boston pandora people hope you are safe
- Thread starter kirkanoss
- Start date
ExquisiteCorpse
Member
I just found it disgusting in earlier posts you were talking about putting all the violent people on an island away from the normal people.
The whole of America would have to go to that island for funding some of the worst atrocities since 1945.
The whole of America would have to go to that island for funding some of the worst atrocities since 1945.
darkborn
Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 455
When we are talking about depleted uranium:
It is not allowed for bomber to bring back "activated" bombs. It means that using it on target or not, bombs should be dropped somewhere. Mostly it is done to ocean (e.g. in Adriatic sea when Serbia was under strike), but in Iraq etc it is often done in - desert.
What is worse, it is the cheapest solution to get rid of weaponry (ammunition) that is expired.
At Kosovo (and mostly Serbia and Bosnia): there was not any kind of special Saddam-like fortifications, so that special, cumulative (and radioactive) explosive was not needed. Regardless of that fact, tons and tons of highly contaminated stuff is "seeded" around Europe (Yes, it is Europe).
EDIT: It is embarrassing but, obviously, needed: "The Czech Republic and Chechnya are two very different entities" (officially from Embassy of the Czech Republic @Washington, D.C.)
http://www.mzv.cz/washington/en/czech_u_s_relations/news/statement_of_the_ambassador_of_the_czech.html
Last edited by a moderator:
Unless you agree with Kumaki that the US government policy is heavily influenced by industry, in which case you would have to sent all the politicians and the leaders of all the big companies funding them to your island.
---
If you want a demonstration of why sending the 'bad guys' to an island is a ridiculous idea, look what England did 200-odd years ago
Timstertoo
Active Member
Didn't that work out quite well?
I mean Australia is booming economically and everyone who is there, appears to be happy to be there. And England was rid of them at the time. I say it turned out win - win.
So I vote for sending more bad guys over there and watch them prosper. Still plenty of unoccupied bits of land in Australia.
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
So you hold tax payers accountable for what those taxes are spent on. What are people supposed to do - since not paying taxes is not an option (you can try, but they'll eventually garnish your wages and in the long run you will pay more than if you had paid in the first place) - ask to be given citizenship into another country on the basis of not liking America's policies? Sorry buddy, emigrating is not a realistic option for most people and even if it is it's a huge burden. Implicitly demanding something like this makes you sound totally unreasonable.
Last edited by a moderator:
There's also a problem with the political party system - in the US there are two parties that have any real chance of power: the right, and the centre-right.
That doesn't allow citizens to express their opinion on any particular issue in a way that will make a difference
That doesn't allow citizens to express their opinion on any particular issue in a way that will make a difference
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
That's the consequence of a single vote system and winner-take-all elections. If we moved to preferential votes people wouldn't feel like they're throwing their vote away by voting for someone who hasn't already gathered a lot of support, and new parties would be able to gradually rise in prominence over multiple elections.There's also a problem with the political party system - in the US there are two parties that have any real chance of power: the right, and the centre-right.
That doesn't allow citizens to express their opinion on any particular issue in a way that will make a difference
But it's hard to even discuss changing the system when all sides of the political spectrum today view the constitution as some kind of religious text, with the big litmus test for policy being whether or not it's constitutional. We have to be much more willing to update the constitution to fit newer and better ideas.
Last edited by a moderator:
ExquisiteCorpse
Member
If you insist on maintaining a shitty democracy then enjoy yoyr terrorist attacks.
Link
ithic.com
^shitty democracy Corporatocracy.
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
Yeah, that's what my post was doing. Please just shut up.
Would it be better if the government were split into many departments (defence, public health, transport, finance, the environment etc):
Each party, in each geographical area appointed one representitive for each department it cared about
(total candidates = parties * departments * political_regions)
The electorate form each geographical area would then separately elect a representative for each department to represent them nationally
There would then be a committee/parliament/similar for each department as well as a general one including all representatives.
That way, if Fred the Conservative wants to represent my constituency on public transport, and Joe the Labour candidate wants to represent the financial interests of the area; I could vote in both.
..?
Each party, in each geographical area appointed one representitive for each department it cared about
(total candidates = parties * departments * political_regions)
The electorate form each geographical area would then separately elect a representative for each department to represent them nationally
There would then be a committee/parliament/similar for each department as well as a general one including all representatives.
That way, if Fred the Conservative wants to represent my constituency on public transport, and Joe the Labour candidate wants to represent the financial interests of the area; I could vote in both.
..?
Well, that makes it a bit difficult when Angus the Libertarian, who beat out Joe for the financial board, refuses to give Joe (who happened to end up on the health care committee) the money needed for the reforms that the Health care commitee has voted for...
Alternatively, Fred decides to build a network of five-lane motorways, preventing Angus from lowering taxes.
What if each department could demand taxes independently, so that people knew what thier money was spent on (roughly) and, if they wanted lower taxes could vote for less enthusiastic reps.
Bring in Dr Richard, who says that the transport department can save loads of money (and so reduce taxes) by discarding all the low-traffic railway routes and selling them for supermarket car parks
What if each department could demand taxes independently, so that people knew what thier money was spent on (roughly) and, if they wanted lower taxes could vote for less enthusiastic reps.
Bring in Dr Richard, who says that the transport department can save loads of money (and so reduce taxes) by discarding all the low-traffic railway routes and selling them for supermarket car parks
Similar threads
