Motion of censure

Remove all ads!

Well, let's say that I don't get started on the problems of capitalism either and call it quits

Still, just one note: with direct investment in the market there is always the risk that the state will not invest wisely and the large investment can cause some unforeseen circumstances. If you so much want to put the money somewhere, depositing it within a series of banks may be wiser - there are the people who are supposed to know how to invest best anyway (plus, you don't need to employ people in the government to do exactly that, and I suppose you are against large governments).

Basically, I admit I do not have enough knowledge about the American Social Security system to speak with certainty, but the current idea doesn't sound so bad. Every country faces the problem with aging population, some have it way worse than the US. If Bush wants to change the system so drastically, it could possibly work, but it has to be thought out well. I have seen enough schemes for basically syphoning out people's money as "investment" and "social security" in my country to trust something simply because it is either "state-managed" or "private".
Anyway, GG, the part about the IOUs sounded somewhat weird... What do you mean, that there have been times when the government simply told the people who were due a SS check "Sorry folks, your money went over to Japan to pay for our deficit, better luck next time." That sounds a bit unlikely to me.

 

To put it simply, either you are wrong or every single professional economist I've ever talked to in my life was wrong. You'll have to excuse me if I don't lean your way.

Hey, I never said it was fair, just that SS counts on that to stock their coffers for the people it pays. Life's a b****, and so is death.

 

Oops, sorry for inadvertently contributing to highjack the topic
\me hangs head in shame

Anyway, if the motion of censure does nothing else than express the Congress' dissatisfaction with the President, what is the point of making it a big deal? Even a lot of Republicans have sometimes expressed that they are unhappy with Bush's decisions (as far as the news here shows), so what would change? It seems a bit like a waste of time, really.

 

I think the reason for the motion of censure is that there is no way on God's green earth that the republican dominated congress will approve impeachment, but a great many republicans would probably allow a censure.....which is (only a little) better than nothing.

 

Well, comparing the effect with the time wasted that could possibly be put to good use actually doing something for the country, I'd say very little better than nothing Then again, it's not as if an assembly can't use its time and energy to pass laws that actually harm the country.

 

Now you're getting it. In the view of many of our founders, a government that does nothing is often better than a government that does something.

 

Trust me, I believe they themselves had no idea how right their words could be.