Democracy - The Suggestion Box
-
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
I disagree. I'm sure we agree that elected officials are pompous twats at the best of times. However if we are to attract better persons into the chambers, we must remunerate and recompense them better. - If you pay peanuts you will get m...... - Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
-
I disagree. I'm sure we agree that elected officials are pompous twats at the best of times. However if we are to attract better persons into the chambers, we must remunerate and recompense them better. - If you pay peanuts you will get m...... - Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
ColinDavies wrote: I'm sure we agree that elected officials are pompous twats at the best of times. Agreed! :) ColinDavies wrote: However if we are to attract better persons into the chambers, we must remunerate and recompense them better. You must be kidding! Are you seriously suggesting that our MPs don't get enough money and perks? It's quite simple really. I suggest that if our MPs understood how ordinary people lived, they would do a damn sight more to ensure that we all had a better standard of living. Unfortunately for them, the only way of making them understand is for them to live as ordinary people do, to have to use the public services that the rest of us do. How can you expect a person who hasn't even had to drive for years, to possibly understand what it's like for the average worker to commute 80 miles a day in modern Britain? "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
-
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
Be nice? Are you nuts? More than a little simplistic - MP's should come from a cross section of society and be properly representative of the people they claim to stand for. They should also have had experience of real life. No career politicians allowed. However, they should also be intelligent which, sadly, they usually are not. A better plan would be to change the law such that anyone with an IQ of less than 110 was barred from voting since they could not possibly understand what it was they were voting for. Or they can only stand for 2 parliaments at the end of which they are exiled for 10 years, with their families. Oh, wait, hasn't that already been tried? Those who seek perfection will only ever find imperfection.
-
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
phykell wrote: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a mode of transport. phykell wrote: 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) I have no idea what a comprehensive school is. I am assuming you mean a school run by the state. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a form of education for their children. phykell wrote: 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a health care provider. phykell wrote: 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. Why? Does an MP do the same as the average Joe Bloggs. phykell wrote: 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a home. * Free = Freedom of choice
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
Be nice? Are you nuts? More than a little simplistic - MP's should come from a cross section of society and be properly representative of the people they claim to stand for. They should also have had experience of real life. No career politicians allowed. However, they should also be intelligent which, sadly, they usually are not. A better plan would be to change the law such that anyone with an IQ of less than 110 was barred from voting since they could not possibly understand what it was they were voting for. Or they can only stand for 2 parliaments at the end of which they are exiled for 10 years, with their families. Oh, wait, hasn't that already been tried? Those who seek perfection will only ever find imperfection.
Mark Merrens wrote: More than a little simplistic - MP's should come from a cross section of society and be properly representative of the people they claim to stand for. They should also have had experience of real life. No career politicians allowed. Well, if we were going to reform our current parliamentary system to do such a thing, I'd say that the House of Lords would be best made up of a cross-section of the population - after all, they are responsible for reviewing proposed legislation. The MPs in the Commons are responsible for drafting and voting on legislation, which is a tedious, boring, thankless and complicated task - the average Joe in the street isn't always up to this. There's a simple test here - would you want the characters in the Little Britain comedy show responsible for either proposing or reviewing legislation? Because that's what would effectively happen :-D However, it is a duty of MPs and peers to find out what is important to their constituents. This is achieved through the virtue of reading the letters and emails sent to them, as well as taking note of what parties were voted for in elections. For example, if there were a large number of Green votes, then you do well to consider Green issues. Mark Merrens wrote: A better plan would be to change the law such that anyone with an IQ of less than 110 was barred from voting since they could not possibly understand what it was they were voting for. While there are studies that indicate that people incompetent in a field cannot recognise their inability in that field, it doesn't follow that having "lower" intelligence means they are unable to consider policy that directly affects them. People vote for different parties for different reasons. Should it be the case that only people who can demonstrate significant knowledge in all fields of government get a vote? If you were found incompetant at economic theory (say), does that mean you can't vote at all, even though you are only bothered about other issues? You don't need an IQ of 110 (which is such an arbitrary figure - care to justify it?) to decide that they want to vote for the party who promises to cut taxes, or improve education, or get more local investment, or whatever it is they find important to themselves.
