Lelouch24 Posts
EZ-2789 wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
I don't see how it's a good thing for the government to be "efficient" if being efficient means to go against the best interest of the people. If there's a diverse interest among the people, then there should be a diverse interest within the house of representatives. If you think the house of Representative should have similar ideas when the people do not, then the house of representatives does not accurately represent the people.This is another reason why the federal government is too powerful; most issues are supposed be handled by the states. If the states handled most issues, then conservative states could have conservative legislation, and liberal states could have liberal legislation, etc
Being efficient means being able to pass laws. The most important part of a government is the ability to pass legislation and enforce it.
If the governments biggest concern is to efficiently pass legislation, regardless of what the people want, then this government might as well be a monarchy. The whole reason we aren't a monarchy is so that the people can have a say in how the government functions.
EZ-2789 wrote...
If you can't get past the "passing of legislation" part, then what the hell is your government doing?My government has laws to protect myself and my property, and has officers to enforce these laws. My government provides my community with public schools, parks, rec centers, libraries, and roadways. My government provides police officers and firefighters stationed near me. My government provides me protection from foreign nations through a standing army.
Controversial legislation (such as welfare, healthcare, SOPA, drug wars) are not absolutely necessary for a government to function. would you agree with that?
To say "we need inaccurate representation to pass these laws" is just absurd. If the people do not want a legislation to be passed, then it should not be passed.
I picked "both", but my answer is "either".
I might read a 7-page color h-manga just to fap, or I might read a long vanilla just for the story, but usually not both at the same time. It's sorta nice for something to be erotic and have a good story, but I don't really care if they're together or not
I might read a 7-page color h-manga just to fap, or I might read a long vanilla just for the story, but usually not both at the same time. It's sorta nice for something to be erotic and have a good story, but I don't really care if they're together or not
Koyori wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
I don't see how it's a good thing for the government to be "efficient" if being efficient means to go against the best interest of the people. If there's a diverse interest among the people, then there should be a diverse interest within the house of representatives. If you think the house of Representative should have similar ideas when the people do not, then the house of representatives does not accurately represent the people.This is another reason why the federal government is too powerful; most issues are supposed be handled by the states. If the states handled most issues, then conservative states could have conservative legislation, and liberal states could have liberal legislation, etc
Well a completely inefficient government won't really do anything at all and that's not very good if we take it to the extreme. There's a tradeoff. Which is why a lot of countries with PR has a lower limit of 3-5% that a party must have to gain any seats in the parliament. Else you may end up with 20 groups trying to agree on things. Which is very unlikely to work smoothly.
Can you (or EZ-2789) give specific examples that show why this is bad?
um... you would live with her ex-fiance? O_o
If you're just looking for sex and nothing more, go ahead, but if you want a nice relationship, you need to find someone else, or find a place to live
If you're just looking for sex and nothing more, go ahead, but if you want a nice relationship, you need to find someone else, or find a place to live
EZ-2789 wrote...
Koyori wrote...
EZ-2789 wrote...
Going back to the original question, why is it that most governments have only two to four parties, it's simple, really. The majority of the world's governments use the Plurality (more commonly referred to as First Past The Past) method as their preferred voting style for district seats.In the western world the use Proportional Representation is much more common then FPTP though.
My bad, got those two flip-flopped.
PR itself, while allowing for more parties to join into the fray, isn't without its flaws. In a PR system, the larger number of actual parties in the legislature can often times lead to a highly inefficient system where nothing gets done because the diversity of opinion is so much that the parties themselves cannot come to a consensus. This is a positive, somewhat, because it encourages cooperation among the parties to build coalitions (and sometimes merge) in order to reach a majority in the government.
I don't see how it's a good thing for the government to be "efficient" if being efficient means to go against the best interest of the people. If there's a diverse interest among the people, then there should be a diverse interest within the house of representatives. If you think the house of Representative should have similar ideas when the people do not, then the house of representatives does not accurately represent the people.
This is another reason why the federal government is too powerful; most issues are supposed be handled by the states. If the states handled most issues, then conservative states could have conservative legislation, and liberal states could have liberal legislation, etc
the devils are on fire wrote...
Black_Coat_Puppet wrote...
All very good answers. Very Intelligent answers! But I guess in the end it comes down to a persons own personal definition of intelligence. But in saying that, would you say that the entire concept of intelligence is abstract?
I partly disagree.
People might explain what the word intelligence is based on what they know. And some people might not really know what the exact definition of the word intelligence is.
