politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Eh, I dunno. I think the complaints about age and term limits should be cast aside. It's red herring when it comes to the real problems we have. There is nothing inherently magical about age.
Right now, I'm watching the likes of Big Balls being given the keys to the kingdom, and even though they are 19, I see zero evidence they could give a rat's ass about how anything works, even if they might have been considered good at one small aspect of tech. Even if they were a child prodigy at one sliver of time's tech, it doesn't mean they know shit about government, or even other aspects of tech if for instance that tech involves something like Cobol.
I also don't think being good with computers or tech has much to do with being good at governance, and that's coming from a life-long techie. I mean I would just love and delight in a world in which tech skills magically extrapolated to being good at everything else, but I just don't think it works like that.
So even assuming a role like Big Balls and doge were something American voters actually wanted and was legal, I could care less if someone knows tech or not, if their motivations are warped and they have acquired zero wisdom and their platform doesn't align with actual progress for the American people - they could be demons there just to dismantle government and too young to know the difference.
We already have minimum ages higher than 19... Also tech literacy is massively important when the law writing bodies are writing laws about tech. Most of our modern laws are anchored in tech that 60 year old, life long politicians just don't know anything about. Also term limits are a separate issue from age entirely. I don't think any government position should be life time appointment and I definitely don't think that a government position should give you any real financial advantage over anyone else in the country. Government jobs should just be jobs like every other salary position in the country. It should also come with restrictions on stock trading and anything else that corrupts. That's why I suggest a jury system for an ethics review board.
I still am not getting how age and tech are related? They may track together in general, but I also happen to think some of today's younger generations are even LESS technically proficient in certain ways (again, younger people may be familiar with certain brands and interfaces on pads and phones, but this is less about really being tech-literate but more brand-literate).
I also don't see how government and tech are related, either. What do they have to do with one another? This is like asking a rep to be experts on solar or EV. You don't rely on their personal experience with those things, either, they have staff for that kind of thing. They can explain the outline to them like they are a four-year old (or a manager) just like any other matter requiring a deep dive, and there are many. I highly doubt someone in their 30s as a politico understands nuclear power any better than some geriatric one, nor would I expect them to? Same for matters of solar, or computer networks, or modernized electrical grids, etc...does someone younger just pick this sort of expertise up by osmosis while an 80-something does not? I'd be interested in the mechanism...