Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
Is Democracy the best form of government?Page 3 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)

The best form of government would be an implied matriarchy. The way it works is, the women agree what should be done and the men do it without having to ask what it is.

Get in the kitchen and make me a sammich.

If things keep going like they are such that everyone has some kind of instant connection to an internet always on their person, and constant access to various news, current events, and all manner of goings-on, including all kinds of ongoing debating and philosophizing on this-and-that...we might go ahead and have some form of that "direct democracy", and replace the bulk of political positions with people who's job it is to just carry out and manage what the world decides by the minute. But, then we'd still have the problem of people really getting all of the information, and true accurate information, on lots of things to really make an educated decision.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 42
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/30/2014 9:58:33 AM
I'd like to see those qualified in their field, volunteer to be elected to represent their community interests in their zone. (from a fishermen with a grade 7 education who have been fishing the local waters to micro biologists with a degree). Each field representative would be elected locally by others that are qualified in that field.

Your "qualifications" in any field would determine how many sectors you could vote in.

The number of representatives that met for international conferences to deal with issues and share ideas and solutions, would be based on need, different parts of the sector, and zones, (not provinces or states or countries). There wouldn't be a cap on how many people are needed, the needs of the sector would determine how many people are needed. These representatives would then be paid according to the hours that they have to put in. This pay would be capped at the price it would cost to support their family's basic needs. (say 25 an hour min. going up 5 dollars an hour depending on how many dependents they have, capped at 4000. a month. They may want to work at other jobs, but they shouldn't have to.

These reps could represent as long as they are doing an effective job and are elected again. Long term diligence by the same person may be more efficient when major projects need dedicated people and it's a long haul to the goal.

Mothers can volunteer to be elected by other mothers, teachers by other teachers, engineers by other engineers, doctors by doctors, natural paths by natural paths, loggers by loggers, environmentalists by other environmentalists ....(all based on their field of expertise).

It would be like a union representative who not only looks after the interests of those in their field (fair pay) but they look after the field itself in the zone they represent. When all look after their field in their zone, the whole sector gets looked after.

Clashes can be worked out because these elected professionals want things running smoothly and properly.

A ship shape collective so it's smooth sailing in all waters.
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/30/2014 10:38:19 AM
^ I dunnnooo...that's another "nice idea", but it's not taking into account a lot of factors and dynamics of how such things would evolve and happen in real world application and practicality.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 44
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/30/2014 11:37:22 AM
, wekk.It's more than an idea, it happens all the time. It's how things get done...co operation.

The problem with the way things are now... trying to get the gov't/corporate appointed idiots, who know nothing about what they are in charge of, who are in it for the money and prestige , who are sucking up to their corporate bosses, and who won't/aren't allowed t look at what makes sense and what works, these idiots keep interfering with healthy progress.

We the people have to take over our responsibilities as world citizen's and make sure that the only ones who have a say, are the ones thinking (and knowing) about what's best for everyone and for the long term.

It's more than a nice idea, it's practical, healthy, efficient, progressive and fair. We can't take "into account" (BTW I can't stand that term) until we DO.

Care to explain why it wouldn't work in real world application and practicality?

I noticed that those who poo poo good ideas don't usually offer solutions of their own. They also passive aggressively or aggressively mock the ideas or person who brings them to the table. I wonder why?

Are they happy with the way things are? Are they fearful of change? Lazy? Embarrassed that they may have nothing to offer? spoiled? stuck? con vinced?

EVERYONE has something to offer, go do it and don't let anyone try to tell you, you can't. When we all do this, we'll meet soon enough.

How about just pick a couple of things you are good at and share them with others for now?
You'll see how the ball gets rolling.

"Taking into account" is one of my worst terms btw.
Those that USE it show me what is really driving them. $'s and the easy life. Careful of these guys/gals.

Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/30/2014 6:06:26 PM

Is Democracy the best form of government?

I think that Democracy might be the best form of goverment...but the trick is how to apply democracy, what form it takes, and what the details of how it operates are.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 46
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/30/2014 6:29:43 PM

Fresco speaks more sense than all the politicians I have ever hear put together.


What do you think about about Peter Joseph?
 billingsmason
Joined: 2/3/2012
Msg: 47
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/30/2014 9:24:40 PM
"Taking into account".... I hear, better be aware.
but then again, I can be my own worst enemy sometimes dame. I do well to look after the guy typing this,'for that fvcker gets me in trouble.

