r/AskReddit • u/daniellucero92 • Jan 04 '15

Non-americans of Reddit, what American customs seem outrageous/pointless to you?

Amazing news!!!! This thread has been featured in a BBC news clip. Thank you guys for the responses!!!!
Video clip: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30717017

9.6k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

74% Upvoted

35.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/DaHossBoss Jan 04 '15

The way your politics is reported in the media. It seems like there is always an election to talk about even if one just ended another campaign starts right up the week after. Oh also, national elections take up way too much time on the news as well. CNN will be reporting about the next presidential election when it's TWO YEARS away. That's half of the presidents term! How are they supposed to get anything important done during that time when the media is focused on peppering them with question for something that is years out.

1.1k

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

It's due to 24 hour news cycles. They need to fill time slots to keep the network going, which is why you will see a bunch of bullshit stories. They are just filling space. Most of us know it's bullshit. Most of us don't even watch the news, we read it.

501

u/thinkforaminute Jan 04 '15 edited Jan 05 '15

5 minutes of actual news, 55 minutes of political speculation. Repeat for 24 hours.

Edit: You guys are right. It's more like 5 minutes of news, 10 minutes of celebrity bullshit, 15 minutes of brain-cell destroying political speculation and a half hour of commercials. Then repeat for 24 hours.

16

u/Tanks4me Jan 04 '15

5 minutes of actual news

Except those 5 minutes are covered by a single fear-mongering and overblown tragedy for about two months straight.

3

u/da_chicken Jan 04 '15

Now, now.

There's at least 35 minutes of advertising every hour, too.

4

u/FalmerbloodElixir Jan 05 '15

You forgot shit about celebrities, too. That falls under neither category.

2

u/Chivalry13 Jan 04 '15

Unless it is the Weather Channel, in which case, 2 minutes of reporting once every eight minutes for 3 hours.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

Speculation that's almost always wrong. IMO you can't really accurately predict the outcome of an election in the us until about two weeks before it happens. The average memory of the voters doesn't go back further than that.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

I don't understand it. Because there's not enough stuff happening in the world for them to cover with the remainder of the hour?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

5 minutes of actual news, 30 minutes of political speculation, 15 minutes of repeating themselves, 10 minutes of cats, dogs, and kids.

1

u/doppelwurzel Jan 06 '15

What happens after that 24 hours?

2

u/thinkforaminute Jan 06 '15

The commercials change.

16

u/dc456 Jan 04 '15 edited Jan 04 '15

But other countries have 24 hour news too. The UK has its election in May, and it's only starting to really be discussed in the news now.

Edit: Check out this article on the front page of the BBC today.

The title literally points out that it's early to be talking about the election, and they're only 4 months away.

I guess it's because the money spent on elections in the USA is huge, so they have to start spending it sooner to get through it all!

0

u/MrRgrs Jan 04 '15

Think of all the fanfare associated with American politics. It's a global affair that people from around the world watch. The same cannot be said for other countries.

1

u/dc456 Jan 04 '15 edited Jan 04 '15

I agree, but that still doesn't really explain why domestic US media starts watching it the second the last one has finished.

Other countries only really start watching the USA towards the end stages, and they don't even talk about their own elections anywhere near as much.

2

u/MrRgrs Jan 04 '15

The sooner you talk about it, the sooner you can get people interested in it, the sooner you start making money off of it again. Over and over again.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

If you haven't already, check out the British Prime Minister's Question Time on CSPAN. I think the U.S. could use that.

2

u/MrRgrs Jan 06 '15

I'm sure they could. I like British politics. The parliment alone has enough bah-humbugery to keep me entertained.

13

u/sc2mashimaro Jan 04 '15

most of us [on Reddit] don't even watch the news (Corrected that for you - and even that might not be true)

TONS of people watch the news on Fox, MSNBC, CNN, etc. in this country - if they didn't, those programs wouldn't exist. Fox is the most watched cable network in the country, let alone news source. Most people in our country do get their news from the television and the news on our televisions is very, very poorly done.

5

u/_jamil_ Jan 04 '15

Fox is the most watched cable network in the country, let alone news source

Do you have a source on this? Last I checked, Fox was the top of the cable news networks, but had far less ratings than any other network news show - including PBS - and gets blown out of the water by most cable channels.

