Bush or Kerry: slam the US!

[bobkoure]

Originally Posted by cybrsamurai

I have always wanted to visit NZ and AUS.

Go now - don't wait like I did. Maybe there's an exchange program. University of Otago at Dunedin's supposed to be pretty good technically. Don't know the Aus schools - Cathar?

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by bobkoure

And not having a constitutional monarch has helped us?

Here is my view on it. America has become the wealthiest most powerful country on earth because it divorced it self from the monarchal style of government and the class system that comes with it.

The very nature of a monarchies keep the wealth and power of a nation held by a few based on birth. On the other hand, we can stratify easily and being a self-made man is the ideal not being a member of the lucky sperm club.

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Interesting, is there a big push to get it back on the ballot? It seems your democracy is already structured a lot like the US. If you just did away with the prime minister and voted for a president in a general election there would me no difference.

What are the mechanics of passing laws and what are the roles of your courts in government.

No, our democracy is much, much, much closer to the English system.

In the UK/England, the government runs the show, and the Queen is just a figurative head of state.

In Australia we presently have the Governer-General, who is an Australian, as an appointed head of state who is sworn in by the Queen, but who is selected by the parliament.

If Australia became a republic, the only thing that would change is that the Queen bit gets removed, and the Governer-General title gets changed to President, and becomes the highest figure-head of power, but really does nothing other than ensure that the government that does the real job isn't screwing up.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by Cathar

No, our democracy is much, much, much closer to the English system.

In the UK/England, the government runs the show, and the Queen is just a figurative head of state.

Got that part...served with the Desert Rats for a few months

Originally Posted by Cathar

In Australia we presently have the Governer-General, who is an Australian, as an appointed head of state who is sworn in by the Queen, but who is selected by the parliament.

Whose parliament yours or the UK.

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Whose parliament yours or the UK.

Australia's

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by Cathar

Australia's

Ok got it. This seam to be more of a ceremonial issue, I would think most Aussies would be ambivalent about the queen. You seem to have relieved yourselves of the class system, which is still very pervasive in the UK.

[Kobuchi]

The practical legal differences between the American system and Australia's (or just about anywhere else's) stem, I think, from the US Constitution being overarching and archaic. It was conceived in the 18th century. Just look at that old rag.

I suppose we grow ever more attached to anachronisms.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by Kobuchi

The practical legal differences between the American system and Australia's (or just about anywhere else's) stem, I think, from the US Constitution being overarching and archaic. It was conceived in the 18th century. Just look at that old rag.

I suppose we grow ever more attached to anachronisms.

You mean like monarchies

What part of the United States Constitution would you change?

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Ok got it. This seam to be more of a ceremonial issue, I would think most Aussies would be ambivalent about the queen. You seem to have relieved yourselves of the class system, which is still very pervasive in the UK.

What's a class system?

[bobkoure]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

What part of the United States Constitution would you change?

To start? The part about a black man being counted as 3/5 of a white.
And before you say it, yes I understand that it came from a compromise and that it gave the South disproportionate political power and was a reason that slavery persisted (not as big as the cotton gin, though).
I'm not 'way hot on the electoral college, either.

On the other hand, there is a lot to say for changing nothing - just to sidestep the issue of unintended consequences, although I can't think what they might be around changing 3/5 to 5/5.

My wife teaches English as a second language - and sometimes we have students from her school as long term guests (started as a dorm room shortage emergency but now we just like having 'em around). Our most recent guest was from Colombia, had degrees in law and was clerking for one of the justices in their supreme court. They're in the throes of changing their constitution and it was very interesting to have an ongoing conversation comparing constitutional law in different countries (their current one is based on the French system and they are attempting to meld it with the US one) particularly as it was not an academic conversation but one focused much more on practical consequences. I'm no lawyer, but was glad to be the sounding board.

[Etacovda]

Originally Posted by bobkoure

Go now - don't wait like I did. Maybe there's an exchange program. University of Otago at Dunedin's supposed to be pretty good technically. Don't know the Aus schools - Cathar?

Otago is an excellent University (my home town)

www.otago.ac.nz if you want to have a look

As far as the other universities etc are concerned, they're not even close (wrt international recognition). They do have exchange programmes with the US (theres a few, iirc)

Lincon in Canterbury is the big engineering/tech University.
http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/

Victora in Wellington is known for politics/philosophy/commerce.
http://www.vuw.ac.nz/home/index.asp

Auckland university of Techology (Auckland is NZ's biggest city at 1m pop) obviously known for its Tech.
http://www.aut.ac.nz/

Hope that helps someone.

[pHaTtYaSs2x4]

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

Good to know that everyone that doesn't agree with you is stupid.

The arrogance and incompetence of this administration will catch up. We've already lost our right to privacy, our jobs and the respect of the world. Whats next? More tax cuts? WOW, thats REALLY smart. If people would open their eyes, study the FACTS and most importantly, RESPECT each others lifestyles, we could be happy. Some churches called voting for Kerry a sin. That explains where we are at and it is sad. This is supposed to be "the land of the free". It's more like, "the land of selected freedom". Selected by people who think THEIR beliefs are for everyone. God gave us all one thing, choice. Adam and Eve? Choice. Demonizing gays and shunning them away is the most UN-christian thing anyone could do. I thought God was love, but apparently to most "christians", they have the right to judge people. Censorship has also gotten out of control. But, why should it matter? If you're getting tax cuts, why change all that? Money is ALWAYS more important than freedom. Over 14,000 "Americans" die every year from guns. Under 100 in Canada. Do we own more guns then Canadians? NO!
The constitution needs to be inforced and it's being pushed aside, thats one of the most UN-patriotic things. People should be outraged, but alas, nobody blinks an eye.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by bobkoure

To start? The part about a black man being counted as 3/5 of a white.
And before you say it, yes I understand that it came from a compromise and that it gave the South disproportionate political power and was a reason that slavery persisted (not as big as the cotton gin, though).
I'm not 'way hot on the electoral college, either.

On the other hand, there is a lot to say for changing nothing - just to sidestep the issue of unintended consequences, although I can't think what they might be around changing 3/5 to 5/5.

Last time I checked my vote counted as a whole man. Hummm 13th thru 15th Amendments. Yep they are my friends.

The cotton gin and other technical advances would have eventually ended the economics of slave labor.

The electoral collage may seem somewhat undemocratic at first however; you should read the federalist papers see No 68.

Originally Posted by bobkoure

My wife teaches English as a second language - and sometimes we have students from her school as long term guests (started as a dorm room shortage emergency but now we just like having 'em around). Our most recent guest was from Colombia, had degrees in law and was clerking for one of the justices in their supreme court. They're in the throes of changing their constitution and it was very interesting to have an ongoing conversation comparing constitutional law in different countries (their current one is based on the French system and they are attempting to meld it with the US one) particularly as it was not an academic conversation but one focused much more on practical consequences. I'm no lawyer, but was glad to be the sounding board.

I think if you read the federalist papers, you will find that every article in the constitution was well debated. Men who debated every form of government from Direct Democracy in Athens to British Parliament wrote the US Constitution. None of them trusted the masses, a central power or one another and all assume human beings ultimately made decisions based on self-interest. All those premises find their way into the structure of our constitution.

[toastyghost]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

I went to war with officers with Master's and Ph.D's, and non-commissioned officers/enlisted who had Bachelor's degrees. Everyone knew his or her job and how it fit into the big picture. "We" want to keep it that way (no room for second string).<--fragment

Yeah it sounds like you're all some pretty smart motherfsckers. You make a lot of sense. Thank you for your insight.

[Kobuchi]

Originally Posted by Kobuchi

Just look at that old rag.

I suppose we grow ever more attached to anachronisms.

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

You mean like monarchies

What part of the United States Constitution would you change?

I haven't any suggestions. I was leading you to contrast the two. Which part of Her Majesty would you change? Would that disturb me so much as revamping the constitution would an American?

See, even kings must die, but it's a real PITA killing an idea.

***

@toastyghost. Mean.

[bobkoure]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Last time I checked my vote counted as a whole man. Hummm 13th thru 15th Amendments. Yep they are my friends.

My issue with 3/5 is that it's a "slap in the face" to black people. Sort'a like flying the "stars and bars". I'm glad it doesn't bother you. I'm pretty sure, were the situation reversed, it would bother me.

The cotton gin and other technical advances would have eventually ended the economics of slave labor.

