The Sinister Design Forums

General => General Discussion => Politics => Topic started by: Duskling on October 16, 2010, 10:47:54 PM

Title: Government of Choice
Post by: Duskling on October 16, 2010, 10:47:54 PM
What government type do you support? Democracy, Republic, something else? If I were to pick a government type, it would be Communism, not the Leninism/Stalinism Communism with those dictators, but the theoretical, working Communism, i.e., everyone is equal, no social classes, nobody is out of anybody's league, etc.

As a side, please do not criticize other people's government choices, you can point out what's wrong with Communism if you like (go wild, im2smart4u), but no lashing out at other people simply because of what they believe in.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 17, 2010, 05:29:08 AM
I'm a Baptist Republican. Yeah. I think the Republican side better fits America but if insets allowed to vote already, it would be after a lot of prayer. And nice way to set up rules Duskling. :)
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 08:18:06 AM
I'm in favor of an absolute democracy, not voting is as unamerican as not paying taxes, there needs to be a stop to it, and it's not even that hard to vote, I can't believe that someone would pay their taxes willingly and not vote.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 17, 2010, 08:21:30 AM
Not paying taxes is very Amercian. It's just not a value prized by the government collecting those taxes.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 08:46:45 AM
hmmm, no paying taxes is in the american spirit of honesty.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 17, 2010, 08:49:33 AM
I would say it's more in the spirit of dishonesty, but we can't all agree on everything.

I would want a Democratic Socialist Republic (Don't worry; I don't mean "Communist Dictatorship with high HIV/AIDS prevalence").
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 10:33:08 AM
wow, racist...
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 17, 2010, 10:43:09 AM
HOW IS THAT RACIST!!!???
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 12:07:53 PM
Because you're implying that all democratic socialist republics are communist dictatorships with a high HIV/ AIDS prevalence
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 17, 2010, 12:21:29 PM
No, I'm implying that a lot of countries that call themselves "Dem. Republic of..." tend to be communist dictatorships with high HIV/AIDS prevalence rates. I'm not seeing the racism here.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 03:50:20 PM
To the best of off the top of my head there is only one such country.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 17, 2010, 06:15:58 PM
Democratic republic of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, People's Democratic Republic of Yemen, German Democratic Republic, Democratic People's Republic of North Korea + a bunch more. HIV/AIDS prevalence is high in Africa, which is where some of them were, and Communist countries REALLY like to call themselves People's Republics and Democratic Republics. Still not seeing the racism.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 17, 2010, 06:17:56 PM
Quit arguing. It's spamming.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 06:22:39 PM
Not really, we're arguing about government types, that's what this is about.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 17, 2010, 06:23:46 PM
No. You were arguing about racism.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 17, 2010, 06:26:25 PM
Hmmm, only kind of, but this argument truly is spam so don't reply.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 17, 2010, 06:45:35 PM
I like the idea of a republic.  Two party system sucks though.  It sucks that if you vote for a third party, then you are throwing your vote away.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Steel Ersatz Man on October 18, 2010, 05:43:41 AM
I don't kjnow about you, but I live in the UK and, if I was old enough to vote, I would have voted for labour to stay. But NOOOOOOOO! The people voted for a party thats on the verge of putting us in a double dip recession!  >:(
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Cypher on October 18, 2010, 08:38:06 AM
I think I'll remain silent on this one.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 18, 2010, 03:36:41 PM
I don't know much about UK politics, but I tend to agree with the Conservative Party.  As much as I love Tony Blair for always standing by the US in the fight for democracy and the war against terrorism, I tend to disagree with his party's stance on things.  The reason that the United States has been economically dominant over Europe for so long is because the US has had conservative economic policies, while Europe tends to overly tax the wealthy and have tons of costly social programs.  Ironically, many European governments (like UK's Conservative Party) are trying to move towards America's old conservative policies, while Obama is moving America towards socialist polices that prevented Europe from being able to compete against the US.


Not paying taxes is very Amercian.
Nearly half of US house holds don't pay taxes (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0&.v=1), because the top 1% already pay for everything (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/top-1-paid-more-in-federal-income-taxes-than-bottom-95-in-07/).  Some liberals argue that the rich still don't pay thier fair share.


