Councilman
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2009
- Messages
- 4,454
- Reaction score
- 1,657
- Location
- Riverside, County, CA.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
American is in a lot of trouble economically right now and Democracy may actually be the barrier to getting things back on track.
Based upon how you see America's situation, on scale from 1 to 10, how would you rate Democracy being an interference with America's ability to get back on track, where 1 means Democracy has absolutely no interference with solving the problems, 10 means it interferes absolutely with problem solving.
Is the 'bit of truth' that the natural progression of a Democracy end days arrive with 'lousy fiscal policy', and a dictatorship is imminent. If so, would you say the dictatorship is neccessary for survival or is it just a horrible result where success is just a roll of the dice from that point?
There's little debate that these are facts. Everyone knows there's two things you can do in this situation; cut spending or raise taxes, or both.
Well hell, I thought you would be happy with those slightly smarter that the average USA voter. If you're looking for much smarter than the average USA voter, maybe you should go with the citizens of sandiegozoo.So you have no serious alternative to our representative government...............who would have guessed? :sun
How much influence should an ignorant person have? Do you think giving experts more power in decision making would would help with the problem of rational ignorance and rational irrationality? For example, under the present voting system, a voter who has no proven intelligence in given area has the same influence with their vote as one who is studied the issue for years. Also, would the same approach help electorates Mayor Snorkum?
It sounds like you are saying that lobbying may has too much potential influence available to them. Would it effective to limit the influence of lobbyists interests relative to the interests of the nation? For example, some legislation is merely moral preference. Why should one person dictate the morals of another, where those actions are moral in nature only and the disagreed upon behavior causes no significant financial impact upon the nation, but criminalizing them does have a negative financial impact in comparison.
The USA citizens just don't seem to be very good at picking leaders.
Based on recent history, wouldn't the USA be better off with a monkey and a dartboard?
.
Dictatorship may not always be the end result.
Places like Argentina who have had failed state problems, still have a democratic form of government.
It's just incredibly crony (aka, corrupt) in nature.
I disagree. There are many spanish speakers in the US who understand the issues. If there are large language groups in the US, we should write the ballot in multiple languages. If you can't read either of them, I would agree.The correct path to repair the electorate is the following:
1) If you can't read English, you can't vote in an election in the United States. Anywhere in the United States. No exceptions.
I'm sorry, but that is just irrational. Plenty of young people are very intelligent; maybe even more so than adults. Ironically, your name flinging doesn't make me feel confident in your maturity. With age comes greater wisdom...unless you don't actually get wise. I don't like the collective approach of saying "you can't vote until you are this age." I think a much better solution would be to focus on the merits and eligibility of each individual, not some arbitrary collective group, or as you call it "those who just discovered sex." As a college student, I take offense to your remarks, which are very uncivil, full of ad hominem, and quite frankly disrespectful.Young? Stupid? Just discovered sex and your girl friend wants whirled peas? Then go get laid, you're too damn immature to vote. Get your diploma, get a real job, and see us when you're thirty. Maybe you'll be mature enough to cast an intelligent vote by then. You'll be old enough that you should be embarassed by voting your gonads by that age, anyway.
Absolutely, dictatorships always work better.
If we cut spending, 'pet projects', how will those people survive if they don't have a job?
What if the pet project is like you said, a 'government check' that would stop them from landing in the streets.
It makes no sense to drive our people into squalor,
which will result into crime, drug addiction, mental illness and likely if not turned around quick enough could metastasize into a troublesome and even radical sub-culture haunting our children years far into the future.
I find that unpractical and lazy and unbefitting of a real leader who should be leading us away from such ideas while maintaining sustainability.
Skimming incomes with taxes I think is better than selling out to ideas that will create third world neighborhoods.
If cuts are to help, I think they must be accompanied with a guarantee of basic housing, food and medical support.
We will have lowered that person's consumption and at the same time maintained their dignity.
I can understand downsizing government to improve it's efficiency.
Those downsized will still have the option of challenging others for the existing jobs that pay better, but still have a guaranteed safety net that doesn't have an expiration date.
Those in such a situation should have the willingness to work if asked when they have not found work on their own. We should all jump at the opportunity to pay our fair share,
I think we should tax some big business too and only give them a break after the tax for downsizing in a similar manner to encourage an increase in productivity.
