Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Page 627 of 730 FirstFirst ... 127527577617625626627628629637677727 ... LastLast
Results 6,261 to 6,270 of 7296
  1. #6261
    TDF Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    England
    Posts
    435
    Likes (Given)
    67
    Likes (Received)
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by notdeadyet View Post
    For me, monarchy is outdated and has no place in modern society. Let it die with the Queen. You may not be a fan of Trump but is having a buffoon like Charles representing the country any better just because he was born on the right side of the blanket to a single incredibly privileged family? Or the fabricated-for-the-media William?
    AFAICS the US model is far worse than the model we have. Who really wants to have even more elections to vote in some populist figure head over an heredity one. The knowledge that QE2 carries in her head has to be invaluable to any sensible PM.

    I agree that QE2 tenure is limited but saying that I'm quite looking forward to Charly boy taking over. Whilst he not everyones cut of tea and not that popular his words look to be thoughtful and have a lot of sense in this overpopulated world.
    I just sad to say I think his heir is unlikely to be sensible* and thinking but and will be very popular.

    *To be honest in this over-populated world with hime fronting a 'green' program I describe him as 'Bl**dy Hypocrite"! He should had the 2 bricks treatment after his second kids - and publicly announced it.

  2. #6262
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,498
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4162
    Quote Originally Posted by notdeadyet View Post
    The British public loves the class system, despite social mobility being at its lowest. Keeps riffraff away from the middle class, teaches the lower classes to know their place and be grateful for it. It will never change.
    It is true many people feel like that. I certainly do not and although my dad worked all his life in a factory I benefitted from a free University education and have become middle class even though I self identify as riff raff.

    The sycophantic bullshit when Diana Spencer died made me puke. I am not looking forward to the stupidity that will accompany the death of Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg Gotha.
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  3. #6263
    Established TDF Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    West Lothian
    Posts
    2,698
    Likes (Given)
    1098
    Likes (Received)
    945
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Digger View Post
    A non executive head of state is almost by definition fabricated for media consumption, are you suggesting an executive head of state that would at the least compete with the sovereignty of parliament and at worst create gridlock in the system of government, imagine no one in the NHS paid for 3 months or so as happened in the National Parks in the US. Sadly in order to do away with the monarchy one requires a complete revamp of the Parliamentary system and government. No one in this world seems to have it quite right, certainly not the US founding fathers even though they expended quite a lot of thought on it. I can think of other changes to our system of government that would be far more useful than getting fid of a hereditary non executive head of state.
    I do think there are better systems than here but as you say it will take seismic change to alter the current system of government but that is not something that works for either of the main parties. First past the post voting is the first thing that needs to change as it creates a system where, once in power, it is easier to hold on to it.

    America is definitely not the place to look for answers - any system that allows a party to effectively shut down government is wrong. I wonder whether the US politicians would be as ready to shut down government if their own assets were frozen at the same time (make them feel the same pressure as the government employees they lock out on a regular basis). I suspect that, as soon as there was any threat to their incomes, they would very quickly find a solution.

  4. #6264
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,498
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4162
    Quote Originally Posted by Neilwood View Post
    I do think there are better systems than here but as you say it will take seismic change to alter the current system of government but that is not something that works for either of the main parties. First past the post voting is the first thing that needs to change as it creates a system where, once in power, it is easier to hold on to it. ...
    A big part of the whole thing (well for me anyway) is there is too much centralised power. Having a more "Federal" type system like Germany would be (I think) better. With much more devolved spending power at regional level and central government simply setting an overall tax rate. The present system means Westmister starves the councils of funds and then they (councils) get the blame for central government cuts. By the same token more centralisation of things like NHS buying and homolgation of what is and is not treated would be a benefit. That would stop the excesses of both major parties.
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  5. #6265
    Established TDF Member Energy58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    London at the moment
    Posts
    2,099
    Likes (Given)
    338
    Likes (Received)
    569
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Digger View Post
    A non executive head of state is almost by definition fabricated for media consumption, are you suggesting an executive head of state that would at the least compete with the sovereignty of parliament and at worst create gridlock in the system of government, imagine no one in the NHS paid for 3 months or so as happened in the National Parks in the US. Sadly in order to do away with the monarchy one requires a complete revamp of the Parliamentary system and government. No one in this world seems to have it quite right, certainly not the US founding fathers even though they expended quite a lot of thought on it. I can think of other changes to our system of government that would be far more useful than getting fid of a hereditary non executive head of state.
    The (non-royal) Head of State pretty much has to be an appointed non-entity who never did anything important and won't present an alternative to the legitimate government - making a short list in your head of who you might end up with under this system makes your blood run cold: it will probably be someone off "I'm a Celebrity..." or a footballer. The alternative option of an elected president runs the risk of a messianic individual or one who becomes messianic because he is called "your highness" all the time and a constitutional crisis follows.

