What should America do next? - Page 2

Drogue · December 24, 2002, 16:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Lemmy

Am i the only one who is confused by this?
America is the most democratic society.
Europe isn't as democratic, it's too communistic.
Today the US is no real democracy.
Capitalism stands in the way of true democracy.

I'd guess the first paragraph, up to the end of the bracket [europe)] was something he was quoting, and the rest was his reply. But then I am not sure, it was a little confusing

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 16:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Whoops, Sava and Odin! Time to brush up on Article V:

Yeah, it seems like they want to change the system until they get what they want.

The United States is not a nation of individuals, its a nation of individual states. Thats why its often called the "Union". And by that logic, its completely democratic. Each state has an equal say.

What sava is suggesting (it seems) is the merging all of the states into one huge gigantic government. That has inefficiency written all over it.

KaiserIsak · December 24, 2002, 18:46

Well, the first part was irony at the expense of the so-called democracy you have over there.

Nubclear · December 24, 2002, 18:54

Quote:

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
What sava is suggesting (it seems) is the merging all of the states into one huge gigantic government. That has inefficiency written all over it.

Right now were testing it with the Homeland Secuirty department...if sucessful, it'll move to te states.....

Lonestar · December 24, 2002, 19:01

Nah. I say the Federal System will continue to work.

Odin · December 24, 2002, 19:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Lonestar
Nah. I say the Federal System will continue to work.

Federalism is a relic of the states' rights BS. (I shudder every time I think of John C. Caulhoun.

)

Stefu · December 24, 2002, 19:45

I think America should do Britain.

The crack between Wales and Cornwall is exceptant for long, hard thrusts of Florida!

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 21:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Stefu
I think America should do Britain.

Kinky

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 21:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Odin

Federalism is a relic of the states' rights BS. (I shudder every time I think of John C. Caulhoun.

)

What would you suggest it be replaced with?

Drogue · December 24, 2002, 21:48

Proportional Representation. Other than nuking the place (

) It seems the most popular idea amoung apolytoners

Drogue · December 24, 2002, 21:55

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
It just seems like, that for such a flawed system, democracy has so many supporters.

Flawed but fair. I think that's important to many people. Like Churchil said

Quote:

Democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried

I personally do not like democracy as it is now, as all politicians care about is the time until the next election, rather than long term, because they're main aim is to get re-elected. However, Churchill is right IMO, I have never heard of a system that works better.

Much like capitalism. I don't like it, but I don't think we have a system that would work better in practice. Democracy and Capitalism are the best system until humanity, and human nature has evolved IMHO.

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 21:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
Proportional Representation. Other than nuking the place (

) It seems the most popular idea amoung apolytoners

Why? So California can always get what it wants and the rest of the country can rot to sh*t? That doesn't sound very democratic to me... In fact, it sounds alot like Ontario here in Canada.

PR is just mob rule... it screws over minority opinions. Its also a great way of enforcing the status quo indefinately.

Besides, I don't think many other American are crying out for PR. Oh, but I suppose thats just because Americans are ignorant f*cks and you know better

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 22:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue

Flawed but fair. I think that's important to many people. Like Churchil said

I personally do not like democracy as it is now, as all politicians care about is the time until the next election, rather than long term, because they're main aim is to get re-elected. However, Churchill is right IMO, I have never heard of a system that works better.

Much like capitalism. I don't like it, but I don't think we have a system that would work better in practice. Democracy and Capitalism are the best system until humanity, and human nature has evolved IMHO.

And then we can all live in a classless, moneyless, communist utopia

Seriously though, whats with all the griping about capitalism? All it is is a system that lets anyone do whatever they want to make a living as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

If your problem is with big business and multinationals thats more of an issue with anti trust laws. Those can always be amended and stiffened. Socialism is hardly the answer. Besides, you can always move to Cuba

Drogue · December 24, 2002, 22:17

I'm not American, so I've no need to move to cuba. The only gripe I have with capitalism is the inequality. By having a strong welfare system it solves that, but as if that'll happen in the US

About the Utopia, that's, whatb I said. Capitalism works better than any other system at the moment, but I hope humanity will evolve so that a utopian style system will work.

If California has more residents, why should it not have more say? Otherwise each person in California has less say, and less power than each person in say Alaska. PR does not screw minorities. Actually, here in the UK it will help them. If we had PR we would have the Green Party getting one or 2 seats, and I think the UKIP and BNP would get one too. However, with first past the post, only the 3 main parties and a couple of independants get seats.

California will not get everything, because it is not a majority in itself. However, each persons opinion there is as valid as someone is any other state, yet with government by state and not PR each voter in Alaska has 50 times as much voting power when it comes to the senate than each Californian voter (Cali has 50 times population and the same number of senators) IMO that's fairer.

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 22:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
I'm not American, so I've no need to move to cuba. The only gripe I have with capitalism is the inequality. By having a strong welfare system it solves that, but as if that'll happen in the US

About the Utopia, that's, whatb I said. Capitalism works better than any other system at the moment, but I hope humanity will evolve so that a utopian style system will work.

If California has more residents, why should it not have more say? Otherwise each person in California has less say, and less power than each person in say Alaska. PR does not screw minorities. Actually, here in the UK it will help them. If we had PR we would have the Green Party getting one or 2 seats, and I think the UKIP and BNP would get one too. However, with first past the post, only the 3 main parties and a couple of independants get seats.

California will not get everything, because it is not a majority in itself. However, each persons opinion there is as valid as someone is any other state, yet with government by state and not PR each voter in Alaska has 50 times as much voting power when it comes to the senate than each Californian voter (Cali has 50 times population and the same number of senators) IMO that's fairer.

