GeforceWell, A PM, unlike a president can not be impeached. In a multiple party system, the coalition partners should however demand that a new PM is installed. But since “Il cabaritieri” is also the richest, most important man in Italy, nobody has the guts to question him. It’s evident that what’s going on in Italy, is not normal and should be followed by the rest of the world closely. A shame the EU doesn’t put more pressure on Berlusconi.
GeforceThe definition I know is a territory, inhabited by a people, with a effective ruling entity (legal defintion).
Indeed, this is the definition. And to make sure the state can perform its tasks, it has a monopoly on violence. But since paying taxes is not “violence” as it is a right, theoritically, paying more taxes is not a punishment. Children who become a burden on society – a good point you brought up here – can be avoided through a good educational system. Even then, there will always be exceptions who will still become criminals. As is the case now, the “good” people will still have to pay for the “bad” people’s mistakes. I don’t really think there’s anything you can do. But if a state can use some of its power, maybe it can prevent these things from happening. Ofcourse, if the state is not allowed to interfere in anyone’s life, how can you expect it to effectivily put a halt on issues like criminal activities. This however, is not socialism, because the state should look at each person individually, and not as one “group”. Ofcourse, this is more of an Utopia, and will be harder to achieve than socialism.
Should they be forced to marry or engage in a relationship, so they as well can have children?
Ofcourse not, it’s not like we live in a totallitarian state. But if you have children, you already recieve more money now. If people want to stay single then they should be able to. Paying a bit more taxes is not going to kill or even opress you. If you are handicapped or have a perfectly good reason not to marry or get children, you should not pay more taxes ofcourse.
There’s more in the world that the US system, and either is there only one alternative to the US system.
True, but the other systems don’t influence my daily life. And it is important, as many EU-politicians would like to copy the US-system to the EU. So I’m not attacking the US-system itself, only the ones who want to bring it to the continent.
Never fully trust statistics.
That’s true, therefor I only trust what I can see with my own eyes. Fact is, that, although the US-system pretends to give a higher standard of living to all people, this is in reality only happening to a limited group. So, there’s no reason to assume that the American system would be so much better than the one in Europe, in fact, the opposite. I’m not going to deny that there are still poor regions in Europe, especially Portugal, the south of Italy and even Wallonia scores high in these statistics. I don’t know about the Netherlands though, but I believe you.
over-bureaucratization of the Dutch health-care system
True, and that is largely because doctors in the Netherlands are payed by the state instead of owning a private business. Too much state controll can also damage society, like here. So that shows once again I’m not a socialist, and I chose for liberalism wherever it is possible.
Don’t pretend everything in Belgium is perfect though. I’ve been there a couple of times (Brussels last year), and things weren’t all that bright in Belgium.
You mean like – what? Ofcourse Belgium is not perfect, I’m probably the last one who’s going to say that, looking at my posts. But for a nation which has 3 totally different cultures, languages and opinions, I still think it’s a succes. Unless a civil war breaks out :p
However, if you read the text, you’ll see sufficient references to democratic ideas, such as elections
Elections don’t necessairily mean a country is democratic. What you mean is a republic. Iran is also a republic, though I have my doubts on the democratic values over there. Democracy means that people (individuals) have the possibility to activelly, become a part of the “government” (both legislative and executive tranch). This is impossible though, it can never work. What most so called democracies today are, are actually republican authoritarian states, where a dictator – who represents more than 50 % of people’s opinion because he has been elected – holds all power. What we now have is a dictatorship of the majority, not of some individual despot. But it’s still not democracy, because that would mean you can satisfy all 100 % of a country’s population.
Also, at least the US constitution gives the US population rights of all kinds. I don’t believe the EU constitution does that.
I wouldn’t call it a EU-constitution either, because as you said, there aren’t any individual rights in it. But don’t forget we still have the national constitutions. What this EU-document really is, is a roadmap to the hundreds of institutions which are currently part of the EU. So I’m, much like most people in favour of European integration, disappointed in the convention and this document.
GeforceThe definition I know is a territory, inhabited by a people, with a effective ruling entity (legal defintion).