Ian Darling The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity ... that such complexity can arise ... ou
-
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
1 and 2 have been tried in the US, and it turned out not to work for security reasons. Like it or not, their position is powerful enough that they have enimies no matter how good they are, so they need security. As for the rest. Last I heard the UK allowed you to vote (with some restrictions for the house of lords that are being phased out), if you don't like the way your polititions are voting, vote for someone else, and get others to do the same. When politions live a life that you don't like, it only proves that you don't care enough about how they live vs other factors to make a difference. Either that or you are part of a crackpot minority who is unwilling to compromise on what the "average guy" wants. Your proposeals would not help because people are idiots. As for the proposal to not let idiots vote, there are two problems. First, it means the idiots are steped on by smarter people, and that leads to the revolutions that earlier generations saw. Second, and worse, the person who writes the IQ test can choose who does well to a large extent, which means that person can choose the government. Psycologists do not know what a IQ test represents, they just know that it is a reliable test of whatever that is.
-
Mark Merrens wrote: More than a little simplistic - MP's should come from a cross section of society and be properly representative of the people they claim to stand for. They should also have had experience of real life. No career politicians allowed. Well, if we were going to reform our current parliamentary system to do such a thing, I'd say that the House of Lords would be best made up of a cross-section of the population - after all, they are responsible for reviewing proposed legislation. The MPs in the Commons are responsible for drafting and voting on legislation, which is a tedious, boring, thankless and complicated task - the average Joe in the street isn't always up to this. There's a simple test here - would you want the characters in the Little Britain comedy show responsible for either proposing or reviewing legislation? Because that's what would effectively happen :-D However, it is a duty of MPs and peers to find out what is important to their constituents. This is achieved through the virtue of reading the letters and emails sent to them, as well as taking note of what parties were voted for in elections. For example, if there were a large number of Green votes, then you do well to consider Green issues. Mark Merrens wrote: A better plan would be to change the law such that anyone with an IQ of less than 110 was barred from voting since they could not possibly understand what it was they were voting for. While there are studies that indicate that people incompetent in a field cannot recognise their inability in that field, it doesn't follow that having "lower" intelligence means they are unable to consider policy that directly affects them. People vote for different parties for different reasons. Should it be the case that only people who can demonstrate significant knowledge in all fields of government get a vote? If you were found incompetant at economic theory (say), does that mean you can't vote at all, even though you are only bothered about other issues? You don't need an IQ of 110 (which is such an arbitrary figure - care to justify it?) to decide that they want to vote for the party who promises to cut taxes, or improve education, or get more local investment, or whatever it is they find important to themselves.
Ian Darling The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity ... that such complexity can arise ... ou
Ian Darling wrote: would you want the characters in the Little Britain comedy show responsible for either proposing or reviewing legislation? Because that's what would effectively happen I now have this vision of Prime Minister's Question Time with answers like: Yeah... But, no but... yeah, but..... no, but, yeah, but no! Anyway my friend Janice Smedly, who's big sister is three years older, and goes out with Gary Dagging........
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
Ian Darling wrote: would you want the characters in the Little Britain comedy show responsible for either proposing or reviewing legislation? Because that's what would effectively happen I now have this vision of Prime Minister's Question Time with answers like: Yeah... But, no but... yeah, but..... no, but, yeah, but no! Anyway my friend Janice Smedly, who's big sister is three years older, and goes out with Gary Dagging........
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I now have this vision of Prime Minister's Question Time with answers like: Yeah... But, no but... yeah, but..... no, but, yeah, but no! Anyway my friend Janice Smedly, who's big sister is three years older, and goes out with Gary Dagging........ :laugh: Might make the proceedings more watchable on TV :-)
-
Ian Darling wrote: would you want the characters in the Little Britain comedy show responsible for either proposing or reviewing legislation? Because that's what would effectively happen I now have this vision of Prime Minister's Question Time with answers like: Yeah... But, no but... yeah, but..... no, but, yeah, but no! Anyway my friend Janice Smedly, who's big sister is three years older, and goes out with Gary Dagging........
