volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@_m_miles@mstdn.social
Unfortunately, that is what an awful lot of clickbait sort of media outfits want you to feel.
If you feel like we are falling over the edge, well that keeps you on the hook, keeps you coming back to click more and get more ad revenue.
No, there's nothing new under the sun. Just the same old strife, the same old boss, same as the old boss, trying to get people all worked up with sensational rhetoric, if not out right lies.
uspol,reproduction
To be clear, the whole court case is over the FDA violating the law, violating its own procedures by its own admission, and the administration could simply have the FDA follow its procedures correctly to resolve this whole thing.
That the administration is apparently not going down that road to fix this really needs to be called out.
The courts are more or less begging the FDA to just fix this and be done with it. Apparently the administration would rather have the fight than the solution?
USpol, debt limit, Republican brazenness
Keep in mind that the Treasury says it will have enough money to service its debts, so Biden is threatening to default, to not pay debts, even though he can, which is very brazen, and would be an illegal, impeachable offense if he followed through on that threat.
So yes, seriously.
And I really wish the reporting about the debt ceiling didn't buy the spin the administration is putting on it, and looked at the math instead.
I certainly wouldn't vote for him. He really has not lived up to the promises he made during his campaign, and the executive branch at this point is pretty off the rails.
Both in terms of philosophy and in terms of doing his job as head of the executive branch, Biden seems to me to be an absolute failure.
@_m_miles@mstdn.social
Or, you know, making convincing arguments that bring other people over to your perspective through the democratic process, but never mind that, right?
What precisely was the error?
What response are you looking for?
I mean it would mainly illustrate that the US has respect for an independent judiciary.
That's a weird thing to say.
This letter was pretty minor work considering everything else the Court works on, from internal deliberations through public issuance of opinions.
@TruthSandwich@toad.social
From the look of things, it seems you block reality.
I always find it funny when "fascist" is apparently the term for someone pointing out simple facts or science or math.
It's one of those things where you can see that name calling doesn't promote any argument, when it ends up being that whatever derogatory term is conflated with people who actually know things.
"Oh you can do calculus? Well you must be a <insert slur>!"
Well apparently those <slur> people are pretty smart and informed! Go figure!
@TruthSandwich@toad.social
Except, it's a Democrat in the White House who is threatening not to spend the money he has on servicing the debt.
Again, the Treasury has plenty of money to service its debt regardless of this debt ceiling thing. If it defaults, that's purely because the Democratic president chose to blow up the economy, as you put it.
The Treasury says it has the money to service the debt. This is a power play of the president trying to get more borrowing authority, which is exactly what a president is supposed to do, but we need to be clear about how it's working.
No, it's part of the checks and balances in the US system of government.
It's one thing to spend money, but for the government to borrow money will generally imply the commitment of generations of citizens to pay that money back, so it takes a second act of Congress to authorize that borrowing.
That kind of generational commitment is important enough that our representatives need to approve it.
The debt ceiling is merely the result of requiring democratic approval for borrowing.
@TruthSandwich@toad.social
No that's not how the federal government works.
Congress gives permission to spend through appropriations bills, but the executive branch is the one that spends money throughout the year.
Just because Congress gives the president permission to spend doesn't mean the money is spent or legally promised.
Those are two different actions as per the checks and balances of the US system of government.
But that version of the story is completely at odds with how the US government is organized.
The Treasury is an executive branch department, and it will have plenty of revenue to service its debts regardless of the debt ceiling.
Therefore it has nothing to do with the legislative branch of government whether a default would be on the table. That is purely up to the president, and it would be an impeachable offense should he choose to not pay the debts as he is threatening.
So yes, let's be clear about who is actually threatening default. And that is the president. And he needs to knock it off.
That's not quite right.
The Treasury will not run out of funds since more money will come in throughout the year. The Treasury always collects money throughout the year, even if it will collect less than expected.
The issue is that the Treasury is spending faster than It should considering the lower income.
And that's really up to the president to fix. He really needs to rein in spending that is on course to outpace income to prevent this running out of money.
@gwfoto@newsie.social
We need to be clear that this is all up to Biden.
The Treasury says it will have enough money to service its debts, so should Biden choose to default despite having money to pay, regardless of his constitutional obligation, that would be clear grounds for impeachment.
Yes, if he wants the power to borrow more than he needs to work with Congress to get that power. He has to come to the table.
But all of his talk about defaulting should be met with pushback of the illegality of that position.
@newsopinionsandviews@masto.ai
Wow, that strikes me as the statement of someone who doesn't know how the Supreme Court actually works in the US judicial system.
No, the Supreme Court is not in crisis.
That a whole bunch of news outlets are getting clicks by being sensational about irrelevant drama doesn't actually impact the work of the court all that heavily
Those strike me as pretty different from this blatant violation of the rules of the chamber and interfering with the democratic process.
It's one thing to be a jerk. It's another to so flatly interfere with the institution one is a part of.
You know, I had forgotten about exactly how that clause worked, so you guys have a good point, and I need to think about that more.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
