
system look every bit as messy as ours?

Post by ajohnstone
And that is my question. Why while declaring to be a democracy is there
this blatant lack of transparency in the exercise of democracy?

It's a consequences of Big Government. When it is considered
legitimate for government to get involved in everything, of course
politicians are going to find an excuse to get involved in everything
that benefits them politically.

If Congress was forced to limit itself to the Enumerated Powers in the
Constitution, it would be way different.

Post by ajohnstone
Surely, this is a serious concern for all American citizens that has to be
addressed.

Another poster suggested a line item veto. Would you favor that?

Post by ajohnstone
It makes a mockery of the claim that the government - regardless of what
party wields power - is of the people, by the people, for the people.

The nonsense in the relief bill is "of the people."

It panders to every special interest group. Including a lot you
probably like.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
I would rather you explain and justify the benefits of the US democratic
process and demonstrate its advantages over other nations' legislative
procedures. Passing laws without scrutiny appears to be in total
contradiction to the spirit of your own constitution's origins.
As for Brexit, the withdrawal deal is fifth the size of your latest
stimulus bill and is focused solely on the actual ramifications of the
secession from the EU. Unrelated and immaterial political and economic
issues are not being smuggled into it.

Don't you understand that the mess you have had with Brexit makes your
system look every bit as messy as ours?

Post by ajohnstone
And that is my question. Why while declaring to be a democracy is there
this blatant lack of transparency in the exercise of democracy?

It's a consequences of Big Government. When it is considered

SO YOU DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT.
You prefer anarchy.

Post by John McAdams
legitimate for government to get involved in everything, of course
politicians are going to find an excuse to get involved in everything
that benefits them politically.
If Congress was forced to limit itself to the Enumerated Powers in the
Constitution, it would be way different.

Post by ajohnstone
Surely, this is a serious concern for all American citizens that has to be
addressed.

Another poster suggested a line item veto. Would you favor that?

Post by ajohnstone
It makes a mockery of the claim that the government - regardless of what
party wields power - is of the people, by the people, for the people.

The nonsense in the relief bill is "of the people."

How? Explain what you think.

Post by John McAdams
It panders to every special interest group. Including a lot you
probably like.

How can it pander to all?
Then it would not be pandering to just one.
YOU KNOW THAT right now the Senate is pandering to the super-rich ab\nd
that doesn't bother you, no matter how many millions of people die.

Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[19efppp]

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.
It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.
So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, that explains Europe. Now I wonder what hurts in Syria, Libya,
Ukraine, Iraq, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela.

[John McAdams]

Post by 19efppp

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.
It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.
So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, that explains Europe. Now I wonder what hurts in Syria, Libya,
Ukraine, Iraq, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela.

You have named places wy worse than the UK. It's a collection of very
troubled states.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[19efppp]

Post by 19efppp

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.
It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.
So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, that explains Europe. Now I wonder what hurts in Syria, Libya,
Ukraine, Iraq, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela.

You have named places wy worse than the UK. It's a collection of very
troubled states.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, maybe more US bombs and economic blockades will help them to ease
the pain.

[John McAdams]

Post by 19efppp

Post by 19efppp

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.
It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.
So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, that explains Europe. Now I wonder what hurts in Syria, Libya,
Ukraine, Iraq, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela.

You have named places wy worse than the UK. It's a collection of very
troubled states.

Well, maybe more US bombs and economic blockades will help them to ease
the pain.

Maybe people throwing off nasty governemts will help ease the pain.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[19efppp]

Post by John McAdams

Post by 19efppp

Post by 19efppp

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.
It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.
So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, that explains Europe. Now I wonder what hurts in Syria, Libya,
Ukraine, Iraq, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela.

You have named places wy worse than the UK. It's a collection of very
troubled states.

Well, maybe more US bombs and economic blockades will help them to ease
the pain.

Maybe people throwing off nasty governemts will help ease the pain.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Yeah, if the US kills enough of them, they might give up and accept the US
puppet governments just to stay alive. It's a plan.

