RE: House of 'Commons'
Thursday 21st August 2003
House of 'Commons'
Ted's depressed. He reckons democracy has had its day...
Discussion
Spot on Ted. Human nature being what it is, people only act when the pain of doing something is less than the pain of not. In this context, I wonder how long will people put up with the ever expanding taxes, the increasingly interfering nanny state and the current clowns in govt. ?
I reflect all to regularly at the moment on whether I'd be better of living in another country - anyone else? Proud to be British - not much any more.
Steve.
>> Edited by Steve_T on Thursday 21st August 12:51
I reflect all to regularly at the moment on whether I'd be better of living in another country - anyone else? Proud to be British - not much any more.
Steve.
>> Edited by Steve_T on Thursday 21st August 12:51
And I thought I was having a bad day :/
One of my favourite comments on this sort of thing is along the same lines, especially the NHS:
The NHS was a brilliant idea and it made a huge difference to this country. Unfortunately times change, along with technology and society. While the underlying principles remain the same (ie to provide free healthcare to the country) the means, backing and legislation that runs the NHS is a mess. The only real solution is to wipe the slate clean and start again with a new set of rules for the current times - the downside is the thousands of people who would suffer inbetween (along with the thousands who would sue just for someone having that idea). The same applies to government - nice idea but we are not living in the 19th century. Yet again it applies to law - the rules we live by are often inappropriate for the times we live in.
While I know what the end result needs to be - I have no idea on how to solve the problem of implementing it without alienating a few million individuals...any attempt to do something so radical would end up with the instigators standing blindfolded infront of a dubiously perforated wall.
One of my favourite comments on this sort of thing is along the same lines, especially the NHS:
The NHS was a brilliant idea and it made a huge difference to this country. Unfortunately times change, along with technology and society. While the underlying principles remain the same (ie to provide free healthcare to the country) the means, backing and legislation that runs the NHS is a mess. The only real solution is to wipe the slate clean and start again with a new set of rules for the current times - the downside is the thousands of people who would suffer inbetween (along with the thousands who would sue just for someone having that idea). The same applies to government - nice idea but we are not living in the 19th century. Yet again it applies to law - the rules we live by are often inappropriate for the times we live in.
While I know what the end result needs to be - I have no idea on how to solve the problem of implementing it without alienating a few million individuals...any attempt to do something so radical would end up with the instigators standing blindfolded infront of a dubiously perforated wall.
Well I think you're being naive if you think politicians have ever anything other than out of their own self interests. What I think we have seen is a shift from principled government e.g. privatise, nationalise to one which appeases the public by saying they are dealing with minor (relatively) local issues to give the electorate that feel good factor. For example dangerous dog legislation, on the spot fines for drunk 'n disorderly, or may I be so bold to say banning fox hunting (which is maybe part-principled but maybe that's why they spent time on it).
I believe this creates a disconnect between the government and the public which was highlighted during the election when Tony Blair got shouted at by a woman outside a hospital. She had a real issue that needed to be debated and sorted out (can't remember the exact details, something along the lines of NHS decline) but TB completely ignored it.
What we need are policiticians who deal with issues not soundbytes.
Andy.
P.S. Another example - it's obvious that Labour's policy is to raise taxes to spend. Did you ever hear them talk about that ? Or do you remember the opposite ? Do you feel short changed that this was never debated ?
I believe this creates a disconnect between the government and the public which was highlighted during the election when Tony Blair got shouted at by a woman outside a hospital. She had a real issue that needed to be debated and sorted out (can't remember the exact details, something along the lines of NHS decline) but TB completely ignored it.
What we need are policiticians who deal with issues not soundbytes.
Andy.
P.S. Another example - it's obvious that Labour's policy is to raise taxes to spend. Did you ever hear them talk about that ? Or do you remember the opposite ? Do you feel short changed that this was never debated ?
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
or should that be Prime Pistoner??
top rant...
it's just a very big shame about the:
"have done more damage than any of us will see undone in our lifetimes" part...
that's the really depressing bit!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
Ted for Prime Minister!!
or should that be Prime Pistoner??
top rant...
it's just a very big shame about the:
"have done more damage than any of us will see undone in our lifetimes" part...
that's the really depressing bit!
andyvdg said:
Well I think you're being naive if you think politicians have ever anything other than out of their own self interests.
That's fair comment, it's the peurile means by which they go about it these days. All credit to someone who wants to be top dog, prime minister or whatever, but it would be nice if it was based on some sound principles, beliefs or plans rather than just presenting a blurred facade masquerading as 'policy'.
Nine ppl in the office and not suprisingly nine ppl who are ready to vote for you. Totally correct that MP's no longer have our interests in mind.
MP's have overstayed their welcome. Historically, a position awarded to a responsible local who would then travel "great distances" to London to express the views and opinions of the village.
The age of communication we are now in no longer requires such ppl. Does that mean that the government is now obsolete?
How do we move on that proposition? :-)
MP's have overstayed their welcome. Historically, a position awarded to a responsible local who would then travel "great distances" to London to express the views and opinions of the village.
The age of communication we are now in no longer requires such ppl. Does that mean that the government is now obsolete?
How do we move on that proposition? :-)
trouble now (swing lantern like old'n- but ain't) is that these career politicians start as late 20s to early 30s "spotty little oiwks" and are in politics & parliament until they are "gouty old farts" with no real:
job, life ,work, get hands dirty, suffer, sweat, blood and toil: experience which develops : conviction.
there are a couple of exceptions, but currently not many.
job, life ,work, get hands dirty, suffer, sweat, blood and toil: experience which develops : conviction.
there are a couple of exceptions, but currently not many.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff