The bastion of US freedom, your constitution is based upon a document of British freedom, the Magna Carta written some 700 years earlier.
No, the US Constitution is based on the constitution of the Iroquios Confederacy. As a printer Benjamin Franklin was asked by the Confederacy to print copies of their constitution.
And the Magna Carta was issued in 1215, less than 600 years before the USA Constitution was written. Ah, I see you say that later, so your math is bad?
Most European states saw the separation of church and state long before the US
Except many of the first European settlers to come to the Americas were fleeing religious persecution. What's ironic is that once they had the freedom to follow their religion they started persecuting followers of other religions as well as burning innocents on the stake.
you stand your ground, or you are far worse for this country than a palin supporter.
I think I understand the mentality but I disagree with the conclusion. I know what it's like to be trampled into the mud every tyme you get up, no matter how much you try eventually you're worm out. I know because I am like that now and have been for years. More than 10 years ago I was disabled in an accident and have been struggling with my disability since. If not for the stubbornness some of my doctors and therapists said I had it's likely I'd be dead.
a few fringe flavors tha tnever have a chance, ever
Except this is not true. If most people are in the middle they don't show it. They don't vote Libertarian, which is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The best of both worlds. No, the Democrats and the Republicans are mirror images of each other. Both want big government, with Democrats it's big social welfare and with Republicans it's a big military, prison, industrial complex. They both hand out the candy. They both also want to control what people can do. Democrats want to control business and economics while Republicans want to deny anything that interferes with their religion.
Oh its owned by a corporation alright, but you'd never guess who. This goes as far back as the East India [trading] Company.
Which East India company? There have been a number of them. Having said that, they were the first businesses to be granted corporate charters. And of those listed, including the British East India Company, none still exists.
What was the East India Company's biggest threat when they ruled the seas? That's right - PIRATES.
The weather was a big threat too. Which one was bigger I don't know but weather was a big concern.
What really burns me if when they want to not be regulated they wrap themselves in the Freedom of Speech and We are artists flag. Which the Slashdot crowd jumps right into bed with.
When they want a law past they are all about "Protecting IP rights" even at the expense of free speech and Fair use.
But not all of the Slashdot crowd jumps in bed when they scream "Protecting IP rights". There are actually some Slashdotters who want to end the monopoly of intellectual property.
NAZI Germany was a representative democracy, and therefore also a republic.
It wasn't, it abolished democracy, called itself "Reich" (roughly: empire) and was obviously a dictatorship.
The NAZIs came to power in a democracy, which is a republic. And they never instituted a monarchy so it remained a republic.
Wrong, limiting powers of the state is a standard feature of many constitutions all over the world.
Constitutions don't need to be hundreds of pages if it is limiting the power of government, er I mean a government doesn't need that much power does it? Only if you want a dictatorship or some other non-free government. You only use that many pages to detail what government will do or to enumerate all rights the people have.
I've never understood why it shouldn't be liked that. I voted for a party, not for them individual. As long as the party line is the same as it was on the elections day, why would I want them to vote against it?
One, there isn't a party that takes the same position as I do on the issues that matter to me. Two, not everyone in a party agrees with everything on the party's platform. That's what was good about the actor Ronald Reagan, he brought people into his big tent where almost anyone could find a standing on an issue s/he liked.
Myself, before I vote I create a chart of the candidates and where they stand on the issues that matter to me. When a candidate has the same position as I do then I check off their name for that issue, and when they have the opposite position I cross it out. A check gets 1 point and if something is crossed out it gets -1. Once this was done I search on the net for the top point earners' to see what people have to say about them. When I vote I vote for the top point earner for each office unless I come across something negative. If there isn't a candidate I could vote for I don't vote for anyone for an office.
Last year I did the same, with one change. For the first tyme the state allowed ranked voting where voters could vote for more than one person for the same office. Voters could pick their first choice, second choice, and so on.
Representatives in a republic do face the difficult choice of doing what they think is right versus doing what the majority of their constituents want.
