Perhaps the first thing then is to simplify your elections. If for no other reason then it is hard for people to be informed about every candidate from street cleaner up. Here in Canada we have federal elections, one position. Provincial elections, one position and municipal with to many positions.
The democratic country I live in uses pen and paper to vote and it is run by a non-partisan government agency. Voting is trusted here, now we just need someone trust worthy to vote for.
Actually it's only a convention that the leader of the majority party becomes the PM. In theory, the monarch (GBH,SDAMJEISIG) could "invite" anyone to take the position.
So I thought you were saying the monarch could invite anyone to be PM, disregarding the wishes of Parliament. Of course if Parliament wishes for a non-elected person to be PM that is OK as Parliament was elected to govern. As to the monarch, I was thinking of James II who I misremembered as appointing a PM who did not have parliaments support. Actually he appointed everything except the PM and prorogued parliament quite a bit. When he left town one day parliament declared that he had abdicated and invited his daughter and her husband to take over.
Technically, no UK prime minister is elected by the electorate to be prime minister - it's other members of his party who do that
Actually it's only a convention that the leader of the majority party becomes the PM. In theory, the monarch (GBH,SDAMJEISIG) could "invite" anyone to take the position.
At certain times the post has been filled by an aristocrat who (by virtue of not being a commoner) wasn't even be eligible to be an MP.
And when Parliament votes no-confidence (or refuses to vote for a money bill) he is forced to resign which usually leads to an election. I think the last King who tried something like that was James II who was replaced. Parliament is much more powerful then the monarch and has been for a long time.
Can you think of a better system? I live in a parliamentary system and while it has its flaws (including unelected PMs in the past) it still seems to work as well as other systems. Helps that here we currently have 4 parties in Parliament and the fact that the PM has to worry about losing a confidence vote if he goes too batty is good.
Actually it is the party that has the support of the most seats. Here (Canada) we have 4 parties in Parliament and the government hasn't had a majority in the last 4 or so elections. Works much better when the PM has to worry about losing a confidence vote.
What would the American taxes be like if they were high enough that they weren't running a deficit for the last decade? Up until this year Canada has been operating in the black. Here is a chart for 2004, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deficit#National_budget_deficits_.282004.29 note that the States deficit is about 25% where as Canada's is about -4%
Another difference between Canada and the States is the deficit. What would the Americans taxes be like if they had not been running a deficit for the last decade or so?
That's wrong. I use Environment Canada for getting the local weather and just the other week there was a surprise thunderstorm. Before it arrived there was a big red banner warning of the storm and clicking the banner gave detailed info about where the storm was and speed and direction it was moving.
Which scripture? There are scriptures from India that seem much more interesting then the one from the middle east. And even if we stick to the story about some minor desert deity evolving into this God you talk about why stop at the new testament? The Koran claims it is a continuation of the story. Anyways if there really was such a powerful god that you claim I'd expect evidence like most religions being in basic agreement about it. The Inuit might have more snow in their version but it would still talk about a god who incarnated as a man and was sacrificed to save us. The same with the majority of cultures. That is a simple test about religion, how much do they agree and it turns out that even the people who claim to follow the bible are in disagreement about the message.
Lots of things go from simple to complex. Look at matter. Starts out as hydrogen, under the right conditions such as when a large mass gets together turns into helium, carbon etc. Perhaps we also shouldn't teach nuclear physics as obviously things don't get more complex and no one has actually observed hydrogen fusing. Perhaps those nukes are just intelligently designed bombs. Same with chemistry, elements obviously can't combine into more complex chemicals and the evidence that we have that it happens isn't conclusive as it might all be handled by an intelligent being. Of course we have the same problem with an intelligent designer, obviously everything couldn't of come from it as there must be an even more intelligent designer who design it. So we're left with not teaching anything because when it comes down to it there is always another idea and the proof is never enough.
The competing hypotheses have all been disproved or in the case of the flying spaghetti monster have no evidence. Intelligent design loses due to no evidence of intelligence in the design of life just like the fsm loses due to no evidence of noodles outside of kitchens, grocery stores etc. Other hypotheses have lost out due to lack of experimental evidence or experimental evidence showing the idea was broken.
