TakeYouToTasker Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Right, I understand that how it originally was thought up or explained but seriously, is California going to team up with Texas on some big state issue that hurts Wyoming? I think it was more along the lines of having a branch of the legislator that was not very close to the people. An upper house chosen by, for and from the vested interestes of the particular states. A check on "We the People" Exactly what Obama was getting at and Liberal reformers have complained about for over a century There were complaints about this at the time. Pennsylvania simply had a one house legislature that was like the house of reps. Again, not saying it was better, but people saw what was happening and what the purpose of a senate or upper house was for. Like the House of Lords in England. **thanks Third, I meant 18th century The point is that neither Texas nor California can dictate to Rhode Island or Maryland. Further, what incentive do the middle of the country, or smaller states have to remain a part of the country if their interests are subjugated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 The point is that neither Texas nor California can dictate to Rhode Island or Maryland. Further, what incentive do the middle of the country, or smaller states have to remain a part of the country if their interests are subjugated? what is the point then? What interests do the small states share? So Wyoming would be better off as it's own land locked country if it didn't have wildly inflated representation in the government compared to new York? That ridiculous. Does Alberta get the same proportional representation in Canada? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 what is the point then? What interests do the small states share? So Wyoming would be better off as it's own land locked country if it didn't have wildly inflated representation in the government compared to new York? That ridiculous. Does Alberta get the same proportional representation in Canada? That's awesome. I'm not here as much lately, but it's good to know I can swing back from time to time and find you're bringing solid new material. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 what is the point then? What interests do the small states share? So Wyoming would be better off as it's own land locked country if it didn't have wildly inflated representation in the government compared to new York? That ridiculous. Does Alberta get the same proportional representation in Canada? The purpose in not to account for one single moment in time, but to account for changing tides, and to insure that as the world changes, that no states interests can be subjugated to another's. And yes, any state is better off if it's citizens are not subjugated and turned vassal to the whims of other states. And what relevance does Alberta have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted May 23, 2014 Author Share Posted May 23, 2014 Does Alberta get the same proportional representation in Canada? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_Canada The Senate is modelled after the British House of Lords and consists of 105 members appointed by the governor general on the advice of the prime minister Yeah, that sounds democratic. But then again, you'd love it if Obama appointed Senators Although the approval of both houses is necessary for legislation, the Senate rarely rejects bills assed by the directly elected Commons As opposed to American Senate where Harry Reid doesn't bother even bringing House bills to the floor for debate As Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) EDIT: You know what? Forget that post. Let's have some fun with an experiment in "democracy" instead. Let's pretend PPP is a parliamentary system. Everybody gets a vote, and let's pretend we are all "committed to a more Democratic society". I move to introduce a resolution that gatorman must begin all his posts with: "Since I am an idiot, my reponse is:"... All in favor? Next, I move to introduce a resolution that in any thread, gatorman must click on every link provided, read them all, and provide a summary report of what he read. We shall call this the "gatorman homework resolution". All in favor? Edited May 23, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 I would propose an amendment for the first resolution. He must begin each post with, "Since I am a !@#$ing idiot, my response is:" I am voting "present" on the second resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 what is the point then? What interests do the small states share? So Wyoming would be better off as it's own land locked country if it didn't have wildly inflated representation in the government compared to new York? That ridiculous. Does Alberta get the same proportional representation in Canada? Use your imagination. Take water rights for example and see how it might be possible for Texas and California to unduly influence the law if they were given senators based on population. I would propose an amendment for the first resolution. He must begin each post with, "Since I am a !@#$ing idiot, my response is:" I am voting "present" on the second resolution. Can't do that, you have to be all there in the first place----------------------wait a minute, how did Obama get away with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted May 23, 2014 Author Share Posted May 23, 2014 EDIT: You know what? Forget that post. Let's have some fun with an experiment in "democracy" instead. Let's pretend PPP is a parliamentary system. Everybody gets a vote, and let's pretend we are all "committed to a more Democratic society". I move to introduce a resolution that gatorman must begin all his posts with: "Since I am an idiot, my reponse is:"... All in favor? Next, I move to introduce a resolution that in any thread, gatorman must click on every link provided, read them all, and provide a summary report of what he read. We shall call this the "gatorman homework resolution". All in favor? You are doing it all wrong my friend. Regarding resolution #1 If we are striving for a more "Democratic" message board, then votes need to be tied to revenue. I mean, why bother voting if there's no taxes revenue involved? Gator's inane ramblings negatively affects all of us. Every time I click a link to read a thread his posts are downloaded with the rest of the page. What a waste of bandwidth. Bandwidth that I am paying for. I therefore propose Gator should pay his fair share of my ISP bill. I propose a tax revenue resolution that every time Gator posts to PPP he/she taxed levied a $.01 fee for each unique visitor that downloads the page. Regarding Resolution #2 gatorman homework resolution just doesn't have the right ring to it. It doesn't give the low information voters a nice warm and fuzzy feeling like the American Recovery and Re-investment Act, or the SAFE Act. You need to improve the title, maybe something like the Gatorman Education and Improvement Act of 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 You are doing it all wrong my friend. Regarding resolution #1 If we are striving for a more "Democratic" message board, then votes need to be tied to revenue. I mean, why bother voting if there's no taxes revenue involved? Gator's inane ramblings negatively affects all of us. Every time I click a link to read a thread his posts are downloaded with the rest of the page. What a waste of bandwidth. Bandwidth that I am paying for. I therefore propose Gator should pay his fair share of my ISP bill. I propose a tax revenue resolution that every time Gator posts to PPP he/she taxed levied a $.01 fee for each unique visitor that downloads the page. Regarding Resolution #2 gatorman homework resolution just doesn't have the right ring to it. It doesn't give the low information voters a nice warm and fuzzy feeling like the American Recovery and Re-investment Act, or the SAFE Act. You need to improve the title, maybe something like the Gatorman Education and Improvement Act of 2014 How about the Stopping The Unintelligent Posters' Insipid Drivel - Gatorman's Intentional Trolling Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 How about the Stopping The Unintelligent Posters' Insipid Drivel - Gatorman's Intentional Trolling Act. The STUPID GIT Act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 The STUPID GIT Act? you've got to admit, it's got a ring to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts