Rules, regulations and politicians
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-01-2017, 04:05 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(06-01-2017 06:20 PM)excitedpenguin Wrote:  Weird how everyone uses the single/plural forms incorrectly in this thread. Tongue

We need to regulate our societies and make up laws, our progress is dependent on it. So we do, in fact, need government. I feel like your post attacked not only the practice of politics, but the very idea of governance as well. I think that's unwise. What we ought to do is to continuously strive to find better ways to govern ourselves in order that more people lead better lives and that more progress is made, in turn, in all things we know and care about.

Penguin,

I've been thinking a little more about the OP and there are some examples of politicians loosening the ropes, to good effect. There was the ending of alcohol prohibition in the US (although some Puritanical spots are still dry, such as parts of Kentucky), the decriminalization of abortion and the decriminalization of weed smoking in some states.

So, as you say, "progress is made". Smile

D.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dworkin's post
08-01-2017, 04:11 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(07-01-2017 09:43 AM)Walter Wrote:  The socialists in my family never ask me about my views on economics, politics or science.

Walter,

Maybe they know you only too well, and guess the answers Wink

Just a joke, W, no offence meant.

D.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dworkin's post
08-01-2017, 05:44 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(08-01-2017 04:05 AM)Dworkin Wrote:  
(06-01-2017 06:20 PM)excitedpenguin Wrote:  Weird how everyone uses the single/plural forms incorrectly in this thread. Tongue

We need to regulate our societies and make up laws, our progress is dependent on it. So we do, in fact, need government. I feel like your post attacked not only the practice of politics, but the very idea of governance as well. I think that's unwise. What we ought to do is to continuously strive to find better ways to govern ourselves in order that more people lead better lives and that more progress is made, in turn, in all things we know and care about.

Penguin,

I've been thinking a little more about the OP and there are some examples of politicians loosening the ropes, to good effect. There was the ending of alcohol prohibition in the US (although some Puritanical spots are still dry, such as parts of Kentucky), the decriminalization of abortion and the decriminalization of weed smoking in some states.

So, as you say, "progress is made". Smile

D.

No ending of prohibition would be needed if it wasn't started in first place.

Abortion issue is similar - religious and authoritarian assholes delude themselves into thinking that illegal means unavailable despite evidence to the contrary. Results are illegal abortions which endanger lives of woman. But without gov giving into mainly religious pressure abortion would be available at hospitals thus lessening the risk.

I wont even start weed subject. Just look at all drug war nonsense.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2017, 07:12 AM (This post was last modified: 08-01-2017 08:13 AM by excitedpenguin.)
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(07-01-2017 01:29 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(06-01-2017 04:58 PM)Dworkin Wrote:  Szuchow,

What a depressing picture. But I would say that. No

D.

It's only depressing cause it is true.

Politicians are mirrors of people that elect them. Unfortunately many people seems to have authoritarian tendencies.


Well, that's a bit of an idealistic view of reality. Your premise is preposterous, frankly, and then you draw an even more preposterous conclusion based on that.


Politicians lie, Dworkin. Come on, you know that. Everyone does. The electorate is never ever perfectly informed in today's democracies, nor will they ever be, to be sure. There are an incredible amount of factors going into what kind of statesmen we put into power, why now, how they achieve electoral success, what they can and cannot do with it, what is attributed falsely to them and what isn't and so on.


The issues people usually care about are often simplistic and shortsighted, personal and biased, culturally influenced and even purely incidental as well (e.g. John met his spouse at a public library downtown on a day when he would've otherwise gone to see an acquaintance. The traffic had been horrendous on the way to his original destination so he had decided to go to the library instead, on foot. He fell in love with his then to be wife and over the years assimilated much of her political views and came to strongly believe in them in his own right. But for this happenstance it wouldn't have happened that he got this significant amount of exposure to the particular ideas she held. - - - It's not unimaginable that this sort of thing happens daily, by the way). There can also be a mix of such forces at work at any one time. This is all so complex, so how can we use such simplistic rules of thumb that we don't even know work but for various pundits' say-so in the media?


Nobody would've ever said before 2016, not with a straight face, anyway, that the electorate might be disproportionately suffering from an authoritarian mindset.


I prefer more intelligent explanations to such complex issues. Ones that take -any-factors into account - yours seems to take none, let alone explain those factors on their own terms and have them fit logically and elegantly with other pieces of the puzzle.


(07-01-2017 05:43 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  "We have to DO something" ---- the mantra of the impotent..............

.....

When any problem pops up - people think "We need a new law" -- even though there's already a slew of existing laws already on the books..

....

The problem isn't a lack of laws.

The problem is - people - are problematic............


That is as perverse a psychological claim as any I've encountered of late. To do something is a necessary component of any type of progress or problem solving. It is formally contained within both reactive and proactive actions. To the extent that one does nothing, on the other hand, one is giving entropy the best seat available at the table. Strategically applied and cultivated patience or refusal to engage are not representative of inaction, I should add, but actions in and of themselves. They can be premeditated, wise and made to yield ever greater amounts of productivity(as dependent on the coefficient of effort introduced into the relevant mental fiefdoms of elaborate planning and risk mitigation).


What laws people think should be implemented and what legislators decide to do will often be at odds. Luckily those not interested enough in the political process to responsibly inform themselves in regards to such things as whether or not the solution to any new significant problem has its answer in some pre-existing laws and regulations also don't get as much of a say in or chance to influence the actual making of the legislative sausage.


Bright minds and experts do (overwhelmingly successfully, I should stress) work and apply pressure on everything short of the most controversial and hot political subjects that a large majority of the electorate takes a direct interest in, such as evolution versus creationism in American education(perhaps formally, I am not as up to date with the heretofore fluctuations within that area of dissent, I am using it purely exemplarily), or indeed the climate crisis as a hoax or a real-world impending doom scenario.


There are such things as special interests, of course, but I highly doubt it it is as easy as anyone seems to think to play the game of politics to your own advantage at the expense of everyone else - including, that is, the electorate, companies, the government itself as a whole and other foreign and domestic agents inextricably involved and affected by the impending outcome of one party's, however powerful at that, realistically significant political gambles, aspirations, trajectories and games of power. There are, by now, a great number of preventive processes put into place to stop such things from happening. Particularly in the more politically transparent first world democracies these things are more the product of overzealous, ignorant and conspiratorially inclined private citizens' minds and have very few or weak common denominators with the actual and awesome complexity of the gargantuan and insiduously convoluted political reality itself, which, however imperfectly, does end up working for most, if not all, and not just the purportedly illegitimate few.


Here, as elsewhere, perfection is key. Uninformed pessimism is more of an obstacle, on the other hand, than a legitimate venue for change.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes excitedpenguin's post
08-01-2017, 08:01 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(08-01-2017 05:44 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  No ending of prohibition would be needed if it wasn't started in first place.

Abortion issue is similar - religious and authoritarian assholes delude themselves into thinking that illegal means unavailable despite evidence to the contrary. Results are illegal abortions which endanger lives of woman. But without gov giving into mainly religious pressure abortion would be available at hospitals thus lessening the risk.

I wont even start weed subject. Just look at all drug war nonsense.

Szuchow,

Of course, the point made in the OP (and emphasized above) holds generally, but the examples of these onerous laws being loosened (to varying extent) is fact.

I will be interested to see which way the wind blows in the next few years, particularly in the US. My guess is more authoritarianism dressed up as liberating the people.

That's the oldest politics one/two punch in history. Laugh out loadSadcryface2

D.

PS - I've thought of another one. The French government have just allowed unlicensed air rifles to be increased in power, as a tip of the hat to the hunting lobby over here. Lots of keen bird shooters in France and the extra ft lbs come in handy. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2017, 08:08 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(08-01-2017 08:01 AM)Dworkin Wrote:  
(08-01-2017 05:44 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  No ending of prohibition would be needed if it wasn't started in first place.

Abortion issue is similar - religious and authoritarian assholes delude themselves into thinking that illegal means unavailable despite evidence to the contrary. Results are illegal abortions which endanger lives of woman. But without gov giving into mainly religious pressure abortion would be available at hospitals thus lessening the risk.

I wont even start weed subject. Just look at all drug war nonsense.

Szuchow,

Of course, the point made in the OP (and emphasized above) holds generally, but the examples of these onerous laws being loosened (to varying extent) is fact.

Opposite happening is also true - when Poland was behind Iron Curtain laws regarding abortion were looser, only after fall of communism situation changed.

Quote:I will be interested to see which way the wind blows in the next few years, particularly in the US. My guess is more authoritarianism dressed up as liberating the people.

Depends on location. I doubt that countries like Hungary, Russia or Poland will se much liberalization, but Western Europe could stand against tide of populism and authoritarianism.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2017, 09:29 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
I disagree with the old adage that ultimately the people get the government they deserve. The recent Federal election in Australia disabused me even further of that notion.

We had the (only) choice between the Labor party (economically liberal, democratic socialist, trade unionist) and the Liberal party (conservative, economic rationalist, new right), or as the electorate saw it, the lesser of two evils.

Our effectively two-party system makes a joke of democracy as it's generally thought—and hoped—to be. We also have the so-called "preferential" voting system, which nobody can figure out. Simply put, it means that a candidate with a only a handful of primary votes can win a seat in parliament—in a similar fashion that let Drumpf win, despite Clinton receiving a 2.9 million popular vote advantage.

And as far as rules and regulations go, to my knowledge, no politician from either side really gives a damn about what people want and/or need. Government legislation is led by personal lurks and perks, big corporations, and ego. Legislation is also designed to keep the plebs in their place; ill-educated, socially disadvantaged, unhealthy, economically impaired, and State dependent.

A weak society is a malleable one. And the "nanny state" ensures that.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2017, 11:12 AM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(06-01-2017 02:51 AM)Dworkin Wrote:  A wise pundit once said that politicians are like dogs, p****** on the previous scent to mark it with their own scent.

Like Roman emperors removing heads from statues of previous emperors and replacing them with their own image.

Kind of old news mate.

How old are you mate?

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2017, 12:30 PM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(07-01-2017 09:43 AM)Walter Wrote:  The market (simple supply and demand for my services, still taught somewhere if you look hard enough) is the only thing which has determined my success. My customers, scientists from the chemical, food and pharmaceutical industries, are only concerned about the quality of my work.
Yeah that is basically how my IT consultancy has functioned for these past 33 years. Customers only want my work done correctly, it's pretty easy to quantify "correctly" even though there are some subjective elements such as clients overtly saying they want "X" when in fact what they really will be satisfied by at the end of the day is "Y". But if I fail to convince them of Y and deliver X to them, they still have to pay me for it, it's a self inflicted problem. I document the conversation about "Y", show it to them, and suggest they listen to me next time.

Even taxes are simple. Gross receipts minus whatever I paid to my subcontractors equals taxable income basically, end of story other than personal exemptions if any. Nothing ambiguous about it. No licensing, no regulation.

Alas there are very few such fields of endeavor anymore. As you say, pity the poor beautician. Far simpler than software architecture in principle but far more complicated to execute and navigate all the rules, regulations and disclaimers.

I wonder sometimes why software development has eluded the usual bondage and discipline. I guess it is because it is (1) intimidating (2) critically necessary and (3) people like me who are good at it have little tolerance for bullshit. So if they want (2) without (1) they have to cater to (3). The most onerous thing in my field is the attempt to cheapen the craft by farming it out to hapless locals in the third world for a fraction of the hourly rate, but that has its limits, and it's relatively easy to specialize in areas that are particularly resistant to commoditization.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2017, 12:40 PM
RE: Rules, regulations and politicians
(08-01-2017 12:30 PM)mordant Wrote:  I wonder sometimes why software development has eluded the usual bondage and discipline.

In the future all software will be written by robots in Estonia.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: