Washington D.C. is broken.

First, I would like to say that voter apathy is not a problem. Voter apathy is a choice - it is not necessary for people who don't care about government to take a stand on issues they don't care about. In fact, more than being unnecessary, it is wholly bad for the country. If someone is apathetic, they SHOULDN'T vote. Now if people were forced to vote or given incentives to vote (like money or such) then we would have a broken system. We would have apathetic people actually voting. Only the people who want to vote should. The fact that you think everyone should vote does not make our system broken, it simply means you're either wrong or you simply have a different point of view than me. And as I pointed out in the last argument, differing tastes is like a person who likes the color red calling a blue cup broken. You then attacked my 4-oz cup, 8-oz of liquid analogy. You say the cup isn't broken, but the process is broken. Simply because it isn't the most efficient way possible? The definition you gave of broken was "needing repair" not "needing repair if you want it to be PERFECT." The process of drinking all 8 oz from a 4-oz cup indeed works, so it cannot be broken. Perfection does not exist - by your warped definition you try to apply here, everything is broken. Next, you say that perhaps there is a better type of government, one that can have both trade efficiency and fairness. I think you missed the point. It is an economic principle that Governments face a trade-off between efficiency and fairness. There are only a few things that increase both, such as disallowing monopolies (I think, at least). But most any other policy a government could enact, if it raises one, the other will drop. It all depends on your value system - some people like higher efficiency, others like more fair distribution. The point being, this is simply a matter of taste. Once again, it's like calling a blue cup broken simply because you prefer red. Then you say that the mistakes of individuals mean that the system is broken. What is our government supposed to do, only elect perfect people? Sure, if we had an overabundance of perfect people, maybe that would be viable. Last time we checked though, we have NONE. People are not perfect. Them being otherwise does not constitute a broken system. I concede that something does not need to be fixable to be considered broken, thus I have moved away from that argument. You say that political parties only look out for themselves; this is simply not true. They simply make policies based on their party's beliefs. For instance, republicans tend to think it's better to help out the big businesses in an attempt to stimulate the economy and let it 'trickle down,' whereas democrats tend to give stuff straight to the people. This is why one group does one and the other does another. However, republicans don't only help republican businesses, and democrats don't just give stuff to the democrats among the people. They are far-reaching policies that are used regardless of the political standing of the beneficiary. Then, you reasserted that the US government should not be the world's police officer. Why not? Because you don't want them to be? Because that wasn't one of the initial reasons they were set up? Neither of these are good answers. It simply means that you have a different value system than the government. You like government to be one way, it's not. That doesn't make it broken. It just means that you have different tastes. Whether or not it was originally set up to police the world, it has now taken that upon itself. To you, this is a blue cup, when you would prefer it to be red. This does not constitute a broken system at all, it just means you disagree with it. And to back up my statement that Washington is robust, it is constantly changing. Each 4 years our prez is switched out, and most legislators have similar term lengths. This means that if someone gets in office who is comparatively incompetent, this person will be gone in due time. If enough people realize that there is a problem, they will seek change. That is how the government works. It is not a static system, nor should it be. By its very nature, it is constantly changing to adapt to what the people think is best. This is why it is robust, because it is constantly being fine-tuned. Policies come and go all the time, politicians come and go all the time, not much is truly constant in our government. I have shown that all of your qualms with government can pretty much be attributed to you having a different value system than the government. Thus, I have shown that none of your examples make the government broken, they just mean that you have different tastes than the government. Thus, with the information given so far, we cannot assume that the government is broken, since no decisive evidence has been given. I look forward to your final statements.