US election system. Is the US really a democracy, or a duocracy?

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Why do Europeans from Panzer speed-bump countries hate the US so much?

Are you referencing something specific you read recently? The only articles I can think of are the current extradition of a UK student over copyright infringement charges and our foreign policy. Other than that it's more an optimistic "we hope you get a better system soon" which I think most of us in the US can agree with. Either that or mild pity over how we handle situations and systems. The system isn't really designed to change though.

[Baneblade]

He is referring to the Germans in WWII.

[ItsTheSheppy]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Why do Europeans from Panzer speed-bump countries hate the US so much?

Sentences like that can't be all that helpful.

[Baneblade]

It's okay to be intimidated by me, I don't mind in the least.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Why do Europeans from Panzer speed-bump countries hate the US so much?

Why do own Japanese citizen interners think others hate them when they deliver critique?

[Saifoda]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Why do Europeans from Panzer speed-bump countries hate the US so much?

Distracting themselves from their own problems (good job, eurozone).

[CutterJohn]

Malorn, the 'founding fathers' were a brave bunch. They committed High Treason against the crown and won. I can't imagine the weight on their shoulders at this time(though I think this sums it up rather well..).

But they were still men, and hence, fallible, and they made many errors, compromises and oversights, that were shortsighted, ill advised, or just plain wrong. Out of ignorance and bigotry, or just plain hard headedness.

In fact, they were so human, that the government they created under the articles of confederation had to be scrapped and rebooted entirely after a mere ten years. The replacement *was* pretty damned stable. The US government is one of the current record holders for longevity(depending on how you count the secession of the southern states).

But it is by no means perfect. Figment has a great many valid criticisms, and you would do well to realize that sometimes an outsider can have insights you're blind to.

Figment, the US system may not be perfect, but it does work. Not well, and not all the time, but you can't argue with the results. We may not be the best country in the world, but we're up near the top. I don't know if you've ever visited america, but its a pretty swell place in most areas. To our shame, we may let people slip through the cracks, but all in all life is pretty damned good for a majority of people. Wide ranging upheavels in the system could do more harm than good, even if on the surface they would be for the best.




But for fun, I'd still love to see congress appointed by Sortition. Screw politics. Screw voting. Let every man have a chance.

[ItsTheSheppy]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Malorn, the 'founding fathers' were a brave bunch. They committed High Treason against the crown and won. I can't imagine the weight on their shoulders at this time(though I think this sums it up rather well..).

But they were still men, and hence, fallible, and they made many errors, compromises and oversights, that were shortsighted, ill advised, or just plain wrong. Out of ignorance and bigotry, or just plain hard headedness.

In fact, they were so human, that the government they created under the articles of confederation had to be scrapped and rebooted entirely after a mere ten years. The replacement *was* pretty damned stable. The US government is one of the current record holders for longevity(depending on how you count the secession of the southern states).

But it is by no means perfect. Figment has a great many valid criticisms, and you would do well to realize that sometimes an outsider can have insights you're blind to.

Figment, the US system may not be perfect, but it does work. Not well, and not all the time, but you can't argue with the results. We may not be the best country in the world, but we're up near the top. I don't know if you've ever visited america, but its a pretty swell place in most areas. To our shame, we may let people slip through the cracks, but all in all life is pretty damned good for a majority of people. Wide ranging upheavels in the system could do more harm than good, even if on the surface they would be for the best.




But for fun, I'd still love to see congress appointed by Sortition. Screw politics. Screw voting. Let every man have a chance.

This was perhaps the most reasonable post in this entire thread.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Figment, the US system may not be perfect, but it does work. Not well, and not all the time, but you can't argue with the results.

I don't think I've ever claimed it didn't work. It does something and it does enable a strong government (lol @ Malorn who wants a weak government) that's capable of forcing a minority opinion down someone else's throat.

As said, I've never said it doesn't work. A dictatorship works. I merely disagreed with the notion of pretense of being a democracy.

We may not be the best country in the world, but we're up near the top. I don't know if you've ever visited america, but its a pretty swell place in most areas. To our shame, we may let people slip through the cracks, but all in all life is pretty damned good for a majority of people.

I know. All I said on this account (enticed by Malorn in particular) was that others have been doing even better on several key points. And not just as an average of populace, but also with less extreme extremities at the bottom end in particular.

Wide ranging upheavels in the system could do more harm than good, even if on the surface they would be for the best.

Entirely depends on the manner and planning of implementation, which demands time, careful planning and careful consideration. Think of the difference in effects when transporting water through the Colorado, or through the Mississipi river. Systems that want to change benevolently usualy need time to trickle through, though sometimes going through some rapids works as well.

