KmlSlmk64

IIRC if DC became a state, only specific federal buildings, such as the white house, scotus & the capitol buildings would remain as a territory (due to the constitution), but, because of a amendment to the us constitution giving DC the same amount of voters _(members of the electoral college)_for the president as the lowest-representation (essentially always 3), which only citizens living inside the area would be allowed to vote for, only the citizens of white house would be able to vote for 3 whole electors.

I might be incirrect, as I am not a US citizen, but I’ve seen this mentioned somewhere long ago

The worst part is, that the people who voted for them are ashamed of their vote, because they either refused or lied on exit polls. At least now everyone can see how the government is making clowns of themselves (the speaker of the parliament drove into a traffic pole while drunk last week for example), they don’t act on their promises, argue with each other and lie. There are constant protests in the two largest cities of Bratislava and Košice, where many people gather to show the disagreement with the coalition and ridicule the politicians. A new meme emerged in the past few days about the fact, that more people signed a petition to remove the new minister of health from the office in a day, than the amount who voted for her in the election. There’s also an observable difference between what people in large cities and foreign mail-in voters vote for and what people from villages with worse access to information and who are targeted by the adverts and propaganda by the populist extremist politicians vote for. Also the opposition is theoretically more favoured than the current coalition, but because there are many different parties, the votes get split and many parties don’t get through the threshold that is needed for them to be even a part of the parliament and their seats get assigned to the ones who get there. We would probably benefit a lot from some kind of ranked-choice voting. We will see what happens in the upcoming presidential elections. At least it is a 2 round election, so the split opposition can get behind a common favourite.

I mean, you generally don’t want to tie up a lot of money, each year by year, meaning that you would have a lot of frozen capital. And capitalism (which also has some flaws, but right now we are using this system) depends on the flow of money/capital. Also managing these funds would make a lot of work / administration, because someone would have to manage what goes in and out and also in what form the funds to store in. And at the point of storing money from younger people, that is not being spent, whilst using money from older people, why not just have less money stored and use the money from the younger generation for the older ones. And you go full circle to the idea that we wanted to solve. Each system has its benefits and flaws, some of which are greater, which outweigh other, smaller ones. Sometimes the solution can be something completely different.

I don’t think that funds are kept in money. IIRC They are mostly kept in other means, so that they are at least somewhat sustainable against inflation. But that doesn’t mean that the above idea is good, or doesn’t have other flaws.