Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
votting
#31
Im happy as i stirred the political pot!!

I couldn't stop laughing at the fact so many of you thought i believed the bit about US!! I respect my Allie and the men who fought beside us to win the war. ( Although they did join a bit late ) Without them we would have been surrounded and trapped and forever shall they be remembered!

There never will be anova Churchill as people are to scared to stand up and fight the bad people! "The only thing needed for the triumph of Evil is for good men to do nothing!"
Reply

#32
I've always been a bit too easy to fool.

Nothing like a good stir.
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply

#33
At present we have a Parliment at Westminster, with 646 MPs. Another Parliment in Scotland, with 129 MSPs. A Welsh Assembly, with 12 Minsters plus 2 other posts. Another one in Northern Ireland, with 108 MLAs. A grand total of 897 politicians, do we need so many?

How much does it cost the country to employ these politicians?
Also what is the cost to provide the buildings, the support staff and expenses?

Are we getting value for our money?
Reply

#34
Rychard the Lionheart Wrote:At present we have a Parliment at Westminster, with 646 MPs. Another Parliment in Scotland, with 129 MSPs. A Welsh Assembly, with 12 Minsters plus 2 other posts. Another one in Northern Ireland, with 108 MLAs. A grand total of 897 politicians, do we need so many?

How much does it cost the country to employ these politicians?
Also what is the cost to provide the buildings, the support staff and expenses?

Are we getting value for our money?

NO WE DO NOT NEED THEM!! They steal money from us all the time!
Reply

#35
Quote:I'm sorry but you haven't really mentioned enough states to convince me that 'swing states' no longer exist, just that they are not as narrowly defined as previously.

I didn't say that swing states didn't exist or that they were not important. I said that they are no longer as important. You were indicating that they were the only thing that mattered much in American elections, and that is just not true. Leave aside the changes we saw in the most recent presidential elections, it would still be impossible for a Democrat to win without California or a Republican to win without Texas.

Quote:I didn't use the word satisfied, its too strong. I am afraid I really cannot comment on Presidential job approval ratings, no equivalent statistic gets media attention over here. .

Really? A quick search on Gordon Brown opinion polls on Google leads me straight to an article from the London Times.

Quote:Second, that the voters think that fixing the system of government is practically impossible because either they will be offered candidates like Kerry, who don't offer a real change or if they do elect a reformer he won't actually be able to achieve any actual reform in Washington. This is no so much apathy as a considered view that although politics and government are important actual voting has become ineffectual. Although I don't doubt that this would be be an accurate description of the thoughts of a few voters, I haven't seen any evidence that a large number of voters think that way, can you show me any.

From this statement, I can tell that you have not spent much time speaking with American's about their politicians. There is a large since that the American government has been bought and paid for by special interest groups who pay for the campaigns. Whether it is Halliburton or the Teachers Union, most people feel that our government is no longer "by the people, for the people, and of the people". Why do you think heavy restrictions on lobbyists were such a large component of President Obama's platform?

As far as your philosophy, you are correct. The people thought that the Bush administration was riddled with bad doctrines. That is why McCain, who largely held the same doctrines, was not elected. But, perhaps you are talking about extreme examples with your philosophy. It seems you are channeling Jeffersonian philosophy when you describe the people eradicating bad governments:

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."--The Declaration of Independance

Yet, many people think that the Bush administration was one of the worst if not THE worst in American history. But a tyrant of the American people, he was not. And that makes all the difference. Now, whether he was a tyrant to his guests at Guantanamo Bay is another question entirely.
Reply

#36
albabonzai Wrote:Im happy as i stirred the political pot!!

I couldn't stop laughing at the fact so many of you thought i believed the bit about US!! I respect my Allie and the men who fought beside us to win the war. ( Although they did join a bit late ) Without them we would have been surrounded and trapped and forever shall they be remembered!

There never will be anova Churchill as people are to scared to stand up and fight the bad people! "The only thing needed for the triumph of Evil is for good men to do nothing!"

Ah, "the Lies, all lies" was a bit over the top for my incredulous mind.

You never know if there will be another Prime Minister like Churchill, the change that created the system in which no politician is willing to "stand up and fight the bad people" may bring about a system or time when such politicians exist and may even be necessary. I hope for all our sakes that we will never again have a need so dire as that which produced men so great as Churchill and Roosevelt.
Reply

#37
Quote:Fredv3b is actually right Baz. the U.K was going to starve into submission if they weren't getting U.S help with food and oil. The U.K try'ed everything like getting food from the U.K colonies but most of them were intercepted and destroyed by the German armies. even normal cargo ships were being rebuilt to get food and oil from the colonies. + Churchill requested many times for the U.S to help.

It was the German navy, using wolf packs of U-Boats which sank most of the allied shipping.

At least you Americans get to elect you president, our prime minister is elected by a small group of MPs. Very similar system of voting to the catholic's church election of a Pope.
Reply

#38
Rychard the Lionheart Wrote:A grand total of 897 politicians, do we need so many?

Are you single counting those with two jobs? Alex Salmond allegedly still finds time to be an MP as well as being First Minister in Edinburgh. In any case don't forget the thousands in local government! I'd be interested to know how we compare to other countries.

Its those other countries that wanted all these extra politicians. Not us English.
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply

#39
Thanks for your reply

Wintereis Wrote:Really? A quick search on Gordon Brown opinion polls on Google leads me straight to an article from the London Times.

First THERE IS NO SUCH NEWSPAPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is the 'The Times', you can add the suffix 'of London' if you wish. It was there before all the other Times newspapers. (Apologies for that rant but it something that really gets my goat.)

Personal approval ratings are much more complex given cabinet government and Parliamentary democracy. So although they do exist they do not get the same attention as voting intention.

I am afraid I don't get to speak to American's a great deal, being on this side of the Atlantic. I am not sure though how much that would change my opinion given that philosophy that I have outlined. I don't doubt that Americans feel strongly the system is in need of reform but broken?

Wintereis Wrote:But, perhaps you are talking about extreme examples with your philosophy.

Wintereis Wrote:Yet, many people think that the Bush administration was one of the worst if not THE worst in American history. But a tyrant of the American people, he was not. And that makes all the difference. Now, whether he was a tyrant to his guests at Guantanamo Bay is another question entirely.

Although I would not use the word extreme, I would agree that I have much lower bar for what constitutes bad government than you (if lower is the correct word). For my perspective is only natural that peoples that have not recently experienced bad government start to consider governments that they are unhappy with as bad governments.
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply

#40
Rychard the Lionheart Wrote:At least you Americans get to elect you president, our prime minister is elected by a small group of MPs. Very similar system of voting to the catholic's church election of a Pope.

Depends if you consider 300-odd MPs to be a small group. Don't forget that American's only vote indirectly for their President, there is an electoral college. (From memory back in 2000 the British press gave the impression that a significant number of Americans had forgotten that the existence of the electoral college meant that a President could be elected with a minority of the vote - I am sure Wintereis could enlighten me if it really was a significant number.)

On the other hand a PM can be gotten rid of at any time, by a successful challenge within his own party or by a motion of no confidence. Presidents can only be removed by impeachment, Congress failed to impeach President Clinton despite him lying under oath to them which shows just how difficult it is in practice.
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
2 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com