Actually cars and airplanes both evolved from bicycles. The question about an intelligent designer is who designed it? And saying it was always there seems like quite a cop out.
I've often thought of something similar though I never considered charging for the reversal, thinking that just wanting it reversed would cut down on unwanted children. Still a charge like you say might be a good way to make sure people are serious. 21 years old seems pretty old to restrict people to. By 21 in most places you've been considered an adult with all privileges and responsibilities for at least 2 or 3 years. Perhaps 16 with a psychiatric review and 18 if both parents to be are in agreement. Also might be an idea to have a built in delay of at least 3 months and perhaps more so people don't get the reversal too impulsively.
Sometimes having a Doctor wave some lab reports in front of your face and saying your gonna die soon is enough to galvanize someone into taking care of themselves. I have a friend here in Canada who at 40 went for a checkup, got told he was a prime candidate for a heart attack any day. He changed his diet, slowed down on the work and started exercising. Next Doctor visit is more positive (nice to have feedback that your doing right). He's over 50 now and doing fine. Sometimes we need reminding of our mortally so we do take care of ourselves.
Of course Win 3.1+ and DOS are still available from other vendors. Perhaps IBM still sells PC-DOS, but for sure there is FreeDOS. You can still buy OS/2 which includes pretty good DOS support and their licensed WinOS2 which is basically 3.1 with a lot of bug fixes and networking support through OS/2
I've never seen anyone put money in a stripper's G-String, at that it would all fall out when she took the G-String off. And yes the lowest note now is $5
Perhaps, still just the other week I was outside working during a heat wave. Nothing to strenuous but I went through a gallon of water and started getting bad cramps. Licked some salt and the cramps went away. Anyways I'm glad not to be accused of a crime down there and not be able to make bail. Doesn't matter if the court finds you not guilty if you have to suffer like that while waiting. Be enough to lose all respect for the law.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps the first thing then is to simplify your elections. If for no other reason then it is hard for people to be informed about every candidate from street cleaner up.
Here in Canada we have federal elections, one position. Provincial elections, one position and municipal with to many positions.
The democratic country I live in uses pen and paper to vote and it is run by a non-partisan government agency.
Voting is trusted here, now we just need someone trust worthy to vote for.
Well you're showing the knowledge of an American.
Hint the largest part of North America uses proper spelling.
Sorry, you said
Actually it's only a convention that the leader of the majority party becomes the PM. In theory, the monarch (GBH,SDAMJEISIG) could "invite" anyone to take the position.
So I thought you were saying the monarch could invite anyone to be PM, disregarding the wishes of Parliament.
Of course if Parliament wishes for a non-elected person to be PM that is OK as Parliament was elected to govern.
As to the monarch, I was thinking of James II who I misremembered as appointing a PM who did not have parliaments support. Actually he appointed everything except the PM and prorogued parliament quite a bit.
When he left town one day parliament declared that he had abdicated and invited his daughter and her husband to take over.
Actually it's only a convention that the leader of the majority party becomes the PM. In theory, the monarch (GBH,SDAMJEISIG) could "invite" anyone to take the position.
At certain times the post has been filled by an aristocrat who (by virtue of not being a commoner) wasn't even be eligible to be an MP.
And when Parliament votes no-confidence (or refuses to vote for a money bill) he is forced to resign which usually leads to an election. I think the last King who tried something like that was James II who was replaced.
Parliament is much more powerful then the monarch and has been for a long time.
Not the largest party, the party with the most support which is usually the largest party but in a minority it may not be.
Can you think of a better system? I live in a parliamentary system and while it has its flaws (including unelected PMs in the past) it still seems to work as well as other systems.
Helps that here we currently have 4 parties in Parliament and the fact that the PM has to worry about losing a confidence vote if he goes too batty is good.
Actually it is the party that has the support of the most seats.
Here (Canada) we have 4 parties in Parliament and the government hasn't had a majority in the last 4 or so elections. Works much better when the PM has to worry about losing a confidence vote.
What would the American taxes be like if they were high enough that they weren't running a deficit for the last decade?
Up until this year Canada has been operating in the black.
Here is a chart for 2004, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deficit#National_budget_deficits_.282004.29 note that the States deficit is about 25% where as Canada's is about -4%
Another difference between Canada and the States is the deficit. What would the Americans taxes be like if they had not been running a deficit for the last decade or so?
That's wrong. I use Environment Canada for getting the local weather and just the other week there was a surprise thunderstorm. Before it arrived there was a big red banner warning of the storm and clicking the banner gave detailed info about where the storm was and speed and direction it was moving.
One other difference since the days of Al Capone, the racketeers are better at paying their taxes.
Which scripture? There are scriptures from India that seem much more interesting then the one from the middle east. And even if we stick to the story about some minor desert deity evolving into this God you talk about why stop at the new testament? The Koran claims it is a continuation of the story.
Anyways if there really was such a powerful god that you claim I'd expect evidence like most religions being in basic agreement about it. The Inuit might have more snow in their version but it would still talk about a god who incarnated as a man and was sacrificed to save us. The same with the majority of cultures. That is a simple test about religion, how much do they agree and it turns out that even the people who claim to follow the bible are in disagreement about the message.
Lots of things go from simple to complex. Look at matter. Starts out as hydrogen, under the right conditions such as when a large mass gets together turns into helium, carbon etc.
Perhaps we also shouldn't teach nuclear physics as obviously things don't get more complex and no one has actually observed hydrogen fusing. Perhaps those nukes are just intelligently designed bombs.
Same with chemistry, elements obviously can't combine into more complex chemicals and the evidence that we have that it happens isn't conclusive as it might all be handled by an intelligent being.
Of course we have the same problem with an intelligent designer, obviously everything couldn't of come from it as there must be an even more intelligent designer who design it.
So we're left with not teaching anything because when it comes down to it there is always another idea and the proof is never enough.
The competing hypotheses have all been disproved or in the case of the flying spaghetti monster have no evidence.
Intelligent design loses due to no evidence of intelligence in the design of life just like the fsm loses due to no evidence of noodles outside of kitchens, grocery stores etc.
Other hypotheses have lost out due to lack of experimental evidence or experimental evidence showing the idea was broken.
Predictions like what will turn up in the fossil record for one.
Actually cars and airplanes both evolved from bicycles.
The question about an intelligent designer is who designed it? And saying it was always there seems like quite a cop out.
I've often thought of something similar though I never considered charging for the reversal, thinking that just wanting it reversed would cut down on unwanted children. Still a charge like you say might be a good way to make sure people are serious.
21 years old seems pretty old to restrict people to. By 21 in most places you've been considered an adult with all privileges and responsibilities for at least 2 or 3 years.
Perhaps 16 with a psychiatric review and 18 if both parents to be are in agreement. Also might be an idea to have a built in delay of at least 3 months and perhaps more so people don't get the reversal too impulsively.
Sometimes having a Doctor wave some lab reports in front of your face and saying your gonna die soon is enough to galvanize someone into taking care of themselves.
I have a friend here in Canada who at 40 went for a checkup, got told he was a prime candidate for a heart attack any day. He changed his diet, slowed down on the work and started exercising. Next Doctor visit is more positive (nice to have feedback that your doing right). He's over 50 now and doing fine.
Sometimes we need reminding of our mortally so we do take care of ourselves.
Of course Win 3.1+ and DOS are still available from other vendors. Perhaps IBM still sells PC-DOS, but for sure there is FreeDOS.
You can still buy OS/2 which includes pretty good DOS support and their licensed WinOS2 which is basically 3.1 with a lot of bug fixes and networking support through OS/2
I've never seen anyone put money in a stripper's G-String, at that it would all fall out when she took the G-String off.
And yes the lowest note now is $5
Absolute power over others corrupts absolutely;
While I agree with your post, I'm not sure about this one quote.
Perhaps it is more
Absolute power (over others) attracts the absolutely corruptible.
Perhaps, still just the other week I was outside working during a heat wave. Nothing to strenuous but I went through a gallon of water and started getting bad cramps. Licked some salt and the cramps went away.
Anyways I'm glad not to be accused of a crime down there and not be able to make bail. Doesn't matter if the court finds you not guilty if you have to suffer like that while waiting. Be enough to lose all respect for the law.
They probably get things like salt given to them to make it more bearable.
Cats don't challenge us for leadership. They just assume leadership.