Yeah, you can argue for some slight supermajority rules sometimes. I was responding to a guy who said "2/3 of all eligible voters" -- which is basically the same as "don't even bother".
Many of those 52% voted leave based on Farage telling lies.
So they were living great lives and experiencing the wondrous benefits of the EU every day, but one guy told them a story and they instantly forgot how good they had it?
Can we have a more thoughtful discussion than this, please?
Ok. If you impose a very high supermajority to one side, you've effectively already chosen for everyone. The vote becomes farcical. Why should people participate in meaningless pretend elections?
No, it's more that you, along with many other people, seem to think that the democratic process aways results in optimal decisions and that democratic decisions made in a referendum are above criticism.
What if things didn't always have to be optimal or catastrophic? What if we lived in a world where policies had pros and cons and we could try to improve things a little sometimes and not make things worse other times? How would these discussions go then?
One country can represent the interests of one country better than a block of 28 countries will represent the specific interests of one of the counties in that block.
Yeah, it's the end of the world and the living will envy the dead. Or this is extreme hype and things will turn out fine, or a little better than fine, or a little worse than fine, after some period of adjustment.
Consider dual nationality if you want to continue your nice European life.
I'm guessing about 52% of people weren't enjoying that nice European life. Perhaps the ones who were enjoying that life should have listened to the ones who weren't and tried to come up with policies that worked out better for more people.
People should start thinking about the cost of what they want done for them and what they want done to their neighbors.
How many police do you want to get shot or to shoot people while enforcing your laws or collecting the taxes you want to spend on yourselves?
Do you really need that speed limit sign? That law against vaping? That prohibition on 19-year-olds drinking beer? Your free government mobile phone? That blue law? That marijuana law? That licensing requirement for barbers? Or cab drivers? That gun law? Those special government union privileges? Your high-speed rail dreams? Your composting law? Your animal cruelty law? Your abortion law? Your discrimination law? Your ethanol subsidy? Your favorite defense project? Your favorite clean energy project?
Is it really worth bullying people? Do you really want your neighbors to have a criminal record? Or be forced to register? Or be shot in a misunderstanding? Or end up in a shootout with police? Or be forced to leave their homeland in order to escape your controlling hand? Or your greedy hand?
What kind of person sends the police after his neighbors who are minding their own business? Would a good person do that? What if you decided to be kind instead? To forgive and be open? To be generous instead of self-interested? To understand and empathize rather than slur and dismiss?
Give it a try. If you want peace, be peaceful. If you want understanding, be understanding. If you want your people treated respectfully, be respectful and respectable.
And limit due process whenever it suits them. And get rid of some personal property rights. And take away some religious freedoms. And deny freedom of speech to anyone who organizes as a corporation. And take away freedom to carry groceries in plastic bags. Etc, etc, etc, etc.
They don't believe in individual liberties at all.
If it were up to me, no police officer would ever be hurt enforcing license tab laws or stopping someone for any other minor driving offense -- those laws would either be repealed or enforced by sending the vehicle owner a ticket in the mail. That would leave more manpower available to safely arrest drunk drivers and truly reckless drivers, and to catch murderers and other real criminals.
How many cops and drivers need to be killed before we rethink the way we do things?
It's the all-purpose solution to every complaint. Also, I'm sure Facebook supports this sort of regulation elsewhere. Why not apply it where it's needed most?
Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.
Also extremely stupid (and/or entirely evil). How do you "ban" religion? What are you going to do to people who disobey your "ban"? Do you have some sort of camps in mind for them?
This should work well in some select neighborhoods, in good weather, during the day. Then the company will get sued for discriminating against people in poor neighborhoods. Then they'll start offering the service in poor neighborhoods. Then the deliveries will get stolen and/or the robots wrecked. Then the company will have to double the delivery fee on everyone to make up for the extra costs.
Meanwhile, regular deliveries during the day also work fine. Unlike the robots, regular delivery guys just drop off the goods when their route takes them past your house. They don't need to schedule a time to meet with you. Regular delivery guys know how to not get robbed. They can deliver a when it's raining or snowing. They can carry more than 2 grocery bags. And delivery isn't super expensive now, even though it includes the wages of the delivery guy.
It will be interesting to see what happens with these. I expect a mix, with robots delivering to rich neighborhoods in California and delivery guys delivering anywhere with weather or crime or where you can hire a trustworthy delivery guy for an affordable wage.
Self-promoter promotes himself with vague claims. Also, you're supposed to be mad at Apple because someone -- possibly a lawyer who wants to file a class action lawsuit -- has figured out a way to personally benefit if enough people are mad at Apple.
Which giant company are we supposed to be cheerleading for? And why? This is a minor procedural dispute over which forms company A has to fill out when it deals with equipment installed by company F and company T. Someone will decide and those forms will get filled out and the wires will get installed, regardless of the cheerleading.
One factual argument in support of not freaking out is that nothing has, in fact, happened. Factually, there is a long time in between now and whenever, so any energy spent freaking out beforehand is wasted.
Let's also stop freaking out about every other scary story someone wants to make up about the future. Expect the next 10 years to be largely like the last 10. It'll be different, but not scary-different.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, you can argue for some slight supermajority rules sometimes. I was responding to a guy who said "2/3 of all eligible voters" -- which is basically the same as "don't even bother".
Many of those 52% voted leave based on Farage telling lies.
So they were living great lives and experiencing the wondrous benefits of the EU every day, but one guy told them a story and they instantly forgot how good they had it?
Can we have a more thoughtful discussion than this, please?
Ah. The election where all the politicians tell the truth (according to how you see it). When can we expect that to happen?