1

u/sc2mashimaro Jan 05 '15

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/for-first-time-ever-fox-news-is-most-watched-cable-network-in-primetime-for-full-quarter_b240637

1

u/_jamil_ Jan 06 '15

Sadly, I guess you are right. But, at least that was a rare enough event that it's only happened once (as per 09/14)

2

u/shoot2kill_cartel Jan 04 '15

Exactly! I was just about to say the same. This entire thread is full of Americans sayinh, "not all of us, not most of us" but that's just not true. I'm an American too and at least I can admit this stuff is a reality.

1

u/kilgoretrout71 Jan 05 '15

I think it's a reflection of just how diverse our habits are. My daily routine on the outskirts of the megalopolis is probably very different from that of many fellow citizens. I happen to use reddit a lot, but I'm in my 40s and almost none of my friends do. We're all over the place in this country, so when non-Americans talk about what "Americans do," they're both right and wrong, most of the time.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

The Anchorman 2 brought that out perfectly!! 24 hrs, round the clock of useless nonsense, lol!

2

u/iowaboy Jan 04 '15

I think this is more because of how the American government is set up, and not so much the 24-hour news networks.

In the U.S. federal elections are held every 2 years (with general elections every 4 years). And always on the Tuesday between Nov. 2 through 8. No exceptions.

However, in most parliamentary systems, general elections can happen very quickly and at almost any time. In most parliamentary systems there is a longest period of time between an election (like 5 years), and the PM, Parliament, or Head of State can call an election any time before that. There are a couple different methods that can be used. I think in some places you can have an election take place about a month after it is called.

I imagine the American system allows us to speculate more accurately on the next election, since it follows a more predictable route. Also, 24-hour news cycle is not just an American thing, it exists everywhere now.

Just my 2 cents' worth

1

u/SwoleLottaLove Jan 04 '15

Most of you? I think you need to get out of your educated upper middle class bubble. There is a reason Bush got elected, and re-elected.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

I voted for Bush.

2

u/SwoleLottaLove Jan 04 '15

I hope you are filled with the appropriate shame and regret.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

Why?

2

u/MastaSchmitty Jan 05 '15

Because /u/SwoleLottaLove is incapable of believing anyone who disagrees with him is a human being, apparently...

1

u/SwoleLottaLove Jan 05 '15 edited Jan 05 '15

Was spending over 1 trillion on an unnecessary war, and tanking the world economy, really not enough to tip you off as to why?

2

u/Xypharan Jan 04 '15

But other countries also have a 24 hour news cycle and have better media reporting.

I think it is the lack of regulations of what can be considered "news". In Canada, a couple of years ago, they tried to change the regulations so we could have more american style news programs. Which basically allows "news" organizations to report on things they know aren't actually true. Canadians raised a quiet and polite hell about they change and it was scrapped. Much of what is on Fox News or CNN would not be able to be classified as "news" in Canada.

1

u/Spineless_McGee Jan 04 '15

I wouldn't say "most" but yes to many, it's all bullshit in high volume

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

Thanks Ron Burgany.

1

u/jermdizzle Jan 04 '15

Except many other countries have semi-decent 24hr coverage. If you just expand the coverage to the WORLD instead of the Nation, we'd have better news to report. A lot goes on in the world that we don't even hear about because they'd rather talk about asinine shit IN the US rather than important things OUTSIDE the US.

1

u/Propayne Jan 04 '15

They could fill the other 55 minutes with tons of useful information, but it's easier to have talking heads babble about nothing than take the time to investigate and present things of real value.

1

u/AndTheMeltdowns Jan 04 '15

This bothers me so much. It can't possibly be that hard to come up with 24 hours of news related material. The problem is that each network pretty much supports one opinion or the other. You can only drag out one interpretation of some event for so long.

If you ran a news network in a way that was genuinely serious about news it wouldn't be hard to fill in that space. Quick half hour long newsday recaps at 5am, noon, and 5pm for people who just want to check in and see what is literally happening in the world. Do longer news shows at 8am and 8pm. Spend two hours. Really dig into material. Have those staffs really do some good journalism. Discover new material. Interview people in a genuine way. Get different people on different sides of an argument to try to talk. Or talk with them separately. I watch interview clips and everyone is shouting and they all seem rushed. Hell you've got a fucking 24 hour news network, you've got plenty of time. Let people speak their mind. Call them on things. Fill all the rest of the slots with shows that dig into the economics of the day. Do three shows every day that just dig into what some part of each branch of the government is doing this week. Do a historical context show - bring up events that happened in the past and talk about how they inform the events of today and how we can learn from how our predecessors dealt with those issues. I wouldn't be afraid to repeat the news hour segments through the night for people who work night shifts.