Yes, but why should we have Alaskans deciding what happens in California, or New Yorkers deciding what happens in Nebraska? Government by state allows each state to take care of its own affairs and districting (as opposed to PR) gives each state equal sufferage when it comes to national affairs.

So you're saying states should be disbanded as political units?

JimmyCracksCorn · December 24, 2002, 22:59

Quote:

I'm not American, so I've no need to move to cuba. The only gripe I have with capitalism is the inequality. By having a strong welfare system it solves that, but as if that'll happen in the US

If you can't afford health insurance, the state pays for it (medicare). If you're unemployed, the state gives you unemployment cheques. If you can't pay your bills you file for bankruptcy and you're protected.

Do you want to be spoonfed too?

Drogue · December 24, 2002, 23:17

No states are fine, but I think the senate should go, or at least should be elected by people not by state. I agree, Alaskans should not have a say in Californian state matters, but each Californian should have an equal say as each Alaska in federal matters. In federal matters I don't think states serve a purpose.

As Frankychan said: Go 3rd Estate!

I don't want to be spoonfed, I live in a society where I feel we have enough welfare. I like having the National Health Service, having state pensions, state unempolyment benefits etc. IMHO America does not go far enough, but that is what it has decided, and it doesn't affect me, so I have no reason to complain. I'm just glad I don't live there.

Nubclear · December 25, 2002, 00:54

Quote:

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn

Kinky

Felch · December 25, 2002, 01:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
No states are fine, but I think the senate should go, or at least should be elected by people not by state.

We addressed that "problem" about 90 years ago. All it's caused is an increase in special interests groups controlling the Senate.

Indirect elections mean that the candidates don't have to rely on campaign contributions as much. That's why we don't elect the Supreme Court - so that the donators can't influence them.

In reality democracy is a pretty crappy system, since half the population has a double digit IQ, and big money groups are able to easily influence them. The government is effectively run by the rich and the retarded.

St Leo · December 25, 2002, 02:12

Proportional Representation. Other than nuking the place () It seems the most popular idea amoung apolytoners

Damn straight. Ontario is getting screwed in Canada. We have 38% of Canada's population, the part that hasn't atrophied into worthless drones like the Prairies and the Maritimes, but we only control a mere 33% of the Federal government. It sounds to me as though we are getting shafted by the CCRAP-voting Westerners and the unemployable Easterners.

Nubclear · December 25, 2002, 02:15

North America does not seem to be doing well

pg · December 25, 2002, 03:46

nuking america sounds good, specifically washington, dc. in all seriousness though i'd most like to see the us gov't(all parts of it) shrink tremendously, and have all the benefits that comes with that.

KaiserIsak · December 25, 2002, 11:52

Quote:

Seriously though, whats with all the griping about capitalism? All it is is a system that lets anyone do whatever they want to make a living as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

Had THIS been capitalism, do you really think so many would have been so upset on it?
Capitalism is a system which is developing trough peoples egoism, in contrast to socialism who is a system who progress trough peoples solidarity. The problem with capitalism is that they who are in power, people with money, lets the profit rule their prioritys. This cause enviromental disasters, animal extinction, slavery, hunger.

And YES, there is an option. It is called socialism, and it is a system where the peoples needs are what makes it all going. Not a few peoples needs for profit. It is a system with true democracy, where everybody owns the resources togheter. Not those who accidently inheritet (not sure if it is the right word to use) it from their parents.

Most rich people today are children of rich people, while most poor peoples are children of poor people. Is that what you call "a system that lets anyone do whatever they want to make a living ".

Sava · December 25, 2002, 21:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Flubber
The only problem is that if your senate was proportional as well as the House of Representatives, you would quickly end up with a situation where some 30-40 states would feel irrelevant to the process. This feeds feelings of alienation. As it is now, the senator for Maine or Rhode Island can exert some influence for their constituents. I don't necessarily see that as a terrible thing but it does lead to an ongoing situation where a minority of the population elect a majority of the Senate.

I guess it all depends if you place any value on having some form of effective regional representation. If the Senate were going to be purely based on population, you may as well just abolish it since in theory it should just mirror the House

30-40 states should be irrelevant to the process. If I were reorganizing the US, I would get rid of the concept of the State altogether. Or at least redraw the borders in such a way to make things more efficient.

Sava · December 25, 2002, 21:06

Sooner or later society has to start thinking of itself as one unit. Nationalism needs to go... the idea of personal wealth needs to go... Human civilization will never unite as long as capitalism is around.

red_jon · December 25, 2002, 21:07

America nuking itself won a disturbing amount of votes. Incidently I voted for nuking Japan. Bwaha.

David Floyd · December 25, 2002, 21:12

Quote:

Flawed but fair. I think that's important to many people.

I fail to see how majority rule is fair to anyone except those in the majority at that particular moment.

Quote:

However, Churchill is right IMO, I have never heard of a system that works better.

How unlibertarian of you

Drogue · December 25, 2002, 21:32

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
How unlibertarian of you

Have you seen a system work better? If so, where? Please enlighten us.

Sava · December 25, 2002, 21:35

DOn't try arguing with Floyd about Democracy vs absolute freedom... I'm convinced the he thinks people should have the "freedom" to commit murder.

David Floyd · December 25, 2002, 21:40

Quote:

I'm convinced the he thinks people should have the "freedom" to commit murder.

No you aren't. You're just saying that to build yourself up at my expense.

Quote:

Have you seen a system work better? If so, where? Please enlighten us.

No, because I don't think that ANY current or past system works very well. I have HEARD of one, though