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: Yeah... But, no but... yeah, but..... no, but, yeah, but no! I've just realised - isn't this exactly what Blair's answer for "does Iraq have WMD?" (or most things these days, it seems) boils down to :-D
-
phykell wrote: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a mode of transport. phykell wrote: 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) I have no idea what a comprehensive school is. I am assuming you mean a school run by the state. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a form of education for their children. phykell wrote: 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a health care provider. phykell wrote: 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. Why? Does an MP do the same as the average Joe Bloggs. phykell wrote: 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. Why? We live in a free* society polititians have as much right as the rest of us in choosing a home. * Free = Freedom of choice
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
I feel you've deliberately missed the point. As for "freedom of choice", there are plenty of jobs which affect your personal life yet people are still prepared to do them, and it's not as though MPs are "forced" into being politicians is it? I don't believe for one second that what I've proposed would ever happen but I think it's interesting to think about anyway. The simple fact is that our politicians are responsible, amongst other things, for managing public services. How do you expect them to manage these services if they themselves don't *have* to use them, unlike the rest of us unlucky ones. Seriously, if the average MP needed an operation for a hip joint or whatever else, do you think he'd wait two years like many people do? Not a chance! He'd leap-frog the queue with his private health care and then have the nerve to question why people are so dissatisfied with the NHS! Do you think the Deputy PM has any real idea of what it is to drive on Britain's roads these days with cameras, road tax, 400% tax on fuel, tolls, the highest fuel cost in Europe* (despite the fact we're the only producer*)? Does he hell. What about the Labour MP who sent her son to private school despite the fact she represented Hackney and what was her excuse? What exactly was she saying about the state system when she made that decision? "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
-
I feel you've deliberately missed the point. As for "freedom of choice", there are plenty of jobs which affect your personal life yet people are still prepared to do them, and it's not as though MPs are "forced" into being politicians is it? I don't believe for one second that what I've proposed would ever happen but I think it's interesting to think about anyway. The simple fact is that our politicians are responsible, amongst other things, for managing public services. How do you expect them to manage these services if they themselves don't *have* to use them, unlike the rest of us unlucky ones. Seriously, if the average MP needed an operation for a hip joint or whatever else, do you think he'd wait two years like many people do? Not a chance! He'd leap-frog the queue with his private health care and then have the nerve to question why people are so dissatisfied with the NHS! Do you think the Deputy PM has any real idea of what it is to drive on Britain's roads these days with cameras, road tax, 400% tax on fuel, tolls, the highest fuel cost in Europe* (despite the fact we're the only producer*)? Does he hell. What about the Labour MP who sent her son to private school despite the fact she represented Hackney and what was her excuse? What exactly was she saying about the state system when she made that decision? "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
phykell wrote: I feel you've deliberately missed the point No, I think you don't realise that I have a different opinion. phykell wrote: it's not as though MPs are "forced" into being politicians is it? No, it is their choice to stand, and the electorate's choice to vote for them. I could be a street cleaner, however I choose not to apply for that job because it doesn't pay highly enough for me to do the things I want to do. phykell wrote: How do you expect them to manage these services if they themselves don't *have* to use them, unlike the rest of us unlucky ones I'm sorry you class yourself as unlucky. However, does the chairman of GlaxoSmithKlien use all the drugs his company produces? No. Well, how do you expect him to manage all that drug production if he doesn't use them himself? Go into any industry and you will find people who are managing their company very effectively without ever using their own product(s) or service(s). phykell wrote: What about the Labour MP who sent her son to private school despite the fact she represented Hackney and what was her excuse? What exactly was she saying about the state system when she made that decision? Because the schools are crap and she's trying to do the best for her child - just like any parent would. It may seem hypocritical and if you feel that then don't vote for that polititian again. That is YOUR CHOICE. phykell wrote: I don't believe for one second that what I've proposed would ever happen but I think it's interesting to think about anyway That is because to think of them that way is naive in the extreme.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
Ian Darling wrote: would you want the characters in the Little Britain comedy show responsible for either proposing or reviewing legislation? Because that's what would effectively happen I now have this vision of Prime Minister's Question Time with answers like: Yeah... But, no but... yeah, but..... no, but, yeah, but no! Anyway my friend Janice Smedly, who's big sister is three years older, and goes out with Gary Dagging........
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
:laugh: The tigress is here :-D
-
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
We'll if you retitled it "My suggestions for a fascist state" I would agree with you!;P If your countrymen continue to elect MP's that are not living up to your expectations the problem is with your fellow countrymen, not those MP's. We know that only too well here in Canada where every election the entire countrie's fate rests in the hands of people living in a single province of Ontario. Being such a large and diverse country, needless to say, the rest of us are not too happy about that, but at least it's not inappropriate to blame someone else for our problems. ;) Welcome to the soapbox.
An election is nothing more than the advanced auction of stolen goods. - Ambrose Bierce -
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
...we don't hear nearly enough about UK officials accepting bribes over here. Such drastic steps are all but necessary in order to step up the frequency and amount of payoffs. You're just never gonna catch up with Mexico at the rate you're at now... :rolleyes:
You**'re one microscopic cog** in his catastrophic plan... -
phykell wrote: I feel you've deliberately missed the point No, I think you don't realise that I have a different opinion. phykell wrote: it's not as though MPs are "forced" into being politicians is it? No, it is their choice to stand, and the electorate's choice to vote for them. I could be a street cleaner, however I choose not to apply for that job because it doesn't pay highly enough for me to do the things I want to do. phykell wrote: How do you expect them to manage these services if they themselves don't *have* to use them, unlike the rest of us unlucky ones I'm sorry you class yourself as unlucky. However, does the chairman of GlaxoSmithKlien use all the drugs his company produces? No. Well, how do you expect him to manage all that drug production if he doesn't use them himself? Go into any industry and you will find people who are managing their company very effectively without ever using their own product(s) or service(s). phykell wrote: What about the Labour MP who sent her son to private school despite the fact she represented Hackney and what was her excuse? What exactly was she saying about the state system when she made that decision? Because the schools are crap and she's trying to do the best for her child - just like any parent would. It may seem hypocritical and if you feel that then don't vote for that polititian again. That is YOUR CHOICE. phykell wrote: I don't believe for one second that what I've proposed would ever happen but I think it's interesting to think about anyway That is because to think of them that way is naive in the extreme.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: No, I think you don't realise that I have a different opinion. No, I think you know exactly what I was trying to say but you decided to twist it. For what purpose, I have no idea. Colin Angus Mackay wrote: No, it is their choice to stand, and the electorate's choice to vote for them. Which is exactly my point. Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I'm sorry you class yourself as unlucky. However, does the chairman of GlaxoSmithKlien use all the drugs his company produces? No. Well, how do you expect him to manage all that drug production if he doesn't use them himself? Go into any industry and you will find people who are managing their company very effectively without ever using their own product(s) or service(s). I don't class myself as unlucky necessarily but relatively speaking I have more experience of how the services we pay our taxes for, fall short of what I believe is an acceptable standard. As for your bizarre analogy, it's invalid. Public services are not individual consumer items. Colin Angus Mackay wrote: Because the schools are crap and she's trying to do the best for her child - just like any parent would. It may seem hypocritical and if you feel that then don't vote for that polititian again. That is YOUR CHOICE. So it doesn't bother you that what an MP thinks isn't good enough for herself and her children is perfectly adequate for everyone else? Oh sure, I see why she acts as a parent first rather than an MP, but perhaps MPs would show more responsibility and empathy for the people they serve if they were to lead by example. "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
-
ColinDavies wrote: I'm sure we agree that elected officials are pompous twats at the best of times. Agreed! :) ColinDavies wrote: However if we are to attract better persons into the chambers, we must remunerate and recompense them better. You must be kidding! Are you seriously suggesting that our MPs don't get enough money and perks? It's quite simple really. I suggest that if our MPs understood how ordinary people lived, they would do a damn sight more to ensure that we all had a better standard of living. Unfortunately for them, the only way of making them understand is for them to live as ordinary people do, to have to use the public services that the rest of us do. How can you expect a person who hasn't even had to drive for years, to possibly understand what it's like for the average worker to commute 80 miles a day in modern Britain? "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
phykell wrote: You must be kidding! Are you seriously suggesting that our MPs don't get enough money and perks? Think of all the absolute shit that gets thrown in the direction of polititians whether you agree with them or not. Of course, if you pay the average salary then the polititians will simply not be up to the job, because the people who are up to the job will go else where. Put it another way. If polititians don't get paid a sufficient amount they start abusing their power. They get their money and their perks from sources that are not in the interest of the country. There are still instances of this happening, however it would be much much higher if polititians were paid less. phykell wrote: How can you expect a person who hasn't even had to drive for years, to possibly understand what it's like for the average worker to commute 80 miles a day in modern Britain? Firstly, I don't HAVE TO drive. It is a choice. I drive on average 40-50 miles a week. The rest of the time I take the train. Does the average worker commute 80 miles a day? Most of the people I work with live closer than I do. I would guess that only 15% of the people in the company I work travel 80 or more miles per day. I would suggest that polititians commute a lot further when you consider that they have parliamentarty business in London and they also have constituency meetings in the place they represent. Only the MPs for places in and around London would fit inside your average. phykell wrote: Unfortunately for them, the only way of making them understand is for them to live as ordinary people do, to have to use the public services that the rest of us do And how does an ordinary person live? The people I come into contact with each day have a diverse set of lifestyles. Also, polititians DO use public services every day. The drink water, they use the toilet, they walk in the street, they drive cars, they fly in aircraft. All these activities depend on public services.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way!
-
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: No, I think you don't realise that I have a different opinion. No, I think you know exactly what I was trying to say but you decided to twist it. For what purpose, I have no idea. Colin Angus Mackay wrote: No, it is their choice to stand, and the electorate's choice to vote for them. Which is exactly my point. Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I'm sorry you class yourself as unlucky. However, does the chairman of GlaxoSmithKlien use all the drugs his company produces? No. Well, how do you expect him to manage all that drug production if he doesn't use them himself? Go into any industry and you will find people who are managing their company very effectively without ever using their own product(s) or service(s). I don't class myself as unlucky necessarily but relatively speaking I have more experience of how the services we pay our taxes for, fall short of what I believe is an acceptable standard. As for your bizarre analogy, it's invalid. Public services are not individual consumer items. Colin Angus Mackay wrote: Because the schools are crap and she's trying to do the best for her child - just like any parent would. It may seem hypocritical and if you feel that then don't vote for that polititian again. That is YOUR CHOICE. So it doesn't bother you that what an MP thinks isn't good enough for herself and her children is perfectly adequate for everyone else? Oh sure, I see why she acts as a parent first rather than an MP, but perhaps MPs would show more responsibility and empathy for the people they serve if they were to lead by example. "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
phykell wrote: No, I think you know exactly what I was trying to say but you decided to twist it. For what purpose, I have no idea. I have no idea what you think I've twisted. All I did was express my opinion. phykell wrote: As for your bizarre analogy, it's invalid. Public services are not individual consumer items. Actually they are. Some examples * I drink water every day - A public service provides me that water. * I walk in the street after dark - A public service provides the lighting for me to see. * I drive a car - A public service maintains the roads so I can drive safely. * I have to take certain drugs for the remainder of my life - A public service provides me these drugs at a reasonable cost and if I should lose my job that public service will make these drugs available to me for no cost. * I need to visit my cardiologist every year - A public serive provides the money to train my doctor, to build the hospital and provide the medical facilities so that my condition may be monitored. * I was educated by the state for 13 years - A public service provided the buildings, the equipment and the teachers for me to become an educated person. * I go to the toilet - A public service provides a sewerage system to take that waste away hygenically. * I am licenced to drive a car - A public serivice provided the test center and paid for the examiner in order that I could be tested. That is a lot of consumerism. Some things I use everyday and somethings less often. I pay for all of this through my taxes. phykell wrote: So it doesn't bother you that what an MP thinks isn't good enough for herself and her children is perfectly adequate for everyone else? Eh? An MP sends her child to a fee paying school is the same as many families. It is a CHOICE. If you think an MP is being hypocritical then don't vote for that MP. phykell wrote: but perhaps MPs would show more responsibility and empathy for the people they serve if they were to lead by example No, you are confusing empathy with sympathy. Empathy: The ability to identify and understand another person’s feelings, ideas, and circumstances. Sympathy: a relation of affinity or harmony between people; whatever affects one correspondingly affects the other That MP in south London you mentioned before probably does have empathy for her consituants, but that does NOT mean that she has to do the same as
-
My first* Soapbox thread, so be nice :) I'm from the UK and I have a few suggestions for our political "system". I reckon that if such rules were in place, we would all see a dramatic improvement in the standard of living generally. Perhaps it would also be appropriate for other democratic nations. See what you think: 1. MPs and their dependants should use public transport. 2. MPs should send their children to public schools (note to Brits: I mean comprehensives, etc.) 3. MPs and their dependants should use the National Health Service. They should not be permitted to have access to private health care. 4. MPs' salaries should be capped at the national average. 5. MPs should be restricted to living in a home which reflects the national average in terms of price or something below. [edit] Nearly forgot, has anyone got any other suggestions? * - may not actually be true "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"
I think a far simpler method is to simply disallow politicians from serving consecutive terms. That is, you cannot be in office and run for office at the same time. This would make it difficult for anyone to be a career politicans while at the same time not altogether eliminating political expertise from the political system. Anyone wanting to hold office would have to maintain a means of supporting themselves between stints with the government. They would be forced to get along in the real world while waiting for another chance at office.
-
I think a far simpler method is to simply disallow politicians from serving consecutive terms. That is, you cannot be in office and run for office at the same time. This would make it difficult for anyone to be a career politicans while at the same time not altogether eliminating political expertise from the political system. Anyone wanting to hold office would have to maintain a means of supporting themselves between stints with the government. They would be forced to get along in the real world while waiting for another chance at office.
Stan Shannon wrote: I think a far simpler method is to simply disallow politicians from serving consecutive terms. I think that is a fair suggestion. Although, I think the system you have in the States just now, where there is a maximum of 2 consecutive terms, is better - Sometimes I just don't think there is enough time in a single term to complete longer term projects.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
phykell wrote: No, I think you know exactly what I was trying to say but you decided to twist it. For what purpose, I have no idea. I have no idea what you think I've twisted. All I did was express my opinion. phykell wrote: As for your bizarre analogy, it's invalid. Public services are not individual consumer items. Actually they are. Some examples * I drink water every day - A public service provides me that water. * I walk in the street after dark - A public service provides the lighting for me to see. * I drive a car - A public service maintains the roads so I can drive safely. * I have to take certain drugs for the remainder of my life - A public service provides me these drugs at a reasonable cost and if I should lose my job that public service will make these drugs available to me for no cost. * I need to visit my cardiologist every year - A public serive provides the money to train my doctor, to build the hospital and provide the medical facilities so that my condition may be monitored. * I was educated by the state for 13 years - A public service provided the buildings, the equipment and the teachers for me to become an educated person. * I go to the toilet - A public service provides a sewerage system to take that waste away hygenically. * I am licenced to drive a car - A public serivice provided the test center and paid for the examiner in order that I could be tested. That is a lot of consumerism. Some things I use everyday and somethings less often. I pay for all of this through my taxes. phykell wrote: So it doesn't bother you that what an MP thinks isn't good enough for herself and her children is perfectly adequate for everyone else? Eh? An MP sends her child to a fee paying school is the same as many families. It is a CHOICE. If you think an MP is being hypocritical then don't vote for that MP. phykell wrote: but perhaps MPs would show more responsibility and empathy for the people they serve if they were to lead by example No, you are confusing empathy with sympathy. Empathy: The ability to identify and understand another person’s feelings, ideas, and circumstances. Sympathy: a relation of affinity or harmony between people; whatever affects one correspondingly affects the other That MP in south London you mentioned before probably does have empathy for her consituants, but that does NOT mean that she has to do the same as
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I have no idea what you think I've twisted. All I did was express my opinion. OK, fair enough. I was just trying to make the point that MPs don't live like the people they serve and perhaps if they did, our public services might improve as a result. You just seemed to take it a different way, probably my fault for not being clear :) Colin Angus Mackay wrote:Actually they are. It depends on your definition I guess, but using one of your examples, you quote water as a "consumer item" despite the fact you also say it's delivered by a public service. Semantics perhaps but I think water is a necessity and while certain companies certainly have made water into a consumer item, it's also a basic human need in the form we use in our homes and it is the responsibility of the Government to provide a clean, safe water supply. The defence of the nation, for example, could be described as a public service but hardly as a consumer item. Onto transport and the rail regulator head, Tom Winsor, who is just leaving his post, has stated his case with a rail review on how the Government have failed to manage this most important aspect of public transport with regards, for example, to how Ministers have repeatedly tried to decrease funding, even in the wake of the Hatfield disaster. Anyway, I'm going OT... Colin Angus Mackay wrote: No, you are confusing empathy with sympathy. No, I'm not. I'm well aware of the difference. I don't expect sympathy from MPs, I expect their empathy, their ability to identify with ordinary people which is my whole point of course. "Oh, I'm sick of doing Japanese stuff! In jail we had to be in this dumb kabuki play about the 47 Ronin, and I wanted to be Oshi, but they made me Ori!"