Most Terrible Issue Facing America Today ? (1 Viewer)

[Mr. Blue Sky]

I debated whether or not to put this into some other discussion, but i think it’s worth its own thread.. there are many different threads here covering a variety of very pressing topics.. Which two or three, for you, are the most immediate and ‘fire alarm’ type issues today, as i type this in mid March of the year 2025 ? To be clear, almost every issue that comes out every day is horrible, but i am trying to prioritize my horror .. My list:

1) the environment .. with almost every single regulation being rolled back and the EPA soon be eliminated, expect absolutely no action on climate change and expect even more hurricanes, tornados , wildfires etc al and premiums to be even more sky high and unaffordable , IF you can even acquire insurance at all .

2) Having a megalomaniac Russian asset in the White House with the nuclear codes.. ‘Nuff said .

3) Social Security.. I’ve been paying into it since im 14 yrs old working fast food, if they want to cut me a check for hundreds of thousands of dollars (plus interest) and call it even, then that’s fine .. otherwise, it looks like the Republicans will finally get their wish to “privatize” Social Security .


.. sorry to denigrate Immigration, the economy, racism, LGBTQ+ and everything else.. hopefully we can figure out a way to address all of these things.. but what are your top two or three ?

 

[Dragon]

And we do.

Apparently not. Just look at the hate directed at LGBTQ+ individuals and women. Many conservatives on this board have argued that a fetus’s life is more important than that of the mother, while using derogatory language to describe immigrants and African Americans. And notice how many americans openly embrace the hate fueled by Musk and others who promote white nationalism—even to the point where vigilantes indiscriminately arrest and harass people simply for looking Hispanic.

 

[TampaJoe]

And we do.

Apparently not. Just look at the hate directed at LGBTQ+ individuals and women. Many conservatives on this board have argued that a fetus’s life is more important than that of the mother, while using derogatory language to describe immigrants and African Americans. And notice how many americans openly embrace the hate fueled by Musk and others who promote white nationalism—even to the point where vigilantes indiscriminately arrest and harass people simply for looking Hispanic.

Yes, some conservatives say some hateful things. That does not represent the view of all conservatives. As a conservative, I favored keeping Roe, I favored gay marriage, I don’t want to do away with Medicare and Medicaid.

I do favor law and order. I do think we need to control our borders. I do think it’s in our best interest to deport migrants who have criminal records. I do think it’s in our best interest to enforce immigration laws. I don’t have a problem with taking a deep dive into government spending and to work to make sure government is operating as effectively and efficiently as possible. I think most conservatives and most of the country shares those views.

I don’t agree with all the methods or messaging from the Trump administration but I do agree with some of what they seek to accomplish. There are better ways to accomplish these objectives.

None of this means that I and fellow conservatives lack empathy for our fellow man. Most of us want a peaceful and stable society where everyone lives the life as they choose. We differ in how best to get there.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

And we do.

The people you vote for work together to support an administration that doesn't. At some point, you have to reconcile how much you care with how little the GOP does.

 

[TampaJoe]

The people you vote for work together to support an administration that doesn't. At some point, you have to reconcile how much you care with how little the GOP does.

As do you with the people you support.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

As do you with the people you support.

This level of both sides-ism is gonna give you whiplash, Joe. At the risk of banging my head into a brick wall, I will try this one more time.

Only one side is actively dismantling the federal government by firing tens of thousands of federal employees while withholding billions of dollars from projects that help not just Americans, but the entire global population. Those fired employees are now contributing less to the economy because they are losing health insurance, losing paychecks, and scrambling to find work. Some of those with specialized educations who were doing groundbreaking research here are now being offered opportunities overseas. Those who remain are now looking to collect unemployment benefits to tide them over until they find more work, which is a drain on the states. A lot of them are veterans, Joe. Military veterans looking to start the next phase of their lives have had everything thrown away by a guy who is only here because he illegally overstayed his visa. How's that for irony?

Meanwhile, the executive and legislative branches- some of whom you voted for- are actively working to remove protections from LGBTQ+ folks, immigrants, and racial minorities. You know, your neighbors. The ones you say you care for genuinely. They are deporting legal residents as well as immigrants actively going through the legal system to become legal residents, and they are doing it all with zero due process. They openly defy the courts.

Tell me how Democrats are doing anything remotely close to this, Joe.

 

[coldseat]

I don’t agree with all the methods or messaging from the Trump administration but I do agree with some of what they seek to accomplish. There are better ways to accomplish these objectives.

This is the part that gets me and I can't abide by. This guy below is certifiably insane. I can't look at anything he, or the unqualified and radical people he's put in charge of his cabinet and administration, is doing and not believe or know for a fact that is't all coming from an incredibly poisoned well. When there's this much proof that person with so much power is so toxic, immoral, vindictive, crazy and dumb, and that Republicans are willing to follow him down into the depths of that sycosis, maybe you (as a voter) should give a second thought to what you think they "seek to accomplish" and reconsider if maybe it isn't the best thing for America. Even if you previously thought it would be good. Also maybe give consideration to the irreversible damage they're causing to the country and get more pissed about that.

