RCBH928 wrote:You can't vote on every single thing, but I think you should be able to vote on bigger things. In the case of the USA I think stuff like invading Iraq, invading Afghanistan, privacy, should be voted on because its a huge deal.
I heard there were riots against the Vietnam war back then, if it was a democracy then people should vote for what they want, but it looks like some one else is calling the shots.
The way I see it is that no matter what system you have, it is always going to be the rich who is in power in the long run. And if I learned anything from this world, its that the rich are usually the corrupt bad people. I am not a communist but many, if not most, rich people are sleazy and there are always some shady back-story on how they acquired their wealth. In the book Freakonomics, it states that top tier managers stole more bagels than lower managers making the author conclude that its not because they see bagel prices too low for them to consider it a crime not to pay for them, but its because they reached their high positions by being corrupt in the first place and if they can get away with stealing a bagel they will.
I read in the media that multi-billion dollar corporations are the ones who control American politics but I can not comment on that if its true or not.
I think you are right, for the most part. I only pointed out the different types of democracies because it shows the problem that true democracy isn't really an option in any type of large nation, and there really isn't a good option in general when it comes to government at all.
MrPopo wrote:
You say that like it's a bad thing. Have you met the average person?
RCBH928 wrote:You can't vote on every single thing, but I think you should be able to vote on bigger things. In the case of the USA I think stuff like invading Iraq, invading Afghanistan, privacy, should be voted on because its a huge deal.
I heard there were riots against the Vietnam war back then, if it was a democracy then people should vote for what they want, but it looks like some one else is calling the shots.
The way I see it is that no matter what system you have, it is always going to be the rich who is in power in the long run. And if I learned anything from this world, its that the rich are usually the corrupt bad people. I am not a communist but many, if not most, rich people are sleazy and there are always some shady back-story on how they acquired their wealth. In the book Freakonomics, it states that top tier managers stole more bagels than lower managers making the author conclude that its not because they see bagel prices too low for them to consider it a crime not to pay for them, but its because they reached their high positions by being corrupt in the first place and if they can get away with stealing a bagel they will.
I read in the media that multi-billion dollar corporations are the ones who control American politics but I can not comment on that if its true or not.
I think you are right, for the most part. I only pointed out the different types of democracies because it shows the problem that true democracy isn't really an option in any type of large nation, and there really isn't a good option in general when it comes to government at all.
I agree. I don't think people should vote on going to war but I think a poll should be in place to gauge the public's stance. Btw, It's called a direct democracy. Small parts of Switzerland are currently a direct democracy. Athens was the first direct democracy.
So the Ukraine issue is finally resolved? I heard the president gave in...
@Oxymoron
My problem with democracy is this. Democracy is where people vote for what they want, because the majority is right. Thats why they get to pick the president. But then some one would say, people should not vote if we should go to war or not because people do not know whats best for them. So, why do they get to choose the president then?
RCBH928 wrote:So the Ukraine issue is finally resolved? I heard the president gave in...
@Oxymoron
My problem with democracy is this. Democracy is where people vote for what they want, because the majority is right. Thats why they get to pick the president. But then some one would say, people should not vote if we should go to war or not because people do not know whats best for them. So, why do they get to choose the president then?
Voting for a president and voting to go to war is two very different. Too many people are swayed by propaganda and emotion. If we (the public) had voted on the Invasion of Iraq I guarantee 100% it would have been a yes. Why? Because people wanted revenge. Most folks wouldn't have even looked into the reason for invasion.
*Should we invade Iraq?*
Voter: "That sounds Middle Eastern".
*Votes Yes*
Am I exaggerating a bit? Yes, but this is my problem with voting on war.
RCBH928 wrote:So the Ukraine issue is finally resolved? I heard the president gave in...
@Oxymoron
My problem with democracy is this. Democracy is where people vote for what they want, because the majority is right. Thats why they get to pick the president. But then some one would say, people should not vote if we should go to war or not because people do not know whats best for them. So, why do they get to choose the president then?
Gotta choose the guy in charge somehow. By using a popular election it means that the elected leader gets a few years where he doesn't have to worry too much about the populace being unhappy with him.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
RCBH928 wrote:So, why do they get to choose the president then?
To be honest we don't actually choose the president, The electoral college does. When you have the time please watch these two videos which will explain how the electoral college works and why its outdated.
RCBH928 wrote:So the Ukraine issue is finally resolved? I heard the president gave in...
Well more like he gave up power. He got the hell out of there before they could put his head on a stick. The people have control back but its up to them to see that the new people they vote in don't make the same mistakes. So them protesting and fighting police is over, but the rebuilding of their country has just begun.
Adam wrote:
Devolution Max would still prevent me from coming home. What government denies its own citizens to come home? My wife and I would like a child one day, as we aren't exactly getting any younger, but we are afraid that'll make the situation worse as the already ridiculous monetary requirements will rise even further. It is borderline impossible. Meanwhile, EU citizens with their non-EU spouses has the automatic right of free passage. This is scandalous.
As I've said, I will never accept a loss in this referendum and I mean it. The Conservative Party are my sworn enemies and I wouldn't hesitate to take action if the situation ever arose. I want to come home.
Why is it you can't come home? You've never actually explained as far as I can tell. And why would iScotland let you or your wife in either? It can't be a question of money. Get on a plane and walk in. She'll have to wait of course. That's only fair. But you should have zero problems.