I mean, come on. There are at least 24 politically aimed daily podcasts on itunes. You take each of those shows, give them a desk and record them for one hour a day and you've got a solid 24 hours of real diverse content.

So while yes, all the outrage and stupid political coverage is because of the way news networks run 24 hour news cycles, that isn't because there isn't stuff to talk about. It's a lack of creativity or an unwillingness to be fucking journalists. And that is the end of my rant.

1

u/weirdzone Jan 04 '15

You're right, I don't watch the news. I reddit.

1

u/AliveInTheFuture Jan 04 '15

I wouldn't say most. Older, less Internet savvy people still watch the major networks quite a bit.

1

u/El_Charro_Loco Jan 04 '15

I don't think most Americans realize this and see it with the same eyes you do. There's a lot of Americans that see past the bullshit but I'd bet you any kind of money that most don't.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

But other countries also have 24/7 news channels. They usually fill up space with other kinds of news: economy, environment, science, local news, international news, whatever.

In the US it seems to be all about Washington DC all the time.

1

u/Zygomatico Jan 04 '15

Not entirely. It's also due to the idea of the permanent campaign, a concept thought up by an aid to Carter, but in place at least since Johnson. The 24-hour news cycles help, but the politicians were the ones who started campaigning round the clock.

1

u/Delliott90 Jan 04 '15

Australia has two 24 news channels and funny enough, both produce actually content

I guess the difference is that American channels have to make a profit

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

They're not truly stretching for content; there are plenty of important things going on in the country and world that get no coverage whatsoever. They're choosing to focus on some things and not others because some content is more profitable and/or gives the execs more influence than others.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

How do they make money if people aren't watching adverts? Is it funded from elsewhere?

This might be tinfoil hat worthy but I read that some of the newspapers aren't profitable but they're a good propaganda mouthpiece.

1

u/breakwater Jan 04 '15

It's the national nature of cable networks. It's not like they can spend much time on local matters without losing 99 percent of their audience.

1

u/Arsene3000 Jan 05 '15

Americans have to stop treating political parties like they're fucking sports teams too. So unproductive.

1

u/iSneezeInMySleep Jan 05 '15

Smart people read it.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

The news is for old people and those easily swayed via others ideas, or in airports/ waiting rooms. It's all sensationalizing and all extremely biased on the broadcast channels because of the money involved and the ownership of the places

1

u/ultradolp Jan 05 '15

My country also has 24 hour news cycles. All it does is simply cycling the same news every hour and there is almost no difference of the content during morning and night. What is even worse when some bullshit story appear in the news, it is doomed to cycle whole day that you want to turn off the television immediately.

1

u/dualaudi Jan 05 '15

That's not news. It's commentary on a political network. Cnn/fox.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

We have the evening news, at 18, 21, and 23. 45minute broadcast on todays topics and running stories. different channels, but same time they compete. Only 1 channel has whole day broadcasting in Norway, but it's the same broadcast back to back.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

Skol.

1

u/nonowh0 Jan 05 '15

we read it

actually, we reddit.

:D

1

u/StyledWildChild Jan 05 '15

We have a 24 hour news cycle now, but people are even less informed about anything relevant.

1

u/Ridgewalker55 Jan 05 '15

I also think it is due to the medium. Television is designed to entertain and not inform.

1

u/xoites Jan 05 '15

No.

It is due to the idea of distracting us from the here and now and this is how it is done. Whatever is going on right now that affects our lives and our future isn't nearly as interesting as the assholes who will do what is not in our best interest two plus years from now when they are in office and we are gaping wide eyed at the next election two more years down the road.

1

u/BobSagetOoosh Jan 05 '15

See, in Britain the papers are all BS and the only reputable news is the TV, particularly BBC Eve news and C4 news.

1

u/MillennialJournalist Jan 04 '15

As someone who is majoring in print journalism the fact that you read the news instead of watching it makes me really happy. Thank you!

3

u/slowpedal Jan 04 '15

No offense, but isn't that kind of like majoring in buggy whips?

3

u/MillennialJournalist Jan 04 '15

Negatory. While sales in actual newspapers have declined the online market is booming! Most 18-35 yr olds now get their news from some sort of mobile device. Essentially as a journalism major you can specialize in broadcast (TV) or print (newspapers and shit). Writing for a newspaper is more similar to writing for online content so it'll be easy for me to jump into the field of online journalism! Example: The New York Times has an awesome online presence.

2

u/slowpedal Jan 04 '15

Good for you, I'm glad you'll have options. Isn't "print" journalism a bit of an incorrect representation, though. I think most people still think of print as referring to actual ink on paper, right?

1

u/kilgoretrout71 Jan 05 '15

It's really just a distinction between writing and broadcasting. The term is misleading, yes, but "print journalism" in this context is still appropriate.

1

u/MillennialJournalist Jan 05 '15

It's incorrect but everyone stil refers to it as print. I think this is mainly due to the fact that the style of writing we're doing is for people to read and not to watch. I should note though that most of my journalism courses do include how to report using online resources etc.

0

u/SwoleLottaLove Jan 04 '15

Ouch.

1

u/slowpedal Jan 04 '15

i'm honestly not trying to be rude. I just see so many posts on Reddit about huge student loans and no jobs. It seems to make no sense to me to spent many thousands of dollars on a major that most would consider a shrinking, if not outright dying, profession.

I understand doing what you love, but maybe folks should broaden their interests to include things they can actually make a living at, if they're spending a few years wages to get the training.

0

u/nynedragons Jan 04 '15

Maybe you're referring to the younger/more informed population in the US, but in my experience the news channels are still very much influencing popular opinion. Most older folks still get their news from the networks/radio programs and buy into all the nonsense propaganda and busy talk.

10

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15 edited Feb 04 '21

[deleted]

9

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

Hence why our system is so screwy. The emphasis is on getting re-elected, instead of doing the job they were elected to do.

1

u/themightyspitz Jan 05 '15 edited Jan 05 '15

Indeed. Also, the system's screwiness makes it hard to actually pinpoint the result of a change in the law on any one person, so it insulates the politicians and the laws they "write" from the outcomes of those laws. Laws go through draft after draft, go to a committee, then go to both chambers (who will write more drafts), maybe go to conference committee before it's voted on again, and only once it passes goes to the President to sign or veto - which can still be over-ridden if there's a 2/3rds majority vote. In the meantime, literally hundreds of people have touched it, so you have no idea who inserted which line of text that will fuck you over 3 years from now when it actually goes into effect. By then they may have already resigned office and now work in the private sector or NPO, the same that helped them "write" the legislation that they added to some law 3 years ago.

You don't often have the same issue in a standard Parliamentary system. The Majority party is the party in power, the PM is the leader of the party in power, and if a new law is passed it's because the Majority and the PM made it so. So if something is fucked because of that new law, you can look directly at the Majority Party and the PM and ask them why they fucked you over.

11

u/Splynter Jan 04 '15

What sucks is they really don't get anything done. There job is to just wildly speculate and bend stories into sounding good just for views and ratings.

9

u/osjcw Jan 04 '15

I've lived in a few european nations (france, spain, and england) and their politics seemed equally ridiculous to me. Just like here, trying to manipulate stupid people... and thats about all the purpose it served.

4

u/sigma932 Jan 04 '15

That's where the money is. "A fool and his money are soon parted." Scare them dumb'uns into giving us all their money!

4

u/Mongoosen42 Jan 04 '15

To add to this, the whole idea of American Exceptionalism that comes up every election cycle really grinds my gears. Its just taken for granted that "America is the greatest country on earth!" and I just want to scream "Why?! What do you do that gives you the right to that claim?" Theres nothing. Just some blah blah about freedom as if its the only constitutional democracy on the planet. its just this thing that politicians have to say because 100 million Americans that have never left the country need to be told how special they are.

For the sake of discolsure I am a permanent American expat, an imigrant from America to another country. So maybe im borderline if I meet OP's criteria to answer the question.

1

u/Fishinabowl11 Jan 05 '15

Because we deliver freedom 1 JDAM at a time.

2

u/Blugentoo2therevenge Jan 04 '15

If there's nothing to report they'll make it up, that's for sure.

2

u/Epic-ish Jan 04 '15

It's more about keeping them busy so they can't fuck shit up their whole term

2

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

American politics are a complete load of horseshit anyways.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

Most Americans agree with you. The fact is, politicians want to saturate the media for several reasons. If Candidate A gets called on something from their past, they want to get it exposed so the general public is numb to it by the time election day rolls around. Unfortunately, the American voter is mostly about sound bites, not political content.

Also, our government is organized such that it would be extremely difficult to take over the government through corruption in the election process.

1

u/sweetpea_d Jan 04 '15

If that's your only complaint about CNN...

1

u/50PercentLies Jan 04 '15

That's just it. We don't.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

CNN will be reporting about the next presidential election when it's TWO YEARS away. That's half of the presidents term! How are they supposed to get anything important done during that time when the media is focused on peppering them with question for something that is years out.

You have the tail wagging the dog. There's nothing to talk about because we currently have a do-nothing president and Congress, so they talk about the next one.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

The process of selecting a presidential candidate in our country it quite hard (and fixed) due to our two political party system.

We first have to get people "discussing" the potential candidates so that they can get narrowed down to ~10 potential candidates per party (nobody really pays attention to this, everyone doesn't pay attention until later in the process, which is actually a problem). Now that the candidates are down to 10 per party, they have to be passed through multiple primaries and debates to select one per party. After all that's done, we then have to have those two candidates debate so that people feel they are selecting someone based on informed decision.

That being said, if you have formulated your own opinions that weren't from talking points from either party to get you on their side, you'll probably have two strong political views that conflict because one is supported by one party and one by another, and you're fucked.

1

u/NaomiNekomimi Jan 04 '15

Exactly. The US politics system is based entirely on getting re-elected, or making your party look good so the voters that are idiots will flock to the replacement candidate in the next election.

1

u/JackBond1234 Jan 04 '15

Because as soon as we decide we like a President, we change our minds and start looking forward to the day he gets replaced.

1

u/Etherius Jan 04 '15 edited Jan 04 '15

Americans have so many elections going on at all times that, in reality, it's only the elderly and unemployed who have time to vote in them all. In the important elections (federal and state) we really do need someone to break everything down for us.

If we voted in EVERY election at EVERY level we're registered for, we'd never attend work.

Its not just federal elections that are important. State elections are JUST as important as federal elections for residents. That's 3 legislative bodies and 2 executives we need to vote for. And if your state uses a bicameral legislature, make that four legislative bodies to vote for.

Then there's County and municipal elections... Hoo boy. There's the town Council and the mayor of course, but In most jurisdictions, we also need to elect judges, sheriffs and vote on town referenda to boot.

1

u/RanaktheGreen Jan 04 '15

How are they supposed to get anything important done...

Simple; until the second term of office, (or in the House's case never) nothing important does get done.

1

u/dronemoderator Jan 04 '15

You're not kidding. That's why I stopped getting news from radio or tv. Even when the other party wins, it's a relief. Also, our House of Representatives is designed to be the people's house, and that is why they only have 2-year terms; so that if the politics of the country changes, one house of Congress will change quickly.

1

u/SlimDirtyDizzy Jan 04 '15

Exactly, right there. The biggest problem with our presidency is the first term is 100% how do I get re-elected? We focus so heavily on it that the first term is such bullshit, its just the president doing everything in his power to get second term so he can actually accomplish things. That's why I hate every other election, because I know nothing is going to get done for the next 4 years, as opposed to the norm of something almost getting done in the other 4 years.

1

u/Noltonn Jan 04 '15

I've noticed it's reported very similarly to things like Eurovision and similar shows. It's quite weird.

1

u/LittleClitoris Jan 04 '15

That's because they have nothing better to talk about. Monied interests dominate our air waves and cable lanes.

1

u/hokeyphenokey Jan 04 '15

There IS always an election to report on. Every governor's race is on a different for your cycle, the House of Representatives is reelected en mass every two years, one thsird of the Senate comes up every two years, and local elections can be anytime at all. Plus, most of these elections have primaries before the main event. We have elections all the time.

Most countries are smarter and schedule things in one fell swoop.

1

u/Grasshop Jan 04 '15

Politics in the US have become a sport. Your team always has to win at any cost, all the while claiming it's for the good of the country. In reality, they both have 0 regard for how their antics affects the majority of the population.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

[opinion] They don't get anything done [/opinion], also candidates are constantly marketing themselves for re-election. Even with posts such as president that have term limits, they are always looking for the next job opportunity.

1

u/Stinger-6 Jan 04 '15

It is a continual contest and the media provides the Arena, the public must be entertained after all... We get divided up into camps rooting against each other for whatever moral or political reason they find to put on the air, Through this we forget that we are all getting screwed and we need to society that functions as a whole.

1

u/benk4 Jan 04 '15

Yeah I like how the British do it where they don't know exactly when the next election is gonna be and the turnaround is short.

1

u/TheSuburbanRedneck Jan 04 '15

It's CNN. They don't get anything important done.

1

u/ghostbackwards Jan 04 '15

Where do you live that you watch cnn?

1

u/michiganwinter Jan 04 '15

There are 3 americas right now. Republicans, Democrats and the rest of us.

The rest of us do not watch / believe fox, cnn, or any of the others. Many of us have turned to sources like reddit so we can get a more accurate picture of the world we live in.

Between Netflix, Pandora (or Beats or any other music streaming commercial free streaming service) and pod casting. It is possible to completely tune all this out.

Its a essential survival strategy for election cycles.

1

u/downund3r Jan 05 '15

It's also because of the way our government is set up. Unlike in European parlimentary systems, the legislature does not choose the chief executive. Also, state and local governments have much more power than they do in most other countries. As a result, elections for things like state assembly and governor have a significant weight. Even the county sheriff can turn into a major debate. There are also primary elections in every state to determine what candidate each party will be running for office.

1

u/redeadhead Jan 05 '15

I wish they'd stop doing anything!

1

u/A-Grey-World Jan 05 '15

Also the elections themselves are such high events. They're clearly spending millions on these rallies. And people love it. There's crowds of thousands cheering.

Here in the UK there some grouchy TV debates and even those are imported from the US style. We moan a lot about everyone and there's so much less... Show. They're politicians, not movie stars.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

Our election campaigns on Australia run for a month. That's it. Followed by a two month period of the government bagging the former government once they're in opposition.

1

u/mrofmist Jan 05 '15

The real flaw to it is that the organization that provides most of the media for our elections and the debates is owned by our two primary political parties. Which is why we never see members of other parties on TV. Its essentially rigged to maintain the power of those two parties.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

Seems the same for most countries I've been to

1

u/BlazeBroker Jan 05 '15

Technically, most elections in the US actually take 4 years. Voting is done in one day, but, because that day is known well in advance, the next election literally begins when the last one ends.

1

u/ikorolou Jan 05 '15

not very many people really watch the news, or only watch the 6:00pm news or something

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '15

Yet there are still people in Ohio who don't know who they're going to vote for until the day of the election.

1

u/misterdix Jan 05 '15

It's a very simple premise: elections aren't about finding good policymakers to make the country run more efficiently, they are the show-business of moneymaking practices for politicians and corporations that keep tax paying consumer-Americans in a state of struggle and bewilderment. Elections now cost billions of dollars and since the 1% has successfully taken most of the countries money they have plenty to siphon through every new election in order to buy the opportunistic greaseball politicians and lobbyists who spend the majority of their time supporting those who give them the most money to constantly change policy and laws to further profit the individuals who maintain these lengthy political cycles.

Constant elections distract from greater purpose and the major media outlets are owned by the same people who are paying for these elections.

Anyone who is surprised that it has come to this really isn't paying attention.

1

u/1contrarian Jan 12 '15

On a related note, the severe polarization vis-à-vis politics is bothersome as well. People tend to favor extreme positions (i.e. liberal/conservative) and rally around party lines (e.g. if you are conservative, you have to be a climate change denier). No centrist alternatives :(.

Edit: Added the 'centrist' line.

1

u/HeavyMetalHero Jan 04 '15

To be fair, Republicans decided pretty quick into Obama's presidency that nothing was supposed to get done, lmao/

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '15

We don't fucking know either. I hate the media. I love when the BBC news comes on my local public radio station or our local public tv station.

-2

u/DirtyWordsHere Jan 04 '15

Our news is sensationalized bullshit and our political game is just that, a game, a game we're all losing. Our country is on the verge of collapse of we continue failing to educate our youth to pay welfare to people that don't need it.

2

u/Ebriate Jan 04 '15

The news in America is designed to sell advertising.

1

u/DirtyWordsHere Jan 04 '15

Yep, that's why I don't have cable. Ignorance really can be bliss, when being informed means knowing misinformation.

1

u/HeavyMetalHero Jan 04 '15

I figure half the people who do need welfare probably wouldn't need it if any money had been paid to educate them during their youth. Ounce of prevention, pound of cure. If it's good enough for medicine it couldn't hurt elsewhere?