 

[TampaJoe]

This level of both sides-ism is gonna give you whiplash, Joe. At the risk of banging my head into a brick wall, I will try this one more time.

Only one side is actively dismantling the federal government by firing tens of thousands of federal employees while withholding billions of dollars from projects that help not just Americans, but the entire global population. Those fired employees are now contributing less to the economy because they are losing health insurance, losing paychecks, and scrambling to find work. Some of those with specialized educations who were doing groundbreaking research here are now being offered opportunities overseas. Those who remain are now looking to collect unemployment benefits to tide them over until they find more work, which is a drain on the states. A lot of them are veterans, Joe. Military veterans looking to start the next phase of their lives have had everything thrown away by a guy who is only here because he illegally overstayed his visa. How's that for irony?

Meanwhile, the executive and legislative branches- some of whom you voted for- are actively working to remove protections from LGBTQ+ folks, immigrants, and racial minorities. You know, your neighbors. The ones you say you care for genuinely. They are deporting legal residents as well as immigrants actively going through the legal system to become legal residents, and they are doing it all with zero due process. They openly defy the courts.

Tell me how Democrats are doing anything remotely close to this, Joe.

I have done several reorganizations in my career. I have never seen one that was painless. I have never seen one where everyone was happy. I have never seen one that was easy. Never.

If you wait on the perfect process where no one objects and everyone agrees then you will never make the hard choices. If they were easy it would have already been done. It won’t be perfect. Mistakes will be made. That doesn’t mean the change isn’t warranted or needed.

I would go about this differently were it my decision but I still believe it needs to be done.

 

[RobF]

I have done several reorganizations in my career. I have never seen one that was painless. I have never seen one where everyone was happy. I have never seen one that was easy. Never.

If you wait on the perfect process where no one objects and everyone agrees then you will never make the hard choices. If they were easy it would have already been done. It won’t be perfect. Mistakes will be made. That doesn’t mean the change isn’t warranted or needed.

I would go about this differently were it my decision but I still believe it needs to be done.

"I don't think setting fire to the house was the best way to go about tidying it," said the man sagely, as another part of the building collapsed in the flames, "but I still think the house needed to be tidied. And if we'd waited for the perfect way to tidy it, we'd never make the hard choices."

I genuinely hate to be so very blunt, but that's yet another clown take. You're still in this fantasy world where you're just plain ignoring every person who's pointed out multiple times they were already processes for re-organising and improving efficiency. But because you can't defend what's actually happening, you want to create this false framing, where those objecting to the crude destruction aren't objecting to that at all, no, they're objecting to "reorganizations" and "change" in general, and where the choice is a false dilemma between "the perfect process" and "an unelected billionaire and his goon squad chainsawing their way through government".

But that's just incredibly feeble, Joe. There are obviously many other alternatives, including the processes and efforts that already existed, and not only is it possible to object to this destruction while supporting reorgnization and efficiency in general, it's very, very, very, obviously the rational position that people actually hold.

"This is the wrong way to go about this," should be your entire take. Trying to do that and simultaneously justify it with such feeble arguments as you use above? Garbage.

 

[Dragon]

I have done several reorganizations in my career. I have never seen one that was painless. I have never seen one where everyone was happy. I have never seen one that was easy. Never.

If you wait on the perfect process where no one objects and everyone agrees then you will never make the hard choices. If they were easy it would have already been done. It won’t be perfect. Mistakes will be made. That doesn’t mean the change isn’t warranted or needed.

I would go about this differently were it my decision but I still believe it needs to be done.

There is a vast difference between running a country and running a business—a HUGE difference.

A government exists to serve its people, while a business exists to generate profit.

In governance, the true “profit” isn’t measured in money but in the well-being of the citizens who elected their leaders. It means ensuring people have safe roads to get to work or enjoy their free time, schools to educate their children, healthcare when they are sick, and support when they grow old or face hardship. It means protecting the country from threats and ensuring clean air and water for future generations.


That is the real profit a government should strive for.

 

[TampaJoe]

This is the part that gets me and I can't abide by. This guy below is certifiably insane. I can't look at anything he, or the unqualified and radical people he's put in charge his cabinet and administration, are doing and not believe or know for a fact that is't all coming from an incredibly poisoned well. When there's this much proof that person with so much power is so toxic, immoral, vindictive, crazy and dumb, and that Republicans are willing to follow him down into the depths of that sycosis, maybe you (as a voter) should give a second thought to what you think they "seek to accomplish" and reconsider if maybe it isn't the best thing for America. Even if you previously thought it would be good. Also maybe give consideration to the irreversible damage they're causing to the country and get more pissed about that.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I have done several reorganizations in my career. I have never seen one that was painless. I have never seen one where everyone was happy. I have never seen one that was easy. Never.