So, they ended up explaining what the word means to them. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm saying if it's close enough to the real definition or not.
unless we quote from a dictionary, any definition we give for anything is only what the word means to us. I wouldn't say that the entire concept is abstract, but it's certainly not a simple thing to define
knowledge is basically memorized facts.
intelligence is your ability to utilize your knowledge
you could know lots of stuff, but if you have low intellect, you can't utilize that which you know. You can hardly know anything, but be able to effectively utilize what you know to form logical thoughts and ideas.
I consider myself to have high intellect, but low knowledge. I have a lot of trouble increasing my knowledge, but once I learn something, I'm able to utilize that knowledge incredible well.
intelligence is your ability to utilize your knowledge
you could know lots of stuff, but if you have low intellect, you can't utilize that which you know. You can hardly know anything, but be able to effectively utilize what you know to form logical thoughts and ideas.
I consider myself to have high intellect, but low knowledge. I have a lot of trouble increasing my knowledge, but once I learn something, I'm able to utilize that knowledge incredible well.
I bought my $ 280 i7 processor online, but it was an in-store pick-up, and I paid at the store, so I don't think it counts
I also bought a basketball backboard online, which was $200
I also bought a basketball backboard online, which was $200
I'd simply ask my child "what do you want me to do?"
"I can call the principle, and have him put a stop to it. If you don't want me to, I could still try to help you. If he is non-physically bullying you, then you need to stay surrounded by friends and ignore him. If he is physically bullying you, I can help teach you martial arts."
(I say "martial arts", because the goal of a martial artist is to stop a fight before it starts")
"I can call the principle, and have him put a stop to it. If you don't want me to, I could still try to help you. If he is non-physically bullying you, then you need to stay surrounded by friends and ignore him. If he is physically bullying you, I can help teach you martial arts."
(I say "martial arts", because the goal of a martial artist is to stop a fight before it starts")
I don't care, I didn't even know it was a rule of society to not date a taller girl.
I play basketball, so normally care about height differences, so I myself wonder why I don't care
I play basketball, so normally care about height differences, so I myself wonder why I don't care
music distracts me, so I rarely listen to it while fapping. Sometimes I'm really bored and I listen to this just to make it more interesting
if your trying to lose weight, then you need to do aerobics (stamina exercises, like running, swimming, etc). lifting weights is anaerobic, which is great for getting stronger and bulking up, but you won't lose weight. I did a lot of weight lifting last summer, and I went from 150 lbs to 165 lbs.
running is boring, but you're gonna have to find a way to motivate yourself. I'm extremely competitive, so I get motivated to run by racing against other people. I can't tell you what motivates you, so you're gonna have to figure that out, and expose it.
good luck
running is boring, but you're gonna have to find a way to motivate yourself. I'm extremely competitive, so I get motivated to run by racing against other people. I can't tell you what motivates you, so you're gonna have to figure that out, and expose it.
good luck
The government should be trying to expose the evidence, but they're doing the exact opposite; that alone should be enough to be suspicious.
I find it unfair how the people who suspect a conspiracy are tasked with proving evidence of explosions, while the people who don't believe in a conspiracy don't explain why the government is hiding the evidence.
so, defenders against a conspiracy (Darkhilt), why is the government hiding the evidence?
I find it unfair how the people who suspect a conspiracy are tasked with proving evidence of explosions, while the people who don't believe in a conspiracy don't explain why the government is hiding the evidence.
so, defenders against a conspiracy (Darkhilt), why is the government hiding the evidence?
I pretty much agree with FPoD, they wouldn't have interviewed him in the first place; this just makes bad publicity for CNN. I think there's a small chance that this was intentional, but it's very unlikely
It's going away from cartoon-network, but cartoon network sucks anyways (maybe there's a connection...). It has started to air on some other kids channels, but their horribly censured.
I watch it online, so I don't care about the decline of anime on TV
I watch it online, so I don't care about the decline of anime on TV
It would depend on who's idea it was, but if we we are equally responsible, I'd play rock-paper-scissors with him to decide who stays in prison.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"
So, even if we were to complete remove congress and replace them, would this solve our problems? What must change to fix the structure of our government? I support Ron Paul, and he could save the executive branch, but It won't fix the rest of the government
So, even if we were to complete remove congress and replace them, would this solve our problems? What must change to fix the structure of our government? I support Ron Paul, and he could save the executive branch, but It won't fix the rest of the government
I think I'll agree with Saito-Knight, Mae's Hughs has the perfect balance of humor and seriousness.
other close contenders are:
Monkey D Luffy,
L,
Lelouch
other close contenders are:
Monkey D Luffy,
L,
Lelouch
