What level of tyranny will you live under ?

[SgtSpike]

I don't know who you are talking to, but I myself am well aware of what a true democracy is, and just as much aware that the US is a republic, not a democracy like everyone likes to call it.

Also, I'm not sure whether you condone the republic or rebuke it?  Are you a fan of true democracy?  It sounds like you don't like our current government setup, but you also seem to use aggressive wording against democracy.

I am against all Democracy.

I am also against a representative form of government because they are corrupted and do not serve the will of the people. Also the fact that they are so removed from their constituents, who have almost no access to their representatives for redress of grievances.

Every 2 years every town in the USA votes and those votes are counted to elect our leaders. Pretty simple system that has worked for hundreds of years. There is no reason every citizen shouldnt be able to vote in this fashion on legislation that affects them, from local municipal, to state, right up to the judicial, legislative, and executive, if they so choose to participate.

Our system was designed for elites, by elites, for the protection of elites, and the benefit of elites. The system does not work for the everyday citizen serf (you and I).

Now you're not making sense either.

First you say that you are against all democracy, then go on to say that "there is no reason every citizen shouldn't be able to vote in this fashion".  Uh, maybe I had a brain fart, but isn't the very definition of democracy the idea of every person being able to vote on every issue?

You can still vote in a Republic form of government on various issues and concerns. The hingepin is none of it means squat if it violates our rights. When it becomes a representative form of government and the people have no say other than voting in their representatives, means the people have no real voice.

For instance, how many citizens would vote in legislation that allows our President to shut down the internet or kill a citizen without due process versus how many compromised representatives who would do the same?

Instead of thinking in terms of how it is now, think of the design that was originally proposed to the people.

Government doesnt need to be a career job. It should be everyday people, for the people.

Voting is not a democracy if the votes violate our rights. Mob rules voting with no concern for our rights is a democracy.

Ok, I think I understand your viewpoint now.  You support a republic government system without corruption.  Me too.  I think far too many politicians are far too removed from the "real world" to know the best way of handling things... not to mention the number of viewpoints that are simply bought in a variety of government positions.

[1715337220]

1715337220

[1715337220]

1715337220

[1715337220]

1715337220

[tiberiandusk]

The House just passed CISPA.

[mccorvic]

the exact amount you are willing to put up with.

The kind that protects me from the libertarians

[Realpra]

I'm flexible; I will go where the chances are the best.
Most people just stay put out of habit.

Right now I'm in a rich country with low corruption, decent freedom and high bureaucracy.
If something better was available I would go there.

I have thought about going to one of those oil boom towns you hear about... maybe I will in the future after taking some chances here first.

[Explodicle]

Explodicile, what exactly is a direct democracy, and how is it implemented in California?  Whenever state politics come up, California is always (in my mind) the worst example of a working state government.

And I don't see why a majority-rule democracy wouldn't just tax the **** out of the top 10%?  Or 49%, for that matter?  I've never thought that a true democracy was a good idea...

I'd loosely define a DD as one in which the populace has direct initiative and referendum power. So even though California is a hybrid system, IMHO it still counts.

But part of the reason it doesn't work so well (yet! yet! ) is because the majority isn't terribly well informed. For example, I recently refused to sign a recent petition for an inititative that would raise income taxes on people who make over $250,000. I think most folks don't consider deadweight losses, the race to the bottom, and other econ basics that tell us that the rich aren't just a magical source of infinite free money. We're shooting OURSELVES in the foot by telling them not to work here, even counting the tax revenue... a rational direct democracy would support efficient taxes like pigovian, land, and pollution taxes. That's part of the reason I advocate voting reform - in spirit the system is less unjust than representative democracy, but in practice has almost as many bugs to work out as anarchy.

Sometimes I feel like an anarchist living in Somalia, and everyone keeps reminding me about the crime.

[SgtSpike]

Explodicile, what exactly is a direct democracy, and how is it implemented in California?  Whenever state politics come up, California is always (in my mind) the worst example of a working state government.

And I don't see why a majority-rule democracy wouldn't just tax the **** out of the top 10%?  Or 49%, for that matter?  I've never thought that a true democracy was a good idea...

I'd loosely define a DD as one in which the populace has direct initiative and referendum power. So even though California is a hybrid system, IMHO it still counts.

But part of the reason it doesn't work so well (yet! yet! ) is because the majority isn't terribly well informed. For example, I recently refused to sign a recent petition for an inititative that would raise income taxes on people who make over $250,000. I think most folks don't consider deadweight losses, the race to the bottom, and other econ basics that tell us that the rich aren't just a magical source of infinite free money. We're shooting OURSELVES in the foot by telling them not to work here, even counting the tax revenue... a rational direct democracy would support efficient taxes like pigovian, land, and pollution taxes. That's part of the reason I advocate voting reform - in spirit the system is less unjust than representative democracy, but in practice has almost as many bugs to work out as anarchy.

Sometimes I feel like an anarchist living in Somalia, and everyone keeps reminding me about the crime.

You pointed out exactly why I think a republic is better than a democracy: because the majority public is largely uninformed and stupid.  Like I said, the majority would vote to raise taxes on those with high incomes, because they want to lower inequality (or whatever other lame reason they choose).  Electing officials who are well educated and experienced, who know what laws to make that will benefit society as a whole, is the better route to go.

But, obviously, corruption comes in to play in a republican government, and that is exactly what we see today...

There's certainly no easy solution.

[Red Emerald]

You pointed out exactly why I think a republic is better than a democracy: because the majority public is largely uninformed and stupid.  Like I said, the majority would vote to raise taxes on those with high incomes, because they want to lower inequality (or whatever other lame reason they choose).  Electing officials who are well educated and experienced, who know what laws to make that will benefit society as a whole, is the better route to go.

If a Democracy cannot be trusted because the people are uneducated, I think it is foolish to believe that this same uneducated group will vote for educated and experienced officials in a Republic.

[Explodicle]

You pointed out exactly why I think a republic is better than a democracy: because the majority public is largely uninformed and stupid.  Like I said, the majority would vote to raise taxes on those with high incomes, because they want to lower inequality (or whatever other lame reason they choose).  Electing officials who are well educated and experienced, who know what laws to make that will benefit society as a whole, is the better route to go.

If a Democracy cannot be trusted because the people are uneducated, I think it is foolish to believe that this same uneducated group will vote for educated and experienced officials in a Republic.

Exactly. Garbage in = garbage out. I don't think there's much we can do to reduce voter ignorance.

That's where futarchy comes in... we can have citizens/representatives "vote on values, bet on beliefs". The average person can't be expected to understand the complexities of government, but they can much more easily define what consequences they want to see.

[dancupid]

I live in China - it's ok actually. Cigs and beer are cheap.