VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tue 2003-08-19 20:02:46
Author: arendt (posting for redeye)
Subject: Re: RE: updated version of NK-govt - PART 2
In reply to: arendt 's message, "Re: RE: updated version of NK-govt - PART 2" on Tue 2003-08-19 20:01:24

From: redeye
Date: Aug 18th 2003

Okay, it's getting too long, so I'm replying in point format...

1. You're wrong about people feeling pain when even one cell gets killed. The whole body works like an ant colony, more or less; cells are born and die and we don't even notice, and if fact those cells that don't die are cancerous cells that eventually kill us. Treating a state like an organism yields us tyrannical governments such as Plato's aristocracy and Lenin's dictatorship of the proletariat.

2. a) The number 200 comes from Finland's constitution; Finland is so sparsely populated that even with 50 legislators it'd have a reasonable v/r ratio of about 50,000.

b) If you look at the British Parliament, you'll see that it's far more functional than the US House. Size is definitely an important part of the equation whose result is functionality, but so are procedures and culture. So it's very possible to get 200 members and still have a functional legislature.

c) I'm not inverting the pyramid, because there are still many SLs subordiante to each DL. In many firms the board of directors is larger than the average work team; however, since there's only one board but numerous work teams, there are many more ordinary workers than directors. If there are 5 SLs to each DL, then the ratio of Specialized Legislators to Departmental Legislators will be 2.5:1.

d) If the lower-level stuff is more rote, then computers can do it, can't they?

3. The part about secretaries and emergencies sounds reasonable, to a degree. I know that in Weimar Germany, the procedure for emergency decrees was such that the Chancellor requested and the president signed - the same can be done here, so the Minister of the Environment might ask the president to agree to a decree outlawing any oil drilling in ANWR if the situation there turns into a crisis, etc. The main difference between you and me here, I guess, is that I support a more active president, who needs to actually confirm the ministers' decisions in an emergency and doesn't just veto what he doesn't like.

4. Detour: the question here is what delay there really is in politics. If it's, say, 24 hours, then Congress will really be in control; when response times need to be lower, it will likely because of an emergency situation, so the executive will partly take over.

5. Digression: that makes sense... However, this begs for a lot of leeway depending on the type of legislation. I support minimum debate times for laws, which get higher and higher as we move to higher levels that need to decide on more important affairs. For example, an L0's minimum debate time might be 3 hours, an SL's might be 6 hours, a DL's might be 12, and Congress' might be 24. Now, maximum debate times are problematic because not always all issues will've been resolved by the deadline. As for poison pills, all that's needed is a procedure rule that states that just before the final vote, each amendment or section of a bill is voted on independently. Thus, representatives will be able to vote the poison pill down and let the rest of the bill pass.

6. I didn't really understand you on the budget.

7. Oops, sorry about the excutive/legislative conundrum. So basically every person can vote in all executive elections and then in some legislative elections in each level?

8. The problem with prior experience qualifications is that some people just suck at doing routine stuff and are much better at setting policy guidelines. It's like with Peter's Laws: you end up promoting those who're good at a certain office out of that office.

9. I see the question of age qualifications as one of adulthood and self-goevrning. Are 18-year-olds able to govern themselves? Yep. Are 16-year-olds able? Yep, again. Why then should we be restricted from having real power? Besides, people are going to vote anyway, regardless of whether they're schizos, so the schizophrenia argument really shouldn't affect anything. And moreover, by the same token we can disenfranchise everyone who doesn't have a graduate degree because he "lacks the intellectual abilities to vote rationally." That's pure BS. Finally, I think in today's terms, in the sense that I am shaped by current events and thus my ideas are not cast in stone. Many 30+ people don't, so under your suggestion the government will deal with today's problems only in 10 years, with 2013's problems in 2023, etc. I'd rather let those who let current facts confuse them vote.

10. The legislature that does all the procedure stuff should actually be Congress - it should be the one that establishes new SLs, creates new departments, etc., rather than a legislature that's inside a department. My logic tells me that new SLs and DLs are an issue that everybody should be able to decide on, not just those who vote in a certain SL.

11. By "accountable," I mean that the president needs to regualrly report to Congress, which may remove him with large enough a majority.

12. The civil rights department is a regular department, like defense or the treasury. It's concerned with issues of setting guidelines for the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and so on, beyond what the Supreme Court rules, as well as dealing with race and gender issues.

13. The unelected level of specialized committee is there because it's so detailed that it doesn't make sense for it to be voted on. Besides, when there are only four or five sub-issues per SL, none can really trample the others like unemployment, inflation, and national security do in Congress nowadays. A proportionally-elected legislature can easily give the voters choices on 3-5 issues.

14. I don't really like the presidential veto over legislative issues; it makes him too much of an elected king. There's a perfectly good check on bad laws, namely the Supreme Court; and hostilities between the executive and the legislature should not create a deadlock on any legislation.

15. I'd prefer the discussion to continue on LWD, but first you'll need to post your first PM, then I'll need to post my reply, etc. Otherwise the exchange will be pretty unreadable, and the whole idea of posting it on a forum methinks is to let others have some input.


 

 

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.