  6. #6266
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,498
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4162
    Quote Originally Posted by Energy58 View Post
    The (non-royal) Head of State pretty much has to be an appointed non-entity who never did anything important and won't present an alternative to the legitimate government ..
    Why?

    Genuine question.
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  7. #6267
    Prior Member Tim Digger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    West Midlands UK
    Posts
    5,180
    Likes (Given)
    3708
    Likes (Received)
    4028
    Quote Originally Posted by notdeadyet View Post
    How do you feel that our head of state will more than likely never be black, a Jew, gay or from a working class background?

    Barbados's choice makes perfect sense in the 21st century. We should make the same one.
    I still don't believe you can get rid of the monarchy without a complete revision of all our political system, unless you mean to have a joke election for a non executive head of state. As I said if going down this route there are other changes with a far greater priority like proportional representation and ongoing revision of the revising chamber. The monarchy is fairly irrelevant to most government, it's teeth were pulled long ago.
    Evolution is great at solving problems. It's the methods that concern me.
    Tim Digger

  8. #6268
    Established TDF Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    West Lothian
    Posts
    2,698
    Likes (Given)
    1098
    Likes (Received)
    945
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisch View Post
    A big part of the whole thing (well for me anyway) is there is too much centralised power. Having a more "Federal" type system like Germany would be (I think) better. With much more devolved spending power at regional level and central government simply setting an overall tax rate. The present system means Westmister starves the councils of funds and then they (councils) get the blame for central government cuts. By the same token more centralisation of things like NHS buying and homolgation of what is and is not treated would be a benefit. That would stop the excesses of both major parties.
    Agreed that that is an important factor. The UK has been ruined for decades by the concentration of money and power in the south east while deprivation and poverty are rife in a lot of previously heavy industrial towns. Devolving spending to regional assemblies allows for a better focus on local need. I would say that, on the whole, the devolved assemblies in Scotland, Wales and NI have been pretty successful (although not all will agree). A similar structure in England would make sense as well even if it was regional as opposed to county based.

    I do think there needs to be a change in voting structure though with the number of seats actually reflecting the percentage vote share. If that were the case, I suspect that there would be a lot less tactical voting and more representation of "minor parties" such as the Green party who, if proportionally represented, would have 18 seats instead of 1.

  9. #6269
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,498
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4162
    Quote Originally Posted by Neilwood View Post
    ...
    I do think there needs to be a change in voting structure though with the number of seats actually reflecting the percentage vote share. If that were the case, I suspect that there would be a lot less tactical voting and more representation of "minor parties" such as the Green party who, if proportionally represented, would have 18 seats instead of 1.
    For sure. The problem is that Johnson has an 80 seat majority with less than a third of the electorate wanting him in at all. Corbyn got more votes than Blair but lost. My Green Party vote counts for nothing and has done so all my life.

    If you were able to steal money in industrial amounts and cheat democracy and lie and fuck up the country and still get an 80 seat majority on a small margin why would you change? Maybe cheat a bit and gerrymander the borders a bit more.

    So many people banging on about taking back control but want a German aristocrat to rule over them (aided by a sky fairy). Hard not to think a lot of people are actually quite stupid.

    https://medium.com/lessons-from-hist...y-957cbb3fbac1
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  10. #6270
    Established TDF Member jamesp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Wrexham
    Posts
    5,664
    Likes (Given)
    2804
    Likes (Received)
    2136
    Quote Originally Posted by Neilwood View Post
    Agreed that that is an important factor. The UK has been ruined for decades by the concentration of money and power in the south east while deprivation and poverty are rife in a lot of previously heavy industrial towns. Devolving spending to regional assemblies allows for a better focus on local need. I would say that, on the whole, the devolved assemblies in Scotland, Wales and NI have been pretty successful (although not all will agree). A similar structure in England would make sense as well even if it was regional as opposed to county based.

    I do think there needs to be a change in voting structure though with the number of seats actually reflecting the percentage vote share. If that were the case, I suspect that there would be a lot less tactical voting and more representation of "minor parties" such as the Green party who, if proportionally represented, would have 18 seats instead of 1.
    Speaking as a victim of welsh devolution, I can say that what is now clear is that the utter shambles is down to home grown stupidity and ineptitude rather than centralised welsh office disinterest.


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •