It takes me a while to recover so I can function like a normal human again.

 

Why is it my cognitive skills deteriorate after watching political debates?

Relax! There would be cause for concern only if they didn't!!!

Best regards
HP

PS
FWIW - My remarks are with reference to both parties!

 

Political debates are not debates any longer (since Kennedy vs Nixon). They are extended commercials, by non-professional actors. SAG should be screaming. And commercials are nothing more than mass hypnosis to get you to stop thinking critically. Hence, the drop in cognitive skills.

 

Unfortunately, I remember the Kennedy-Nixon debates.

Some people have asked for a return to the Lincoln-Douglas style, but given the current popularity, I suspect that is unlikely. After all, which gets more viewers, a heavy-weight fight or Jeopardy?

John

 

A lot of what they say and do is specifically to NOT engage your cognitive abilities but rather to affect your touchy-feely side. These are not reasoned debates scored on logic and deductive reasoning skills. They're grade-school recess yard brawls where the combatants vie for perceived status with the rest of the primates.

 

I agree the debates play to the emotional side. The some candidates are buying votes, by offering more "free" stuff. Apparently the cost of the "free" stuff offered by the Independent from Vermont is 18 Trillion. Someone has to pay up ... It's like the "free" healthcare. If you don't have it you can be subject to the "shared responsibility" payment (not a tax) which could be 695 dollars for some. It is based on income. Between user fees, "shared responsibility payments", and taxes, the government is collecting alot of revenue.

We get the government we vote for ... even if your selection didn't win.

It seems the founders were smart enough to ensure conflict between the branches. Who knows what damage could be done if they actually passed everything offered.

The history of the income tax is interesting. First they were going to send everyone an annual bill to pay. Then they forgave that payment, and instituted the withholding process, making the employer a revenue agent for the government, so you can "pay as you go." Take a little a week adds up quickly when your talking a little from the general population. The legislative branch isn't stupid. They know they can buy votes with the "free" stuff.

 

I agree the debates play to the emotional side. The some candidates are buying votes, by offering more "free" stuff. Apparently the cost of the "free" stuff offered by the Independent from Vermont is 18 Trillion. Someone has to pay up ... It's like the "free" healthcare. If you don't have it you can be subject to the "shared responsibility" payment (not a tax) which could be 695 dollars for some. It is based on income. Between user fees, "shared responsibility payments", and taxes, the government is collecting alot of revenue.

We get the government we vote for ... even if your selection didn't win.

It seems the founders were smart enough to ensure conflict between the branches. Who knows what damage could be done if they actually passed everything offered.

The history of the income tax is interesting. First they were going to send everyone an annual bill to pay. Then they forgave that payment, and instituted the withholding process, making the employer a revenue agent for the government, so you can "pay as you go." Take a little a week adds up quickly when your talking a little from the general population. The legislative branch isn't stupid. They know they can buy votes with the "free" stuff.

Yeah...it IS a good thing you don't get all the government you pay for!

 

I agree the debates play to the emotional side. The some candidates are buying votes, by offering more "free" stuff. Apparently the cost of the "free" stuff offered by the Independent from Vermont is 18 Trillion. Someone has to pay up ... It's like the "free" healthcare. If you don't have it you can be subject to the "shared responsibility" payment (not a tax) which could be 695 dollars for some. It is based on income. Between user fees, "shared responsibility payments", and taxes, the government is collecting alot of revenue.

We get the government we vote for ... even if your selection didn't win.

It seems the founders were smart enough to ensure conflict between the branches. Who knows what damage could be done if they actually passed everything offered.

The history of the income tax is interesting. First they were going to send everyone an annual bill to pay. Then they forgave that payment, and instituted the withholding process, making the employer a revenue agent for the government, so you can "pay as you go." Take a little a week adds up quickly when your talking a little from the general population. The legislative branch isn't stupid. They know they can buy votes with the "free" stuff.

I was to cheap to sign up for your link.
But the 18 trillion is a little misleading. Most of that is already being paid by someone. So moving it to a tax is a wash if you can figure out how to do it. I think it would be difficult at best the way our healthcare is intertwined with private, employer, and uninsured.
College for all takes just plain tax increases. Is it worth it? Personal choice I guess. Do I think it will happen? No way. But clearly something needs to be done with health care costs.

 

Yeah...it IS a good thing you don't get all the government you pay for!

Fun to compare to Europe.

 

Well 21.2% of federal spending on health in the US compared to UK's £122...

 

Yeah I joke but it worries me a bit that the education part of the US federal budget is wrapped up with the everything else category.

 

Yeah I joke but it worries me a bit that the education part of the US federal budget is wrapped up with the everything else category.

An afterthought. But it is over half of that slice at 15%. The one that was interesting to me was defense. I keep hearing all the politicians saying we are weak on defense. Must just be another sound bite.

 

You first mistake was to watch public TV. That initiated the brain melt. The next mistake was based on which party was debating. Was your brain leaking out of your RIGHT ear or your LEFT ear, which is a sign of which party was debating. Now, please, it is best to discard what leaked out of your head because it mainly consists of dissolved and unrecoverable brain cells. Remember the big thing about the pink slime that came out of beef when you cooked it?? Yup, that was collected after major debates and used to make beef weigh more. Welcome to the world of American political debates and beef processing. Enjoy your meal.

 

Most government spending has nothing to do with buying votes.

Government spending is actually due to the $$$ interests who give contributions to governmental officials in return for a special interest program. Most of these programs do not benefit the Average Joe middle class or the lower class. In fact, the middle class is actually shrinking and more people are being shoved down hill toward the lower class.

If you don't buy it, you might want to check out the worsening socio-economic conditions in San Francisco where the politically connected are sopping up huge amounts of taxpayer $$$ and less is going to public services. In fact, California is becoming a "Government State" similar to the Soviet Union and increasingly riddled with mismanagement and corruption.

The Soviet Union and communism eventually failed because of mismanagement and rampant corruption. However it was not a democracy and the failure cannot be blamed on "buying votes".

 

If you have the common sense to move out of The Great Peoples Republic of California, Arizona or Texas will take you.

 

"If you have the common sense to move out of The Great Peoples Republic of California, Arizona or Texas will take you."

You got that one right!!!!

People who want to get out of California, and have the $$$ to get out, are getting out.

What will be left of California are the political interests and their cronies who bankrupted the state (financially, intellectually, and morally) and the lower income class.

 

You guys have to quit thinking anything about government or politics on TV is about reality. That's "entertainment", a sort of theater performance. The real power running our country doesn't go on TV. They are much too busy getting filthy rich while you watch the entertainment.

 

You guys have to quit thinking anything about government or politics on TV is about reality. That's "entertainment", a sort of theater performance. The real power running our country doesn't go on TV. They are much too busy getting filthy rich while you watch the entertainment.

I'm amused how the news reports on some presidential campaign tour (like one of Hillary's) where she makes a statement and a crowd of people immediately start whopping and cheering like they're at the Super Bowel.

It's a classic example of a "Rent-A-Mob".

 

If we abandoned the electorial college and go with the popular vote, only the major metro areas need to be motivated to get out the vote and the politicos would concentrate their resources there. A class D radio station in BFE would not have a good financial year and the major metros would be all political commercials 24/7 during the presided tial campaigns.

There is a reason why our elections were set up with the college.

 

There is a reason why our elections were set up with the college.

How many radio and tv stations were there when the electoral system was set up in 1787? And how many were there when the present electoral college was formed in 1847?