|
General Chat General chat - common sense in here please. Decent serious discussions to be enjoyed by everyone! |
|
|
Welcome to Accrington Web!
We are a discussion forum dedicated to the towns of Accrington, Oswaldtwistle and the surrounding areas, sometimes referred to as Hyndburn! We are a friendly bunch please feel free to browse or read on for more info. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, photos, play in the community arcade and use our blog section. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!
|
26-03-2008, 19:05
|
#16
|
Apprentice Geriatric
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Darwen, Lancashire
Posts: 3,706
Liked: 0 times
Rep Power: 88
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyfr
Any political system will have parties. Parties are simply a loose alignment of people with similar thinking, and you're always going to get people who agree with each other on lots of issues.
|
Parties are not a ‘loose’ arrangement of people with similar thinking. They are a tight formation of people under one banner who have to vote how the party requires in most cases.
People agreeing on lots of issues means that they can disagree on some.
So if one person agrees with points one to ten someone else might agree with them except for points two and five. Another person could agree with all but point nine and so on. So when it comes to a vote on a point the MP could vote for the point that he agrees with or vote against the point if he disagrees with it. Much more democratic.
The current system of political parties and the method of voting favours the big two and keeps one of them in office to the exclusion of the rest.
It does not give any other party even a smell of a chance of influencing decisions.
|
|
|
26-03-2008, 19:07
|
#17
|
God Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Accrington
Posts: 3,905
Liked: 1 times
Rep Power: 918
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambutty
Parties are not a ‘loose’ arrangement of people with similar thinking. They are a tight formation of people under one banner who have to vote how the party requires in most cases.
People agreeing on lots of issues means that they can disagree on some.
So if one person agrees with points one to ten someone else might agree with them except for points two and five. Another person could agree with all but point nine and so on. So when it comes to a vote on a point the MP could vote for the point that he agrees with or vote against the point if he disagrees with it. Much more democratic.
The current system of political parties and the method of voting favours the big two and keeps one of them in office to the exclusion of the rest.
It does not give any other party even a smell of a chance of influencing decisions.
|
I think you will like the US system in principle then because thats how it works even though there are parties.
__________________
formerly cyfr
|
|
|
26-03-2008, 22:50
|
#18
|
God Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF/ Bay Area California
Posts: 4,002
Liked: 0 times
Rep Power: 1337
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
so in your ideal Parliamentary Democacy would you be reserving 50 %+ of the seats for women ?, since women make up more than 50 % of the population, surely in a truely democratic and winner take all society (you don't approve of proportional repesentation) women should be in the majority .
Have you considered the implications/complications if this was ever allowed to occur .......
25 % would be absent at any one time either on Maternity leave, taking the kids to the Doctor, attending PTA meetings or getting their bunions seen to.
Parliament would have to close early every day to allow the members to get to the child minders or a early hair appointment .
Every month the Country would be at War with someone over some alleged slight .
over to you ladies
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 11:17
|
#19
|
Apprentice Geriatric
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Darwen, Lancashire
Posts: 3,706
Liked: 0 times
Rep Power: 88
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steeljack
so in your ideal Parliamentary Democacy would you be reserving 50 %+ of the seats for women ?, since women make up more than 50 % of the population, surely in a truely democratic and winner take all society (you don't approve of proportional repesentation) women should be in the majority .
Have you considered the implications/complications if this was ever allowed to occur .......
25 % would be absent at any one time either on Maternity leave, taking the kids to the Doctor, attending PTA meetings or getting their bunions seen to.
Parliament would have to close early every day to allow the members to get to the child minders or a early hair appointment .
Every month the Country would be at War with someone over some alleged slight .
over to you ladies
|
It is amazing how some people try to put words in my mouth. I never mentioned anything about reserving 50% of the seats for women or men for that matter.
