Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-25-2019 3:31 PM
27 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, AZPaul3, jar, JonF, kjsimons, PaulK, Percy (Admin), RAZD, Stile (9 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,729 Year: 9,765/19,786 Month: 2,187/2,119 Week: 223/724 Day: 62/93 Hour: 2/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1314151617
18
Author Topic:   Smelling The Coffee: 2010
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 256 of 270 (544007)
01-22-2010 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by Briterican
01-21-2010 5:11 PM


Re: Come on man, pass it
To be a bit more serious, like anything it has its positives and negatives. I'll try to get around to starting a serious thread about my observations at some point.

I would be absolutely fascinated to hear your views on the two cultures, pros and cons, good and bad etc. etc. etc.

And if you are anywhere near I would be happy to meet up at some point in the fuure too..................


This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Briterican, posted 01-21-2010 5:11 PM Briterican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Briterican, posted 01-24-2010 10:22 AM Straggler has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 257 of 270 (544008)
01-22-2010 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by Legend
01-21-2010 4:12 PM


Re: That's not democracy!
It is still desperately unclear how it is ever decided what gets voted on in your proposed system.

I've already explained it in a couple of posts: we do. The Assembly. Anyone can put a proposition through to the Assembly and everyone's free to vote on it.

What assembly? Who makes up the "assembly"?

Let's say we ask the 40 million (or whatever) voting public of Britain to submit their proposals for legislation. Everything from the pet 10,000 page detailed budget to the "Let's kill all gays" proposal.

How do we decide which of the 40,00o,00o proposals goes through to the next vote?

And are all of these restrictions on amending the constitution able to be overruled by simple majority decree?

Yes, subject to checks and balances, as outlined above.

But if the majority decides that the "checks and balances" are undemocratic then what is to stop them overruling them?

If the majority decide that they want to change the constitution AND that they want to change the restrictions on changing the constitution to get their changes through quickly and easily can they do this by popular vote?

Yes, although doing so should be neither quick nor easy.

But if the majority decides it should be quick and easy where does that leave your majoratarianism philosophy?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Legend, posted 01-21-2010 4:12 PM Legend has not yet responded

  
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 44 days)
Posts: 6349
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 responded

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

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3725
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 259 of 270 (544055)
01-23-2010 3:05 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Rrhain
01-22-2010 9:44 PM


Nice message - How about a spin-off topic
To POTM or not to POTM?

I think the California system an interesting topic - Too good to be buried in a topic apparently about hot caffeinated beverages.

How about a new "Coffee House" topic on the theme, one with a good topic title?

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2010 9:44 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 260 of 270 (544110)
01-23-2010 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Asgara
01-18-2010 8:59 PM


Re: It's a Republic Stupid
Asgaral writes:

You see Buz, ma dear, this is exactly what I"m talking about. The majority does not have the "right" to legislate away the "rights" of others. A right is a right, whether you're part of the majority or a minority of one.

But dear heart, many laws legislate rights from some and to others. That's how a representative Republic of the people works. Are you advocating disolution of the republic? 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.

Conversely, every law which revolks entitlements to non-producers from the public treasury restores entitlements to workers allowing them to keep their earnings.

Asgara writes:

Show me one spot in American government or public education where one's right to pray has been taken away. I advise you to make a call immediately to the ACLU.

I stand corrected on this count. 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.

Asgara writes:

You obviously missed the part where I specified stoning "YOU." You and your family are going about your business, breaking no laws that you are aware of. A majority of your peers decide that, for whatever reason, they don't like something you do. They vote to stone you. I take it you'd be ok with that? It is the majority making a decision. Who cares about your rights? Those don't matter.

Perhaps you missed my point which included me if I had committed murder.

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.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Asgara, posted 01-18-2010 8:59 PM Asgara has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Rrhain, posted 01-23-2010 10:28 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 261 of 270 (544111)
01-23-2010 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Rrhain
01-22-2010 9:44 PM


Re: Low turnout
Rrhain writes:

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.

Hi Rrhain. All who bothered to turn out and vote were accountable to the public at large whom the government represented. That voter apathy counted for the low turnout in no way diminishes the accountability of citizens who exercised their lawful right to vote their preference.

Were you, your family and like minded friends included in the 28% turnout? If not, why not?


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2010 9:44 PM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by Rrhain, posted 01-23-2010 10:30 PM Buzsaw has responded

  
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 44 days)
Posts: 6349
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 yet responded

    
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 44 days)
Posts: 6349
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 responded

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

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 264 of 270 (544127)
01-23-2010 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by Rrhain
01-23-2010 10:30 PM


RE: Messes Of Things
Rrhain writes:

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.

Sure you can, Rrhain. All you need do is to stop whining, muster up your likeminded citizens and convince a majority of voters to get out and vote your own mess of things into law.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Rrhain, posted 01-23-2010 10:30 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Shield, posted 01-24-2010 1:21 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Shield
Member (Idle past 1034 days)
Posts: 482
Joined: 01-29-2008


(1)
Message 265 of 270 (544138)
01-24-2010 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Buzsaw
01-23-2010 11:35 PM


RE: Messes Of Things
quote:
Sure you can, Rrhain. All you need do is to stop whining, muster up your likeminded citizens and convince a majority of voters to get out and vote your own mess of things into law.

So i should form a mob?

Edited by rbp, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Buzsaw, posted 01-23-2010 11:35 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Briterican
Member (Idle past 2121 days)
Posts: 340
Joined: 05-29-2008


Message 266 of 270 (544157)
01-24-2010 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Straggler
01-22-2010 8:00 PM


London rules
Hiya Straggler

Straggler writes:

And if you are anywhere near I would be happy to meet up at some point

I'll keep your gracious invitation in mind. I've got no trips to London in the near future, but I'm overdue a visit to the British Museum, so I'll get back down there eventually.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Straggler, posted 01-22-2010 8:00 PM Straggler has not yet responded

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 1123 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 267 of 270 (544180)
01-24-2010 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by Rrhain
01-23-2010 10:30 PM


If my elected official makes a mess of things, I can vote him out in the next election.

No you can't.

You can vote for some other candidate, and that's it. If the majority votes like you then the elected official will be out of a job, but if they don't (remember Bush 04?) the elected official remains, to make a bigger mess.

Thus, there is no accountability.

There is marginal accountability at the moment.

When I see Bush on trail for war-crimes, along with Cheney, then I'll agree that there is real accountability. As long as he sits in his ranch, having order the mass murder of innocent people in both Iraq and Afghan, it remains in the hands of the elite to decide who is accountable - not you the citizen - and especially not with something as trivial as voting.

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Rrhain, posted 01-23-2010 10:30 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
Legend
Member (Idle past 3178 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 268 of 270 (544203)
01-24-2010 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Rrhain
01-22-2010 9:44 PM


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.

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.

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.

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. Direct governance can only empower people, make them have a say in their future and therefore eliminate apathy.

You'd be turning over the government to a tiny fraction of people with no accountability to anyone.

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. And you will continue to do so as long as you are limited to personal representation instead of direct participation in the affairs of your state.

I already have the government you propose. It sucks.

If you did have and it did suck then you'd be able to do something about it. The fact that you're unable to, suggests to me that you have nothing like what I'm proposing. You're just stuck in an endless loop of swapping representatives in blind faith that the next one will be better than their predecessor.


"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"
This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Rrhain, posted 01-22-2010 9:44 PM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Rrhain, posted 01-24-2010 11:08 PM Legend has not yet responded

  
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 44 days)
Posts: 6349
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 yet responded

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

    
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 1884
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 270 of 270 (544241)
01-25-2010 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Rrhain
01-24-2010 11:08 PM


The average asshole on the street aint worse than those in office
I'm thinking the Greeks, the guys who came up with democracy in the first place - albeit with slaves and sexism and a whole raft of other stupidity - they had a good idea when it came to determine the president of the Senate - lottery.

We already do this very well with the Jury Duty system.
Schools would prepare students.....

Imagine something like this (well - there are details)

At age 21 all U.S. Citizens are put into a pool, like the draft pool of old.

For all of the lowest level officials, like town select(wo)men and city council(wo)men, names are chosen from the pool by lottery. Those selected move into office & are then part of the second level pool.

For the second lowest level officials, names are chosen from the second level by lottery. Those selected move into the 3rd level pool.

For the 3rd level officials, names are chosen from the 3rd level pool, and so on all the way up to POTUS.

Any official found guilty of any kind of corruption at all is kicked out of all pools. National TV cheers the winners in their well-known stupifying way, but it works to keep the incentive to NOT CHEAT.
Each time your name is NOT chosen at a certain level, a copy of your name is added to the pool, increasing the odds that you will be chosen next time.

Depending on how many levels there are, the POTUS will be someone experienced and unbought.

It's a combination of anarchy and meritocracy. BUT there's no more of the CRAP CRAP CRAP of election commercials or robocalls. Big Business cant do *ANYTHING* about the process other than make fraudulent lotteries. And those are easy to catch. Oh, the gnashing of their teeth.

Never happen.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Rrhain, posted 01-24-2010 11:08 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1314151617
18
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019