Vyor
My influence grows!
Texas has thier own so...technically
Still connects to the rest of the country in places, it's also managed really fuckin poorly.
Texas has thier own so...technically
Because of stupid green pushers.Still connects to the rest of the country in places, it's also managed really fuckin poorly.
Because of stupid green pushers.
THE reason it connects to the rest of the US is because TX sells surplus electricity to other states.
That does fall under interstate commerce, but just because an action falls under interstate commerce doesn't mean you need an entire cabinet level department creating rules and regulations on the topic. In fact, if it is just a matter of interstate commerce, we already have a cabinet level department for it, which nobody mentioned as a useful and essential part of the Federal government, even though it handles a lot of the core responsibilities actually laid out under Article 1.It does, yeah. It also pulls from said rest of the country if something bad happens, natural disasters you see.
But, I don't know chief, that sounds like interstate-commerce to me.
Sure.
Restarting the pipeline is impossible, the companies that wanted it have pulled out both in the US and in canada.
He has no authority to shrink the IRS by that much (and it would be a fucking bad idea to begin with).
50% of the government isn't even underneath the executive branch and the majority of the ones that are are military, pretty sure firing 100% of our military is considered a Bad Idea.
And while he could revoke all EOs from Biden, Bush, and Obama... that would be fucking retarded to do because most of them involve personal security?
Problem is that Trump, assuming he even gets elected again and doesn’t fall victim to ‘fortified elections’, gets JFK’d or manages to get on the ballot at all, doesn’t have the military on his side. Or at least not the leadership and a fair portion of the rest.Andrew Jackson once played the "I have an army, what do you have" card blatantly telling the Supreme Court at the time that they could fuck off or try to stop him.
Now, I don't think that was a good thing, but a sitting President can get away with a lot if they want to and don't care about PR fallout, which a President in their final term in Office usually doesn't.
He also didn't have the Posse Comitatus act.Andrew Jackson once played the "I have an army, what do you have" card blatantly telling the Supreme Court at the time that they could fuck off or try to stop him.
Now, I don't think that was a good thing, but a sitting President can get away with a lot if they want to and don't care about PR fallout, which a President in their final term in Office usually doesn't.
That does fall under interstate commerce, but just because an action falls under interstate commerce doesn't mean you need an entire cabinet level department creating rules and regulations on the topic. In fact, if it is just a matter of interstate commerce, we already have a cabinet level department for it, which nobody mentioned as a useful and essential part of the Federal government, even though it handles a lot of the core responsibilities actually laid out under Article 1.
For instance, the Commerce Department runs the National Institute for Standards and Technology, the organization that handles defining all sort of industrial and trade standards across the US, from things like "what is an Inch" to "what are IT security best practices".
Ok, what happens if you toss the Dept of Energy and let every state set it's own energy safety and use regulations, even for nuclear materials?That does fall under interstate commerce, but just because an action falls under interstate commerce doesn't mean you need an entire cabinet level department creating rules and regulations on the topic. In fact, if it is just a matter of interstate commerce, we already have a cabinet level department for it, which nobody mentioned as a useful and essential part of the Federal government, even though it handles a lot of the core responsibilities actually laid out under Article 1.
For instance, the Commerce Department runs the National Institute for Standards and Technology, the organization that handles defining all sort of industrial and trade standards across the US, from things like "what is an Inch" to "what are IT security best practices".
State's will no longer need to match up to the syne wave of the national grid, so lots of ways for state-to-state power transmission to become rather dangerous. State's will also no longer need to worry about Federal regs around nuclear materials, so can make as shoddy a reactor as they desire/can pay for.
So? In Europe, we have EU psychopaths in Brussels who use this kind of 'logic' to centralise power in their hands. It's nonsense. Germany and Poland should be able to decide on their own policy. In addition to ensuring a free trade block (which is always the main thing), any kind of greater union really has only two major policy areas that should be run centrally: foreign affairs, and the military. (Hilariously, those are the two things the EU doesn't manage to centralise properly...)
And for the exact same reason, California and Montana should each handle their own affairs, too. Whatever the lunatics have turned it into, the United States were founded -- quite explicitly -- as a union of states. A league. A compact. Not a superstate. If states handle things differently, that's good. That's healthy competition. That's a battle of different ideas, each trying to demonstrate their worth, and being tested by reality.
Uniformity is stagnation and decline. You want variation. You want competition.
And yes, that can lead to errors. But at least to some degree, and usually to a great degree, those errors will be of limited scale. If you centralise things and a critical error is made... centrally... then the scale is not limited. Then everyone is screwed. That's what you want to avoid. This is why many ships and submarines need those watertight doors you can lock, so that if one compartment floods, you can still save the vessel, still prevent the water from getting everywhere.
You imagine centralism, in this context, as a safeguard against local mistakes. I urge you to see if from the other side: decentralism is a safeguard against central mistakes. And that's infinitely more important. It saves the ship from sinking, even if a critical mistake is made.
And then you plug your computer in and it explodes because the sine wave shifted.
See, here you are falling into the Euro trap of seeing US states as akin to European nations, and operating from there for your argument.So? In Europe, we have EU psychopaths in Brussels who use this kind of 'logic' to centralise power in their hands. It's nonsense. Germany and Poland should be able to decide on their own policy. In addition to ensuring a free trade block (which is always the main thing), any kind of greater union really has only two major policy areas that should be run centrally: foreign affairs, and the military. (Hilariously, those are the two things the EU doesn't manage to centralise properly...)
And for the exact same reason, California and Montana should each handle their own affairs, too. Whatever the lunatics have turned it into, the United States were founded -- quite explicitly -- as a union of states. A league. A compact. Not a superstate. If states handle things differently, that's good. That's healthy competition. That's a battle of different ideas, each trying to demonstrate their worth, and being tested by reality.