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by John McAdams

Post by 19efppp

Post by 19efppp

Post by John McAdams

Post by ajohnstone
For non-Americans it is difficult to comprehend the American
decision-making process. It is completely baffling, at times.
Take the recent stimulus bill passed by the House and the Senate and now
vetoed by Trump, 5,595 pages, and very much of it having absolutely
nothing to do with the dealing with that pandemic such as policy to the
who succeeds the Dalai Lama and that is only an example. Important issues
are being passed without a full dedicated debate such as new rules on
copyright. So many extraneous inclusions to the bill, which seems a form
of black-mail to me...either accept it as it is presented or delay an
urgently needed government intervention.
These are not amendments in the normally accepted interpretation which is
a standard procedure in reaching agreements. If such additions to a bill
was made in any other setting, it would be ruled out of order.
It is doubtful the law-makers actually read the full text before voting
and certainly it very doubtful that the public fully realize what is in it
other than the bullet points the media decide to highlight.
Is this really the sort of democracy worth defending? Certainly it nor one
that should be recommended or promoted, as i see it.

It hurts to have been a superpower, and now be a mere mid-level power.
It hurts to have had an empire on which the sun never sets, and now
have none of it.
So naturally, there is going to be a fair amount of sour grapes.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Well, that explains Europe. Now I wonder what hurts in Syria, Libya,
Ukraine, Iraq, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela.

You have named places wy worse than the UK. It's a collection of very
troubled states.

Well, maybe more US bombs and economic blockades will help them to ease
the pain.

Maybe people throwing off nasty governemts will help ease the pain.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

OH, you man Trump?

[ajohnstone]

The timeline for the publication and the acceptance of the Covid-19 Relief
Bill was a matter of a few hours
https://nypost.com/2020/12/22/aoc-ted-cruz-agree-covid-relief-bill-was-too-big-to-read/

"It’s ABSURD to have a $2.5 trillion spending bill negotiated in
secret and then—hours later—demand an up-or-down vote on a
bill nobody has had time to read"

From what i understand both the UK and EU law-makers will have up to 30th
December to study the secession agreement before a vote will be taken and
even then it will be a provisional approval. And i consider that not to be
sufficient time for a full and in depth debate when the advice of experts
and specialists would be necessary to fully comprehend the legal and
technical implications.

But a few hours for the House and the Senate to analyze a document that is
5 times as long before voting on it.

Just what has $73 million to Israel's Iron Dome got to do with the
pandemic? Are the Israelis going to shoot down the coronavirus with
missiles?

Surely the clauses that are dedicated solely to the pandemic could have
been voted on its own as stand-alone laws as a matter of urgency and all
the other spending get its own time and its own vote.

As i said, i would like to know how such a legislative process arose in
the first place and why there is not a determined and sustained campaign
to amend the procedures which clearly is not an exercise in representative
decision-making.

Or am i mistaken and there is a case that can be made for its efficiency.

Ever since i joined this discussion list i have been confused by the
unique American practices as to the powers of attorney generals who sit on
evidence for months, to the farce of this election where states decide who
gets to vote and how it is counted.

As for Brexit, one thing that can be safely said...it wasn't rushed
through...four long tedious years of negotiation and in the UK there has
been several Parliamentary votes at different stages of it. And still
there is no clear view on how it will all pan out in the coming
years...the proof of the pudding is now going to be in the eating.

This is exactly as the Remainers predicted at the time...a leap into the
dark and a very messy exit, as you correctly suggest and not something
easily accomplished as the Brexiteers argued in the referendum. The irony
is that Northern Ireland will continue to be subject to EU authority,
making a united Ireland, an economic reality if not a totally political
one. And it has spurred a renewed campaign for Scottish separatism from
England. Breaking away from Europe seems to have led to the breaking up of
the UK.

[John McAdams]

Post by ajohnstone
The timeline for the publication and the acceptance of the Covid-19 Relief
Bill was a matter of a few hours
https://nypost.com/2020/12/22/aoc-ted-cruz-agree-covid-relief-bill-was-too-big-to-read/
"It’s ABSURD to have a $2.5 trillion spending bill negotiated in
secret and then—hours later—demand an up-or-down vote on a
bill nobody has had time to read"
From what i understand both the UK and EU law-makers will have up to 30th
December to study the secession agreement before a vote will be taken and
even then it will be a provisional approval. And i consider that not to be
sufficient time for a full and in depth debate when the advice of experts
and specialists would be necessary to fully comprehend the legal and
technical implications.
But a few hours for the House and the Senate to analyze a document that is
5 times as long before voting on it.
Just what has $73 million to Israel's Iron Dome got to do with the
pandemic? Are the Israelis going to shoot down the coronavirus with
missiles?
Surely the clauses that are dedicated solely to the pandemic could have
been voted on its own as stand-alone laws as a matter of urgency and all
the other spending get its own time and its own vote.

No, they could not. Members of Congress take the opportunity to put
their own pet projects into the bill.

And there is considerable "log rolling." "You support my special
interest provision, and I'll support yours."

Post by ajohnstone
As i said, i would like to know how such a legislative process arose in
the first place and why there is not a determined and sustained campaign
to amend the procedures which clearly is not an exercise in representative
decision-making.
Or am i mistaken and there is a case that can be made for its efficiency.

The most "efficient" governments are those without checks and
balances. And indeed, those without things like free elections.
Nothing prevents the "efficient" solution.

Even if it's a "final solution."

Post by ajohnstone
Ever since i joined this discussion list i have been confused by the
unique American practices as to the powers of attorney generals who sit on
evidence for months, to the farce of this election where states decide who
gets to vote and how it is counted.

It's known as Federalism.

Post by ajohnstone
As for Brexit, one thing that can be safely said...it wasn't rushed
through...four long tedious years of negotiation and in the UK there has

Translation: the process was a mess, and the system seemed unable to
act on a clear public mandate.

Post by ajohnstone
been several Parliamentary votes at different stages of it. And still
there is no clear view on how it will all pan out in the coming
years...the proof of the pudding is now going to be in the eating.
This is exactly as the Remainers predicted at the time...a leap into the
dark and a very messy exit, as you correctly suggest and not something
easily accomplished as the Brexiteers argued in the referendum. The irony
is that Northern Ireland will continue to be subject to EU authority,
making a united Ireland, an economic reality if not a totally political
one. And it has spurred a renewed campaign for Scottish separatism from
England. Breaking away from Europe seems to have led to the breaking up of
the UK.

Are you actually trying to claim that European governments don't
pander to special interest groups? That's nonsense, and you know it
is.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[ajohnstone]

All i have been trying to do is request an explanation of what you call
"log-rolling" and how it offers the best form of decision making by the
USA. So far you have not given a reasonable defense of the manner of
law-enactment performed by America's elected representatives, other than
you scratch my back and i'll scratch yours.

What is really troubling is the actual lack of any interest in addressing
the issues that have been given re-newed attention in the issues. I
thought the US Constitution was a living document, able to be amended with
the changing times when the situation required improvements to it.

I know only too well that lobbying exists within all political
institutions as you say and often anachronisms remain.

An example would be the forcible deportation of the inhabitants of the
Chagos Islands by the UK to make way for the US airbase on Diego Garcia.
Having lost every legal case in every court including the highest in the
UK and the EU by every government regardless of party, the UK government
had to resort to the archaic medieval Royal Prerogative to reject the
right of the inhabitants' return. Democracy it wasn't.

As for seceding from the European Union, i consider it very much a
internecine dispute between rival sections of the capitalist class where
ordinary people are casualties and collateral damage, losing our rights of
free mobility of labor within the EU region and losing our ability to
choose where in Europe we can dwell. From my reading, the agreement offers
only an illusion of sovereignty, acknowledging in reality that the EU is
the regulatory power and the UK will continue to follow its standards.

[John Corbett]

Post by ajohnstone
All i have been trying to do is request an explanation of what you call
"log-rolling" and how it offers the best form of decision making by the
USA. So far you have not given a reasonable defense of the manner of
law-enactment performed by America's elected representatives, other than
you scratch my back and i'll scratch yours.
What is really troubling is the actual lack of any interest in addressing
the issues that have been given re-newed attention in the issues. I
thought the US Constitution was a living document, able to be amended with
the changing times when the situation required improvements to it.

The process for amending the Constitution is a difficult one and it was
intended to be. It is the foundation of the republic and not subject to
blow with the political winds. There are a number of changes I would like
to see such as a line item veto and a balanced budget amendment. Congress
isn't going to give the presidency that kind of power as they would be
giving up some of their own. After the Republican takeover of Congress in
1994, the Senate came up one vote short of passing a balanced budget
amendment when Mark Hatfield was the only Republican to vote against it.
14 Democrats had voted in favor. If not for that one vote, the amendment
would have been passed on to the states and 3/4 of the legislatures would
have to have voted to ratify it. There no longer seems to be any desire in
Congress to revive the amendment. Either of these measures would have been
a fundamental shift in the balance of power between the legislative and
executive branches. If was not intended that such radical changes could be
enacted by a simple majority vote. While that has thwarted efforts to make
what I believe would be positive changes, it has also thwarted many more
bad ideas. Most recently a desire to scrap the electoral college. No
chance that is going to happen any time soon. Probably never. The smaller
states benefit from the way the electoral votes are allocated and there is
no reason for them to surrender that advantage.

Post by ajohnstone
I know only too well that lobbying exists within all political
institutions as you say and often anachronisms remain.
An example would be the forcible deportation of the inhabitants of the
Chagos Islands by the UK to make way for the US airbase on Diego Garcia.
Having lost every legal case in every court including the highest in the
UK and the EU by every government regardless of party, the UK government
had to resort to the archaic medieval Royal Prerogative to reject the
right of the inhabitants' return. Democracy it wasn't.
As for seceding from the European Union, i consider it very much a
internecine dispute between rival sections of the capitalist class where
ordinary people are casualties and collateral damage, losing our rights
of free mobility of labor within the EU region and losing our ability to
choose where in Europe we can dwell. From my reading, the agreement
offers only an illusion of sovereignty, acknowledging in reality that
the EU is the regulatory power and the UK will continue to follow its
standards.

How do you explain that ordinary people voted in favor of Brexit?

[ajohnstone]

Post by John Corbett
How do you explain that ordinary people voted in favor of Brexit?

Northern Ireland and Scotland were for remaining. London was for
remaining.

There is a lot of academic debate on the why Brexit got support. I'm not
claiming to know all the reasons.

I think it may be related to why Trump originally got support in the rust
states and Clinton was viewed as a representative of the financiers. There
was a feeling of alienation among the working class, rejected by the
Conservatives and by the Labour Party elites. Farange and Johnson
conducted their own populist campaign of mis-information, supported by the
tabloid media.

The Remainers failed to present a strong defense of the EU, much like
Clinton declined to attract certain communities, taking support for
granted and by-passing on the election trail some of those poor neglected
states.

After the referendum i recall a documentary where they went to one of the
working class towns in a depressed deprived region which overwhelmingly
voted to leave and the documentary makers took no-voters around the town
showing them all the signs that the new shopping center, the new
industrial estate, the new factories and offices were all funded by the EU
which the locals were totally unaware of. They then asked if they believed
a London-based government would now compensate with new investment...well,
i think you know the response.

And then there was also the Little-Englander nationalist angle. Blaming
migrant workers from Europe for stealing jobs and for higher crime levels
became the sub-text for passport controls and the end of free mobility of
labor. There was ample evidence it was not so but a lack of focus. It is
easier for the Remainers to just call someone a racist for not
understanding the economics than to try to explain why he or she is out of
a job and living on welfare in a slum. That would be an indictment of
capitalism, wouldn't it? Name-calling as you know creates a psychological
defense-mechanism and a backlash.

The two-million or so UK ex-pats living in the EU were excluded from the
referendum and find themselves now living in limbo, practically
state-less.

I think you are right. Once the original constitution was agreed, the US
oligarchs and plutocrats made sure it couldn't be changed very easily,
fearing for their own position and status as the voting suffrage was
expanded. The women's rights ERA was passed by both houses in the 1970s
and still no constitutional change and i would imagine the controversy
over equal rights for females would have disappeared.

But is glacial speed of change the best form of democracy? Do we consider
changing the American constitution in geological time?

[John Corbett]

Post by ajohnstone

Post by John Corbett
How do you explain that ordinary people voted in favor of Brexit?

Northern Ireland and Scotland were for remaining. London was for
remaining.

Which begs the question.

Post by ajohnstone
There is a lot of academic debate on the why Brexit got support. I'm not
claiming to know all the reasons.

I think it's safe to say a lot of ordinary people wanted out.

Post by ajohnstone
I think it may be related to why Trump originally got support in the rust
states and Clinton was viewed as a representative of the financiers. There
was a feeling of alienation among the working class, rejected by the
Conservatives and by the Labour Party elites. Farange and Johnson
conducted their own populist campaign of mis-information, supported by the
tabloid media.

Even in this past election, Trump got tremendous support from the Rust
Belt states, even more than in 2016. Those voters got overwhelmed by the
Trump haters primarily in the big cities who seemed even more energized
than in 2016.

Post by ajohnstone
The Remainers failed to present a strong defense of the EU, much like
Clinton declined to attract certain communities, taking support for
granted and by-passing on the election trail some of those poor neglected
states.
After the referendum i recall a documentary where they went to one of the
working class towns in a depressed deprived region which overwhelmingly
voted to leave and the documentary makers took no-voters around the town
showing them all the signs that the new shopping center, the new
industrial estate, the new factories and offices were all funded by the EU
which the locals were totally unaware of. They then asked if they believed
a London-based government would now compensate with new investment...well,
i think you know the response.

I think governments investing in anything is a poor idea. That's not the
role of government.

Post by ajohnstone
And then there was also the Little-Englander nationalist angle. Blaming
migrant workers from Europe for stealing jobs and for higher crime levels
became the sub-text for passport controls and the end of free mobility of
labor. There was ample evidence it was not so but a lack of focus. It is
easier for the Remainers to just call someone a racist for not
understanding the economics than to try to explain why he or she is out of
a job and living on welfare in a slum. That would be an indictment of
capitalism, wouldn't it? Name-calling as you know creates a psychological
defense-mechanism and a backlash.

Why would that be an indictment of capitalism?

Post by ajohnstone
The two-million or so UK ex-pats living in the EU were excluded from the
referendum and find themselves now living in limbo, practically
state-less.
I think you are right. Once the original constitution was agreed, the US
oligarchs and plutocrats made sure it couldn't be changed very easily,
fearing for their own position and status as the voting suffrage was
expanded. The women's rights ERA was passed by both houses in the 1970s
and still no constitutional change and i would imagine the controversy
over equal rights for females would have disappeared.

The ERA was superfluous because we already had the 14th and 19th
Amendments which guaranteed equal rights for all regardless of gender.

Post by ajohnstone
But is glacial speed of change the best form of democracy? Do we consider
changing the American constitution in geological time?

The US Constitution has been amended 28 times, 26 if you consider that the
21st Amendment was a repeal of the 18th. That is a perfect example of why
the Constitution should NOT be used as a vehicle for legislation. The
Constitution is intended primarily to define the powers of the government
and the rights of the people. It should only be amended for that purpose.

Ironically the most recent amendment ratified was one of the first
proposed. The 27th Amendment was part of the original 12 proposed
amendments, ten of which were ratified and became our Bill of Rights. It
was passed by Congress in 1789 but not ratified until 1992. It deals with
the compensation of those in Congress. The story of its ratification is
quite interesting and amusing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

I just read about a group that is pushing for a 28th Amendment which would
limit the right of groups to contribute to the candidates of their choice
and engage in political activities on their behalf. If passed it would
reverse a SCOTUS ruling in 2010 which struck down a law that was in
infringement on the right of free speech. Like the 18th Amendment, it is
trying to use the Constitution to legislate a ban on something some people
don't like.

My state of Ohio has a much less arduous process for amending the state
constitution. Amendments can be made through ballot initiatives or by the
legislature. The result is our Constitution is used to legislate petty
causes which can't get enacted through the normal legislative process.
Rather than being a framework for governance, it has become an addendum to
the Ohio Revised Code. As I understand it, Ohio is not unique in this
regard. I would much prefer to see a far more stringent process required
for the modification of our state constitution similar to what is required
to amend the US Constitution.

[ajohnstone]

I think governments investing in anything is a poor idea. That's not the role of government.

You may think that, JC, but the reality has been since the beginnings of
the capitalist system, the government has either directly or indirectly
funded business activity.

The EU since its formation from a mere 6 countries has shown the success
of funding industrial development
https://www.eubusiness.com/funding

The USA too has a long history of subsidies and tax relief and government
lending. Wasn't the latest this Covid Relief Bill, a rather poor replica
of what the rest of the developed world has done. Call it justifiable
compensation for lockdowns and curfews but it is an example of how a state
has to prop up the economy.

The success of China which has either done so or about to surpass the
American economy was largely due to the State involvement.

The recovery from WW2 and the post-war boom was largely due to the
Marshall plan, wasn't it. If the US hadn't given money to Europe to spend,
it wouldn't have been able to buy American goods.

Capitalism is always in need of a scapegoat for poverty and inequality and
it is easier placing blame on foreigners or what Americans call welfare
queens or in the UK benefit scroungers - would mean admitting there are
inherent faults with capitalism.

I take on board your comments on the constitution and will be more
careful.

[John Corbett]

Post by ajohnstone

I think governments investing in anything is a poor idea. That's not the role of government.

You may think that, JC, but the reality has been since the beginnings of
the capitalist system, the government has either directly or indirectly
funded business activity.
The EU since its formation from a mere 6 countries has shown the success
of funding industrial development
https://www.eubusiness.com/funding

If governments would just stay out of the way, private enterprise would do
just fine. It would result in economic Darwinism. The strong would survive
and the weak would die out.

Post by ajohnstone
The USA too has a long history of subsidies and tax relief and government
lending. Wasn't the latest this Covid Relief Bill, a rather poor replica
of what the rest of the developed world has done. Call it justifiable
compensation for lockdowns and curfews but it is an example of how a state
has to prop up the economy.

I am as much against corporate welfare as other types of welfare.
Naturally if the government is handing out other people's money,
businesses are going to get in line. I don't want there to be a line.
Government cannot create wealth. It can only redistribute wealth.
Government can't give anybody anything it hasn't first taken from somebody
else. I really don't care if the government hands out $600, $2000, or zip
in Covid relief funds. Whatever they are giving me is devaluing the money
I already have. That's what so many people fail to understand.

There are three ways government can get the money it spends. It can tax
the people. That is recessionary. It can borrow the money. That means less
capital available for private enterprise. It can increase the money
supply. That is inflationary. People have more dollars but those dollars
buy less. It's a zero sum game. I'm sure those relief checks are going to
make everyone feel better but it isn't going to make them any richer. One
way or another, they are just getting their own money. If government could
really make people wealthier by handing out "free" money, why stop at
$2000. Why not make everybody millionaires?

Post by ajohnstone
The success of China which has either done so or about to surpass the
American economy was largely due to the State involvement.

That supposes they couldn't have done better than if they had just allowed
businesses to operate freely. I'm not willing to make that supposition.

Post by ajohnstone
The recovery from WW2 and the post-war boom was largely due to the
Marshall plan, wasn't it. If the US hadn't given money to Europe to spend,
it wouldn't have been able to buy American goods.

So we Europeans were buying our goods with our own money. There's a hell
of a deal.

Post by ajohnstone
Capitalism is always in need of a scapegoat for poverty and inequality and
it is easier placing blame on foreigners or what Americans call welfare
queens or in the UK benefit scroungers - would mean admitting there are
inherent faults with capitalism.

Free capitalism wouldn't need scape goats. Inequality is not a negative.
Why should people who don't produce as much be entitled to equality?

Post by ajohnstone
I take on board your comments on the constitution and will be more
careful.