Slavery was already in decline. Then the cotton gin made large scale cotton production feasible, which drove the demand for labor (especially "free" labor - I prefer to regard it as "stolen" but I'm one of those northern white liberals). Of course, that's just a theory, although it's not new with me. No way to prove a historical cause and effect.

The electoral collage may seem somewhat undemocratic at first however; you should read the federalist papers see No 68.

Yep. The situation has massively changed since then, however. It no longer takes weeks to get from one colony to another. Folks no longer owe their primary political allegiance to a state (state as in Massachusetts, not state as in this country). IMHO it was a check and balance that has since turned out to be more trouble than it might be worth.
Clearly it's not so much trouble that we have the political will to do something about it - even when a situation like the 2000 election happens - so my non-preference for it doesn't matter much at all...

[bobkoure]

Originally Posted by Cathar

What's a class system?

Separate bars.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by toastyghost

Yeah it sounds like you're all some pretty smart motherfsckers. You make a lot of sense. Thank you for your insight.

I'm looking for a secretary...how do you look in a skirt.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by bobkoure

My issue with 3/5 is that it's a "slap in the face" to black people. Sort'a like flying the "stars and bars". I'm glad it doesn't bother you. I'm pretty sure, were the situation reversed, it would bother me.

Honestly, I don't think anyone thinks about it. Nothing will change the fact that was once a thriving institution.

Originally Posted by bobkoure

Yep. The situation has massively changed since then, however. It no longer takes weeks to get from one colony to another. Folks no longer owe their primary political allegiance to a state (state as in Massachusetts, not state as in this country). IMHO it was a check and balance that has since turned out to be more trouble than it might be worth.
Clearly it's not so much trouble that we have the political will to do something about it - even when a situation like the 2000 election happens - so my non-preference for it doesn't matter much at all...

Sure, a lot has change since then but human nature is essentially the same. Moreover, our government is supposed to be difficult.

[bobkoure]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

... Men who debated every form of government from Direct Democracy in Athens to British Parliament wrote the US Constitution.

Just as a BTW, the democratic institution they had most experience with was the governance system of native Americans. For instance "King" Philip was called that because we didn't have a word for a leader who had been selected not by bloodline.
Our new england town meetings seem to have their roots in that "everyone gets to speak, decision by acclamation" that was part of that system. I'm pretty sure Ben Franklin makes some mention of Indian governance in his biography - in the part about his attempts to organize a common colonial defense just before what we now call the French and Indian wars (sorry about vagueness, it's been 30+ years...). Note also that this was the system of the tribes in the north east - no idea what the rest of 'em were doing...

[superart]

<joe>"Only thing missing is Riots to complete the 1968/69 appearance."
What about the wild drug-laiden orgies and cool concerts with good music?




<Cybersamuri>"I'm just trying to figure out which country I want to move to. "
Holand is nice, but i hear that it's really socialist. Like 2 clicks shy of a welfare state.

Also, Iv'e talked to a couple people who live in New Zealand, and they say that the cops really don't give a shit about peoples civil liberties there. They just passed a bunch of drug laws that are pretty much PATRIOT act on steroids. Cops there now have the right to search you or your car/home, tap phones/internet, stop you on the street for no reason. All this without due process or reasonable cause. All they have to say is "I thought he may or may not have had drugs on him"

Haven't heard anything bad about Astralia :-)



<toastyghost>"Yeah it sounds like you're all some pretty smart motherfsckers. You make a lot of sense. Thank you for your insight."
Quit being such a little fu<king bitch. What are you, Mrs.Duchebag the new English teacher? STFU.

[BillA]

I think it is a characteristic of those 'not in power' to want to 'improve' the system,
no shortage of agendas

[bigben2k]

Some added info I came across recently:

It seems that while North Korea is a big problem, their economy is crumbling, and it's bound to turn into the next Cuba: a tourist attraction, without any attractions. In short, it should collapse under its own weight; it's just a waiting game at this point. Does anyone have any more info on this?

Otherwise, what concerns me the most is that a lot of people voted for Bush, simply because their religious beliefs won't let them vote for someone that's for abortion, and gay civil unions (not "marriage"). The Democrat position is that, as per the constitution, and basic Human Rights, one cannot discriminate against people based on religion and sex (which may or may not include sexual preference). So while God fearing people are against abortion, they don't seem to understand that a country doesn't have to be run as per that one religion: it must protect all of its citizens, regardless of their religious convictions, and the bottom line is that while abortions are legal, you still have a choice, and it's up to your own faith to do the right thing. Otherwise, this country, IMO, is similarly fanatic as some of these countries that we're objecting to...