Uniformity is stagnation and decline. You want variation. You want competition.
Not in nuclear safety regulations, you don't.And yes, that can lead to errors. But at least to some degree, and usually to a great degree, those errors will be of limited scale. If you centralise things and a critical error is made... centrally... then the scale is not limited. Then everyone is screwed. That's what you want to avoid. This is why many ships and submarines need those watertight doors you can lock, so that if one compartment floods, you can still save the vessel, still prevent the water from getting everywhere.
Radiation and nuclear materials aren't things that care whether you prefer centralization of power or not, only whether you respect the hard physics involved.You imagine centralism, in this context, as a safeguard against local mistakes. I urge you to see if from the other side: decentralism is a safeguard against central mistakes. And that's infinitely more important. It saves the ship from sinking, even if a critical mistake is made.
Yes, it is a well-known fact that this happens daily in Europe, where every country has its own power grid, and yet the bordering countries have them connected to serve as each other's emergency back-up.
Get real.
i am a fan of the 70 maxims.So government is like trust?
The less you use the further you will go?
What? No. This is an utter strawman of my argument. But even that aside, this is a situation of "tell me you know nothing of electrical engineering in the US without telling me you know nothing about electrical engineering and I'm so lazy and convinced I know how things work I'm not even going to do a cursory search on the topic."Ok, what happens if you toss the Dept of Energy and let every state set it's own energy safety and use regulations, even for nuclear materials?
State's will no longer need to match up to the syne wave of the national grid, so lots of ways for state-to-state power transmission to become rather dangerous. State's will also no longer need to worry about Federal regs around nuclear materials, so can make as shoddy a reactor as they desire/can pay for.
I get it, you think the Dept of Energy is overly broad and shouldn't be a cabinet level situation, but the work the Dept of Energy does is very much an interstate commence situation, and that they exist at the level they do, because the implications of things under the Dept of Energy going bad leads to things like 3 Mile Island and worse.
And then everyone realized the Articles of Confederation sucked.the United States were founded -- quite explicitly -- as a union of states. A league. A compact. Not a superstate.
And just to literally drive this point home and put a stake in this entire train of thought, the Department of Energy's OWN WEBSITE explicitly links to the IEEE standards and states they "help" develop them, not that they establish, manage, or otherwise dictate them.
See, here you are falling into the Euro trap of seeing US states as akin to European nations, and operating from there for your argument.
Montana and Cali are states, not nations, and do have 48 other states they coexist with and need to share regulations with regards to safety and commercial laws.
Also, 1865 and Appomattox Court House would like a word about the US not being a 'United' nation/'superstate'.
When it comes to industrial safety regs and things like national scale energy policy, that's a Federal level issue very much under the Interstate Commerce rules.
Now if we want to toss all nuclear shit under the DoD, and that includes nuclear power programs that were previously civie, there is an argument for that, but it runs into the fact the DoE is more focused than the DoD in general.
Not in nuclear safety regulations, you don't.
Fissile materials work under laws that give no shit about human politics or local vs state vs federal power, only hard physics, and what works and what doesn't is pretty fucking well known.
Trying to play with nuclear safety regs like that, just because people feel the Dept of Energy's remit is too broad, is possibly irradiating the nose to spite the face.
Radiation and nuclear materials aren't things that care whether you prefer centralization of power or not, only whether you respect the hard physics involved.
The amount of money needed to do serious radiation and nuclear work is not at all trivial, and states should not be expect to each have their own Dept Energy level nuclear materials and policy dept and budget.
There is damn good reason to have a whole Dept at the cabinet level to address the issues, because Dept of Energy also works with DoD nuclear units as well.
Gutting the Dept of Energy would gut the nuclear triad, never mind what it would do to the civie grid, and that is why the complaints about it being overbroad feel like we want to pretend the Founders knew what an atom bomb and nuclear reactor would be and would have expected it to be handled at a 'small level' to avoid empowering the Interstate Commerce 'unnecessarily'.
The EU actually regulates that. Nice try though!
See, here you are falling into the Euro trap of seeing US states as akin to European nations, and operating from there for your argument.
Montana and Cali are states, not nations, and do have 48 other states they coexist with and need to share regulations with regards to safety and commercial laws.
Also, 1865 and Appomattox Court House would like a word about the US not being a 'United' nation/'superstate'.
When it comes to industrial safety regs and things like national scale energy policy, that's a Federal level issue very much under the Interstate Commerce rules.
Now if we want to toss all nuclear shit under the DoD, and that includes nuclear power programs that were previously civie, there is an argument for that, but it runs into the fact the DoE is more focused than the DoD in general.
Not in nuclear safety regulations, you don't.
Fissile materials work under laws that give no shit about human politics or local vs state vs federal power, only hard physics, and what works and what doesn't is pretty fucking well known.
Trying to play with nuclear safety regs like that, just because people feel the Dept of Energy's remit is too broad, is possibly irradiating the nose to spite the face.
Radiation and nuclear materials aren't things that care whether you prefer centralization of power or not, only whether you respect the hard physics involved.
The amount of money needed to do serious radiation and nuclear work is not at all trivial, and states should not be expect to each have their own Dept Energy level nuclear materials and policy dept and budget.
There is damn good reason to have a whole Dept at the cabinet level to address the issues, because Dept of Energy also works with DoD nuclear units as well.
Gutting the Dept of Energy would gut the nuclear triad, never mind what it would do to the civie grid, and that is why the complaints about it being overbroad feel like we want to pretend the Founders knew what an atom bomb and nuclear reactor would be and would have expected it to be handled at a 'small level' to avoid empowering the Interstate Commerce 'unnecessarily'.
And then everyone realized the Articles of Confederation sucked.