If you wait on the perfect process where no one objects and everyone agrees then you will never make the hard choices. If they were easy it would have already been done. It won’t be perfect. Mistakes will be made. That doesn’t mean the change isn’t warranted or needed.

I would go about this differently were it my decision but I still believe it needs to be done.

I asked you to do one thing and you failed to do it. Wanna try again or do you just want to carry water for the people responsible for wrecking the government from the inside?

 

[TampaJoe]

There is a vast difference between running a country and running a business—a HUGE difference.

A government exists to serve its people, while a business exists to generate profit.

In governance, the true “profit” isn’t measured in money but in the well-being of the citizens who elected their leaders. It means ensuring people have safe roads to get to work or enjoy their free time, schools to educate their children, healthcare when they are sick, and support when they grow old or face hardship. It means protecting the country from threats and ensuring clean air and water for future generations.


That is the real profit a government should strive for.

I’m not going to have the whole business versus government thing again. You guys have your minds made up. What I can say is that large bureaucracies are inherently prone to inefficiency. This is true in either sector. Large bureaucracies are much more difficult to change. The same complaints I’ve been hearing I have heard multiple times from multiple people in every reorganization I have ever worked.

So you can say that the government is highly efficient and has processes in place to root all waste,fraud and abuse. Not the first time I’ve heard that either. We spend trillions of dollars each year and we have identified all the waste fraud and abuse and there’s nothing else to see or do. Just move on and keep writing those checks.

If you believe that then that is entirely up to you. I am unconvinced. It appears much of the public is unconvinced.

 

[RobF]

So you can say that the government is highly efficient and has processes in place to root all waste,fraud and abuse. Not the first time I’ve heard that either. We spend trillions of dollars each year and we have identified all the waste fraud and abuse and there’s nothing else to see or do. Just move on and keep writing those checks.

Literally no-one said that.

You've just done the exact same thing I accused you of doing, again, trying to create a false dilemma. But the choice is not between "everything exactly as it currently is, or an unelected billionaire and his goon squad chainsawing their way through government" either. And you obviously know that. Give it a rest already, it's embarrassing, derails the actual discussions taking place, and just wastes everyone's time.

 

[TampaJoe]

There is a vast difference between running a country and running a business—a HUGE difference.

A government exists to serve its people, while a business exists to generate profit.

In governance, the true “profit” isn’t measured in money but in the well-being of the citizens who elected their leaders. It means ensuring people have safe roads to get to work or enjoy their free time, schools to educate their children, healthcare when they are sick, and support when they grow old or face hardship. It means protecting the country from threats and ensuring clean air and water for future generations.


That is the real profit a government should strive for.

And when government fails to meet what you have defined as its stated purpose, what then? Do we try to change or reorganize or do we just keep on doing those things that haven’t worked? Government isn’t perfect. Neither is the private sector. They are both run by human beings. Those human beings live in the same neighborhoods and go to the same schools are folks who work in the private sector. They share the same human nature and the same strength and weaknesses as everyone else. Now you may believe that government is more benevolent and less self serving if you choose. That is up to you. But it needs to be managed and it needs oversight just like every human endeavor.

You have a very idealistic view of government. That’s nice. I just don’t see it quite as favorably as you.

 

[Dragon]

And when government fails to meet what you have defined as its stated purpose, what then? Do we try to change or reorganize or do we just keep on doing those things that haven’t worked? Government isn’t perfect. Neither is the private sector. They are both run by human beings. Those human beings live in the same neighborhoods and go to the same schools are folks who work in the private sector. They share the same human nature and the same strength and weaknesses as everyone else. Now you may believe that government is more benevolent and less self serving if you choose. That is up to you. But it needs to be managed and it needs oversight just like every human endeavor.

You have a very idealistic view of government. That’s nice. I just don’t see it quite as favorably as you.

That kind of government does exist—just not in the U.S., and that’s largely because of people like you who continue buying into the illusion that those in need are simply lazy or fraudulent. Meanwhile, you turn a blind eye when massive corporations buy politicians and overcharge the government billions for so-called “services” (just look at the American military-industrial complex). But those aren’t the ones the Trump administration accuses—no, they go after the elderly man trying to claim the Social Security he’s paid into for decades.


And yes, I know what I’m talking about. I live in a country where these problems have been solved—where strict and well-enforced laws prevent politicians from being bought. But for the U.S. to get to that point, you need to stop falling for the right-wing political machine’s lies about “fraud.” They want you to hate immigrants and those on welfare so you stay distracted—so your anger is misdirected while billions flow to the corporations funding their campaigns (and in some cases, even their own pockets).