Representatives are not needed in a republic. So long as the head of government is not a monarchy or hereditary head of state it is a republic. NAZI Germany was a representative democracy, and therefore also a republic. On the other hand Monaco, surrounded by France and the Med, is a Principality ruled by a monarchy. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are monarchies as well. Morocco, where Bogart's Casablanca is, is a Constitutional monarchy. So is the United Kingdom.
simply voting based on your perception of the majority of your constituents desires is essentially reverting back to mob rule.
I agree, and so did the USA's Founding Fathers. That's why they only gave the federal government limited power, if the Constitution does not enumerate a power the federal government does not have that power. Of course some people twist things around when they say it's a living document. Of course it can be changed, by amending it which has been done 27 tymes. Therein lines a big difference between the USA and other constitutional democracies, government is limited in it's powers. The USA's Constitution itself can fit on two pages of paper, adding the amendments my printer software said it was 20 pages. The EU's proposed constitution, which voters in France vetoed as did those in the Netherlands, however was 852 pages. Now while the EU Constitution is dead the Treaty of Lisbon has been approved and signed.
From my perspective, if my representative does nothing more than parrot my views (or the average of the views of his constituents), he is completely superfluous and can be replaced by a small perl script. I want him to do the job that I can't: study the matters that come before him in a thorough manner, and decide based on what will benefit overall society the best.
You may want to live the life of a slave but others prefer freedom. And who gets to decide what's best for society? The NAZIs thought they knew, the Soviet Union pretended it knew, and Chinese, both Communists and the KMT massacred millions because they wanted to decide for themselves.
I don't want anyone deciding what's best for me, only I can make that decision. If anyone disagrees then they can try to persuade me but as soon as I am told what I can and can not do when I am not harming anyone else then I am their slave and not free. And I am willing to extend the same consideration to others, for instance I disagree with others, like you, but I support your right as well as theirs to say what you and they want. Nor do I want to hold anyone at gun point and force them to give money they worked to earn to some bum who will not work. I am willing to volunteer and donate tyme and money to causes I believe, and have done so in, but I oppose the use of government to force others to do the same. One of the few things government should do is make sure everyone has an equal opportunity, opportunity not outcome.
You really, really like to watch Fox News don't you? I hear them use that term all the time, and it's just ridiculous how right-wingers parrot their talking points in unison.
I never watch or listen to Fox News. Right now my TV is tuned to CNN, the only news I watch on TV. The only other station I watch is the History Channel. Two, I not a right winger, I am a center winger. I believe in and support liberty and small government. In other words I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Actually both are liberalism. Both the French and US Revolutions were based on this Liberalism.
The reality of the situation is that although the majority of people reject "Obama's Plan", once you explain to them what's actually in the bill the majority flip-flops into supporting it. That simply speaks to how good of a PR job Republicans have done.
Citation needed.
Obama isn't "forcing" a bill onto anyone. The Democrats were elected to a majority. It's their turn to enact legislation that satisfies their voter base's ideals. It's that simple.
Most people are against Obama Care so he is trying to force it down people's throats. And yes, until you can prove that once it's explained to them voters support it it is forcing it on people. As for a majority, yes Democrats have one now, but the latest elections saw the Democrats lose some seating. And I fully expect them to lose more come November if they insist on passing this health care plan.
Another thing, you say congress owes voters what they want. No they don't, they take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the USA. If you think doing what voters want and passing health care is part of it please tell me where health care is mentioned in the Constitution. And remember the Constitution places a limit on what government can do, if something is not mentioned government does not have the power. Here'e a hint, Article 1 Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress. Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People goes further and states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Nowhere is health care delegated to the government. Now the Constitution allows a method by which health care can be added, it's called amending the Constitution. If the Democrats want to propose an amendment I'll support their effort to make the proposal. Then I'll promptly oppose said amendment, as some have said, though I disagree with what people may say I'll support their right to say it.
What the federal government does have the ability to do, as I've said a number of tymes, is to force states to allow interstate commerce, ie require states to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines. Which in not allowed now, each state regulates who can sell insurance in the state. So when someone, such as those political ads demanding a public option, state only a couple of insurance companies offer insurance in some states, remember that. If only one or two companies offer insurance in a state it's because that states grants them a monopoly/duopoly or whatever. I live in Minnesota and if health insurance is cheaper in South Dakota I should be able to buy that insurance.