If I were to pick a government type, it would be Communism, not the Leninism/Stalinism Communism with those dictators, but the theoretical, working Communism, i.e., everyone is equal, no social classes, nobody is out of anybody's league, etc.
I didn't know we were allowed to choose a fictional type of government.  If that is the case, then I think we should have a government where God rules through a bureaucracy run by angels.  The Soviet Union is a clear example of how communism doesn't work.  In a society where a doctor is equal to the guy who flips burgers, there won't be any doctors.
"nobody is out of anybody's league"? Do you want Communism, because some chick/dude rejected you?
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 18, 2010, 04:37:14 PM
I'm almost sure that Duskling didn't mean it like that.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 18, 2010, 05:04:34 PM
I'm almost sure that he didn't mean it like that.
Who met what? Be careful with your pronouns.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Duskling on October 18, 2010, 06:54:06 PM
"nobody is out of anybody's league"? Do you want Communism, because some chick/dude rejected you?
Sir, that is not what I meant. I merely meant that there are no "elite" besides the government (who are necessary) so nobody can say, "HAHA!! I make more money than you, IN YOUR FACE!!!! :P :P :P :P" Plus, I stated that I support the theory of Communism, not the crazy Leninist-Stalinist factions, though it is interesting to learn about them, I must say.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 20, 2010, 01:11:03 PM
Your choice of a working communism is a fictitious choice of government.  It might work temporary, but it would require a Stalin type leader to run that government with an iron fist.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 20, 2010, 03:23:55 PM
Yeah, communism is difficult to see working properly.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Duskling on October 20, 2010, 03:36:20 PM
Your choice of a working communism is a fictitious choice of government.  It might work temporary, but it would require a Stalin type leader to run that government with an iron fist.
Alright, I'll give you points for that one, but you could've just said that before, however, fictitious or not, I support the theory.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: cyso on October 20, 2010, 07:36:31 PM
The problem with Communism, and really just about any other form of government, is that things tend to not work the way people expect. Communism is okay as a theory, but some theories just don't work. Another problem is that pretty much everything can be screwed up somehow. I sound sort of pessimistic, but people don't make things that last forever. Even if they seem to, they often stray from what they started from. An example would be the US. I doubt any of the Founding Fathers pictured the US as it is now. They might not like the direction that the country is going in, or has gone in. It has changed a lot. The Founding Fathers where wise enough to not try to completely restrict the change, which is why the US Constitution has not collapsed entirely. Things change, often for the worse.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 20, 2010, 07:50:13 PM
I agree with yogc. I just wish the US was back on it's Christain roots. We need it. They warned us that if we ever leaved God, we would crumble. What do you see? A crumbling nation? I do.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 21, 2010, 06:30:24 AM
no, I see a budding people, a new country will rise, and an old one will fall, such is life. People remain forever, in our hearts, our minds and in our bodies, we are a growing people, growing in ethnicity, acceptance and heritage, and thus our nation will endure. we bounced back from the thirties and we will bounce back from this.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 21, 2010, 01:47:37 PM
Not the way I see it. Unless we turn ourselves around, expect it to get worse. We already owe more than we can pay back.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Duskling on October 21, 2010, 03:50:58 PM
I agree with that last part, everything here is given, life is too simple. However, namelesskitty is correct, America will jump out of this economical ditch, just don't expect it to happen soon.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 21, 2010, 03:57:29 PM
Was there a jump back onto the bandwagon of religion after the Great Depression? No; there was a war. And a bunch of Communists after that.

My point is, it didn't take "going back to the path we have strayed from" to get us out of that ditch. It's an economic thing, and unless Bible sales count for a much larger part of our economy than I think it does, atheism is a-okay as far as Apple, Inc. is concerned.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 21, 2010, 05:46:29 PM
Now if people stopped believing in the almighty Internet, then we'd be in trouble.

(I don't mean to offend by calling the Internet almighty.)
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: MikeW781 on October 26, 2010, 04:49:07 PM
I am in full support of the philosophy of a communist system, but the issue is in the implementation. The big issue is that communism revolves around equality, but for a communist system to be put in place, a ruling group would need to give up their power and wealth, fully and completely. For obvious reasons, this doesn't happen. Communism has therefore only ever worked in very small scales, like a poor village where everybody shares. This is both due to the issue with a ruling group having to sacrifice power, and because for a country to run today, there would need to be people to regulate foriegn affairs, money, laws, etc. And these people would need more power than the others to do this, thus ruining the idea of communism.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 26, 2010, 07:37:34 PM
I personally don't like the theory of communism.  Why should a person who works harder then someone else be of equal status to the lazy guy who does nothing?  Why should a doctor have equal status to a janitor?
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 26, 2010, 10:14:23 PM
That's the point of capitalism, but since when should a college dropout earn about three digits more than a person who spent eight years learning after graduation?
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 26, 2010, 10:33:10 PM
when should a college dropout earn about three digits more than a person who spent eight years learning after graduation?
When they use their incredible talent or intelligence alongside hard work to create a successful business.  Famous college dropouts: Bill Gates and David Green
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 26, 2010, 10:41:30 PM
Maybe A hobo is hard working, maybe a doctor can work two jobs and get three hours of sleep, but the dropout CEOs make tons more for calling a few people and reading popular science magazine.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 27, 2010, 08:10:28 AM
Maybe A hobo is hard working, maybe a doctor can work two jobs and get three hours of sleep, but the dropout CEOs make tons more for calling a few people and reading popular science magazine.
Are you kidding me?  CEOs become CEOs because they are workaholics.  If a CEO was only calling a few people and reading magazines, then he would be fired by the board of directors.  You really don't know what you are talking about.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 27, 2010, 02:34:55 PM
are you a CEO, you don't know what you mean, if you're born in a rich family with a lot of power you're set for life, otherwise you'r worried about where you're gonna get your next meal.

