Hypothetical Political Scenario - Page 2

Sava · December 3, 2003, 13:24

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
Well, I certainly think that many Americans would vote Libertarian if they listened to the Libertarian viewpoint with an open, rational mind.

sorry, people like the rule of law and protection from Social Darwinian ideologies.

MrFun · December 3, 2003, 13:29

Quote:

Originally posted by East Street Trader
H
Bonus vote - which militarily weak country should be invaded next?

We could try to conquer that foreign country called Texas.

Bugs ****ing Bunny · December 3, 2003, 13:33

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
Well, I certainly think that many Americans would vote Libertarian if they listened to the Libertarian viewpoint with an open, rational mind.

Would the number be similar to the number of Americans who believe they have been the victim of an alien abduction and anal probe?

Japher · December 3, 2003, 13:34

Quote:

We could try to conquer that foreign country called Texas.

Naw, the already gave up and subcumbed to the power the US when they couldn't fend off the Mexicans they stole their land from

MrFun · December 3, 2003, 13:48

Texas subcumbed to the United States??

Since when?

Japher · December 3, 2003, 14:36

It's how they became a state. They Succumbed (I looked up how to spell it right

) way back when... Your kidding right?

Imran Siddiqui · December 3, 2003, 14:40

Quote:

Assume for a minute that it was required that all US citizens read detailed reports on many different political issues, paying special attention to how much it would cost them individually in taxes, and then vote on those issues.

They'd say 'This sucks' and stop paying attention and eventually just start throwing them paper airplanes

.

Urban Ranger · December 4, 2003, 01:00

Quote:

Originally posted by connorkimbro

Quote:

Yes, that's why it's a terrible idea either way.

Fine if you think that, but provide arguments, not fallacies like Zkribbler's straw man that i quoted.

A privately run company controls law enforcement? How will it behave? What will its priorities be? To whom will it be loyal? How will it be funded?

Urban Ranger · December 4, 2003, 01:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Garth Vader
You can't give a bill if you don't know what it's going to cost. If you are estimating costs it depends on who is doing the estimating. Who would have made up the bill for what Iraq was going to cost?

Also, as GePap pointed out, you need to provide an estimation of the cost of not doing something, like how much will it cost if they cancel Medicare.

Kuciwalker · December 4, 2003, 01:06

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
Well, I certainly think that many Americans would vote Libertarian if they listened to the Libertarian viewpoint with an open, rational mind.

where open and rational are defined as "thinking like David Floyd"

Kuciwalker · December 4, 2003, 01:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Commie Chocobo
HAH! maybbe then america would realise commuunism is the only way...

DL DANCE!

Kuciwalker · December 4, 2003, 01:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Whoha
no, southward, its too cold up there, only conquer it when our global warming program finishes to completion and Canada is a tropical Paradise.

All the cold has to go somewhere, doesn't it? Thus proving my assertion that Canada will be a tropical paradise when Hell freezes over

Kuciwalker · December 4, 2003, 01:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Also, as GePap pointed out, you need to provide an estimation of the cost of not doing something, like how much will it cost if they cancel Medicare.

I agree with UR

Capt Dizle · December 4, 2003, 01:23

Congress passes laws, funds programs and approves budgets based on how much grease needs to be applied to our various sqeaky wheels.

And based on how much pork they can mix in. Pork is the currency of Congressmen, cashed in for votes and cash for campaigns.

One good example is the Bush prescription drug plan which does two things for him. One, it eliminates an issue for the Democrats to use against him. Two, it is heavily laden with pork which will bring cash into Republican coffers.

It has little or nothing to do with helping people pay for prescriptions, except people will think it does because they do not take the time to review and judge for themselves.

Political terms are too short. The campaigning never ends. We need to move to a system where terms are longer, and a politician cannot serve consectutive terms.

Or move towards a direct democracy as the thread started hinted.

Zkribbler · December 4, 2003, 02:13

Quote:

Originally posted by connorkimbro

Quote:

Yes, that's why it's a terrible idea either way.

Fine if you think that, but provide arguments, not fallacies like Zkribbler's straw man that i quoted.

It wasn't a straw man. I was trying to point out that the proposal wants reports setting out the costs but omitting any analysis of the benefits.

MrFun · December 4, 2003, 02:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher
It's how they became a state. They Succumbed (I looked up how to spell it right

) way back when... Your kidding right?

Yes -- I was

J

O

K

I

N

G

I'm a history major.

Urban Ranger · December 4, 2003, 22:59

After thinking about this a bit, it seems that having a direct vote on many issues will make the society more socialistic, not libertarian.

Think about it. A capitalistic society is always a pyramid in terms of money with a few individuals at the tip and loads of people at the bottom. So when an issue comes up for direct vote, what will be the most likely outcome? That's right, take money from the people at the top and use them for the people at the bottom.