Forums » Off-Topic
Its not hard to set up a gerrymander so that the number of people within each political district is roughly equal.
It can get complicated yes, but from an objective viewpoint, it isn't hard.
In addition, its worthwhile having a look at a preferential voting system, again, much like the one Australia has in place.
I know I go on about the Australian voting system, but from what I've seen of the several versions of 'democracy', I think the Australian system is the one which gives the most power to the people, which is what democracy is all about.
However, what would be really good is proportional representation, where the people elect their representatives and whichever party gets the majority of representatives has its leader as the president/prime minister. I think this is known pretty well throughout the world as the Westminster System. The Australian version of this is called the Washminster System, because it contains a mix of the Washington and Westminster systems. Combine that with preferential voting and to my mind, you have a system which truly reflects the minds of its voters.
It can get complicated yes, but from an objective viewpoint, it isn't hard.
In addition, its worthwhile having a look at a preferential voting system, again, much like the one Australia has in place.
I know I go on about the Australian voting system, but from what I've seen of the several versions of 'democracy', I think the Australian system is the one which gives the most power to the people, which is what democracy is all about.
However, what would be really good is proportional representation, where the people elect their representatives and whichever party gets the majority of representatives has its leader as the president/prime minister. I think this is known pretty well throughout the world as the Westminster System. The Australian version of this is called the Washminster System, because it contains a mix of the Washington and Westminster systems. Combine that with preferential voting and to my mind, you have a system which truly reflects the minds of its voters.
Uhm... the USA is not SUPPOSED to be a democracy. Why do people keep insisting it is?
It is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. Each STATE has the say so in the federal government. Why should YOUR state be more important than MY state, simply because of higher population etc.
If you want to go with a simple democracy, then we'd have to have a revolution, remove the entire senate, rewrite the constitution etc.
Too much trouble.
It is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. Each STATE has the say so in the federal government. Why should YOUR state be more important than MY state, simply because of higher population etc.
If you want to go with a simple democracy, then we'd have to have a revolution, remove the entire senate, rewrite the constitution etc.
Too much trouble.
Read the US Constitution. From the very start, the intent of the American system has been to remove the power of the people from politics as much as possible. At least on the Presidential level.
Speaking of Australia, does the country have need for more Code monkeys and/or Programmers?
Speaking of Australia, does the country have need for more Code monkeys and/or Programmers?
I'll have to disagree with you that the USA isn't supposed to be a democracy. If you do a bit of reading around you will see that it is supposed to be the greatest experiment in democracy ever.
Also, if America isn't a democracy what the hell was the war of independence all about then? Taxation without representation anyone? Ring any bells?
break19, what you are describing is as democratic as it gets. The USA's execution of it is all wrong though. Instead of perhaps going with each state electing a few representatives, counting them all up and seeing which party has the most reps and therefore the presidency, you have a popular election to make all the people happy, then you have an electoral college making the real decision.
What the hell does that have to do with democracy? I'd call that more of an exercise in making fools out of the people.
moldyman, as far as Australia needing more programmers, have a look at a few oz newspapers jobs pages. Companies will sponsor people if there is a clear demonstration that no one local can do it as well as the person they want to bring in. It happens all the time though, so have a look around, you might see something you like. It doesn't hurt to apply in any case.
Apologies for the lateness of this reply, I've been a tad busy.
Also, if America isn't a democracy what the hell was the war of independence all about then? Taxation without representation anyone? Ring any bells?
break19, what you are describing is as democratic as it gets. The USA's execution of it is all wrong though. Instead of perhaps going with each state electing a few representatives, counting them all up and seeing which party has the most reps and therefore the presidency, you have a popular election to make all the people happy, then you have an electoral college making the real decision.
What the hell does that have to do with democracy? I'd call that more of an exercise in making fools out of the people.
moldyman, as far as Australia needing more programmers, have a look at a few oz newspapers jobs pages. Companies will sponsor people if there is a clear demonstration that no one local can do it as well as the person they want to bring in. It happens all the time though, so have a look around, you might see something you like. It doesn't hurt to apply in any case.
Apologies for the lateness of this reply, I've been a tad busy.
Ooooo.... Well, I'd need to finish college and pay off the college debts first ;)
Constitutional Republic. It's called the United STATES of America.
Not the United PEOPLE of America.
THE STATES ARE UNITED. That does NOT mean that, say, CA is more important than, say, Rhode Island. Yet, if we do away with it.. poor Rhode Island (and other states with fairly low population, such as my own) will become nothing more than doormats for whatever political leanings places like New York, or Los Angeles have.
I have a problem with that. and FYI. Democracy was around LONG before the USA, and the founders knew all about. which is why they formed a REPUBLIC. TRUE democracy is nothing more than tyranny of the majority.. A Constitutional Republic gives even those states with VERY LOW population, at least SOME say-so within the federal government.
This is how the founders viewed governmental power, in order of the most importance.
1. Rights of the PEOPLE
2. Rights of the STATES
3. Rights of the FEDS
Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.
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.
Link for people who want to see it for themselves
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am10
Not the United PEOPLE of America.
THE STATES ARE UNITED. That does NOT mean that, say, CA is more important than, say, Rhode Island. Yet, if we do away with it.. poor Rhode Island (and other states with fairly low population, such as my own) will become nothing more than doormats for whatever political leanings places like New York, or Los Angeles have.
I have a problem with that. and FYI. Democracy was around LONG before the USA, and the founders knew all about. which is why they formed a REPUBLIC. TRUE democracy is nothing more than tyranny of the majority.. A Constitutional Republic gives even those states with VERY LOW population, at least SOME say-so within the federal government.
This is how the founders viewed governmental power, in order of the most importance.
1. Rights of the PEOPLE
2. Rights of the STATES
3. Rights of the FEDS
Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.
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.
Link for people who want to see it for themselves
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am10