Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Lovely.  Ive crossed frozen ponds to get to my ball even hitting off the ice but not this crazy.  I like how there happened to be a man made obstruction in his way too

Pros playin in tourneys for thousands of dollars get much better rulings and fortuitous drops than I do playing my buddies for a beer

In some cases, sure.

But the way it operates, it basically assures that people who commit crimes will be in more desperate positions when they're out. And desperation creates issues up and down for person and society.

Oh I don’t disagree.  You could make a fine argument that prison does not achieve either of it’s 2 stated goals:  offender being rehabilitated and offender paying debt to society.  
in fact the opposite is what usually happens 

nevertheless,  with plenty of candidates for jobs who have gone their entire lives showing good judgment it doesn’t make sense for companies that Handle money to hire those who have not shown good judgment

Pros playin in tourneys for thousands of dollars get much better rulings and fortuitous drops than I do playing my buddies for a beer

I think this depends on the company.  The nit pickiness from my old golfing buds normally is confined to stubbornness on the green.  We seem to take glee in making each other make everything. 
We tend to have enough forgiveness with stupid crap out on the course.  Paths, plugged lies, crappy bunkers, ground under repair etc.

We tend to have enough forgiveness with stupid crap out on the course. 

In other words you cheat?Go see Fearless he'll fill out your card

We tend to have enough forgiveness with stupid crap out on the course.  Paths, plugged lies, crappy bunkers, ground under repair etc.

paths are easy, free drop no closer

plugged lie, only if it's because of casual water, otherwise too bad

crappy bunkers are a hazard, your ball shouldn't be in there.  play it as it lies - unless casual water

ground under repair is easy, free drop no closer

bunkers that are not maintained is one of my pet peeves

crazy proposal, let the rich folks run the government?

crazy!

I think that's an interesting angle, but I also think states were also more of separate entities at the founding of the country. State governments meant more because we were a less United States.

Interesting point.  That was not the reason for the 17th Amendment, except in the general sense that Progressives wanted to steer power to Washington DC and away from the states.

I mean, it puts more power in the hands of career politicians. Maybe that's better? I dunno. 

I can read this two ways.  So, are you saying that the 17 Amendment shifted power to the career pols in Washington?

It reminds me of an interesting political comparison I've often made. So part of the reason we have two parties is because we have all the smaller races that are first past the post. As a result, we have to make compromises to build coalitions. So we have people who like guns, who are very into a certain faith and who like more unfettered markets all banding together. The have folks who like police but also don't like a bigger government together. None of these things are inherently related, and some even contradict each other, but compromises are made because you build majorities. 

That contrasts to a place like Israel, where they have an unusual proportional parliament. So if a party gets 5 percent of the votes, they get 5 percent of the seats. It's good because it kills off the 2-party setup. But in the end, you need a coalition. So the socialists get some compromise to join the main line liberals, and the party that just wants pot can offer its votes to someone. The positions make the compromise and the parties hold power over nominees. I don't know if that's good or bad. I'm sure one rhetorically could make it seem somewhat bad (I feel like angst against established pols has been a huge part of recent discourse).

There are pluses and minuses, but one thing the 2-party system has done is to promote political stability.  I think that Italy--with a parliamentary system--changed governments 9 times one year back in the '80s.
Less so now than historically the case, I think.  But then the parties haven't been this weak in almost 200 years.