Should the US House of Reps have more Representatives?

[PLATO]

States should be abolished entirely.

That is neither a realistic idea or a good one. There has to be a hierarchy of government or things won't function. Should we abolish counties and Cities as well?

Perhaps an argument that the role of States should be changed would have more traction and better represent your idea?

[Sava]

That is neither a realistic idea or a good one. There has to be a hierarchy of government or things won't function. Should we abolish counties and Cities as well?

Perhaps an argument that the role of States should be changed would have more traction and better represent your idea?

I thought you were a conservative? Yet you support useless and redundant layers of government bureaucracy.

[PLATO]

I thought you were a conservative? Yet you support useless and redundant layers of government bureaucracy.

Not really. I just feel that most issues should be decided at the State level. You know...the "closer to the people they represent" philosophy. The redundantcy comes from the federal government usurping the power of the States...not the States exercising their legitimate powers.

[DinoDoc]

States should be abolished entirely.

Why?

[Sava]

Why?

Because I say so.

[DinoDoc]

Because I say so.

Why?

[Sava]

Not really. I just feel that most issues should be decided at the State level. You know...the "closer to the people they represent" philosophy. The redundantcy comes from the federal government usurping the power of the States...not the States exercising their legitimate powers.

But as a conservative, aren't you concerned about government oppressing the people?

If and when the Nazi Islamic Commie government subjugates us all, it's going to be done at the state and local level. Some windbag in Washington isn't going to be in charge.

Also, this has been settled since the 18th century. It was called the Articles of Confederation. It sucked. That's why we have the Constitution.

[Sava]

Why?

BECAUSE I'M BORED AND DRINKING COFFEE AND WANT TO ARGUE

[The Mad Monk]

If and when the Nazi Islamic Commie government subjugates us all, it's going to be done at the state and local level. Some windbag in Washington isn't going to be in charge.

Doing it that way will take much longer, simply because there are so many of them. Why do you think the progressive running dogs are doing their damnedest to beef up the central government?

[Sava]

Doing it that way will take much longer, simply because there are so many of them. Why do you think the progressive running dogs are doing their damnedest to beef up the central government?

Because the central government is the only thing that can protect the American people from some random state governor imposing his will on everyone.

Again... that's why the Articles of Confederation failed.

Plus, the central government is really too inefficient to maintain effective control over the entire country by itself. If you are actually concerned with some dictator taking over, you should support the current system... not some pipe dream anti-federalist utopia that cannot and will not ever exist.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I thought you were a conservative? Yet you support useless and redundant layers of government bureaucracy.

Of course they do. Conservatism (traditionally) is about preserving the hierarchic order .

[Sava]

Of course they do. Conservatism (traditionally) is about preserving the hierarchic order .

Lately they seem interested in returning to a hierarchical order that was rejected over 200 years ago.

[The Mad Monk]

No, the Articles of Confederation failed for exactly the same reason that a "bottom-up" takeover would be much more difficult. For every government that's inclined to revolt, there's going to be one directly opposed, another couple in varying degrees of opposition and more than a few yelling about something else entirely. A few will be stoned out of their gourds watching the butterflies.

[Sava]

No, the Articles of Confederation failed for exactly the same reason that a "bottom-up" takeover would be much more difficult. For every government that's inclined to revolt, there's going to be one directly opposed, another couple in varying degrees of opposition and more than a few yelling about something else entirely. A few will be stoned out of their gourds watching the butterflies.

There were multiple reasons why the Articles of Confederation failed. That's why the "don't tread on me" crowd's support for that style of government is so strange.

[The Mad Monk]

The AoC went too far, in that interstate relations were too chaotic to be supportable. Don't confuse levels of sovereignty with levels of bureaucracy.