Of course that's only part of the solution to rising medical costs. Another part of the solution is to give people who buy their own health insurance the same tax deductions employers get for offering insurance. When an employer offers insurance it can deduct the cost of insurance from it's taxes but when a private person buys insurance they can not deduct the cost from taxes.
I've made such suggestions myself, and others. Maybe I didn't spend enough tyme but so far I've only found one constitutional amendment I made, "I propose a new amendment to the Constitution of the USA, all laws have to be written so the average person can read and understand it in 5 minutes." I've also made a proposal that Amendment 12 be repealed as well as others.
At least the politicians that have no intention to seek reelection are free to take principled stands for the good of the country, no matter how unpopular those positions may be with their constituents.
They are also free to take positions based on who will pay them more.
A well run government often requires passing bills that voters would dislike
A well run government is an anathema, curse, against liberty.
Another thing, if politicians can vote against voters wished democracy means nothing. They are supposed to represent voters.
Fear of voting in line with your views and policies at both top and bottom levels results in a failure of democracy.
If they won't vote the way I want I should know so I can vote against them. If voters don't know how their reps vote then there is no freedom or democracy.
Better than if we went back to the gold standard, abolished the fed, killed all free trade agreements, exacerbated our fun race to the bottom with no respect for rights or the environment, piled on isolationism and protectionism, inflamed xenophobia, and pretty much killed globalization. Oh yes.
And when has Ron Paul proposed all of these? What is so bad about a gold standard? It's bad because it prevents government from creating fiat money? Where in the USA Constitution does it give the federal government the power to create the Federal Reserve? When has he opposed free trade when it did not interfere with sovereignty? Did you know that a Canadian company sued California to permit that company to sell a known cancer causer in the state? When CA banned MTBE, Methyl tert-butyl ether, the Canadian company sued the US using NAFTA's Chapter 11 saying CA was blocking it's investments in MTBE, which is a known cancer causer. As for any race to the bottom, so called fre trade agreements many so called left wingers say they speed up the race to the bottom whereas right wingers support them. Isolationism? Ron Paul: 'Isolationism isn't what I advocate'. Protectionism? Protectionism vs. Liberty. He argues against isolationism and protectionism. Get your facts straight.
There are two candidates, one being the reigning president, the other being a right wing nutjob
So THAT'S where Ron Paul went!
Is this a reference to Ron Paul being a ring wing nutjob? Because he's not. Nowhere does he want to shovel his religion down voters' throats. Nor does he want a big military, anti-liberty laws, or a big prison complex. He's more in the middle between the US's current right wing and left wing. Put another way he's fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
And if my state had had open primaries I would have voted for Ron Paul to run as the Republican candidate, then for him against Obama.
Nah, it's just a sudden, unexpected outbreak of common sense (probably not even that - it's probably just our politicians playing anti-American again).
While I'd prefer ACTA to be stopped based on it's bad points, I'll take anti-Americanism if that's what it takes. Unfortunately that may not stop the US Congress and President from approving and signing it. They, congress and Obama, have already shown they're willing to shovel dirt down voters' throats even when they disapprove it as with health care. Almost if not every poll on Obama and the Democrats' Health Care Plan has more people opposing it that supporting it. But they decided to cram it down voters' throats anyway.
Except that the EU parliament has no real power (much like the British House of Lords). All real power in the EU is held by the bureaucracy.
By the council of ministers, actually. They make agreements behind closed doors without input from either their national parliaments or the euoparliament.
And who does the council of ministers count on, the bureaucracy?
I don't think our miners are subsidised nearly as much as some proponents of alternative energy make out.
First, it's not just proponents of alternative energy who say coal is subsidized too much, one of the links I provided was the CEO of an oil company agreeing to campaign with the Sierra Club on reducing if not eliminating coal subsidizes. That was quite clear in the post you just replied to so if you didn't see it then I don't see any reason to continue. If you did see it then you're trolling. Actually that's it, there is no second because either way I'm ending it here.
Good luck to you! I'm in school right now for Electrical Engineering, and am dreading the fallout from my loans. I'm interested in working in RE somehow as well, not necessarily as an installer but maybe designing components. (I'm actually going to start on a homemade inverter pretty soon, not for intertie of course.) I think there will be a great opportunity for this sort of industry pretty soon, as the cost goes down and more people become aware of just what you can do. Just keep at it, the future will be pretty exciting.
Thanks. Years ago my major was Computer Engineering, so if I go with a major study area of Electrical or Electronic Engineering now I'll still study engineering. Thing is is I'll have to retake a number of classes such as chemistry, math, and physics. Of them all I had left to take was Thermodynamics. But because of bad memory I'd have to review if not retake them all. I'd be basically starting all again. As for working in RE many people start out as installers but as they work, and learn, they start designing as well. Going that route you know what can be done, which reminds me of a friend in college. He was a steel worker on skyscrapers before starting college as an Architectural Engineer and he used to say that if someone on a crew of his came up and said they could not be do something in his plans he'd try to do it himself and if he could it then he'd fire that person.
Just keep at it, the future will be pretty exciting.
Oh I believe things will be interesting. My problem is that I'm so tired. I've been fighting for a life with meaning for more than 10 years but as I said before I'll tired and don't really have much hope anymore. There are only two things that keep me going, trying. One is, as my therapists have said, stubbornness. I have had therapists and neurologists say I only lived because I was stubborn. The other thing is that although I no longer do I used to believe in reincarnation. Occasionally I'd think of ending the pain and suffering but then think that if reincarnation were true then I'd have to come back and go through it in another life. I know it's not rational or logical but neither one could touch it, the fear.
Conservation during the great depression was also different than what conservation is today. I used to speak at length with my grandmother about the Great Depression. She was in her late teens and early twenties and had many memories, diaries, and other honest information about it. Conservation back then meant self-sufficiency as much as it meant anything else.
Conservation still means self-sufficiency. Well it used to mean community and neighborliness, swapping what you no longer need for what you do need. With the mobile society we have now it seems you'll find more community feelings online than you do in real life.
Most everyone in her town grew their own food, and people traded what they didn't need for what they did. The official unemployment rate was high, but that's not really because of unemployment. It was largely a small-scale barter society that was under the radar of taxation.
Yea, growing up we were able to grow a lot of food in our back yard. Growing up in Florida we could get 2 or 3 harvests a year. Though I live up north now, a day's drive from Ontario, I still love gardening. I'm too impatient though and can hardly wait until I can start working on my garden. So I try to content myself with planning it, what will I grow and how much will I grow. Otherwise I still need to wait until the end of March to start my plants indoors. I keep on wishing I had at least half an acre with a greenhouse. I hope to grow more food this year, what I grew last year I shared with neighbors but there wasn't much. The year before I had enough greens to have salad for lunch every day during the summer but only enough last year for salad a couple of days a week. Other gardeners, home and commercial gardeners, didn't have a good year either. It was dryer, and warmer, than usual.
Well last year wasn't totally wasted, I was able to increase the fertility of the soil. I hope I get enough herbs, onions, tomatoes, and tomatillos this year to make and can a few gallons of salsa and sauces. I also want to make some jams/preserves and dry some fruits. Another thing I want to do is use some of my peppers to brew some fire breathing beer.
Now only if I can find a local swap or barter place. Perhaps I can do them at the community gardens in the area, I've been thinking of leasing a plot in one or more gardens to grow more stuff as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I would prefer countries of five to ten million people, allied and with free trade and travel agreements, but not federated or confederated.)
I'd prefer local government, if I can't ride my horse and be there by the end of the day then it's too far, with peering agreements between them.
Falcon
The bastion of US freedom, your constitution is based upon a document of British freedom, the Magna Carta written some 700 years earlier.
No, the US Constitution is based on the constitution of the Iroquios Confederacy. As a printer Benjamin Franklin was asked by the Confederacy to print copies of their constitution.
And the Magna Carta was issued in 1215, less than 600 years before the USA Constitution was written. Ah, I see you say that later, so your math is bad?
