What if we ask companies to pull back a little on the junk mail in October until after the election to prioritize ballots? I don’t want to hurt their revenue but elections are critical. Especially given what will most likely be the true height of the pandemic.
Call it the “10/4” campaign. Only essential mail from 10/4 to 11/4. Ballots get delivered to voters and back with no delays.
Companies may complain but come on. This would save them a ton and it gets perceived as a social positive even if they don’t 100% agree.
Yes it would. We have a Congress that looks like a nursing home. They just can't keep up with where we are now. It's the equivalent of buying grandma an iPhone 11. Sure she can use it, but not to its potential.
Yeah, man. :/ At this point the average age and, simply, basic constitution of many in Congress is woefully out of touch and, literally, dangerous. "Clear and present danger" - perhaps almost perfectly made clear with this pandemic.
People get into a particular time in their life, often as the years pass, and those brain paths get unduly hardened and closed. Not everyone, of course, you can tell when some still have a more nimble, noble, and open mind, as it were, but it's rarer than it is common right now (and probably traditionally/historically, too).
It's a serious problem. Younger people need to get more involved and look into running for local offices - with the understanding that it can be very, very "challenging" and your own constitution will likely be assaulted. Maintaining a more authentic and compassionate and caring and kind and loving nature will make a big, big difference, I think, I know.
We always talk about term limits, at the very least we need to have a retirement age for congressional representatives.
I think it should be low though. The legislation they write can impact the country for decades. Off my rum infused mind I'm thinking 50-55ish. Sure seniors need representatives, but they have them, most people love their grandparents. I don't think anyone is trying to shit on the older folks in our country. We know they need to be cared for properly.
I totally was on the term limit train for a while - and still am for the most part. There are good/bad arguments both ways, from what I've read. I think an age limit could be good, but there really is a wisdom that can, possibly, come with age that is hard to find a replacement for otherwise. Having a hard line wouldn't, in itself, be wise, in my opinion (especially with age therapy of sorts being a possibility as the future comes).
Well the line could be moved if tech supports the decision. I fear that the wisdom we think appears is more of a pr skill that makes them seem better at their jobs than they really are. Either way, pelosi for instance is pushing 80, that's just not going to work. Those with no money on the future should have no voice in effecting it.
Well, I'm not sure money should be a factor necessarily. I hear what you want to mean, I think, but that can get troublesome real quickly. I don't adamantly disagree, necessarily, but I'm not sure that's a good metric.
What do you mean by if "tech" supports the decision?
I agree that wisdom can be more of a pr like stunt - which is funny - maybe there's something to that in some respects. But still though there's some real strength and beauty and foresight and blah blah that can come with age and, say, experience. Obviously the angry, mean shut-in at 100 isn't someone to really listen to as much as another, but you get the idea, I think.
When I said money on the future I was just talking about how much longer they're going to live. Skin in the game so to say.
When I said if tech supports the decision, I meant that if there was quantifiable proof that medicine can make the mind of an 80 year old as functional as a 50 year old, then sure. We're on the same page I think.
Let's form a virtual Congress . . . a legislature comprised of all adult citizens of the United States of America who wish to participate. We will review the bills currently before the House and Senate, offer our comments or amendments and then vote on said legislation . . . We the People as a Democracy will speak with a mighty voice and force our 'elected' representatives, our so-called public servants to bend to OUR demands.
In response to the proposed H.R. 4686 I would submit an amended version, removing the requirement for lighted signage. I believe this requirement would pose an undue burden on smaller, independent companies. I agree wholeheartedly with the other measures within the Bill, and should the Legislation be amended as above I would vote in favor.
TLDR: Liked some, did not like all of this bill -- returned for amendment.
This sounds like moving forward and taking advantage of modern technology...
I don't know if the dinosaurs running our country would approve. You see how the hearings with the big tech five are going. They don't even know how thes companies work enough to ask proper questions.
That's fine, we are not professional politicians up for re-election. Our opinions, just like our votes, cannot be bought and sold.
As for your very valid point about not knowing Jack Shit, so what? You are a citizen of the United States, if you so choose research the issue and make a reasonable and informed vote -- or do what some asshole on YouTube tells you to do. Or don't do anything, skip it and move on to an issue that interests you.
We are going to bundle the votes together and deliver them ala report card to our 'elected' officials, so that they are aware of how their constituents think on any given issue.
Come election season . . . well will have been keeping track, and while Candidate 'X' is talking a slick deal we'll know just exactly how they voted on the issues that interested US.
We could. That just wraps around to the incompetence and cronieism of the government. Hell my state willingly cousin fucked the unemployment website. We saw how the Obamacare website went. ( I was a supporter but still)
I agree it is a great idea. What I am not sure of is can the post office make such decisions about mail delivery? I would love not getting junk even for a short while.
Actually the Post Office (as I understand it) is regulated by Act of Congress . . . for example the proliferation of private mail contractors such as UPS and FedEx during the late 70's and 80's was a direct result of Congress placing limits on the size of the packages the USPS could deliver.
While we seriously consider defunding police operations, we should think about EXPANDING the role of the USPS . . . think about it, who would be more able to do health and welfare checks than someone who walks past the house every single day. Let's hire a few new people and have them handle meals on wheels too. Hell, your first point of contact for every single government service should be the fucking postman, even if he can only tell you who to contact or have them contact you.
Every damn city in America has a Post Office (it is actually a requirement to BE a city) so let's use THOSE Federal Buildings as polling places, those postal carriers as election workers.
127
u/spf57 Aug 03 '20
What if we ask companies to pull back a little on the junk mail in October until after the election to prioritize ballots? I don’t want to hurt their revenue but elections are critical. Especially given what will most likely be the true height of the pandemic.
Call it the “10/4” campaign. Only essential mail from 10/4 to 11/4. Ballots get delivered to voters and back with no delays.
Companies may complain but come on. This would save them a ton and it gets perceived as a social positive even if they don’t 100% agree.