State of the Union

Discussion of current events
User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: California the flame that draws the moths?

Post by SteveFoerster » Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:34 am

neverfail wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:30 pm
I acknowledged that in light of how powers and responsibilities are divided between the federal and state levels of government in your country that it is amazing that The Federal has as much involvement as it does. May I suggest that this is because they have found that in practice you cannot rely on all of the states to do the right thing?
Like all policy, it's because different points of view are in the ascendant at different times. Social Security came out of the Great Depression, and Medicare and Medicaid came out of the 1960's, those were the two main periods of the 20th century when social democracy was en vogue in the U.S.
neverfail wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:30 pm
I could mentally picture how in some state, county of municipality where there is deep dislike of racial minorities they would deliberately underspend on areas of social welfare that are within that particular regional jurisdiction on the understanding that denying the needed support may give them an incentive to move on to become someone else's problem. If some poor white trash misses out as well, then tough luck!

Does this often happen in practice, do you think?
That's a fair question, since it was Eisenhower who had to deploy the National Guard to integrate public schools in the 1950's when the state-level governments resisted it, q.v. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Nine

As for whether this is happening specifically today with state and municipal level benefits... maybe, but not that I'm aware. Especially since more white people than black people receive assistance in the U.S., I'd think that it would be tough to come up with such a workaround, and that would make it a really easy fourteenth amendment case. I gather that systemic racism in the U.S. at those levels are more often expressed through the criminal justice system.

If anything, the best argument for racism in the social safety net is at the federal level. In the U.S., blacks tend to die sooner than whites, which means as a group they get a lot less payout as pensioners than whites do. Personally I think that's yet another reason to move to a system of genuine individual accounts that accumulate value that's actually owned by the accountholder and can be passed on to heirs, but given demographics in the U.S. and that all the money put into the system is immediately required to pay today's pensioners, I'm not sure how one would implement that.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

neverfail
Posts: 1436
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: State of the Union

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:47 pm

Thanks Steve. Your most recent post clarifies things. :D

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: California the flame that draws the moths?

Post by Doc » Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:39 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:45 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:28 pm
Doc (and SF):

You might think nothing of it as you are probably used to this sort of stuff: but might I say that I still find it utterly astonishing that your state governments and even municipalities provide welfare assistance at all. You see, in the federation of which I am privileged to be a citizen welfare payments are entirely the responsibility of our federal level of government - as is raising the tax revenue to fund them.
In the U.S., the idea that some of this is decentralised isn't just a way of doing less of it. It also means that in states and municipalities where people want more welfare than average, they have a way of enacting that without being stopped by a lack of enthusiasm from people who don't share their views and are, to be honest, culturally far different from them. After all, the U.S. is an incredibly culturally diverse country of 323 million people that stretches from Guam to St. Croix. Expecting one size to fit all would be the approach better characterised as "utterly astonishing" -- it's more amazing that there are as many federal programmes as there are, including the Big Three of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which together are a supermajority of the federal budget.
TH e whole idea of Federal VS State is that there are 50 states therefore allowing up to 50 different attempts to experiment with new ideas of laws and government policies.

My home state WV for example came up with several laws restricting teenage driving. The first was suspension of driver's license for teenagers that drop out of school. Another is that under 18 Teenagers are not allowed to operate vehicles with only minors as passengers under a teen restricted license . That license also comes with fewer points to lose before the license is suspended. The idea behind this is to encourage young drivers to be more responsible drivers than they would otherwise be with their under developed pre-frontal cortexes.

These laws have been adopted in several other states after they were found to have a positive impact in WV.
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” … George Orwell

neverfail
Posts: 1436
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: the negative side of US states "experimentation".

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:55 pm

Doc wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:39 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:45 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:28 pm
Doc (and SF):

You might think nothing of it as you are probably used to this sort of stuff: but might I say that I still find it utterly astonishing that your state governments and even municipalities provide welfare assistance at all. You see, in the federation of which I am privileged to be a citizen welfare payments are entirely the responsibility of our federal level of government - as is raising the tax revenue to fund them.
In the U.S., the idea that some of this is decentralised isn't just a way of doing less of it. It also means that in states and municipalities where people want more welfare than average, they have a way of enacting that without being stopped by a lack of enthusiasm from people who don't share their views and are, to be honest, culturally far different from them. After all, the U.S. is an incredibly culturally diverse country of 323 million people that stretches from Guam to St. Croix. Expecting one size to fit all would be the approach better characterised as "utterly astonishing" -- it's more amazing that there are as many federal programmes as there are, including the Big Three of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which together are a supermajority of the federal budget.
TH e whole idea of Federal VS State is that there are 50 states therefore allowing up to 50 different attempts to experiment with new ideas of laws and government policies.