Most European states saw the separation of church and state long before the US
Except many of the first European settlers to come to the Americas were fleeing religious persecution. What's ironic is that once they had the freedom to follow their religion they started persecuting followers of other religions as well as burning innocents on the stake.
Falcon
you stand your ground, or you are far worse for this country than a palin supporter.
I think I understand the mentality but I disagree with the conclusion. I know what it's like to be trampled into the mud every tyme you get up, no matter how much you try eventually you're worm out. I know because I am like that now and have been for years. More than 10 years ago I was disabled in an accident and have been struggling with my disability since. If not for the stubbornness some of my doctors and therapists said I had it's likely I'd be dead.
Falcon
a few fringe flavors tha tnever have a chance, ever
Except this is not true. If most people are in the middle they don't show it. They don't vote Libertarian, which is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The best of both worlds. No, the Democrats and the Republicans are mirror images of each other. Both want big government, with Democrats it's big social welfare and with Republicans it's a big military, prison, industrial complex. They both hand out the candy. They both also want to control what people can do. Democrats want to control business and economics while Republicans want to deny anything that interferes with their religion.
Falcon
Oh its owned by a corporation alright, but you'd never guess who. This goes as far back as the East India [trading] Company.
Which East India company? There have been a number of them. Having said that, they were the first businesses to be granted corporate charters. And of those listed, including the British East India Company, none still exists.
What was the East India Company's biggest threat when they ruled the seas? That's right - PIRATES.
The weather was a big threat too. Which one was bigger I don't know but weather was a big concern.
Falcon
What really burns me if when they want to not be regulated they wrap themselves in the Freedom of Speech and We are artists flag. Which the Slashdot crowd jumps right into bed with.
When they want a law past they are all about "Protecting IP rights" even at the expense of free speech and Fair use.
But not all of the Slashdot crowd jumps in bed when they scream "Protecting IP rights". There are actually some Slashdotters who want to end the monopoly of intellectual property.
Falcon
NAZI Germany was a representative democracy, and therefore also a republic.
It wasn't, it abolished democracy, called itself "Reich" (roughly: empire) and was obviously a dictatorship.
The NAZIs came to power in a democracy, which is a republic. And they never instituted a monarchy so it remained a republic.
Wrong, limiting powers of the state is a standard feature of many constitutions all over the world.
Constitutions don't need to be hundreds of pages if it is limiting the power of government, er I mean a government doesn't need that much power does it? Only if you want a dictatorship or some other non-free government. You only use that many pages to detail what government will do or to enumerate all rights the people have.
Falcon
I've never understood why it shouldn't be liked that. I voted for a party, not for them individual. As long as the party line is the same as it was on the elections day, why would I want them to vote against it?
One, there isn't a party that takes the same position as I do on the issues that matter to me. Two, not everyone in a party agrees with everything on the party's platform. That's what was good about the actor Ronald Reagan, he brought people into his big tent where almost anyone could find a standing on an issue s/he liked.
Myself, before I vote I create a chart of the candidates and where they stand on the issues that matter to me. When a candidate has the same position as I do then I check off their name for that issue, and when they have the opposite position I cross it out. A check gets 1 point and if something is crossed out it gets -1. Once this was done I search on the net for the top point earners' to see what people have to say about them. When I vote I vote for the top point earner for each office unless I come across something negative. If there isn't a candidate I could vote for I don't vote for anyone for an office.
Last year I did the same, with one change. For the first tyme the state allowed ranked voting where voters could vote for more than one person for the same office. Voters could pick their first choice, second choice, and so on.
Falcon
Firstly, If you have representatives, its not a democracy, its a republic.
That's at least a rather outdated use of the word.
As early as 1604 republic meant "state in which supreme power rests in the people".
Falcon
Firstly, If you have representatives, its not a democracy, its a republic.
If you have representatives you may have a representative democracy.
Representatives in a republic do face the difficult choice of doing what they think is right versus doing what the majority of their constituents want.
Representatives are not needed in a republic. So long as the head of government is not a monarchy or hereditary head of state it is a republic. NAZI Germany was a representative democracy, and therefore also a republic. On the other hand Monaco, surrounded by France and the Med, is a Principality ruled by a monarchy. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are monarchies as well. Morocco, where Bogart's Casablanca is, is a Constitutional monarchy. So is the United Kingdom.
simply voting based on your perception of the majority of your constituents desires is essentially reverting back to mob rule.
