The Dutch disagree (for once)

Discussion in 'More Serious Topics' started by SPOooOn, Feb 10, 2006.

?

The government works

  1. yeah, but not for us

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. I even go and vote

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. SPOooOn

    SPOooOn New Member

    Messages:
    985
    I ment in general. If you want tot talk muslim go to another thread, there's plenty of 'em.
     
  2. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    Ok just curious which party holds the majority of seats?
     
  3. XerxesX

    XerxesX New Member

    Messages:
    745
    I like the idea of small parties. Especially if new ones emerge on the scene frequently. The big lobbies have to rearange their payoffs. The new ones can turn out incompetent. Business as usuall.

    But itsright that it end up in two semi-similar camps that go: Capital brings increased education, or, Education brings increased capital....
     
  4. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    I'm of the “education brings increased capital” persuasion myself, Seems that there is a party who believes if they dumb down the population enough they can be made to believe that increasing capital expense on education will increase intelligence proportionally. When this never happens they make an excuse and ask for more capital.
     
  5. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    Interesting news from the Netherlands

    http://www.nisnews.nl/public/110206_1.htm

    There not having babies, The Netherlanderthals are leaving and foreigners coming in.

    Isn't everything pretty much socialized there?
     
  6. diogenes

    diogenes New Member

    Messages:
    2,881
    Joeslogic said...

    That's the American way, we don't solve problems, we throw money at them hoping they will go away.

    Spooon said...

    That's true to a degree, but anytime you vote you validate a party or an official. Even if the small party winds up working with the larger party you've validated the position of the smaller party, giving them increased leverage in dealing with the larger party. That's how it's supposed to work anyhow. I don't know the first thing about Dutch politics, so I won't say anything beyond that.
     
  7. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    They get together as a family and all have sex, then they go vote. :shock: I don't understand the logic either.
     
  8. SPOooOn

    SPOooOn New Member

    Messages:
    985
    CDA VVD D66
    all democrats . .or so they say :p

    There not having babies, The Netherlanderthals are leaving and foreigners coming in.

    Depends on what you mean . . we're looking more like the us every day, more deaths by guns, an increase in "slums", people scared shitless by "the enemy from over there"

    Well not really, the only party that has a real say in anything is the largest one (more than 50% of all votes), If such a party doesn't exist, a coalition is formed to get a majority. That's when all the freaky shit starts happening.. left-wing and right-wing parties holding hands, arch-enemies joining.. I'm sorry, did we say we're for the death penalty? Nono, I can clearly remember us being against the death penalty.. .can we play with you now?
     
  9. diogenes

    diogenes New Member

    Messages:
    2,881
    That's how policy change happens, otherwise everything would just stay the same.
     
  10. chester grape

    chester grape New Member

    Messages:
    2,784
    That's the Danish, fuck-knuckle.

    As far as voting goes, though, I am all in favour of it. How else is your voice to be heard in a democracy?

    Democracy only "works" if you participate. (Or at least, it won't "work" any better if you don't.)

    In Australia, however, we have another problem. Our voting is compulsory.

    So, we have a 96-98% turnout come election time, but many of those people don't actually give a shit, don't properly inform themselves, and so respond to the cheapest and most transparent scare tactics (or whatever). They're easily manipulated.

    So, re-reading all of the above, I guess what I would ideally like is a system where voting was optional, but everybody took the time to inform themselves and then voted anyway and accordingly.

    Dream on, Chester, dream on ...
     
  11. SPOooOn

    SPOooOn New Member

    Messages:
    985
    May be. . but not in a good way, anyhoe. . my point was it doesn't matter who you vote for cuz they end up doing something other then they promised during elections..

    You know what the fuckers did? They threw social security out the window. . you guys over in the US know how that makes me feel . .anyway.. all the small parties promised when voted for, they'd make sure social security'd stay. . and see what happened..
     
  12. DrBungle

    DrBungle New Member

    Messages:
    3,147
    If you want SS in the US I hope you are about to turn 65 sucka.
     
  13. XerxesX

    XerxesX New Member

    Messages:
    745
    Social security. Its damn boring. Havent worked for a cpouple of years. Just cruising around getting a tan r getting drunk orgetting a new book to read. You guys are lucky you havent atained this level of civilisation !

    I am definitely going backto work. I just have to figure out wether i should make money or not
     
  14. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    I was just being an ass earlier Spoon but of course you figured that out.
    The best thing they could do is privatize social security. One little known fact is that here in the states before they amended the laws to prevent it. You had an option to opt out of social security. Of course you were required to have something to take its place and the City of Galveston Texas did just that. This was not a hundred years ago or anything like that either. This was as recient as 1981 actually! Now I need to go find information about it http://www.libertyhaven.com/politic...thcarewelfareorsocialsecurity/galveston.shtml

    This is one of those amazing and hidden truths that seem to allude so many misinformed people here in the states.

    http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba215.html
    Basically it was and is a huge success. The Dems quickly passed legislation to slam the door on any continuation of this practice but not before three Texas counties had already got there foot in the door.

    If this had not been a success then every school text book and every news channel would be plastering it on people’s faces on a regular basis. Since it was a success? Well then mums the word I suppose.

    This is where the danger comes in. Chester pointed it out directly.

    There in lies the problem. Old people and young have been scared shitless by the news media as well as the democrats with regard to Privatization of Social Security. Every year
     
  15. diogenes

    diogenes New Member

    Messages:
    2,881
    there's a shitload of other information you're leaving out of that picture though. Yeah, It could go incredibly well, but it could also crash. That's why they have a guaranteed benefit plan in addition to IRA's. You can have both, so there is no need to privatize social security.
     
  16. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    Privatized social security may crash. Never has in all of history. But it could. And now let’s look at the odds on social security. :wink:

    And that’s just the money govt. is going to take anyways. You can still invest into all the IRA's you want to supplement an already great deal.

    It’s a step away from the socialism sink hole we are suffocating in and the turning point is now not later. The idea of privatization terrorizes the shit out of the Dems. All of a sudden Americans would be concerned how there money was being invested. All of a sudden there would be incentive for success. All of a sudden destructive politics would be frowned upon. All of a sudden trial lawyer scumbags would be seen as a destructive tool of greed.
     

Share This Page