Ok. If you impose a very high supermajority to one side, you've effectively already chosen for everyone. The vote becomes farcical. Why should people participate in meaningless pretend elections?
No, it's more that you, along with many other people, seem to think that the democratic process aways results in optimal decisions and that democratic decisions made in a referendum are above criticism.
What if things didn't always have to be optimal or catastrophic? What if we lived in a world where policies had pros and cons and we could try to improve things a little sometimes and not make things worse other times? How would these discussions go then?
One country can represent the interests of one country better than a block of 28 countries will represent the specific interests of one of the counties in that block.
Or just don't bother with voting at all. Because really, who cares what the people want, right? You clearly know what's best for everyone.
Yeah, it's the end of the world and the living will envy the dead. Or this is extreme hype and things will turn out fine, or a little better than fine, or a little worse than fine, after some period of adjustment.
Consider dual nationality if you want to continue your nice European life.
I'm guessing about 52% of people weren't enjoying that nice European life. Perhaps the ones who were enjoying that life should have listened to the ones who weren't and tried to come up with policies that worked out better for more people.
People should start thinking about the cost of what they want done for them and what they want done to their neighbors.
How many police do you want to get shot or to shoot people while enforcing your laws or collecting the taxes you want to spend on yourselves?
Do you really need that speed limit sign? That law against vaping? That prohibition on 19-year-olds drinking beer? Your free government mobile phone? That blue law? That marijuana law? That licensing requirement for barbers? Or cab drivers? That gun law? Those special government union privileges? Your high-speed rail dreams? Your composting law? Your animal cruelty law? Your abortion law? Your discrimination law? Your ethanol subsidy? Your favorite defense project? Your favorite clean energy project?
Is it really worth bullying people? Do you really want your neighbors to have a criminal record? Or be forced to register? Or be shot in a misunderstanding? Or end up in a shootout with police? Or be forced to leave their homeland in order to escape your controlling hand? Or your greedy hand?
What kind of person sends the police after his neighbors who are minding their own business? Would a good person do that? What if you decided to be kind instead? To forgive and be open? To be generous instead of self-interested? To understand and empathize rather than slur and dismiss?
Give it a try. If you want peace, be peaceful. If you want understanding, be understanding. If you want your people treated respectfully, be respectful and respectable.
...just because someone claims to be liberal does not make them liberal...
Hooray for tautological personal, private definitions of terms!
I don't think you know what the individual part in individual liberties mean.
A grocery store owner isn't an individual, I guess. Hooray for tautological personal, private definitions of terms!
And limit due process whenever it suits them. And get rid of some personal property rights. And take away some religious freedoms. And deny freedom of speech to anyone who organizes as a corporation. And take away freedom to carry groceries in plastic bags. Etc, etc, etc, etc.
They don't believe in individual liberties at all.
If it were up to me, no police officer would ever be hurt enforcing license tab laws or stopping someone for any other minor driving offense -- those laws would either be repealed or enforced by sending the vehicle owner a ticket in the mail. That would leave more manpower available to safely arrest drunk drivers and truly reckless drivers, and to catch murderers and other real criminals.
How many cops and drivers need to be killed before we rethink the way we do things?
How about we stop having panicky gunmen micromanage everyone's driving?
It's the all-purpose solution to every complaint. Also, I'm sure Facebook supports this sort of regulation elsewhere. Why not apply it where it's needed most?
Maybe they'll get her next time. With the Clintons, there's always a next time.
If you don't believe in the green religion, then your Air Conditioner isn't sinful and you don't need to look backward.
How many decades should they let go by without accomplishing anything besides being angry?
Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.
Also extremely stupid (and/or entirely evil). How do you "ban" religion? What are you going to do to people who disobey your "ban"? Do you have some sort of camps in mind for them?
This should work well in some select neighborhoods, in good weather, during the day. Then the company will get sued for discriminating against people in poor neighborhoods. Then they'll start offering the service in poor neighborhoods. Then the deliveries will get stolen and/or the robots wrecked. Then the company will have to double the delivery fee on everyone to make up for the extra costs.
Meanwhile, regular deliveries during the day also work fine. Unlike the robots, regular delivery guys just drop off the goods when their route takes them past your house. They don't need to schedule a time to meet with you. Regular delivery guys know how to not get robbed. They can deliver a when it's raining or snowing. They can carry more than 2 grocery bags. And delivery isn't super expensive now, even though it includes the wages of the delivery guy.
It will be interesting to see what happens with these. I expect a mix, with robots delivering to rich neighborhoods in California and delivery guys delivering anywhere with weather or crime or where you can hire a trustworthy delivery guy for an affordable wage.
Self-promoter promotes himself with vague claims. Also, you're supposed to be mad at Apple because someone -- possibly a lawyer who wants to file a class action lawsuit -- has figured out a way to personally benefit if enough people are mad at Apple.
Which giant company are we supposed to be cheerleading for? And why? This is a minor procedural dispute over which forms company A has to fill out when it deals with equipment installed by company F and company T. Someone will decide and those forms will get filled out and the wires will get installed, regardless of the cheerleading.
It's interesting that a US Senator would advocate for Sweden's Spotify against American companies like Google, Apple, and Amazon.
One factual argument in support of not freaking out is that nothing has, in fact, happened. Factually, there is a long time in between now and whenever, so any energy spent freaking out beforehand is wasted.
Let's also stop freaking out about every other scary story someone wants to make up about the future. Expect the next 10 years to be largely like the last 10. It'll be different, but not scary-different.
Just don't watch it at all.