But for fun, I'd still love to see congress appointed by Sortition. Screw politics. Screw voting. Let every man have a chance.

Oh man... the potential list of presidential candidates!

[Saifoda]

Not to open up this can of worms, Figment, but what are the merits of strong/large vs. weak/small governments? I'd also like to point out the various levels of government (federal state etc...) and further that, although I implied it, strong and large, and weak and small, are not necessarily synonymous.


EDIT: Wow, spelling/grammar errors out the ass. Amazing what a little cold can do to cognitive abilities.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Saifoda

Not to open up this can of worms, Figment, but what are the merits of strong/large vs. weak/small governments? I'd also like to point out the various levels of government (federal state etc...) and further that, although I implied it, strong and large, and weak and small, are not necessarily synonymous.

Complex question. Perhaps better to create an all new topic for centralization vs decentralization merits?

Personally I feel that anything that's going to be roughly the same in any subdividision of a homogeneous nation, should be the same throughout. If only just for clarity and cost-effectiveness. IMO a governmental body (on any level) should not be larger than is really needed to execute its tasks.

Governments should mostly look after the interests of the general public, while protecting the rights of smaller communities as well. With general public rights, I mean making sure basic needs for living are met for all. Human rights, security, environment, legislation, healthcare, infrastructural management and education.

There's a big difference to me if a state or nation is homogeneous compared to the larger body. The US can be far more centralized than the EU IMO because the shared and similar values, history, economy and culture are much more significant in the US. That puts far less demands on tailoring on a regional level than in the EU.

The larger government body should provide coherence and stability through its services and legislation. It's not there to leech from or leech you. Wellfare for instance should be on a level where working is more interesting, but not in such a bad state it encourages crime. Not only is dealing with crime more costly both actively and in the aftermath, but also in the victimes it causes and the damage it does to your economy.

It means the populace should have the freedom to do as they wish and the tools (read: infrastructure/education/etc, not: freeloading on welfare) to live life to the fullest, without being a hindrance to the remainder of the populace. For that, people should take some responsibility in the form of taxes and being subject to law.

There isn't however, one single way to best have a large or small government as it really depends on demographics, geography and social issues plagueing your populace. IMO the government should strife to be as small as possible and only interfere with your life when you're being a burden to society (like you endangering the health of others or needlessly polluting, etc). I wouldn't mind handing out priviliges to certain states or nations to deal with excesses or extreme situations.

But if one works together with others (whether it be companies, states in a federal government or you and your direct relatives), you generally perform better if you can combine work and share workload than if you try to work out everything on your own. But it really depends on the topic and scale what works best.

[Saifoda]

...........Yeah I think this will require another thread lol.



My basic thoughts on small vs big governments has to do with distribution of power, particularly from a sort of bottom up (imo better) approach. I won't take long on this, but basically I think much like the original idea of the American Republic and the EU, having a larger overarching government designed to set more or less basic ground rules (i.e. the constitution and constitutional legislation) for the "lower" forms of government (i.e. states, counties, municipalities, etc...) from which to then form their own rules and laws. It allows for a lot of variation, experimentation of concepts and laws, and allows people even further freedom to settle in states/cities which reflect their values. If you wanna go be a hipster smot poker in san francisco and pay 75% taxes (I know that's not the actual rate, but I wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow it was) then go for it; me, I'd rather be in a "freer" state (in the classical liberal sense). I think of myself sometimes as a sort of hippy lumberjack. Or lumber hippjack. I can never tell.

Anyways.

/tangent.

[Saifoda]

Originally Posted by DjEclipse

2012 we have all this know-how and not much to show for it. More of the same won't remedy that. We need huge infrastructure upgrades that would likely cost every dime in the world. Lightbulb moment, money doesn't make the world go round, it's slowing us down.

In the western version of monetary policy (FED/ECB) it's all debt based, meaning every piece of currency is owed back to a bank, plus interest. There's just enough money in the system though to keep it going, at the moment anyways. That's something that needs to go IMO.

[Saifoda]

Originally Posted by DjEclipse

Meh. Whole thing needs to go. Im an atheist when it comes to money.

There used to be a popular belief that money cant fix problems. The weather is weird and all the gold in the world wont fix the hole causing the weirdness.

what do you mean "atheist?" as in you don't want to use money or you don't think money should exist? (i.e. anarchist) or you don't "believe" in money? I'm just kinda confused.

[Saifoda]

Originally Posted by DjEclipse

Never mind me, I'm an idiot.

New sig