Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31980862/ns/politics-the_new_york_times//

Of course it is sensible to question and possibly amend the details of a proposed bill. That's why you have a parliament.

No we have a congress and a senate not a wussy parliament.
Beside why do our AMERICAN affair any of you business kk

Sounds like change to me... Uh, oh, he said change...



Yeah, Obama likes to dress up like superman when he is thinking sometimes.

garret wrote:No we have a congress and a senate not a wussy parliament.
Beside why do our AMERICAN affair any of you business kk

Actually you have a Congress, which consists of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Ya well people still call the house congress.

Go Parliament!
Wait...why am I cheering on poloticians?

Emperors Faithful wrote:Go Parliament!
Wait...why am I cheering on poloticians?

Because as Winston Churchill said, democracy is a terrible form of government whose only advantage is that all the others which have been tried were worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament#Equivalent_national_legislatures

I've always had the impression that the US political system just "works". I think there is a danger if you actually stopped and looked to closely it would implode I mean Scotland has always moaned that London is too far away for it to really know what goes on up there or what the people need. Scotland is just around the corner when it comes to distance compared to the US! All your states have their own set of rules and mini empires, plus California has a GNP that technically puts it up there as a country, if I remember correctly. I think you should just get an award for getting that lot in the same building, let alone make & pass laws.

I think democracy should be viewed like a set of gaming rules, in that it's suitable for a certain size of population, but as the population gets bigger you need to look at different set of rules

Like Dictatorship?

... might be

Democracy is certainly a conundrum, it's fine in thoery, but as the group size gets bigger you could argue that it becomes unwieldy and inpractical. Throw into the equation the general public and you are asking for trouble. In certain situations a democracy can act like a dictatorship, certain when the "fors" & "against's" are only points apart. Here's a hypothetical situation:

Dictatorship

The dictator of an European country wants to joing the EU. This dictator is a balanced person and genuinely puts the country / people first. They look at the pros & cons of joining and decide that joining the EU is of benefit, so he goes ahead and that country joins the EU.

Democracy

A democratic country looks to join the EU. The governing party decides that it is good for the country and joins, you then have to wait for the next general election to express make your voice known. Or if you are lucky the country is allowed to vote on it. Say the vote is 47 for, but 37 against, 10 points isn't a huge majority, so isn't that similar to a dictatorship?

By the way I'm not expressing an opinion either way, just throwing something into the ring to be discussed

Whatever health care system they finally settle on will be ruined by corruption and bureaucracy anyhow. That's the problem, all of the people sitting around the house and senate who are either bored out of their minds or in somebody's pocket.

Wolfstan wrote:I've always had the impression that the US political system just "works". I think there is a danger if you actually stopped and looked to closely it would implode I mean Scotland has always moaned that London is too far away for it to really know what goes on up there or what the people need. Scotland is just around the corner when it comes to distance compared to the US! All your states have their own set of rules and mini empires, plus California has a GNP that technically puts it up there as a country, if I remember correctly. I think you should just get an award for getting that lot in the same building, let alone make & pass laws.

I think democracy should be viewed like a set of gaming rules, in that it's suitable for a certain size of population, but as the population gets bigger you need to look at different set of rules

In the US case, we have a form of republic.

warpcrafter wrote:Whatever health care system they finally settle on will be ruined by corruption and bureaucracy anyhow. That's the problem, all of the people sitting around the house and senate who are either bored out of their minds or in somebody's pocket.

Perhaps this is the fact, I do not know. I do know their are at least a couple of congressmen that are not in corporate wallet baths.

The fact is when things start to get real bad in the U.S. health care is going to be a huge priority. I can't imagine things being worse than now, besides simply having no public health care at all. So, all in all I doubt this will be a bad thing, although I also doubt whether this will change anything at all. The fact that people are still arguing this basic point says a lot about or country and how little of a flying feth most people give about each other.

I'd rather have an unwieldy democracy than any sort of dictatorship. Hell, I don't even like the queen being on Canada's money!

I'm sure if you'd ask some Germans, they'd agree. The great thing about North America is that we can complain about democracy, and theorize about hypothetical 'good' dictators 'cause we've never had democracy taken from us, like many countries have.

I'm not trying to stifle conversation, lord know I don't have all the answers, I'm just adding to the conversation.

As a form of government I think that democracy is the most dependable and reliable.
The thing about dictatorships is that they are too fickle. For every good, responsible dictator you get (aka king or sumfing), one who genuinely cares for his people and does what's best, you'll get a thousand other ones less...admirable.

Emperors Faithful wrote:As a form of government I think that democracy is the most dependable and reliable.
The thing about dictatorships is that they are too fickle. For every good, responsible dictator you get (aka king or sumfing), one who genuinely cares for his people and does what's best, you'll get a thousand other ones less...admirable.

It isn't just that a dictator is likely to be bad, it's that dictators and other non-democratic political structures are not unaccountable. I don't think the leaders of most non-Democratic states giggle maniacally at the thought of killing kittens. But they aren't accountable for their failings, and given how lines of communication tend to work, they're often not even aware that their grand visions actually suck.

I mean, sure, it isn't good that badly needed healthcare reform is getting held up because politicians would rather do nothing than be held accountable for any possible hypothetical negatives, but it's a hell of a lot better than a system where no level of accountability exists at all.

True, but a dictatorship will always have SOMETHING going on. It will be a decisive action. Just hope it's in the right direction...