I agree, and so did the USA's Founding Fathers. That's why they only gave the federal government limited power, if the Constitution does not enumerate a power the federal government does not have that power. Of course some people twist things around when they say it's a living document. Of course it can be changed, by amending it which has been done 27 tymes. Therein lines a big difference between the USA and other constitutional democracies, government is limited in it's powers. The USA's Constitution itself can fit on two pages of paper, adding the amendments my printer software said it was 20 pages. The EU's proposed constitution, which voters in France vetoed as did those in the Netherlands, however was 852 pages. Now while the EU Constitution is dead the Treaty of Lisbon has been approved and signed.
Falcon
From my perspective, if my representative does nothing more than parrot my views (or the average of the views of his constituents), he is completely superfluous and can be replaced by a small perl script. I want him to do the job that I can't: study the matters that come before him in a thorough manner, and decide based on what will benefit overall society the best.
You may want to live the life of a slave but others prefer freedom. And who gets to decide what's best for society? The NAZIs thought they knew, the Soviet Union pretended it knew, and Chinese, both Communists and the KMT massacred millions because they wanted to decide for themselves.
I don't want anyone deciding what's best for me, only I can make that decision. If anyone disagrees then they can try to persuade me but as soon as I am told what I can and can not do when I am not harming anyone else then I am their slave and not free. And I am willing to extend the same consideration to others, for instance I disagree with others, like you, but I support your right as well as theirs to say what you and they want. Nor do I want to hold anyone at gun point and force them to give money they worked to earn to some bum who will not work. I am willing to volunteer and donate tyme and money to causes I believe, and have done so in, but I oppose the use of government to force others to do the same. One of the few things government should do is make sure everyone has an equal opportunity, opportunity not outcome.
Falcon
You really, really like to watch Fox News don't you? I hear them use that term all the time, and it's just ridiculous how right-wingers parrot their talking points in unison.
I never watch or listen to Fox News. Right now my TV is tuned to CNN, the only news I watch on TV. The only other station I watch is the History Channel. Two, I not a right winger, I am a center winger. I believe in and support liberty and small government. In other words I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Actually both are liberalism. Both the French and US Revolutions were based on this Liberalism.
The reality of the situation is that although the majority of people reject "Obama's Plan", once you explain to them what's actually in the bill the majority flip-flops into supporting it. That simply speaks to how good of a PR job Republicans have done.
Citation needed.
Obama isn't "forcing" a bill onto anyone. The Democrats were elected to a majority. It's their turn to enact legislation that satisfies their voter base's ideals. It's that simple.
Most people are against Obama Care so he is trying to force it down people's throats. And yes, until you can prove that once it's explained to them voters support it it is forcing it on people. As for a majority, yes Democrats have one now, but the latest elections saw the Democrats lose some seating. And I fully expect them to lose more come November if they insist on passing this health care plan.
Another thing, you say congress owes voters what they want. No they don't, they take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the USA. If you think doing what voters want and passing health care is part of it please tell me where health care is mentioned in the Constitution. And remember the Constitution places a limit on what government can do, if something is not mentioned government does not have the power. Here'e a hint, Article 1 Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress. Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People goes further and states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Nowhere is health care delegated to the government. Now the Constitution allows a method by which health care can be added, it's called amending the Constitution. If the Democrats want to propose an amendment I'll support their effort to make the proposal. Then I'll promptly oppose said amendment, as some have said, though I disagree with what people may say I'll support their right to say it.
What the federal government does have the ability to do, as I've said a number of tymes, is to force states to allow interstate commerce, ie require states to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines. Which in not allowed now, each state regulates who can sell insurance in the state. So when someone, such as those political ads demanding a public option, state only a couple of insurance companies offer insurance in some states, remember that. If only one or two companies offer insurance in a state it's because that states grants them a monopoly/duopoly or whatever. I live in Minnesota and if health insurance is cheaper in South Dakota I should be able to buy that insurance.
