Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
he was just voicing his opposition in strong terms.
so we don't have to deal with that kind of shit
gimps the lot of them
Is it ok to turn the gun on ourselves?
i'd like mine spent on gritters
but I don't think the results of that should be binding, or that it should come down to individuals.
Thinking about it, I actually think maybe the public should also be consulted on hefty one-off spends over a certain level too...
For one thing, the election just tells you which of the three parties you agree with most in general/want to run the country. It doesn't say anything about which policies you agree with (or indeed how you feel about policies introduced post-election).
Secondly, a party might win the election with, say, 38% of people voting for them but still have to govern the entire country.
Obviously, historically, when it was costly and difficult to poll people at every turn, it was nigh-on impossible to consult people about decisions between elections. Nowadays, with the internet it's relatively easy (if not anywhere as reliably accurate as an election) to at least poll people and find out what they're thinking and ask for comments. Clearly you wouldn't get a wide enough base of contributors to imply legitimacy (hence why it shouldn't be binding) but you could at least get an idea of what people think...
And I do agree with marckee's point below, which does make this thing very problematic.
because he knows the pricks are watching him
So as not to relinquish too much control to The Man.
in today's divorce cases
moker wrote the words piss of [sic] big brother at least 3 times on his most recent census form
because thats what they'd expect him to do.
he has never finished reading the book
it becomes a divide and rule fight between the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor.
Plus you end up with stupid-shortsighted people demanding that loads of money is spent repairing potholes or something, while cutting bus provision.
some of the people wouldn't even be from London
The GLA has to provide facilities and transport infrastructure for people who work, but do not live or pay council tax in London, but who do pay for things like train or tube tickets.
Should they have a say in how money is allocated? Should they have a say in the GLA/Mayoral elections?
the general public always make sensible and well-informed decisions
wouldn't be too hard to organise
but in general - now that the technology exists - why not have a more democratic decision making process? Why not have online debates and votes that can actually count legislatively?
Why not let the general public vote as a 33 MP bloc or something with a basic test before polling that proves they understand the core issues well enough to be able to make an informed choice ?
Or is that all a bit too Swiss?
and we're not talking about having a general election online
I just mean having a public voting component on Parliamentary votes after Parliamentary debates
How about having it set up where you have to log in before the debate starts, watch the debate, answer 10 comprehension questions then stream through the virtual lobby and hand in your virtual ballot?
any massive irregularities would easily be spotted
In an economy that does things properly? Tens or low hundreds of millions.
b)About 1/100th the cost of Trident replacement
c)The equivalent of running the NHS for 32 hours
d)Less than the Civil List
e)It would pay for itself within 3 Parliamentary terms and would provide much-needed jobs
You can answer as many as you think are correct
or a shifty attempt to leverage future support away from rival parties
my suggestion above to Jordan's reply is certainly more stringent than what goes on currently within the house
that could devise basic comprehension around key points without bias
And what happens to all the thickos who are essentially disenfranchised? Don't trick me into agreeing with Bamnan about anything.
and issue based
if you care or are affected by an issue then it's in your interest to participate
this is the opposite of disenfranchising people
best left to the eton boys
consider it nicked.
i like how his username rhymes with yoker
a midnight toker
so you could work out how long it took him to crack up
Have they got to him?
i'll let mute-branches give you the details
especially given the incompetance and dullness of imagination that is typical of national authorities (of all/most countries)
Practically it might be more possible to allow a portion of the tax to be decided by individuals, to be allocated to selected areas of government spending.
There will be many calls that his would be cumbersome and difficult to administer, but thats nonsense as it would be incredibly easy, it is the bread and butter of it projects.
The greater difficulty would be in the government saying that they wouldnt know how to budget.....which is why it would be necessary for the individual allocations of tax to be for at least 1 year in advance.
Practically one aspect of government spending would be one that would probably pay for the project.....'politician renumeration' without the public using any of their variable selectable tax on mps, then they would not get a budget for a pay rise.....unless they prove to be an excellant bunch who the public admire and wish to reward.