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 11:43
|
#20
|
Resting in Peace
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a state of confusion
Posts: 36,973
Liked: 715 times
Rep Power: 76552
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambutty
It is amazing how some people try to put words in my mouth. I never mentioned anything about reserving 50% of the seats for women or men for that matter.
|
Hey JB they're quick on the uptake on here, they WILL!!!!!!! put words in our mouth
__________________
35 YEARS AND COUNTING
Last edited by jaysay; 27-03-2008 at 11:44.
Reason: error
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 18:20
|
#21
|
God Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Relaxville
Posts: 6,866
Liked: 13 times
Rep Power: 2865
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyfr
Any political system will have parties. Parties are simply a loose alignment of people with similar thinking, and you're always going to get people who agree with each other on lots of issues.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambutty
Parties are not a ‘loose’ arrangement of people with similar thinking. They are a tight formation of people under one banner who have to vote how the party requires in most cases.
People agreeing on lots of issues means that they can disagree on some.
|
In an ideal world I wouldn't want parties but I think Cyfr's point is probably right - even if there weren't official parties in the way that you're thinking Jambutty there would be a loose alignment of people which would start to expand. There would be bonding and wheeling and dealing to the point where they would be trying ot get people to vote for bills and would expect reciprocal voting for other bills.
__________________
The views expressed within this post are mine and mine alone.
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 18:33
|
#22
|
Apprentice Geriatric
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Darwen, Lancashire
Posts: 3,706
Liked: 0 times
Rep Power: 88
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gayle
In an ideal world I wouldn't want parties but I think Cyfr's point is probably right - even if there weren't official parties in the way that you're thinking Jambutty there would be a loose alignment of people which would start to expand. There would be bonding and wheeling and dealing to the point where they would be trying ot get people to vote for bills and would expect reciprocal voting for other bills.
|
Human nature being what it is Gayle, I’m sure you’re right but you are forgetting that MP’s would be obliged to vote in line with their individual manifesto. So very little wheeling and dealing could take place.
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 18:44
|
#23
|
God Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Relaxville
Posts: 6,866
Liked: 13 times
Rep Power: 2865
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
There manifestos would have to be extremely detailed from day one which I doubt they would be. Also, what if 'new' information was released that made the MPs change their minds - would they still be forced to vote in line with their manifesto?
__________________
The views expressed within this post are mine and mine alone.
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 19:09
|
#24
|
Apprentice Geriatric
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Darwen, Lancashire
Posts: 3,706
Liked: 0 times
Rep Power: 88
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gayle
There manifestos would have to be extremely detailed from day one which I doubt they would be. Also, what if 'new' information was released that made the MPs change their minds - would they still be forced to vote in line with their manifesto?
|
No more detailed than the current party manifestos. Surely a manifesto outlines what the party/MP stands for and rarely states how the issue will be achieved. At least not in detail.
That would depend on what the ‘new information’ is.
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 19:11
|
#25
|
God Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: at the border ..
Posts: 8,185
Liked: 1620 times
Rep Power: 361002
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
I've always voted the way i want to vote - even if that disagrees with the party that i am a member of.
__________________
The views expressed in this post is mine and mine alone anyone want to argue well tough!!!
|
|
|
27-03-2008, 21:37
|
#26
|
God Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Relaxville
Posts: 6,866
Liked: 13 times
Rep Power: 2865
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambutty
No more detailed than the current party manifestos. Surely a manifesto outlines what the party/MP stands for and rarely states how the issue will be achieved. At least not in detail.
That would depend on what the ‘new information’ is.
|
I think you've made the argument against your own argument there - because an MP could say that they were trying to achieve the end result of their manifesto whichever way they voted so they could buddy up with other people anyway.
For instance, their manifesto says that they will want to support more people going to college - a bill is presented that says that by law parents have to take out a covenant at birth. They could either vote for it or against it under the new freedom voting that you're introducing. An MP could argue that voting against the bill meant that students would take out their own funding and make them responsible for their own education. See what I mean, they could argue either way that it supported their manifesto so that would give them freedom to buddy up with any other MP.
__________________
The views expressed within this post are mine and mine alone.
|
|
|
28-03-2008, 13:34
|
#27
|
Apprentice Geriatric
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Darwen, Lancashire
Posts: 3,706
Liked: 0 times
Rep Power: 88
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gayle
I think you've made the argument against your own argument there - because an MP could say that they were trying to achieve the end result of their manifesto whichever way they voted so they could buddy up with other people anyway.
For instance, their manifesto says that they will want to support more people going to college - a bill is presented that says that by law parents have to take out a covenant at birth. They could either vote for it or against it under the new freedom voting that you're introducing. An MP could argue that voting against the bill meant that students would take out their own funding and make them responsible for their own education. See what I mean, they could argue either way that it supported their manifesto so that would give them freedom to buddy up with any other MP.
|
Your contrived example is flawed Gayle.
Supporting more people going to college doesn’t mean that the MP would have to agree with whatever method is dreamed up to make it happen. Thus voting against a proposal to make parents take out a covenant is not going against the MP’s manifesto.
Now what about the other points? Or is it ‘cherry picking’ time?
However I was naďve enough to hope that responders to entwisi’s original post at http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/accyweb-elections-37647.html would enter into the spirit of it and come up with their own ideas rather than picking holes in other people’s. After all that was the object of the exercise proposed by entwisi – for forum members to present their own manifestos. I just modified it to limit it to one subject in a manifesto.
What would be your vision on Parliamentary reform?
It is all too easy to destroy but not so easy to create. To construct you need the intelligence that is greater than that of an amoeba. Present company excepted, but how many amoebas have we on this forum?
|
|
|
28-03-2008, 19:51
|
#28
|
God Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Relaxville
Posts: 6,866
Liked: 13 times
Rep Power: 2865
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambutty
What would be your vision on Parliamentary reform?
It is all too easy to destroy but not so easy to create. To construct you need the intelligence that is greater than that of an amoeba. Present company excepted, but how many amoebas have we on this forum?
|
Errr, see post 6, I think I've put some fairly constructive suggestions in there, I thought the rest was a debate. Which does involve deconstructing other people's arguments to some degree, however, I'm happy for you to deconstruct some of mine too - that's what a debate is.
__________________
The views expressed within this post are mine and mine alone.
|
|
|
28-03-2008, 19:57
|
#29
|
Give, give, give member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Overlookin' ducks & geese
Posts: 32,411
Liked: 27 times
Rep Power: 16468
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambutty
how many amoebas have we on this forum?
|
a·moe·ba also a·me·ba (ə-mē'bə) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. a·moe·bas also a·me·bas or a·moe·bae also a·me·bae (-bē)
Any of various one-celled aquatic or parasitic protozoans of the genus Amoeba or related genera, having no definite form and consisting of a mass of protoplasm containing one or more nuclei surrounded by a flexible outer membrane. It moves by means of pseudopods.
Are 'pseudopods' the same as wheels?
__________________
'If you're going to be a Kant, be the very best Kant there is my son.'
Johann Georg Kant, father of Immanuel Kant, philosopher.
|
|
|
28-03-2008, 20:25
|
#30
|
God Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 3,212
Liked: 328 times
Rep Power: 12995
|
Re: I Have A Dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by garinda
Are 'pseudopods' the same as wheels?
|
pseu·do·pod (sd-pd)
n.
A temporary projection of the cytoplasm of certain cells or of certain unicellular organisms, especially amoebas, that serves in locomotion and phagocytosis.
I don't know about that, because, as a certain deluded pensioner from Darwen seems to think, I'm a bit lacking in brain cells. What he (and the above definition) doesn't know, is that the correct plural of amoeba is amoebae, not amoebas, which happens to be an Americanism.
Doesn't that august and factual journal 'Private Eye' have a column entitled 'pseuds corner'? They'll surely know about pseudopods.
__________________
Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right.
Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive.
|
|
|
Other sites of interest.. |
More town sites.. |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:05.
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com
|
|