Of course that's only part of the solution to rising medical costs. Another part of the solution is to give people who buy their own health insurance the same tax deductions employers get for offering insurance. When an employer offers insurance it can deduct the cost of insurance from it's taxes but when a private person buys insurance they can not deduct the cost from taxes.
By allowing a free marke
You may want to check out http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/83
I've made such suggestions myself, and others. Maybe I didn't spend enough tyme but so far I've only found one constitutional amendment I made, "I propose a new amendment to the Constitution of the USA, all laws have to be written so the average person can read and understand it in 5 minutes." I've also made a proposal that Amendment 12 be repealed as well as others.
Falcon
At least the politicians that have no intention to seek reelection are free to take principled stands for the good of the country, no matter how unpopular those positions may be with their constituents.
They are also free to take positions based on who will pay them more.
Falcon
A well run government often requires passing bills that voters would dislike
A well run government is an anathema, curse, against liberty.
Another thing, if politicians can vote against voters wished democracy means nothing. They are supposed to represent voters.
Fear of voting in line with your views and policies at both top and bottom levels results in a failure of democracy.
If they won't vote the way I want I should know so I can vote against them. If voters don't know how their reps vote then there is no freedom or democracy.
Falcon
Better than if we went back to the gold standard, abolished the fed, killed all free trade agreements, exacerbated our fun race to the bottom with no respect for rights or the environment, piled on isolationism and protectionism, inflamed xenophobia, and pretty much killed globalization. Oh yes.
And when has Ron Paul proposed all of these? What is so bad about a gold standard? It's bad because it prevents government from creating fiat money? Where in the USA Constitution does it give the federal government the power to create the Federal Reserve? When has he opposed free trade when it did not interfere with sovereignty? Did you know that a Canadian company sued California to permit that company to sell a known cancer causer in the state? When CA banned MTBE, Methyl tert-butyl ether, the Canadian company sued the US using NAFTA's Chapter 11 saying CA was blocking it's investments in MTBE, which is a known cancer causer. As for any race to the bottom, so called fre trade agreements many so called left wingers say they speed up the race to the bottom whereas right wingers support them. Isolationism? Ron Paul: 'Isolationism isn't what I advocate'. Protectionism? Protectionism vs. Liberty. He argues against isolationism and protectionism. Get your facts straight.
Falcon
Fortunately, I understand enough about real-world finance and economics to realize that only idiots will vote for Ron Paul.
Yea, it's so much better voting for a politician that helped create a recession then voted to bailout businesses that created that recession.
NOT!!!
Falcon
Here you are, happy brewing!
Darn, they still don't have a recipe for hot pepper beer. Nor for chocolate, Framboise, or other fruit beers. Neither does the Open Source Beer Project. But at least my supplier Midwest Homebrewing & Winemaking Supplies has forums where brewers share recipes. And there's Google.
Falcon
There are two candidates, one being the reigning president, the other being a right wing nutjob
So THAT'S where Ron Paul went!
Is this a reference to Ron Paul being a ring wing nutjob? Because he's not. Nowhere does he want to shovel his religion down voters' throats. Nor does he want a big military, anti-liberty laws, or a big prison complex. He's more in the middle between the US's current right wing and left wing. Put another way he's fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
And if my state had had open primaries I would have voted for Ron Paul to run as the Republican candidate, then for him against Obama.
Falcon
Nah, it's just a sudden, unexpected outbreak of common sense (probably not even that - it's probably just our politicians playing anti-American again).
While I'd prefer ACTA to be stopped based on it's bad points, I'll take anti-Americanism if that's what it takes. Unfortunately that may not stop the US Congress and President from approving and signing it. They, congress and Obama, have already shown they're willing to shovel dirt down voters' throats even when they disapprove it as with health care. Almost if not every poll on Obama and the Democrats' Health Care Plan has more people opposing it that supporting it. But they decided to cram it down voters' throats anyway.
Falcon
Except that the EU parliament has no real power (much like the British House of Lords). All real power in the EU is held by the bureaucracy.
By the council of ministers, actually. They make agreements behind closed doors without input from either their national parliaments or the euoparliament.