My home state WV for example came up with several laws restricting teenage driving. The first was suspension of driver's license for teenagers that drop out of school. Another is that under 18 Teenagers are not allowed to operate vehicles with only minors as passengers under a teen restricted license . That license also comes with fewer points to lose before the license is suspended. The idea behind this is to encourage young drivers to be more responsible drivers than they would otherwise be with their under developed pre-frontal cortexes.

These laws have been adopted in several other states after they were found to have a positive impact in WV.
Well, you make a valid case for the "diversity of US states" by citing the case of your home state and driver's licence laws. But may I point out that it works in the opposite direction as well?

Until just a generation or two ago a whole block of states, all located in The South and all former CSA secessionists had on their state statutes what were commonly known as Jim Crow laws. I believe that you would know about those already so no further explanation needed.

The North, along with its anti-slavery radical Republicans, may well have won the American Civil War but it seems that the southern reactionaries subsequently won the peace that followed. The dark shadow of the unrepentant South also extended from that power base stronghold into your Federal political arena. As recently as the 1950's I believe they had segregated regiments in your US armed forces.

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: the negative side of US states "experimentation".

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:27 pm

neverfail wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:55 pm
Well, you make a valid case for the "diversity of US states" by citing the case of your home state and driver's licence laws. But may I point out that it works in the opposite direction as well?
You mean other than the drawback you suggested already?
Until just a generation or two ago a whole block of states, all located in The South and all former CSA secessionists had on their state statutes what were commonly known as Jim Crow laws. I believe that you would know about those already so no further explanation needed.
Ah, nope, it was the same drawback.
The North, along with its anti-slavery radical Republicans, may well have won the American Civil War but it seems that the southern reactionaries subsequently won the peace that followed. The dark shadow of the unrepentant South also extended from that power base stronghold into your Federal political arena. As recently as the 1950's I believe they had segregated regiments in your US armed forces.
Yes, as "recently" as 64 years ago, at the end of after an integration process that was started by Harry Truman in 1948.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: the negative side of US states "experimentation".

Post by Doc » Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:49 pm

neverfail wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:55 pm
Doc wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:39 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:45 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:28 pm
Doc (and SF):

You might think nothing of it as you are probably used to this sort of stuff: but might I say that I still find it utterly astonishing that your state governments and even municipalities provide welfare assistance at all. You see, in the federation of which I am privileged to be a citizen welfare payments are entirely the responsibility of our federal level of government - as is raising the tax revenue to fund them.
In the U.S., the idea that some of this is decentralised isn't just a way of doing less of it. It also means that in states and municipalities where people want more welfare than average, they have a way of enacting that without being stopped by a lack of enthusiasm from people who don't share their views and are, to be honest, culturally far different from them. After all, the U.S. is an incredibly culturally diverse country of 323 million people that stretches from Guam to St. Croix. Expecting one size to fit all would be the approach better characterised as "utterly astonishing" -- it's more amazing that there are as many federal programmes as there are, including the Big Three of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which together are a supermajority of the federal budget.
TH e whole idea of Federal VS State is that there are 50 states therefore allowing up to 50 different attempts to experiment with new ideas of laws and government policies.

My home state WV for example came up with several laws restricting teenage driving. The first was suspension of driver's license for teenagers that drop out of school. Another is that under 18 Teenagers are not allowed to operate vehicles with only minors as passengers under a teen restricted license . That license also comes with fewer points to lose before the license is suspended. The idea behind this is to encourage young drivers to be more responsible drivers than they would otherwise be with their under developed pre-frontal cortexes.

These laws have been adopted in several other states after they were found to have a positive impact in WV.
Well, you make a valid case for the "diversity of US states" by citing the case of your home state and driver's licence laws. But may I point out that it works in the opposite direction as well?

Until just a generation or two ago a whole block of states, all located in The South and all former CSA secessionists had on their state statutes what were commonly known as Jim Crow laws. I believe that you would know about those already so no further explanation needed.

The North, along with its anti-slavery radical Republicans, may well have won the American Civil War but it seems that the southern reactionaries subsequently won the peace that followed. The dark shadow of the unrepentant South also extended from that power base stronghold into your Federal political arena. As recently as the 1950's I believe they had segregated regiments in your US armed forces.
The American civil war continued for far longer than most people in the world realize.
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” … George Orwell

neverfail
Posts: 1436
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: the negative side of US states "experimentation".

Post by neverfail » Wed Feb 07, 2018 6:33 pm

Doc wrote:
Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:49 pm

The American civil war continued for far longer than most people in the world realize.
Never were truer words spoken, Doc.

Post Reply