Whether or not you agree with how US laws are drafted, this administration has no logical foundation for anything it does which is a massively different and worse problem by orders of magnitude.
This administration runs on whims. This is horrifying and there is real harm in this we have yet to see the full repercussions of.
This administration has been slapped back by the courts more then I would have expected though. If we had fewer laws granting pretty broad powers to the executive branch I have to assume more of the administration's actions would be stopped.
You are not constructive when you only want to strap gov. powers. The resulting void is ripe for the private sector to capture. To counter this, you need capable public institutions, so a constructive approach would mean, more precise regulations with balanced liberties and bureaucratic aid, not plain less of it. (IMO, this general rejection without a propper problem description nor solution is a product of corporate propaganda to achieve this exact void.)
It just means that the entire system has not been captured by insane people that there is still some pushback.
Anyone who believes in the Unitary Executive Theory likely believes that the President wears imperial robes. The idea that the President should have unchecked power over the executive branch is insane and mocks the whole idea of coequal branches of government or checks and balances.
You can argue for reform, but nothing currently going on is reform. It is entirely running on fumes. The recent AI executive order is representative of this as is the constantly shifting policy driven by whoever has Trump’s favor at any point in time. There's nothing grounding any recent policy change of the United States.
The lack of a logical foundation isn't the novelty. The whole system has run on whims and backfilled reasoning for a long time. That's the problem.
If it had always been the rule of law until now then we would have an apparatus set up to impose checks and balances and accountability on government officials, but because those things have so atrophied from continuous contempt and neglect, no one knows how to demonstrate that what Trump is doing is wrong without also conceding that half of what the government has been doing for decades is wrong. But they also don't want to stop doing those things and therefore have rather a dilemma.
Of course, that's assuming you actually demand logical consistency. If you don't care about that you can do whatever you want -- which is kind of the trouble.
While I agree as implemented today our system of checks and balances is faltering, those systems do exist. Separation of powers and our three branch system was designed precisely to try and force checks on power.
It may be failing, but the problem isn't that those systems weren't put in place.
You are biased, previous administration war on crypto was worse IMO. The attacks on private banking for companies dealing with crypto and 0 laws by the SEC.
This is a fact regardless if you like/dislike crypto.
I'm not sure how to weigh the previous administrations war on crypto and the current ones complete embracing of it. Not only does the president literally have his own cryptocurrency, they're trying hard to create a digital dollar based on crypto and likely amounting to public bank accounts directly with the federal reserve.
You may be right, but there is a significant difference in how badly regulating crypto affects the broader economy compared to what the current administration is doing.
In countries other than the US, most regulatory bodies are outside the government for exactly that reason - to take the power away from the political elite, whilst continuing to ensure safety and reason come first.
The new law the US is proposing here, is the exact opposite. A kingly appointed adjudicator to decide things.
Whether or not you agree with how US laws are drafted, this administration has no logical foundation for anything it does which is a massively different and worse problem by orders of magnitude.
This administration runs on whims. This is horrifying and there is real harm in this we have yet to see the full repercussions of.
This administration has been slapped back by the courts more then I would have expected though. If we had fewer laws granting pretty broad powers to the executive branch I have to assume more of the administration's actions would be stopped.
You are not constructive when you only want to strap gov. powers. The resulting void is ripe for the private sector to capture. To counter this, you need capable public institutions, so a constructive approach would mean, more precise regulations with balanced liberties and bureaucratic aid, not plain less of it. (IMO, this general rejection without a propper problem description nor solution is a product of corporate propaganda to achieve this exact void.)
3 replies →
It just means that the entire system has not been captured by insane people that there is still some pushback.
Anyone who believes in the Unitary Executive Theory likely believes that the President wears imperial robes. The idea that the President should have unchecked power over the executive branch is insane and mocks the whole idea of coequal branches of government or checks and balances.
You can argue for reform, but nothing currently going on is reform. It is entirely running on fumes. The recent AI executive order is representative of this as is the constantly shifting policy driven by whoever has Trump’s favor at any point in time. There's nothing grounding any recent policy change of the United States.
1 reply →
The lack of a logical foundation isn't the novelty. The whole system has run on whims and backfilled reasoning for a long time. That's the problem.
If it had always been the rule of law until now then we would have an apparatus set up to impose checks and balances and accountability on government officials, but because those things have so atrophied from continuous contempt and neglect, no one knows how to demonstrate that what Trump is doing is wrong without also conceding that half of what the government has been doing for decades is wrong. But they also don't want to stop doing those things and therefore have rather a dilemma.
Of course, that's assuming you actually demand logical consistency. If you don't care about that you can do whatever you want -- which is kind of the trouble.
While I agree as implemented today our system of checks and balances is faltering, those systems do exist. Separation of powers and our three branch system was designed precisely to try and force checks on power.
It may be failing, but the problem isn't that those systems weren't put in place.
You are biased, previous administration war on crypto was worse IMO. The attacks on private banking for companies dealing with crypto and 0 laws by the SEC.
This is a fact regardless if you like/dislike crypto.
I'm not sure how to weigh the previous administrations war on crypto and the current ones complete embracing of it. Not only does the president literally have his own cryptocurrency, they're trying hard to create a digital dollar based on crypto and likely amounting to public bank accounts directly with the federal reserve.
You may be right, but there is a significant difference in how badly regulating crypto affects the broader economy compared to what the current administration is doing.
In countries other than the US, most regulatory bodies are outside the government for exactly that reason - to take the power away from the political elite, whilst continuing to ensure safety and reason come first.
The new law the US is proposing here, is the exact opposite. A kingly appointed adjudicator to decide things.
I must have missed something very important in the article. What law is being proposed here?