The problem with governments...

[Sava]

Democracies, in particular....

Bear with me here. When you build a house, you hire an architect to design it... why? because architects are the most qualified to design houses. You also hire contractors, why? because they are the most qualified to build houses. When you buy stocks, some people hire a broker... why? because they are the most qualified to trade stocks and make money.

Yet, when it comes to electing leaders to solve some of the biggest problems... we elect politicians. This is baffling to me. You'd think we'd choose the best leaders for the positions, based on their qualifications. But no... instead, we get dishonest, corrupt politicians.

What can we do to reform our Democracy so that politics only applies to political issues. For instance... look at the budget for the US. The guy that has the final say is the biggest politician out there. It doesn't matter if it's Bush or Clinton... there hasn't been one president (that I can think of) who was qualified to act as the nation's accountant.

Whether it's Republicans or Democrats, the guy in office runs his own agenda, or his party's agenda; with the full resources of the American people. There has to be a way we can reform the system.

Suggestions: Spread the responsibilities of the President out and delegate them to people who are qualified to do the job. Ideally, the President should be the person that "executes" the law and the will of the people. But instead, the President creates policy. The seperation of powers has been blurred and I think it's time to fix the system.

Comments, suggestions?

[Inverse Icarus]

Re: The problem with governments...

Originally posted by Sava
Yet, when it comes to electing leaders to solve some of the biggest problems... we elect politicians. This is baffling to me. You'd think we'd choose the best leaders for the positions, based on their qualifications. But no... instead, we get dishonest, corrupt politicians.

they're good at what they do, decieving the public. thats why they get elected.

eh, i guess the president making policy is a tad off from the way it was written. hash out a completed proposal and leave it on my desk by tomorrow morning.

[Arrian]

Generally speaking, the people who seek power are the last it should be given to. On the other hand, how else are we going to handle it?

This is why I generally favor a weaker government... they can do less damage.

-Arrian

[Zkribbler]

Re: The problem with governments...

Originally posted by Sava
What can we do to reform our Democracy so that politics only applies to political issues.

First, we need to do everything we can to get the big money (i.e. special interest groups) out of politics.

The Supreme Court needs to reverse its silly ruling that donating money is political "speech" and therefore is under strict scrutiny when it comes to being regulated.

We need to limit the persons who can donate to political campaigns to registered voters--no corporations, no unions, no PACs, no foreign nations.

Television stations--which are given exclusive licenses to use the public airways--must give free time to persons who are campaigning for public office.

Then maybe we can start electing qualified people into office rather than those politicians who raise huge warchests by selling out to every special interest in sight except the American public.

[Ozz]

Dump the vote and lottery pick your representatives
from the voting population. You'd kill corruption and
get a more truly representative government.
(based on math)

Democracy is not necessary voting, The ancient Athenian
citizen would likely serve two terms of office in their lifes.

[Arrian]

Ozz,

So, make it like Jury Duty? One of my best friends advocated the same thing recently, and I questioned his sanity.

Such a government might be more representative, but think about what that really means. It means President Homer Simpson. Before you say "hey, that's not so bad" consider that this isn't a cartoon.

-Arrian

[yavoon]

there's a reason its a representative democracy. we elect ppl we trust to lead the country. not patsies. the idea being that they can be much more informed than us seeing as we have jobs and lives.

[Ozz]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ozz,

So, make it like Jury Duty? One of my best friends advocated the same thing recently, and I questioned his sanity.

Such a government might be more representative, but think about what that really means. It means President Homer Simpson. Before you say "hey, that's not so bad" consider that this isn't a cartoon.

-Arrian

The line between genuis and madness...

Consider your current president, Homer ain't that bad
looking and thats real life.

No it does'nt, it means Representive Homer Simpson, and if Homer Simpson can't be a representive, then he shouldn't be taxable. (Not taxation without representation) Homer would have to be elected by the
representatives to be President. (which would be more
like Prime Minister)

How many representatives does the US have 400 for each house. of of say 800 you'd get a representative
slice of the US, Genuises and morons both.

How would you deal with the position of congressman
if you were picked, I bet a lot of people would work
harder at it than anything else in their lives.

[red_jon]

I've been rapidly losing faith in democracy recently - the people are stupid and have no idea what they really want, yet when they make a clear demonstration against something, the government ignores them. Not that any of the alternatives we've seen are any better.

The only workable alternative I can think of would be a truly meritocratic system, but how would that work? And of course you'd be left with a disempowered lower rung of stupid people, but who cares about them?

[Arrian]

Ok, so you're also arguing for a Parliamentary system to replace our Republican system.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think such a system would have difficulty doing anything. Therefore, I like it.

-Arrian

[Sava]

good posts guys

[Az]

Yeah, because we all know the government is evil.

[Ozz]

Originally posted by red_jon
And of course you'd be left with a disempowered lower rung of stupid people, but who cares about them?

Good start, we'll disempower the homosexuals next.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by Ozz


Good start, we'll disempower the homosexuals next.

Hey, disempowering the stupid is better than electing them as president.

Ba-dum-bum tish.

[Az]

Of course, being gay is just as bad a quality as being stupid.