 

[Sendai]

I have done several reorganizations in my career. I have never seen one that was painless. I have never seen one where everyone was happy. I have never seen one that was easy. Never.

If you wait on the perfect process where no one objects and everyone agrees then you will never make the hard choices. If they were easy it would have already been done. It won’t be perfect. Mistakes will be made. That doesn’t mean the change isn’t warranted or needed.

I would go about this differently were it my decision but I still believe it needs to be done.

Been through a few. My experience is that a 10% RIF has little to no impact. So that would be 240,000. I’ll be surprised if they RIF that many.

 

[TampaJoe]

That kind of government does exist—just not in the U.S., and that’s largely because of people like you who continue buying into the illusion that those in need are simply lazy or fraudulent. Meanwhile, you turn a blind eye when massive corporations buy politicians and overcharge the government billions for so-called “services” (just look at the American military-industrial complex). But those aren’t the ones the Trump administration accuses—no, they go after the elderly man trying to claim the Social Security he’s paid into for decades.


And yes, I know what I’m talking about. I live in a country where these problems have been solved—where strict and well-enforced laws prevent politicians from being bought. But for the U.S. to get to that point, you need to stop falling for the right-wing political machine’s lies about “fraud.” They want you to hate immigrants and those on welfare so you stay distracted—so your anger is misdirected while billions flow to the corporations funding their campaigns (and in some cases, even their own pockets).

Where to start? First you know little to nothing about me. Second, I have never accused anyone of being lazy. I don’t condone anyone buying politicians be it a Clinton or a Biden or a Trump. Investigate it all. But don’t ask me to pick and chose based on political ideology. I haven’t called for cutting safety net programs for people in need. I don’t hate anyone. Do you?

So no. You in fact don’t know what the fork you are talking about when you start making assumptions about what I think. I haven’t accused you of anything or questioned your motivation. I leave that to arrogant arseholes.

 

[superchuck500]

I’m not going to have the whole business versus government thing again. You guys have your minds made up. What I can say is that large bureaucracies are inherently prone to inefficiency. This is true in either sector. Large bureaucracies are much more difficult to change. The same complaints I’ve been hearing I have heard multiple times from multiple people in every reorganization I have ever worked.

So you can say that the government is highly efficient and has processes in place to root all waste,fraud and abuse. Not the first time I’ve heard that either. We spend trillions of dollars each year and we have identified all the waste fraud and abuse and there’s nothing else to see or do. Just move on and keep writing those checks.

If you believe that then that is entirely up to you. I am unconvinced. It appears much of the public is unconvinced.

People throw around these conclusions that "we have identified all the waste, fraud, and abuse" but there's been very little evidence of that - in fact, any time that this current attempt (i.e. DOGE) is pressed for evidence of those claims, what they do produce is so unconvincing that it begs the question of what they're really doing because they're obviously lying about the fraud they have "uncovered".

Here's the issue as I see it and it has been this way for years: Yes, the federal government apparatus is large, bloated, and wasteful - and when I say wasteful, I mean that it doesn't do things efficiently and there are often overlapping programs (more than one office doing virtually the same thing) or programs that lack meaningful oversight. This isn't human negligent wastefulness, but it is institutional waste. BUT there's only one effective way to address these symptoms: you have to do the hard work of breaking down the authorities that give rise to these programs and change them. Most of these programs have either statutory authorization, regulatory authorization, or policy-based authorization. The policy-based ones are easy to cut, but the other two have force of law and if you don't appeal or revise them, you haven't gotten rid of them - no matter how many stuff you cut.

This approach that this administration is taking to the executive branch is a failure because it doesn't actually reorganize the government - it only reorganizes the staff. The programmatic requirements stay the same and that means the agencies are going to be constantly working to try to be able to regain the ability to do them - because they're required to by law! So after this spasm is over, it will return to business as usual. No well-run company would re-organize like this, they would do a thoughtful analysis of how to reorganize in a sustainable way - you don't just cut the staff at the factory, you re-tool the factory to work with fewer staff. So this whole idea that that this is some exercise of fiscal responsibility like a business would do is not persuasive - it's one of those rhetorical devices that appeals to people who only require superficial rhetorical ideas to throw their support behind but the substance is highly questionable and quite damaging along the way.

And in fact, many of the programmatic activities that are being trashed are relied upon by large numbers of people and provide substantial public good. Fine, if the minor savings of getting rid of those programs is what they want to do, then say they need do it - and take the political accountability. The fact is that Trump did not run on getting rid of most of these programs (admitted that he did some) and he even said he wouldn't be getting rid of them. I think it's dirty pool when a presidential candidate is aloof, opaque, or even outright denies certain ambitions in the campaign and then turns around and claims a mandate to do these things because people voted for him. It wasn't informed consent.