I Like the sense of coop... except who does the pay ceiling figures? I dont like someone telling me that is as good as im gonna get. Who gets to decide that for me? For you?
Apketa is a great way to be, but only if its a choice.
Start telling themasses only two loaves a week, because its enough.... you will build a glutinous rebellion.

Personally, this is my style scoot
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kxgz7p6a_BE
but is this kind wrong?
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PiIcGEwmWOk
what about this one?
http://m.youtube.com/user/colinfurze

Who decides what is enough? The individual, not the coop, or the communist leader or the other scooter tramps either.
Or in your analogy... who would the mercenaries pick to represent them? And who would decide what exactly is enough for them?

The rust and the dust is enough for me, but I enjoy the simplest of things. Cooperation doesnt and shouldnt kill ambition.

Skootchie.... for 125 bucks and a semi regular round of beers with a few buddies, you could start a corporation. That is the beauty of our system. Many big corporations started in the back yard, in the garage.... the "corporation" protects you and allows an idea to flourish without the personal liability a simple person couldnt keep a hold of anyways. It minimizes risks that any sane person wouldnt take, with fear of being strung up or stripped down to the cardboard box in the alley. Abuse is what makes this a bad thing.
Take the guy who invented the child seat belt. Paul is a regular guy. Kinda nutty. He had an idea fora little piece of metal that shrunk the belt to fit kids. Like an "H" shape... now think of the liability in that. What if it didnt work or some one decided to sue.... never mind the fact there was nothing for kids before that, he would be to "blame". No body would shoulder that kind of responsibility. Kids would still be bouncing around in the back seat getting tossed through non safety glass windshields from 20 mile an hour collisions. He had to protect himself.

The "best" type of government? Its not the lessor of two evils, its the evil of two lessors.....
I say- lets use some third world solutions to fix some of these first world problems, and reduce the amount of escapism we rely on to get by... to help other folks get by too. Pay the rent or buy the new ps4? Laugh at some kid who decides wrong, but in this day and age why are there so many easily solved problems still out there? Why? Arent these the things that need governing?

Like... a gallon of bleach ( 1 $ ) has 90840 drops in it. A drop treats a gallon of water. Thats a gallon of treated water a day for 248 years. Why the hell are there kids in the world drinking dirty water? We spend more on one election than could fix the WORLD'S clean water problem.

Go to mexico and get the green apple quick trots, then tell me its not a serious problem.
let our governments fix a few of these"no brainer" problems.... then I will start taking them seriously.


what is this kind of government called? Our's.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 48
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 1/31/2014 10:52:19 AM
Billingsmason:

I'm only suggesting capping the income someone can make in their post as the representative of their sector. If they want to make more doing something else as well, fair enough, they can. It's their choice.

I may put in 10 hrs a month dealing with coastal cleanup and sample taking, I'd get paid 250. from that job (if elected) and I can earn whatever else I want by having a business or working somewhere else.
If David Suziki ends up using all his hours and decides he wants to write a book and make money off that, fair enough.
But the representative part should be capped so those that are doing those jobs, are in it for good reasons not just for the bucks. Hours in=hours paid.

As a collective, if something happens and we have to pay out, fine, we can all shoulder that responsibity. We should help those who are hurt because of our decisions. At least the pay outs would be because of a decision that we all had a say in and was truly a result from an accident and not a result of breaking the rules. Not only that, but if the person suing knew that the money came from everyone instead of some evil corporation, the pay out demanded wouldn't be a ridiculous amount.

Exactly, why are kids drinking dirty water? what the fck is the matter with us?

and why as it is now, can a company who already has a record for spilling contaminates be given the right to move (3 times) and carry on business until it suits them to go bankrupt, leaving the taxpayers holding the bag and ending up sick? Those guys pretty much gave the finger to regulations and to the people. They belong in jail and their assets should go in the collective.
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/1/2014 11:35:43 AM
It’s always interesting to just look at the etymology and definitions of politic, and then wonder how a certain objectivity, and integrity of intentions, can be worked into it’s practice in the real world:

- the practice and theory of influencing other people on a civic or individual level; achieving and exercising positions of governance

- showing good judgment especially in dealing with other people; characterized by shrewdness in managing, contriving, or dealing

- possessing or displaying shrewdness, tact, or cunning

- crafty or unscrupulous; cunning


By the way though, can anybody explain what is meant by this from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics ?:

“Fictions: Records and Law Courts were valuable in helping the people adapt to law-making but like Fictions, they were slow and imperfect. Though slowly, Fictions work because it is a well known fact that people will accept a change in the form of a fiction while they would resist it to the end if the fact is out in the open.”
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 50
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/1/2014 12:21:18 PM
Depending on the personality/background/experiences of the person who you want to convince, different tactics will be employed for different people.

