D.e.m.o.c.r.a.c.y (((((((((dicttor))))))))))

[hobbes]

Originally posted by kAb@28 December 2003 - 07:46
But The U.S. needs to wake up and realize that having the right to vote is an amazing achievment, its sad that what, 11% of the voting population actually votes?

This low number can either be good or bad.

Good: Things are going well, the new administration probably won't screw things up too much, whomever wins. The apathy stems from lack of need for significant change. Once severe problems arise you will see a lot more interest in politics by the average citizen. Outside of college students, politics is a subject of very little interest here in the States. In some countries, politics are discussed with every meal.

Bad: The system is corrupt, my vote doesn't really count.

[Chame1eon]

Originally posted by ilw@27 December 2003 - 20:15
I read somewhere that america used to have a literacy test for voters, but that it was scrapped,

* With good reason it was meant to keep blacks, who usually weren't taught to read at the time , from voting.

* If you place restriction on who is to vote there is always the question of who is to determine what the restricitons are and the
possibility of some classes gaining too much power over the others.

* I don't know the exact numbers but i think about 98 percent of people are within 10 -20 iq points away from average in either
direction(anyone know the exact numbers)

* We have known for a long time that IQ test are not good measures of who will make intelligent decisions in life, they rely too heavily on verbal intelligence, a persons skill at taking tests, and on knowledge. And are best at doing what that were originally meant to do - predict who will have problems in school.

* If 50% of people are below average that is half the population that needs to be represented.


I think the best thing that could be done is to offer the more information that can be easily accessible. I Also thinks it would be better if we had more power over individual decisions, not groups of them. I don't think we should be stuck trying to choose one person who we know little about, to make all of the best choices.

Edit: bad typing, spacing

[Chame1eon]

Originally posted by clocker+27 December 2003 - 21:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 27 December 2003 - 21:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-ilw@27 December 2003 - 19:15
Did you know that over 50% of people are below average intelligence

How can this be?
Wouldn&#39;t this fact lower the "average" in "average intelligence"? [/b][/quote]
Yeah It&#39;s an average. Iq is measured on a bell curve.

[Chame1eon]

Originally posted by hobbes+28 December 2003 - 10:18--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 28 December 2003 - 10:18)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-kAb@28 December 2003 - 07:46
But The U.S. needs to wake up and realize that having the right to vote is an amazing achievment, its sad that what, 11% of the voting population actually votes?

This low number can either be good or bad.

Good: Things are going well, the new administration probably won&#39;t screw things up too much, whomever wins. The apathy stems from lack of need for significant change. Once severe problems arise you will see a lot more interest in politics by the average citizen. Outside of college students, politics is a subject of very little interest here in the States. In some countries, politics are discussed with every meal.

Bad: The system is corrupt, my vote doesn&#39;t really count. [/b][/quote]
Like i said I think it is a lack of adequate information, on the other hand if things were worse i would probably put a lot more effortin in to obtainig infromation, so maybe it is a little of both.

[hobbes]

Two points:

1) Your point has been covered, read the thread before posting in this forum (first post).
2) Since you obviously made little effort to make your post intelligible, why should anybody waste time reading it?

I agree with your position, but damn that is a really sloppy load you dropped. One would think that if you really gave a shit about what you were saying, you would have made an effort to express yourself more articulately.

[Chame1eon]

Since you obviously made little effort to make your post intelligible

Maybe it was kinda sloppy

Your point has been covered, read the thread before posting in this forum

i was just giving my opinion before i read the posts. I do think it adds a little though.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Chame1eon@29 December 2003 - 00:15

Since you obviously made little effort to make your post intelligible

Maybe it was kinda sloppy

Your point has been covered, read the thread before posting in this forum

i was just giving my opinion before i read the posts. I do think it adds a little though.

"NO VOTING FOR YOU&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;", said the Soup Nazi

[billyfridge]

In England, over 30% don&#39;t bother to vote because they are either, apathetic, or think everything is ok, which is good or bad, depends which way you look at it. i think people should be made to vote like Australia.
If we had a referendum on going into Europe, everybody would vote because it&#39;s such a topical subject.

[3RA1N1AC]

keep in mind that the american and british democratic systems aren&#39;t democracies in the strict sense, anyway. they&#39;re representative democracies, with quite a few quirks here & there that exclude them from being "pure" democracies (i.e. the electoral college, the house of lords, etc).

[MagicNakor]

If you want to get picky, the United States of America is a federal republic, and England is a constitutional monarchy (with an unwritten constitution) combined with a representative democracy.