And who does the council of ministers count on, the bureaucracy?
Falcon
I don't think our miners are subsidised nearly as much as some proponents of alternative energy make out.
First, it's not just proponents of alternative energy who say coal is subsidized too much, one of the links I provided was the CEO of an oil company agreeing to campaign with the Sierra Club on reducing if not eliminating coal subsidizes. That was quite clear in the post you just replied to so if you didn't see it then I don't see any reason to continue. If you did see it then you're trolling. Actually that's it, there is no second because either way I'm ending it here.
Falcon
Good luck to you! I'm in school right now for Electrical Engineering, and am dreading the fallout from my loans. I'm interested in working in RE somehow as well, not necessarily as an installer but maybe designing components. (I'm actually going to start on a homemade inverter pretty soon, not for intertie of course.) I think there will be a great opportunity for this sort of industry pretty soon, as the cost goes down and more people become aware of just what you can do. Just keep at it, the future will be pretty exciting.
Thanks. Years ago my major was Computer Engineering, so if I go with a major study area of Electrical or Electronic Engineering now I'll still study engineering. Thing is is I'll have to retake a number of classes such as chemistry, math, and physics. Of them all I had left to take was Thermodynamics. But because of bad memory I'd have to review if not retake them all. I'd be basically starting all again. As for working in RE many people start out as installers but as they work, and learn, they start designing as well. Going that route you know what can be done, which reminds me of a friend in college. He was a steel worker on skyscrapers before starting college as an Architectural Engineer and he used to say that if someone on a crew of his came up and said they could not be do something in his plans he'd try to do it himself and if he could it then he'd fire that person.
Just keep at it, the future will be pretty exciting.
Oh I believe things will be interesting. My problem is that I'm so tired. I've been fighting for a life with meaning for more than 10 years but as I said before I'll tired and don't really have much hope anymore. There are only two things that keep me going, trying. One is, as my therapists have said, stubbornness. I have had therapists and neurologists say I only lived because I was stubborn. The other thing is that although I no longer do I used to believe in reincarnation. Occasionally I'd think of ending the pain and suffering but then think that if reincarnation were true then I'd have to come back and go through it in another life. I know it's not rational or logical but neither one could touch it, the fear.
Falcon
Conservation during the great depression was also different than what conservation is today. I used to speak at length with my grandmother about the Great Depression. She was in her late teens and early twenties and had many memories, diaries, and other honest information about it. Conservation back then meant self-sufficiency as much as it meant anything else.
Conservation still means self-sufficiency. Well it used to mean community and neighborliness, swapping what you no longer need for what you do need. With the mobile society we have now it seems you'll find more community feelings online than you do in real life.
Most everyone in her town grew their own food, and people traded what they didn't need for what they did. The official unemployment rate was high, but that's not really because of unemployment. It was largely a small-scale barter society that was under the radar of taxation.
Yea, growing up we were able to grow a lot of food in our back yard. Growing up in Florida we could get 2 or 3 harvests a year. Though I live up north now, a day's drive from Ontario, I still love gardening. I'm too impatient though and can hardly wait until I can start working on my garden. So I try to content myself with planning it, what will I grow and how much will I grow. Otherwise I still need to wait until the end of March to start my plants indoors. I keep on wishing I had at least half an acre with a greenhouse. I hope to grow more food this year, what I grew last year I shared with neighbors but there wasn't much. The year before I had enough greens to have salad for lunch every day during the summer but only enough last year for salad a couple of days a week. Other gardeners, home and commercial gardeners, didn't have a good year either. It was dryer, and warmer, than usual.
Well last year wasn't totally wasted, I was able to increase the fertility of the soil. I hope I get enough herbs, onions, tomatoes, and tomatillos this year to make and can a few gallons of salsa and sauces. I also want to make some jams/preserves and dry some fruits. Another thing I want to do is use some of my peppers to brew some fire breathing beer.
Now only if I can find a local swap or barter place. Perhaps I can do them at the community gardens in the area, I've been thinking of leasing a plot in one or more gardens to grow more stuff as well.
Falcon
They still do the same thing, find wifi.
Falcon