sure they work hard early on, then they trade that for sitting in at meetings after that it's all in stock options, then it's donating some of you're family's fortune, after that you sit on the john and keep the board happy.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 27, 2010, 03:18:24 PM
are you a CEO
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: MikeW781 on October 27, 2010, 03:51:47 PM
namelesskitty, it sounds like you learned everything you know about what a CEo does from Dilbert. The CEO's are the ambitious workaholics, otherwise they would not be promoted. Even if a lzy man was somehow promoted to CEO, he would shortly be replaced by one of these ambitious workaholics.

buggy, congratulations, you just posted a semi-random quote and got your post count up'd by one. seriously, at least kinda explain a post. maybe say something quick like "you can't say that somebody doesn't get an opinion because they aren't a CEO unless you're one" which is true.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on October 27, 2010, 04:01:34 PM
I was restating Nameless's own question. I want to know if he/she knows what a CEO does since he/she seems to know just what a CEO does.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 27, 2010, 04:58:05 PM
are you a CEO
In case you forgot: posts in the General section doesn't increase your post count.

are you a CEO, you don't know what you mean, if you're born in a rich family with a lot of power you're set for life, otherwise you'r worried about where you're gonna get your next meal.
I think you are referring to trust fund babies.  If the children of a rich family are incompetent, then they will never be CEOs.  I don't care how wealthy Paris Hilton's father is; a board of directors will never let her be a CEO.

Namelesskitty, just because you are angry doesn't mean you know what you are talking about.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 27, 2010, 05:26:13 PM
Nono, I know for a fact he/she isn't angry. I just think that he/she's accepting the general stereotype of a CEO just letting underlings do the work, screwing up the company, and being idiots ($1 a year, f's up the company, and wants bonuses?). This is not true of all CEOs, but each of those traits can be found in separate Chief Executive Officers in companies around the world, if not in combination.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 27, 2010, 06:30:03 PM
Well I've compiled my definition of a CEO from things I hear in the news, most of which are bad, plus they have more money than me and that's a reason not to like some one, I agree that most CEOs have mostly good qualities but it's hard for me to picture that because of all the bad press.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on October 27, 2010, 06:46:16 PM
plus they have more money than me and that's a reason not to like some one
So this all comes down to petty jealousy.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 27, 2010, 06:49:55 PM
Hey, Nameless, just  think of Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, and Bill Gates. Awesome CEOs.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on October 27, 2010, 07:03:03 PM
plus they have more money than me and that's a reason not to like some one
So this all comes down to petty jealousy.

Don't quote me out of context.

That was a minor argument intended as a joke.

My main argument was you are probably right but my mind refuses to accept it.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Duskling on October 27, 2010, 07:11:57 PM
Don't quote me out of context.

That was a minor argument intended as a joke.

My main argument was you are probably right but my mind refuses to accept it.
This is a discussion on politics, and jokes aren't tolerated very well in politics.

Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on October 27, 2010, 07:20:13 PM
As is evident by im2smart4u's response.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Zackirus on November 05, 2010, 04:16:36 PM
I am personally happy with my government. Steven Harper is (in my own view) the greatest prime minister in the past 20 years. He has constantly made decisions that have furthered Canada along on its track. I mean just look at the G20 meeting in Toronto in the summer. He stopped the bank tax which would have crippled the Canadian Banks and set everyone done the right track by saying that have to cut their deficits by half. He is taking charge and making the right decisions for Canada, and I respect that.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on November 05, 2010, 07:47:16 PM
And methinks Obama is the best leader in at least 16...
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on November 05, 2010, 08:49:13 PM
He stopped the bank tax which would have crippled the Canadian Banks and set everyone done the right track by saying that have to cut their deficits by half.
Obama has increased taxes on banks and increased deficit spending.  Obama needs to take some advise from Steven Harper.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on November 05, 2010, 08:52:15 PM
Seeing as I'm only 14, I'm going to more or less pull myself out of this. Though Steven Harper sounds like a good person to be in control.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on November 05, 2010, 09:29:48 PM
Understood, im2smart4u, but G. W. B., Clinton, and G. H. W. B. screwed up so badly, that a bit of honest-for-a-politician leftism, minus the affair w/ a secretary (not cool), appears to be the agenda of a better leader than any of them. I, personally, and socially liberal and fiscally conservative, and still think that Obama is doing what little he can, without beaurocracy getting in the way, to fix the f'd up nation G.W.B. left for him.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: SmartyPants on November 05, 2010, 09:49:25 PM
Understood, im2smart4u, but G. W. B., Clinton, and G. H. W. B. screwed up so badly, that a bit of honest-for-a-politician leftism, minus the affair w/ a secretary (not cool), appears to be the agenda of a better leader than any of them. I, personally, and socially liberal and fiscally conservative, and still think that Obama is doing what little he can, without beaurocracy getting in the way, to fix the f'd up nation G.W.B. left for him.
*The beaurocracy is in his way? You know Obama and his cabinet are in charge of the beaurocracy?  If the beaurocracy is in his way, then it due to his own incompetence.
*I know blame Bush for messing things up, but can you point to what he did to cause an economic depression?  Multiple times in history, one president gets blame for problems that his predecessor causes.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on November 06, 2010, 07:05:45 AM
*I know blame Bush for messing things up, but can you point to what he did to cause an economic depression?  Multiple times in history, one president gets blame for problems that his predecessor causes.

My point exactly.

And the many-billions-a-year war was all G.W.B. Maybe Obama didn't leave when he could have, but at least he moved the war to the right place, and is trying to find Osama bin Ladin, instead of deposing some random dictator.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: bugfartboy on November 06, 2010, 03:48:51 PM
Yes so George W. Bush f'd up. Good people can make bad choices, and bad people can male good choices. But think of this: What has Obama really done? Pushed a healthcare bill that didn't NEED pushed, and gone on campaign to be re-elected. Anything else? I know for a fact that there are several things that he promised to do that he hasn't done [spoiler=Warning: Vulgar Language][spoiler=Last Warning]crap[/spoiler][/spoiler] about. How is our debt? Hmm? Has it improved? If the goverent was to take 100% of the income of EVERY American, it still wouldn't be enough to settle it. Might as well move to Canada now before China literally buys you from the Feds.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Zackirus on November 06, 2010, 04:03:39 PM
Might as well move to Canada


Yay! Anyway, Steven Harper/The Government decision not to sell Potash to the Australian company, which might not be good for the world, but it is good for Canada, and good for Steven Harper as he didn't turn Saskatchewan into another Newfoundland.   
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: TheWanderingShadow on November 15, 2010, 06:30:48 PM
Most governments are perfect...in theory. Of course, human error always sees to their downfalls. I personally like the idea of communism.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: ArtDrake on November 21, 2010, 08:20:37 PM
I like im2smart4u's idea of that place ruled over by angels.

Whoops. I mean... I don't like that idea.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: The Holy namelesskitty on November 23, 2010, 11:53:22 PM
@TWS: we can't base effects on speculation alone, if it is at all testable those results always take precedence. Therefore the government that holds up on paper might not be the one that holds up in real life, the only sure way to know is trial and error and we must base our facts on past and present attempts. On there grounds I favor the one party system of China however as a person I favor democracy due to its relative fairness.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Steelfist on December 14, 2010, 11:36:36 AM
While communism is a nice idea, it simply  doesn't work in practice. That is fairly evident. However, nothing seems to workin the long term. Is that a problem with the government, or with the public? Or just humans in general? Humans want more; that's our nature. And we want different things. Does it prevent us from living in a tuly peaceful and steady society? Apparently so.
Title: Re: Government of Choice
Post by: Duskling on December 14, 2010, 05:02:32 PM
While communism is a nice idea, it simply  doesn't work in practice. That is fairly evident. However, nothing seems to workin the long term. Is that a problem with the government, or with the public? Or just humans in general? Humans want more; that's our nature. And we want different things. Does it prevent us from living in a tuly peaceful and steady society? Apparently so.
Nicely done, and it is true, but it wasn't only human nature, if it wasn't for leaders like Stalin, then I believe Communism would have lasted longer, at least by a little bit. Besides, in Russia, Communism was, by a small margin, better than Tsarism.