Should Canada adopt a US-style senate

[KrazyHorse]

a) The NEP didn't abridge the basic rights and freedoms of any Canadian. You just didn't get your way on an issue and have spent the last 15 years griping.

b)

The constitution hasn't stopped the government from doing REALLY stupid stuff like canceling the Military Helicopter contracts at a massive penalty, only to reorder ****TIER helicopters a few years later at a greater cost, etc.

This is silly. A Constitution protects the basic rights and freedoms of individual Canadians. It cannot (and should not even try to) protect against a government making bad decisions. Only the electorate has that responsibility

c)

We need a useful Senate that takes away Liberal-majority power. Whether that's a system like the US' (which I think works great for the US), or whether it's a system based on proportional representation doesn't really matter to me

Why don't we just stop the government from having any legislative power whatsoever (or requiring that all bills get a 2/3 majority before passing)? That'll protect us, right?

d)

The Liberal dictatorship must be stopped

The federal government doesn't do what I want them to do, so let's change the form of government. Why not just hoist the bloody red flag and have done with it, sweetie?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
In different states? Why shouldn't each state (which has a lot of its own seperate laws) have equal representation in ONE branch of the federal government?

Why shouldn't each county have equal representation in ONE branch of New York's state government. What does it matter that Hicksville, NY has a population of 5 000 and that King's County has a population of a million?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Most Americans dislike both branches of congress.

I totally disagree. 100% in fact. They'd rather have that than Proportional Representation.

Care to produce any evidence in support of this?

Polls routinely show a favorability rating of <50% for the Senate, and often it is <30%. How on earth can you then assert it is loved by the people?

I bet most Americans would favor proportional representation, as more Americans would benefit from it than didn't.

[Asher]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
a) The NEP didn't abridge the basic rights and freedoms of any Canadian. You just didn't get your way on an issue and have spent the last 15 years griping.

The NEP broke the basic rights guaranteed to Alberta to own and control its resources, agreed to in 1930. The Liberal Federal government trumped this agreement and raped the province anyway.

b) This is silly. A Constitution protects the basic rights and freedoms of individual Canadians. It cannot (and should not even try to) protect against a government making bad decisions. Only the electorate has that responsibility

Hey, now you're getting it!
That's why we can't just rely on the constitution! Very good, KrazyHorse!

c) Why don't we just stop the government from having any legislative power whatsoever (or requiring that all bills get a 2/3 majority before passing)? That'll protect us, right?

It would protect us, actually.
On the other hand, it wouldn't do anything at all, which isn't GOOD for us.

We need to strike a balance.

d) The federal government doesn't do what I want them to do, so let's change the form of government. Why not just hoist the bloody red flag and have done with it, sweetie?

Don't be such a moron, KrazyHorse.

We're not changing the form of government, it's still a constitutional monarchy based on representational democracy. What we're doing is replacing a useless senate with a useful one which lessens the sickeningly-high amount of power the majority party gets.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Why shouldn't each county have equal representation in ONE branch of New York's state government. What does it matter that Hicksville, NY has a population of 5 000 and that King's County has a population of a million?

Don't y'all be dissin' Hicksville, ya hear?

And Kings County has much more than 1 million!

And yes, our votes should count as much as anyone else's does, dammit!

[KrazyHorse]

The unrepresentative Senate would block any attempt at distributing power equally. Makes sense, right?

35 states would lose power and 15 states would gain it.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Asher

The NEP broke the basic rights guaranteed to Alberta to own and control its resources, agreed to in 1930. The Liberal Federal government trumped this agreement and raped the province anyway

Hey, now you're getting it!
That's why we can't just rely on the constitution! Very good, KrazyHorse!

Please explain how your unrepresentative Senate would guard against bad decisions. They're elected by the same people as the other branch.

It would protect us, actually.
On the other hand, it wouldn't do anything at all, which isn't GOOD for us

Now you're getting it.

Don't be such a moron, KrazyHorse.

We're not changing the form of government, it's still a constitutional monarchy based on representational democracy. What we're doing is replacing a useless senate with a useful one which lessens the sickeningly-high amount of power the majority party gets.

What you're doing is trying to whine your way into more representation than you deserve. Please explain why it's fair or democratic to give your vote more say than mine in any branch of federal government.

[markusf]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
The unrepresentative Senate would block any attempt at distributing power equally. Makes sense, right?

35 states would lose power and 15 states would gain it.

Whats it matter anyways?

Big business/ super rich control the media, and they control the political parties. They decide every single election by running a good /bad story here and there, and when it comes right down to it all parties do the exact same thing in the US. IN canada we toss in the NDP which are just a bunch of union/mafia/morons.

[Ramo]

The Senate does not preserve individual rights.

It only helps people in low population states to trample on individual rights of all people in the country the way they want - insuring the rule of the minority over the majority.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ramo
The Senate does not preserve individual rights.

It only helps people in low population states to trample on individual rights of all people in the country the way they want - insuring the rule of the minority over the majority.

Exactly.

[Asher]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Yeah, that's very typical. You don't care because it's not you or your family that lost thier jobs and homes due to the greed of Ottawa.

Please explain how your unrepresentative Senate would guard against bad decisions. They're elected by the same people as the other branch.

It's quite simple, really: The Liberals would not have a majority of the seats in the Senate. They'd retain the majority of the seats in the HoC and by having the PM/Cabinet, but the Senate would act as a counterbalance to ensure the needs of those minorities are respected.

Now you're getting it.

The Senate would still function, KrazyHorse. I'm not talking about replacing the entire f*cking system to be a Senate. There's a uhge difference.

What you're doing is trying to whine your way into more representation than you deserve. Please explain why it's fair or democratic to give your vote more say than mine in any branch of federal government.

You are seriously acting so very, very stupid right now that it's getting unbearable to debate you.

You are obviously incapable of viewing this from anyone other than the majority provinces, so why don't you just piss off already. We already know you misinformed opinion.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ramo
The Senate does not preserve individual rights.

It only helps people in low population states to trample on individual rights of all people in the country the way they want - insuring the rule of the minority over the majority.

Mark this day: Ramo and I agree.

Wow, and I agreed with Sava today, too. The Apocalypse must be nigh...

[Asher]

I don't know how many times I need to say this:

The purpose of a democracy is to have rule of the majority while respecting the rights and needs of the minorities.

Right now in Canada, we simply have rule of the majority. This is well and good for those of you in the majority (KrazyHorse), but for anyone not in the majority, you get the sharp end of the stick from a large and overbearing Ottawa with seemingly unlimited power given to the "majority government" (which in fact only represents the view of 40% of the people, but that doesn't really matter...)

[markusf]

Originally posted by Ramo
The Senate does not preserve individual rights.

It only helps people in low population states to trample on individual rights of all people in the country the way they want - insuring the rule of the minority over the majority.

Ya but the whole USA system is a oligarchy, it really doesn't matter how you change the system there. The same people are going to be in power no matter what.

Whats the going rate for a senate seat in the US these days?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ramo
The Senate does not preserve individual rights.

It only helps people in low population states to trample on individual rights of all people in the country the way they want - insuring the rule of the minority over the majority.

Bull****, Ramo, Bull****.

That would be true if the ENTIRE DAMN SYSTEM WAS BASED ON THE IDEA.

But it's NOT.

2/3 of the branches are based upon population. The other 1/3 is there for minority rights.

You can't "insure the rule of the minority" when the minority has slightly more control in 1 out of 3 branches, when the Majority still has way more control in 2 out of 3 branches.

You physics types sure seem to lack a lot in the field of common sense.