[mastermind2004]

Originally Posted by pHaTtYaSs2x4

The arrogance and incompetence of this administration will catch up. We've already lost our right to privacy, our jobs and the respect of the world. Whats next? More tax cuts? WOW, thats REALLY smart. If people would open their eyes, study the FACTS and most importantly, RESPECT each others lifestyles, we could be happy. Some churches called voting for Kerry a sin. That explains where we are at and it is sad. This is supposed to be "the land of the free". It's more like, "the land of selected freedom". Selected by people who think THEIR beliefs are for everyone. God gave us all one thing, choice. Adam and Eve? Choice. Demonizing gays and shunning them away is the most UN-christian thing anyone could do. I thought God was love, but apparently to most "christians", they have the right to judge people. Censorship has also gotten out of control. But, why should it matter? If you're getting tax cuts, why change all that? Money is ALWAYS more important than freedom. Over 14,000 "Americans" die every year from guns. Under 100 in Canada. Do we own more guns then Canadians? NO!
The constitution needs to be inforced and it's being pushed aside, thats one of the most UN-patriotic things. People should be outraged, but alas, nobody blinks an eye.

Let's see, time to find some contradictions in your argument. If this is the land of the free, aren't those churches free to say that voting for Kerry is a sin? Just because they disagree doesn't mean that you can deny them the ability to say what they like. Can I please have an example of how censorship is out of control? I've seen no examples of it myself, so I would like to know how it is out of control. Also, last I checked, the responsibility for ensuring the constitution is not violated is the court system. If you have a problem with something make an issue of it. Last I checked most laws have been decided to be constitutional. Also, can I ask why it's 14,000 "Americans" that die from guns each year? Are they not really Americans, so you have to put them in quotations? I agree that something needs to be done about gun violence, but I would like to see a suggestion about it. I think that continued enforcement of the current laws is a good start, with stricter background checks, and things like that. Dissent is the foundation of democracy, but without ideas, just saying something is wrong is pointless. If you are so strongly against things, why don't you have suggestions or ideas?

[pHaTtYaSs2x4]

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

Let's see, time to find some contradictions in your argument. If this is the land of the free, aren't those churches free to say that voting for Kerry is a sin? Just because they disagree doesn't mean that you can deny them the ability to say what they like.

This is where i disagree, it's called separation of church and state. No church should indorse a political party, it is blasphemy. True christians love everyone, no matter what and don't shun away people. Church and state are a recipe for poison.

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

Can I please have an example of how censorship is out of control? I've seen no examples of it myself, so I would like to know how it is out of control.

This is just one Ever heard of google?

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

Also, last I checked, the responsibility for ensuring the constitution is not violated is the court system. If you have a problem with something make an issue of it. Last I checked most laws have been decided to be constitutional.

Obviously, you don't know what the "patriot act" is. They also have a "right" to view other peoples computer activities(RIAA) even though it's unconstitutional to invade MY privacy. Here's an example

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

Also, can I ask why it's 14,000 "Americans" that die from guns each year? Are they not really Americans, so you have to put them in quotations?

That's not what i was getting at.

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

I agree that something needs to be done about gun violence, but I would like to see a suggestion about it. I think that continued enforcement of the current laws is a good start, with stricter background checks, and things like that.

That's where Canada and America are different, not in control laws, but by other variables. Canada's press doesn't try to scare Canadians, they aren't led by fear.

Originally Posted by mastermind2004

Dissent is the foundation of democracy, but without ideas, just saying something is wrong is pointless. If you are so strongly against things, why don't you have suggestions or ideas?

If saying that churches deciding on our president is wrong, then i feel for you. This is why i want to move, because when people are upset and frusterated and voice their opinions, they're shutoff over a lack of "ideas". I've said what i wanted to say and i believe in an unpartisan nation, where everyone can decide for themselves and not be scared by evil churches that preach blasphemy to our people. A nation where i can turn on the news and have them give me NEWS, not their pompous rich-bitch opinions.