We should drive less, it's probably the biggest energy sucker we have, if we look at it in Joules, not in relativistic market value. With those autos we weight four thousand pounds heavier than any of our ancestors. Lot of excess ass we are dragging around now. These mechanical beasts consume a lot of energy too, eats up the farm, eats us out of house and home. We should position ourselves better to ride mass transit, walk or ride bikes.
That can be encouraged with a gas tax that increases with consumption and decreases with lessened consumption.
They can, providing that the authoritarian is benevolent or wise in policy implementation.
But that's really a comparison between 2 extremes, democracy and dictatorship are both extremes, of similar function.
I disagree. There are many spanish speakers in the US who understand the issues.
If there are large language groups in the US, we should write the ballot in multiple languages. If you can't read either of them, I would agree.If they can't read english, why aren't they learning how? They came to this country expecting their hosts to change to accomodate them?
No. They can get their sorry lazy asses out of town and back to where they came from. The Mayor's German ancestors learned English, the Mayor's Irish ancestors had to learn the language of their oppressors before they came here. The Mayor's french wife thinks it's bull**** that anyone living here should be so rude as to refuse to learn the native language. That's not hard to figure out. If they don't want to have the courtesy to learn to speak as Americans do, then they were never serious about becoming an American and they can move right on out.
There are certain standards the nation must maintain if it's going to survive, and refusing to become a turd-world multilingual society is one of those things we must not allow.
I'm sorry, but that is just irrational. Plenty of young people are very intelligent; maybe even more so than adults.
They can demonstrate their devotion to the United States by enlisting in the Army, Marines, Navy, maybe even the Air Force, and when they get their honorable discharge after a minimum of three years service, they can cut five years off the wait and be allowed to vote at age 25.
Anyone that believes an 18 year old boy has the maturity to understand pressing national issues should remark on the number of votes cast by 18 year olds for Obama and McCain in the last election.
Ironically, your name flinging doesn't make me feel confident in your maturity. With age comes greater wisdom...unless you don't actually get wise. I don't like the collective approach of saying "you can't vote until you are this age."
The Mayor never approved of the 26th Amendment, either.
I think a much better solution would be to focus on the merits and eligibility of each individual, not some arbitrary collective group, or as you call it "those who just discovered sex." As a college student, I take offense to your remarks, which are very uncivil, full of ad hominem, and quite frankly disrespectful.
Oh. Don't worry, the Mayor was a college student once. But he was a grown-up college student with six full years pushing a United States submarine around the world's oceans protecting his nation from foreign agressors. So when he was a college student, he was able to observe first hand just how stupid, thoughtless, and immature your typical college student is. Believe it or not, your average military enlistee is far more mature, because he doesn't get the opportunity to sleep in over those first period classes, and he's not allowed to fail his courses, unless he wants to get assigned to tin can out of Norfolk, Virgina.
So, college man, the Mayor's been there, done that, and doesn't have any sympathy for young people wanting to play grown up, not when they have enough massed power to grab the steering wheel and drive the car off the cliff.
Churchill said it best, too paraphrase "when people are young and idealistic, they're socialists. When they grow up, they're capitalists." It's past time we stopped allowing the children to vote, not when damn few of them even begin to understand the Constitution.
\As for your other points, I don't have much problem with them. My only other comment is that literacy requirements were racist when they were instituted because their primary goal was to prevent black people from voting.
The Mayor won't argue with you on this unless you want to claim that all literacy requirements must be inherently racist.
The Mayor contends that a literacy rate of less than 100% is a national embarassment (excepting, of course, those physically incapable of learning to read). There' s no excuse, and teachers who can't teach their students to read should look into spending more time on the beach.
Looking for discarded bottles and loose change.
but rather than dismiss people as ****ing idiots (who at least know their history) you should tell them how times have change or why your ideas are not guided by the same evil motivations. Please be civil. Thank you.
Not necessary. Times have changed and anyone who's too lazy or too stupid to learn how to read in this day and age cannot hide behind alleged bigotry. They're just idiots.
...
Skimming incomes with taxes I think is better than selling out to ideas that will create third world neighborhoods. If cuts are to help, I think they must be accompanied with a guarantee of basic housing, food and medical support. We will have lowered that person's consumption and at the same time maintained their dignity. This lowered consumption can be applied to the debt.
I can understand downsizing government to improve it's efficiency. Those downsized will still have the option of challenging others for the existing jobs that pay better, but still have a guaranteed safety net that doesn't have an expiration date. Those in such a situation should have the willingness to work if asked when they have not found work on their own. We should all jump at the opportunity to pay our fair share, if we have had no luck in finding work on our own. Some of us just need a good leader to get us going. That's all.
I think we should tax some big business too and only give them a break after the tax for downsizing in a similar manner to encourage an increase in productivity. Tax the general public across the board too. Why? No one will stop spending, so we're going to have to slow over-consumption down one way or another, but every American should make it through this with dignity while the debt is paid off.
End debtors prison, instead criminalize the existing Shylock methods.
We should drive less, it's probably the biggest energy sucker we have, if we look at it in Joules, not in relativistic market value. With those autos we weight four thousand pounds heavier than any of our ancestors. Lot of excess ass we are dragging around now. These mechanical beasts consume a lot of energy too, eats up the farm, eats us out of house and home. We should position ourselves better to ride mass transit, walk or ride bikes. We would be more fit, it will help personal budgets, help the planet, our national debt and economy in general. That can be encouraged with a gas tax that increases with consumption and decreases with lessened consumption. A bigger tax break for proving a significant reduction in consumption could be offered, but some of that savings should go directly toward the debt, not just back to the tax payer.
As long as the dictator can run the country well and keep the people happy or fearful it'll work.
No, representative democracy is still democracy.
Actually, that is not true. Nothing in the constitution requires citizens to speak English. English has just grown to be the primary language.Then they can go back to Mexico and explain the issues down there.
Here in the United States the citizens who belong here are supposed to speak English.
Maybe they are learning how. I think they would be fools if they didn't. But preventing their votes makes it easier for the rise of tyranny of the majority.If they can't read english, why aren't they learning how? They came to this country expecting their hosts to change to accomodate them?
And my Hungarian grandparents learned English. Apparently you have not, because you keep speaking in third person. Maybe you should be prevented from voting. Furthermore, you are assuming that they never have any intention to learn English. I don't think that is the case. Most primary spanish speaking americans are brand new immigrants still learning or elderly immigrants who simply have difficulty mastered a new language at an old age.No. They can get their sorry lazy asses out of town and back to where they came from. The Mayor's German ancestors learned English, the Mayor's Irish ancestors had to learn the language of their oppressors before they came here. The Mayor's french wife thinks it's bull**** that anyone living here should be so rude as to refuse to learn the native language. That's not hard to figure out. If they don't want to have the courtesy to learn to speak as Americans do, then they were never serious about becoming an American and they can move right on out.
Yes, allowing spanish speakers to vote will turn us into a third world country. :roll:There are certain standards the nation must maintain if it's going to survive, and refusing to become a turd-world multilingual society is one of those things we must not allow.
So being in the army for 3 years means they know more about economic issues and everything else? And you dodged my initial point about individualism. There are plenty of younger people who are just as mature as any adult.They can demonstrate their devotion to the United States by enlisting in the Army, Marines, Navy, maybe even the Air Force, and when they get their honorable discharge after a minimum of three years service, they can cut five years off the wait and be allowed to vote at age 25.
And would you like to tell me how many 30+ votes were cast for those 2 candidates? Maybe nobody should vote with that logic.Anyone that believes an 18 year old boy has the maturity to understand pressing national issues should remark on the number of votes cast by 18 year olds for Obama and McCain in the last election.
Your entire argument is emotional and ad hominem. You say that you saw many immature kids...great, so have I. But I have also seen plenty immature adults. A woman of at least 50 years was cursing out her kids, screaming, and making a complete fool or herself in a public place. What about her? If you want to test maturity, test each individual. It is nonsensical to group people into an age group and give their maturity a blanket definition.So, college man, the Mayor's been there, done that, and doesn't have any sympathy for young people wanting to play grown up, not when they have enough massed power to grab the steering wheel and drive the car off the cliff.
So you would ban those young people who understand the constitution from voting?It's past time we stopped allowing the children to vote, not when damn few of them even begin to understand the Constitution.
We aren't suffering from an excess of democracy, presently, in the United States, quite the contrary, we're suffering from a deficit.
Not Democracy, but Democrats are the biggest disturbing factor in America!
Then they can go back to Mexico and explain the issues down there.
Here in the United States the citizens who belong here are supposed to speak English.
The US citizenship requirements mandate that you take an English test that shows that you can read, write and speak English.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?