- Joined
- 15 Oct 10
- Moves
- 98630
15 Mar 12
Originally posted by wittywonkaThe article makes sense. 1000 therefore is still much too small. 3000 mimimum qnd 6000 is more like it. Somebody will say that's too much government. We are the government (at least in theory) and there 300 million plus of us. Slash the salary (say...to the average in their home district), eleiminate or drastically reduce their transportaion allowance (they'll spend more time at home) and let the people make their voices heard.
Food for thought: to make the US House more representative of the electorate, why not literally...make it more proportionally representative? Why not increase the number of seats from 435 to, say, 1000?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/09/opinion/flynn-expand-congress/index.html
Good post
15 Mar 12
Originally posted by wittywonkaInteresting thought.
Food for thought: to make the US House more representative of the electorate, why not literally...make it more proportionally representative? Why not increase the number of seats from 435 to, say, 1000?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/09/opinion/flynn-expand-congress/index.html
On a different issue, I would like to see Puerto Rico get statehood, and the Senate thus go to 102 members.
15 Mar 12
Originally posted by wittywonkaCome on - where are you going to find 1,000 serious and competent politicians? You're scraping the barrel as it is! Why does more of the same make things any better?
Food for thought: to make the US House more representative of the electorate, why not literally...make it more proportionally representative? Why not increase the number of seats from 435 to, say, 1000?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/09/opinion/flynn-expand-congress/index.html
15 Mar 12
Originally posted by moon1969The way the US is headed, about the only way you get them to join the union would be maybe at gunpoint.
Interesting thought.
On a different issue, I would like to see Puerto Rico get statehood, and the Senate thus go to 102 members.
Give us your tax dollars and kids to send overeas to fight or else!! ðŸ˜
15 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by wittywonkaState legislatures have close to the ratios of representative to population mentioned in the article. In Texas, districts have 150,000 people.
Food for thought: to make the US House more representative of the electorate, why not literally...make it more proportionally representative? Why not increase the number of seats from 435 to, say, 1000?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/09/opinion/flynn-expand-congress/index.html
15 Mar 12
Originally posted by wittywonkaI think exactly what we need is more gridlock and there's nothing like another 600 Congressman to make sure that you have 1,000 people fighting over the pork barrel rather than just 400. In fact, make it 2,000 Congressmen and make sure nothing ever gets done in Congress. Ever.
Food for thought: to make the US House more representative of the electorate, why not literally...make it more proportionally representative? Why not increase the number of seats from 435 to, say, 1000?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/09/opinion/flynn-expand-congress/index.html
Better yet, make it 100,000,000 Congressmen and eliminate the unemployment problem in the US by putting most of the work force in Congress and put enormous pressure on the rest of the people to actually make stuff for all the Congressmen.
15 Mar 12
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyAs another aside, we are doing the brain drain on Puerto Rico.
The way the US is headed, about the only way you get them to join the union would be maybe at gunpoint.
Give us your tax dollars and kids to send overeas to fight or else!! ðŸ˜
Puerto Rico's population exodus is all about jobs
MAYAGÜEZ, Puerto Rico— Here, about 100 miles from the tourist-filled beaches, cobblestone streets and historic forts of Old San Juan and the imposing cruise ships docked near the walled city, the main attraction has little to do with tourism. The real draw is the University of Puerto Rico's swelling ranks of engineering, science and nursing graduates looking for work.
Recruiters for companies such as Boeing and Disney, NASA and other U.S. government agencies, school districts and hospitals from Texas to Florida flock to career fairs in this industrial city on the island's western shore.
They're aggressively courting the most coveted slice of the U.S. workforce: college grads trained in all the hot-button STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) disciplines. Add that these students are bilingual, don't need a passport, visa or any government permission to work stateside, and it's clear why they're a hot commodity, even in a down economy.
Puerto Rico has seen a historic population decline in the past few years, and this "brain drain" is a mere symptom of a larger problem rooted in an enduring recession where unemployment is still above 14%, compared with 8.3% nationally.
To the chagrin of many Puerto Ricans, luring the best and brightest off the island has become a breeze.
Consider this just the latest chapter in Puerto Rico's story, one shaped by its complex relationship with the United States. It's a commonwealth — not a state — yet its residents are U.S. citizens who can vote in U.S. elections when they're living in any of the 50 states or the District of Columbia.
How bad is the exodus? So many residents are leaving the island that more Puerto Ricans now live on the mainland than in Puerto Rico. The commonwealth's population had a steeper loss than any of the 50 states since 2006, according to the Census Bureau. In the year ended July 1, 2011, the island lost about 15,000 residents, a 0.4% slide, to a current population of 3.7 million. That's a bigger drop than Rhode Island and Michigan, the only states to see a decline.
Increasingly, the exodus is led by educated professionals — young and middle-aged.
Young people and families are leaving primarily for jobs, but also to get away from a spike in crime (more than 1,000 murders last year, a record high that topped 983 the previous year) and an increasingly active drug trade coupled with widespread police corruption.
A poll by global market research company Ipsos last October found that 1.5 million people, or 45% of islanders, have considered leaving — most for U.S. states. About a quarter of those Puerto Ricans have taken steps to do so, the poll found.
"Professionals are being forced to leave," says Daphne Santa, a speech and language pathologist at the Orlando VA Medical Center and chairwoman of the Puerto Rican Professionals Association based in South Florida. "It's not that they want to."
"It's a substantial concern," acknowledges Secretary of Commerce José Pérez-Riera. "We don't want to see the population leave."
"It's a brain drain," Santa says. "I'm afraid the island will continue to deteriorate because all the thinkers, the intellectuals, are forced to leave."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-11/puerto-rico-economy-brain-drain-exodus/53490820/1
15 Mar 12
Originally posted by whodeyThough it would be nice to get the two Democrat senators from a Puerto Rico state. Would help the Dems get the super majority needed to overcome the obstructionist party of No.
The way the US is headed, about the only way you get them to join the union would be maybe at gunpoint.
Give us your tax dollars and kids to send overeas to fight or else!! ðŸ˜
16 Mar 12
Originally posted by sh76I share your concerns, but I can't help but think that the overall effect couldn't be worse than the current situation. Maybe Congressmen with smaller districts would have to be more responsive to constituents' calls for bipartisanship.
I think exactly what we need is more gridlock and there's nothing like another 600 Congressman to make sure that you have 1,000 people fighting over the pork barrel rather than just 400. In fact, make it 2,000 Congressmen and make sure nothing ever gets done in Congress. Ever.
Better yet, make it 100,000,000 Congressmen and eliminate the unemployment problem ...[text shortened]... put enormous pressure on the rest of the people to actually make stuff for all the Congressmen.
16 Mar 12
Originally posted by finneganNot necessarily. I'll bet there are competent (at least on par with others) candidates in plenty of districts who never felt it was worth their time to run because the district was so heavily favored one way or another toward the majority party.
Come on - where are you going to find 1,000 serious and competent politicians? You're scraping the barrel as it is! Why does more of the same make things any better?
16 Mar 12
Originally posted by wittywonkaBy and large, constituents don't call for bipartisanship. They call for partisanship in their favor.
I share your concerns, but I can't help but think that the overall effect couldn't be worse than the current situation. Maybe Congressmen with smaller districts would have to be more responsive to constituents' calls for bipartisanship.