Let Me Explain

At first glance, poverty seems to be an easy problem to solve (until you think about it). Just give the poor support and money, right? They'll be able to get jobs and start supporting themselves, breaking the poverty cycle, right?  That'll only last until they start relying on the welfare, and once that happens, everything goes wrong.  Welfare dependency is a huge problem in the United States, and a lot of it comes from the fact that prices are rising, wages are staying the same, and housing is harder than ever to find. When a family needs welfare to be able to feed their kids, or when they're $100 short of being able to rent a roof over their heads, it's hard to advocate for cutting off the aid. Which is why I'm not going to advocate for doing that. But giving out the welfare poses its own problems. What happens when those who aren't truly poor start abusing the system (because trust me, they will)? What happens when someone's on welfare  but doesn't se...

The US has a housing crisis. You've probably seen it for yourself, because buying a home or renting an apartment is almost impossible right now. Prices and rents are way too high, and even if you can  afford it, there's almost no houses on the market right now. Part of it comes from inflation, the result of the flaming train that is unregulated government spending. As a refresher: when the government spends too much on something, the increase in demand of one good means that the price of that good increases. If the price of wood increases, for example, businesses that need that wood for maintenance will increase the prices of their products to be able to keep their income. This cascades down the economy, eventually leading to extremely high housing prices. Another part of it comes from there simply not being enough houses in the first place. It's hard to move out from a tiny apartment when there are no townhouses being sold that meet your requirements. It's hard to buy ...

The Electoral College could very well be classified as one of the most unintentionally stupid  ideas to ever have been created. I won't bore you with an intro today, as I don't have the patience. Instead, I'll just describe the absolute abomination that it is. Use your brain from here on out. Say there's two candidates running for president. If a certain presidential candidate wins a state, then they get all of the state's electoral votes. The number of votes they receive is proportional to population: for example, California, being the absolute population juggernaut it is, gets 54 votes. Almost uninhabited Wyoming gets 3. (No offense to you, Wyomingians). If you work out the actual math, though, California should get 52 votes, and Wyoming should get 1. Why is there a two-vote surplus? Because the creators of the Electoral College were concerned about large states having a lot of power compared to small ones, so they added two votes to every state to give smaller st...