If there is a group, many tactics.

Some like it told to them, "in the now and bluntly"

Some like "legends" that they can relate to without it becoming personal.

Some like actions, not words.

Some will listen or join only if this or that happens first.

Some need to follow

Some need to feel it's their idea.

Some need to know history or a pattern. (past cases).

Some don't trust history.

Most need to trust the messenger.

Some never make up their mind.

some, some, some.

So many ways.

It seems to be that you have to understand how the person "hears" before you can convince and so many "hear" differently.

Maybe throwing it all out there (even if some clash with others) is the best way to convince the majority.
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/1/2014 7:18:20 PM
^ Awesome. Thanks. That makes sense now.

I'm now going to go see if the paragraph in question makes more sense (it still seems a bit out of place, and of odd phraseology, within it's larger context...fictions are itemized and referred to, but never actually explained or defined).
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 53
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/2/2014 7:22:50 AM
Smjle:

Once you decide to buy into paranoid conspiracy versions of everything, it certainly IS hopeless. Such fantasies are specifically designed by those who conjure them, to BE impossible to deal with. That's what makes them so magical to imagine, and what excuses those who follow them from putting any effort at all into improving the world. Not to mention that when you are ensconced inside of a clique of "true believers," you have mutual reinforcement of the nonsense, and mutual admiration for your failures to deal with reality.

Drinks: I read that Wiki article you referenced, and I think that the quote you found confusing is among the worst entries I've ever seen there. I don't see that it has anything to do with the kind of legal fictions that the other fellow described.

I would further suggest, that things like adoption are NOT "legal fictions" in the same sense that the presumption of who died first in an accident is. In the latter case, the court assumes something in order to sort out a situation where a decision MUST be made, despite having no facts to base the decision on. In the case of adoption, there is no fiction. The court KNOWS what the facts are. The court does not declare that the child IS blood of your blood, they assign specific legal status to your situation and the child's.

That bit about "Fictions work because it is a well known fact that people will accept a change in the form of a fiction while they would resist it to the end if the fact is out in the open" is complete gobbledygook. Citing the idea of legal fictions as being one of three essential elements to building the modern system of law and legislation is just plain nuts. Perhaps the writer was confused between the obvious case that when confronted by solid facts, that most people will be unwilling to go with a solution based on fiction instead, and the need for a government to have Authority based on the consent of the governed, for the sake of stability.
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/2/2014 11:29:42 AM
Ok...I tune into a CNN channel, because there's supposed to be a show about "Vladimir Putin and how he is trying to reinvent a modern Russia", and I have to hear instead about some philip seymour guy who was fighting drug addiction, or just died, or something. C-N-freaking-N, and even there some news about a celebrity bumps off something about Putin and Russia. Ok, fine, I'm being disrespectful to this actor...yea yea yea...this is CNN dammit, and we hear enough about celebrities already. Aren't there other channels and shows for actors? Isn't Putin a "celebrity"? Hehe.

igor - so, either way, no matter which response from you two is more valid...it's wasn't just me then huh? I wasn't just going crazy?

...and they're STILL jabbering about philip seymour. On CNN. Time to turn this t.v. back off again. Until the superbowl, that is. Football...woohoo!
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:27:28 AM
^ It should be interesting to note -

A monarchy or oligarchy wouldn't be such a bad deal, and would be good for those reasons mentioned ^, but the problem is whether or not your king/queen, dictator, or monarch will have any good sense for having so much power/responsibility, and if he/she would have good intentions/be as just and fair to as many of the people and the interests of the nation as he/she can. How does one increase the chances that such a king/queen would be this way? What does one do when the monarchy is bad? Do we decide that the monarchy is bad just because a particular interest group couldn't be catered to enough, or because some issue couldn't be addressed well enough forgetting that it might in fact be pretty hard for a king/queen to do everything really good?

And I include oligarchy in this simply because the more "modern" the times, and the bigger the nation, the more you better still delegate some of the responsibility. But you'll still get that kind of efficiency, speed, and effectiveness.

And so one would think that the thing to do is have a monarchy or oligarchy which serves limited terms and is subject to the opinion of the people. Except that has it's own problems, obviously. And this implies that somehow the monarch will have most of the power, yet there are organizations around him which retain the ability to remove him if he goes bad? How does one allow these to have that power, yet the monarch has enough power to do what he does, and there not be much of a chance for either the monarch to overtake all or for the people or reps. of the people to just be dummy-heads and remove a monarch everytime somebody farts?

So this leads me to think that maybe some system should be concocted by which the people and the different concerns of the nation are represented, in order to have the information on those concerns and on the interests of the people efficiently transported up and through the governing body, and for action to be efficient and speedy enough.

This also leads me to think that when a nation and "the times" get so progressed and evolved, or get so big, that expecting a single governing body to effectively address all issues and satisfy all peoples is perhaps a bit impossible and unrealistic. Therefore, maybe the idea should be for the single body to only concern itself with a very specific set of concerns having to do only with the huge diverse nation as a whole, but there should be more localized governing for other more specific or localized concerns, as well as a few quasi-independent agencies to handle certain things appropriately. Yet, also, part of the problem is that the more facets that you have like this, the more opportunities for corruption and negligence, so the more need for oversight or some internal affairs monitoring.

This all sounds similar to at least the idea behind things like the United States of America.

But I figure that, again, the issue is that we're not able to evolve into a better way of putting this idea into practice. It's all in the details. Most of us would agree, I suspect, that underneath it all, the fundamental method by which this whole thing operates has some flaws, particular flaws which very much counter the whole basic idea of how it's supposed to work.

Reform? How?
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 57
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:27:36 PM
There are many forms of democracy, democratic socialism/social democratic systems have worked and are working.
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:42:45 PM
Hey, but maybe the american government is a kind of jobs program?
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 59
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/4/2014 11:56:57 AM
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^^ pretty much ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^

a jobs program for the military industry.

Here in canada, harper it's heading towards a job program for the oil industry.

Nice we have our priorities straight. (not).
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 62
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/5/2014 4:55:32 AM
^^^Sad, but true. The greatest irony, or tragedy, to me, is that the very people who most fiercely claim to be promoting freedom and entrepeneurialism and so forth, are daily fooled into helping the selfish portion of the wealthy classes make things doubly WORSE for everyone else.

Democracy requires high level education, in order to function at it's best. This is actually half of why the idea of Republics and representative democracy were conceived.
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/5/2014 8:07:08 AM
(igor etc)

Yes...to make a decision, you need both honest information and thinking skills. If a nation is to be ruled by it's people...the people ruling themselves...those people need to know what the hell they're doing. Deception and manipulation is tragically too easy.


The men of action are, after all, only the unconscious instruments of the men of thought.

- Heinrich Heine


I may be free to do as I please, but am I free to please as I please?

- Arthur Schopenhauer
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 64
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 2/5/2014 2:04:27 PM
I believe what the u.s. has is called a plutocracy. If they wanted a true democracy they would have to start with a social democracy to get the people healthy in mind and body again so that they can think and add something meaningful and progressive.

I don't think the rulers want a democracy, nor do I think they ever did.
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 65
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 4/5/2014 7:41:54 PM
Seems to be about the best that our secular world can come up with, but we have a record of setting the bar pretty low.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 66
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 4/18/2014 5:35:40 PM

I believe what the u.s. has is called a plutocracy.

Yes, or more specifically, a mixture of Economic Elite Domination and Biased Pluralism.

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens homepage materials/Gilens and Page/Gilens and Page 2014-Testing Theories 3-7-14.pdf

It is not just the US, it is the same everywhere. Power corrupts.
 sexwritepro
Joined: 4/17/2013
Msg: 67
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 4/22/2014 10:28:31 AM
I wrote a long opinion but lost it. Have you seen it?
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 68
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 7/10/2014 5:03:35 PM
Is democracy the best form of government?

I hope not!

And,

No
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 70
view profile
History
Is Democracy the best form of government?
Posted: 7/11/2014 2:14:33 PM
Oldie

Yeah!...............many have entered with that noble idea.

What gets in the way then, eh?

Wealth isn't needed, if the rest are there.
And!!
We will have to find a way to judge and get rid of the as---l-s.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >