Why do we have a two party system?

[MorkandMindy]

YES!, yes please!


Back to Democratic Socialism which was the system we were in, an economy designed to give good jobs and sufficient pay to most.

There were exceptions then, sad to say, but now it's even worse with about half as exceptions, only 45% of jobs pay equal to or above subsistence. Then most people got healthcare with their jobs, and most of the rest got it some other way, but now 15% have no healthcare and another 25% are under-insured.

 

[timothyu]

YES!, yes please!


Back to Democratic Socialism which was the system we were in, an economy designed to give good jobs and sufficient pay to most.

There were exceptions then, sad to say, but now it's even worse with about half as exceptions, only 45% of jobs pay equal to or above subsistence. Then most people got healthcare with their jobs, and most of the rest got it some other way, but now 15% have no healthcare and another 25% are under-insured.

Amazing how the gains society made in 35 years has all but been wiped out in the following 45 by those who gathered it all into a pile for themselves. Now they form an un-elected government over all nations and are in the process of establishing what they call the global Great Reset. Government by the money for the money.

 

[MorkandMindy]

The very rich who run the US have done so much damage to the US over the past century that we won't survive without a global great reset.

It's not just the blood sucking the very rich do but also the lies they tell, we have very little grasp of our own history, like the 1950s and 1960s, or about life in other countries right now. But we don't know it because they've substituted lies, with color photos as proof.

 

[timothyu]

The very rich who run the US have done so much damage to the US over the past century that we won't survive without a global great reset.

Yes but their reset will do the opposite of the reset you hope for.

It's not just the blood sucking the very rich do but also the lies they tell, we have very little grasp of our own history, like the 1950s and 1960s, or about life in other countries right now. But we don't know it because they've substituted lies, with color photos as proof.

And circles and paragraphs on the back of each. What they do is what mankind has always done including in institutional Christianity... defending their worldly god of self interest. God says in order to find truth we must first see beyond what the blind keep teaching the blind.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I used to amuse myself on visits to the US by asking people in my own age range to guess how many people were killed in the Vietnam War. No one I asked ever got anywhere near. Even though the war was contemporary to them and some were in it, they still picked the newspaper version over the one they had experienced.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Yes but their reset will do the opposite of the reset you hope for. ...

I'm a bit wary of trying to predict the future, but I'll guess the reset will do what the very rich want it to do.

The Chinese have already lent the US enough money on at least two occasions to avoid bankruptcy, the last thing they want is to lose their best customer, and I'd guess the great reset will involve moving money around again, and I'd hope a powerful international group will force an international dis armament, basically to save us all from ourselves.

They started the problem by telling us everyone else was out to get us, to get the US public to pour money into our (a lot is Californian) weapons industry, and they got a cut in all that, now they just tell the President how much they want and he gives 70% of the COVID relief bill to the banks and everything the very rich own. So now they don't need that Military Industrial Complex any more.

It's gotten pretty tricky lately too because way back the rich and powerful used to give all our military secrets to the Russians to keep the balance of power, but that stopped for some reason, and now it is going to the Chinese, but things are getting a bit scary, or annoying and dangerous. So it is really time to stop it.

If the Americans were true Christians they would have stopped all this aggression at some time in the past, but now we are going to have to rely on the rich and powerful to arrange it all for us. The rich and powerful don't want civilization completely destroyed.

So then the whole world can get on with the task of saving the biosphere.

 

[timothyu]

The rich and powerful don't want civilization completely destroyed.

That is why we are switching from the military-industrial complex to the medical/techno-industrial complex. Technology can defeat where no armies can be successful especially when there is global surveillance. 1's and 0's are the new gunpowder.

 

[variant]

In a one party state there is no dodging responsibility, with two parties you can keep passing the buck back and forth forever,

Oh my. In a one party system all dissent is ruthlessly snuffed out. They dodge responsibility by making sure no one can ever hold them accountable or remove them from power.

 

[timothyu]

Oh my. In a one party system all dissent is ruthlessly snuffed out. They dodge responsibility by making sure no one can ever hold them accountable or remove them from power.

Like the technocrats are doing. They are a one party system.

 

[Andrewn]

I think for one thing we have to go to single transferable votes, transferring until one candidate gets a majority, I think that would work best,

You answered your own question. We have a 2-party system bec we use the "First Past the Post" voting system. It's very difficult for a small party to be voted in. Historically, it has been impossible for new parties to succeed.

So, new parties / caucuses tend to form within the 2 big parties and attempt to drive the party policy in their direction. Trump tried this with the Republican Party and succeeded. Sanders tried this with the Democratic Party and failed.

 

[Andrewn]

One problem is you end up with senile geriatrics for Presidents, and if they need 40 years in politics to build up a voting record the problem is all those votes were for situations that existed up to 40 years ago. We are already in the 4th Industrial Revolution and we need to plan for the future and not for the past.

Joe Biden is 78. Nancy Pelosi is 80, and Mitch McConnell is 78.

I definitely think that presidential candidates should have experience in government. But it doesn't have to be this extensive. What I suggest is only 4 years of elected position at federal or state level + a graduate university degree. Most politicians have a JD degree. Alternatively, 7 years of elected position and / or a high-ranking position in government.

 

[timothyu]

Career politicians might be more prone to self interest but the people they gather around them are telling also. For instance, Biden's transition team apparently has 40 or more lobbyists on it. Do they represent the people, or more likely, are they attached to global conglomerates?