> basic stuff like e-mail and payment processing should be provided by the state

You're looking at America in 2026 and concluding we want to give the state more control over private lives?

Yes, you can give control to the House of Representatives. The House should have way more control over government agencies, it's the people's house. The people deserve to have control.

▲

joquarky 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> it's the people's house

You dropped an adjective: wealthy

	▲	shimman 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		No, the Senate, Presidency, and Legislative branches are for the wealthy. The constitution was literally written so a minority of rich people would have the most control over the government. Having state legislatures (who also happened to decide who can vote + how) choose senators, requiring the senate to pass bills written by the house, judges that are chosen by senators. House of reps only serve for 2 years compared to 6 or 4 or lifetime appointments. The 17th amendment is a little over 100 years old. People need to stop treating the US constitution as this "mythical" thing rather than the reality of it being a very undemocratic document that is highly resistant to change. Luckily the house can be expanded with a simple majority IN the house, one way to truly combat this.

▲

tastyfreeze 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The more you ask around the more you will find the real divide in the US is the same as it always has been. There are those that believe a more powerful government will solve all the problems and those that just want the government to leave them alone to solve their own problems.

Thomas Sowell's Conflict of Visions describes the difference well.

	▲	wredcoll 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You make a really good point I think, if the government just leaves us alone then we can solve all of our own problems with the friendly assistance of ma bell/standard oil/google/facebook.