Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Smelling The Coffee: 2010
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(1)
Message 258 of 270 (544022)
01-22-2010 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by Legend
01-21-2010 4:12 PM


Legend writes:
quote:
Anyone can put a proposition through to the Assembly and everyone's free to vote on it. Example: you want more severe sentences for hate-motivated crimes. You go to the Assembly (electronically speaking) and put your proposal forward, or vote for it if someone else has already proposed it. At the end of the month, the top X suggestions which have been most voted get put forward for further discussion and drafting of bills.
You're suggesting taking the California system of government and stepping it up a notch. As a resident of CA, I must say that this is a horrible idea. The California system of "government by referendum" is what led to things like Prop 13, Prop 8, Prop 22, Prop 209, etc. It is why California had to vote *twice* against propositions that would have rounded up all gay men in the state and quarantined them.
The problem with this continual pinging of the people for everything is that it takes the current problem we have regarding voter apathy and amplifies it to no end. In the last special election, there was only a 28% voter turnout.
You'd be turning over the government to a tiny fraction of people with no accountability to anyone.
I already have the government you propose. It sucks.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Legend, posted 01-21-2010 4:12 PM Legend has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by Minnemooseus, posted 01-23-2010 3:05 AM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 261 by Buzsaw, posted 01-23-2010 8:33 PM Rrhain has replied
 Message 268 by Legend, posted 01-24-2010 6:29 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 262 of 270 (544120)
01-23-2010 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by Buzsaw
01-23-2010 8:04 PM


Buzsaw writes:
quote:
Every law, for example, which entitles benefits from the public treasury to non-producers revolks the rights of workers to keep their hard earned $$ mandated to non-producers.
Spoken like a true ditto-head.
You pretend that there are "non-producers" of any significance and that these "non-producers" are more of a drain on the system than the "producers."
You also pretend that the benefits to society by having the social safety net provided to "non-producers" are of no consequence. Because food riots and epidemics due to lack of ability to afford healthcare don't actually affect society at large.
quote:
I'm not sure about the teachers, however. From what I'm understanding they are not allowed to lead the class in prayer, which may be a good prohibition, given the diversity of beliefs in our times.
That doesn't respond to the question. Since when did teachers have the "right" to force others to engage in religious worship? Your right to pray is a right for you to pray, not a right for you to make someone else pray.
As long as there are pop quizzes, there will be prayer in schools.
quote:
During the last century over a hundred million citizens, the majority of who minded their own business were executed by secular, mostly athiestic dictator communist regimes because there was no republic majority vote allowed to repudiate the carnage.
And for even longer, billions of people, the vast majority weren't doing anything wrong, were executed by sectarian, religious rulers because there was no republic majority vote allowed to repudiate the carnage.
Religion has caused more suffering to more humans than any other idea in the history of humanity.
And I should point out, the number of people who have been killed "in the name of atheism" is vanishingly small. You confuse a murder carried out by someone who happens to be an atheist with an "atheist murder."
If I kill you because I'm trying to rob you and you're fighting back, my personal religious beliefs really don't enter into it and it would be disingenuous at best to claim that I was doing so out of a devotion to that theology, whatever it may be.
Nice work, Buzsaw, you've managed to justify the feudal system, the Crusades, and the Black Death as being good things.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by Buzsaw, posted 01-23-2010 8:04 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 263 of 270 (544121)
01-23-2010 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by Buzsaw
01-23-2010 8:33 PM


Buzsaw responds to me:
quote:
All who bothered to turn out and vote were accountable to the public at large
Incorrect. We can't take away your right to vote. If my elected official makes a mess of things, I can vote him out in the next election. If the government is based upon my neighbors and they make a mess of things, I can't vote them out. Thus, there is no accountability.
quote:
Were you, your family and like minded friends included in the 28% turnout? If not, why not?
Non sequitur. Please rephrase.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Buzsaw, posted 01-23-2010 8:33 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Buzsaw, posted 01-23-2010 11:35 PM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 267 by onifre, posted 01-24-2010 3:20 PM Rrhain has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 269 of 270 (544232)
01-24-2010 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by Legend
01-24-2010 6:29 PM


Legend responds to me:
quote:
I'm not familiar with what you're talking about, but it seems that you're suggesting that the majority of Californian voters wanted to round up and quarantine gay men. Which I find hard to believe.
What I said was that we had to vote against it twice. There is a notorious character in American politics: Lyndon LaRouche. In the mid-80s, during the beginnings of the HIV scare, LaRouche managed to get enough signatures to put on the ballot an initiative that would require quarantining of anybody infected or suspected to be infected with HIV. All doctors would need to report to the health board anybody suspected of being at risk of being infected with HIV.
He introduced this ballot measure in 1986, Prop 64, where it was defeated. He introduced it again in 1988, Prop 102, and it was defeated again.
This is what I mean: We had to vote *twice* against propositions to round up and quarantine gay men. We managed to do so both times, but this isn't something that should be done in the first place.
quote:
Voter apathy is a direct result of a system of governance where the average voter has no influence in decision-making that affects his day-to-day life and has lost trust in the people who are supposed to represent him.
But that's just it: The California system makes the average voter an active participant in governmental actions that affect his or her daily life. In 1988, there were 29 ballot measures to vote on. What is normally a simple ballot for the rest of the country is a novel in California due to all of the referenda that make it into the system. Everything from the budget to human rights is up for grabs and eventually comes rolling down the pike.
quote:
Direct governance can only empower people, make them have a say in their future and therefore eliminate apathy.
California is proof positive that this is simply not the case. The reason why there is voter apathy in California is, in part, because we're constantly going to the polls. Three or four times a year. The only time there is a large turnout is when there is a significant event such as a Presidential or Gubernatorial election. The special election that's only about reworking the way the lottery money is spent, salary requirements of State officers, and such, not so much.
quote:
Newsflash: you are already governed by a tiny fraction of people with very little accountability to anyone, certainly no accountability to you as a voter.
But that unaccountability isn't built into the system. It's only there because we're letting it be there. I am under no delusion that those in power are in any way, shape, or form truly concerned about the actual voters. But given that the voters do have the ability to get rid of them, there is always the possibility that they will figure it out and do so.
Take that away, and there is no way to insert accountability into the system.
quote:
If you did have and it did suck then you'd be able to do something about it.
What do you mean "if"? There is no "if." I really do have the form of government you're talking about. Californians are constantly holding elections to directly ask the voters what to do about everything from the treatment of farm animals to open meetings.
quote:
The fact that you're unable to, suggests to me that you have nothing like what I'm proposing.
Incorrect. What it suggests is that, like so many times before, you are not reading before posting.
California has government by referendum. The electorate is constantly being directly asked to pass laws. It's why Prop 22 couldn't be overturned by the Assembly: It was voted on by the people and referenda cannot be changed by the Assembly. The only way to do so is through another referendum.
Please, do some homework first. You are talking about things which you literally have no knowledge of. You admit to it yourself: "I'm not familiar with what you're talking about." Has it not yet occurred to you to find out first before pontificating?
quote:
You're just stuck in an endless loop of swapping representatives in blind faith that the next one will be better than their predecessor.
Huh? Who on earth is talking about representatives? It wasn't a representative that changed the revenue-sharing agreements with the Indian casinos. That was directly voted on by the people. It wasn't a representative that voted to change the method of redistricting. That was directly voted on by the people.
We have the government you seek.
Nobody votes.
Because we're constantly voting.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Legend, posted 01-24-2010 6:29 PM Legend has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by xongsmith, posted 01-25-2010 2:14 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024