Indeed, this is the definition. And to make sure the state can perform its tasks, it has a monopoly on violence. But since paying taxes is not “violence” as it is a right, theoritically, paying more taxes is not a punishment. Children who become a burden on society – a good point you brought up here – can be avoided through a good educational system. Even then, there will always be exceptions who will still become criminals. As is the case now, the “good” people will still have to pay for the “bad” people’s mistakes. I don’t really think there’s anything you can do. But if a state can use some of its power, maybe it can prevent these things from happening. Ofcourse, if the state is not allowed to interfere in anyone’s life, how can you expect it to effectivily put a halt on issues like criminal activities. This however, is not socialism, because the state should look at each person individually, and not as one “group”. Ofcourse, this is more of an Utopia, and will be harder to achieve than socialism.
Should they be forced to marry or engage in a relationship, so they as well can have children?
Ofcourse not, it’s not like we live in a totallitarian state. But if you have children, you already recieve more money now. If people want to stay single then they should be able to. Paying a bit more taxes is not going to kill or even opress you. If you are handicapped or have a perfectly good reason not to marry or get children, you should not pay more taxes ofcourse.
There’s more in the world that the US system, and either is there only one alternative to the US system.
True, but the other systems don’t influence my daily life. And it is important, as many EU-politicians would like to copy the US-system to the EU. So I’m not attacking the US-system itself, only the ones who want to bring it to the continent.
Never fully trust statistics.
That’s true, therefor I only trust what I can see with my own eyes. Fact is, that, although the US-system pretends to give a higher standard of living to all people, this is in reality only happening to a limited group. So, there’s no reason to assume that the American system would be so much better than the one in Europe, in fact, the opposite. I’m not going to deny that there are still poor regions in Europe, especially Portugal, the south of Italy and even Wallonia scores high in these statistics. I don’t know about the Netherlands though, but I believe you.
over-bureaucratization of the Dutch health-care system
True, and that is largely because doctors in the Netherlands are payed by the state instead of owning a private business. Too much state controll can also damage society, like here. So that shows once again I’m not a socialist, and I chose for liberalism wherever it is possible.
Don’t pretend everything in Belgium is perfect though. I’ve been there a couple of times (Brussels last year), and things weren’t all that bright in Belgium.
You mean like – what? Ofcourse Belgium is not perfect, I’m probably the last one who’s going to say that, looking at my posts. But for a nation which has 3 totally different cultures, languages and opinions, I still think it’s a succes. Unless a civil war breaks out :p
However, if you read the text, you’ll see sufficient references to democratic ideas, such as elections
Elections don’t necessairily mean a country is democratic. What you mean is a republic. Iran is also a republic, though I have my doubts on the democratic values over there. Democracy means that people (individuals) have the possibility to activelly, become a part of the “government” (both legislative and executive tranch). This is impossible though, it can never work. What most so called democracies today are, are actually republican authoritarian states, where a dictator – who represents more than 50 % of people’s opinion because he has been elected – holds all power. What we now have is a dictatorship of the majority, not of some individual despot. But it’s still not democracy, because that would mean you can satisfy all 100 % of a country’s population.
Also, at least the US constitution gives the US population rights of all kinds. I don’t believe the EU constitution does that.
I wouldn’t call it a EU-constitution either, because as you said, there aren’t any individual rights in it. But don’t forget we still have the national constitutions. What this EU-document really is, is a roadmap to the hundreds of institutions which are currently part of the EU. So I’m, much like most people in favour of European integration, disappointed in the convention and this document.
GeforceJJ
This, in my book, is trying to force people to have children.
No Jonathan. The definition of a nation-state is, that, unlike citizens, states have a monopoly on violence. Paying taxes is actually a right, a right you can provide to society. Theoretically ofcourse, most people would rather not pay taxes, but -at least in Belgium- the gov’t can not force you to pay your taxes. They can only make your life a miserable hell :). I still think that anyone who does not want children, should just pay more taxes. Or at least s/he should find another way to help society.
Again I ask the question, what next?
So, the state should be able to defend economic interests (going to war to fight against a third party, enemy), but on the same hand, should not be able to controll their own citizens. In other words, the US (or any other gov’t but the US is a fine example) can controll everyone except their own citizens. The people living in Iraq have to obey US-rule, but Joe Average should not. Strange world.
Thank you for protection against those eeeevil capitalists
At least poverty rates in the country north of me are lower than in the US. And I don’t think there are such backward regions in the Netherlands like you can find in the US: West-Virginia, Mississipi …
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/PovertyRates/PovListpct.asp?ST=US
http://www.insee.fr/en/ffc/docs_ffc/DS9968.pdf
And bear in mind that terrorism threatens the very fabric of society.
So does poverty and a bad health care system. Why else would so many Dutch/Britons go to Belgium to enjoy the fruits of our wonderfull health care, payed by the BELGIAN taxpayer (this is not yet EU). It’s easy to pick on socialism, but at the same time, use it.
The EU is certainly less democratic than the US, I can guarantee you that. Have you seen that new monster of an EU constitution?
Again, some very outspoken words. There’s nothing mentioned about democracy in the US Constitution (much like in any constitution), only some basic rights and liberal ideas, copied from John Locke and Montesqieu. The founding fathers did a great job trying to make a consititution, but it’s not perfect. And most important of all, the current Bush-administration is not very “liberal” either. They put restrictions on freedom to guarantee peace and security. I don’t think there’s one single phrase in the US consitution which justifies this.
The EU-institution is a monster because it’s not based on philosophical ideas (unlike the US, French or Belgian Consitution) but on political agreements. Therefor it will not work.
If you would have let intelligent people like Umberto Eco, Sartre etc write it instead of dinosaur Giscard d’Estian, it might had a chance to work.
the judiciary interprets them.
Indeed, and interpretation can vary a lot, according to circumstances. Not very ideological I think, not?
GeforceJJ
This, in my book, is trying to force people to have children.
No Jonathan. The definition of a nation-state is, that, unlike citizens, states have a monopoly on violence. Paying taxes is actually a right, a right you can provide to society. Theoretically ofcourse, most people would rather not pay taxes, but -at least in Belgium- the gov’t can not force you to pay your taxes. They can only make your life a miserable hell :). I still think that anyone who does not want children, should just pay more taxes. Or at least s/he should find another way to help society.
Again I ask the question, what next?
So, the state should be able to defend economic interests (going to war to fight against a third party, enemy), but on the same hand, should not be able to controll their own citizens. In other words, the US (or any other gov’t but the US is a fine example) can controll everyone except their own citizens. The people living in Iraq have to obey US-rule, but Joe Average should not. Strange world.
Thank you for protection against those eeeevil capitalists
At least poverty rates in the country north of me are lower than in the US. And I don’t think there are such backward regions in the Netherlands like you can find in the US: West-Virginia, Mississipi …
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/PovertyRates/PovListpct.asp?ST=US
http://www.insee.fr/en/ffc/docs_ffc/DS9968.pdf
And bear in mind that terrorism threatens the very fabric of society.
So does poverty and a bad health care system. Why else would so many Dutch/Britons go to Belgium to enjoy the fruits of our wonderfull health care, payed by the BELGIAN taxpayer (this is not yet EU). It’s easy to pick on socialism, but at the same time, use it.
The EU is certainly less democratic than the US, I can guarantee you that. Have you seen that new monster of an EU constitution?
Again, some very outspoken words. There’s nothing mentioned about democracy in the US Constitution (much like in any constitution), only some basic rights and liberal ideas, copied from John Locke and Montesqieu. The founding fathers did a great job trying to make a consititution, but it’s not perfect. And most important of all, the current Bush-administration is not very “liberal” either. They put restrictions on freedom to guarantee peace and security. I don’t think there’s one single phrase in the US consitution which justifies this.
The EU-institution is a monster because it’s not based on philosophical ideas (unlike the US, French or Belgian Consitution) but on political agreements. Therefor it will not work.
If you would have let intelligent people like Umberto Eco, Sartre etc write it instead of dinosaur Giscard d’Estian, it might had a chance to work.
the judiciary interprets them.
Indeed, and interpretation can vary a lot, according to circumstances. Not very ideological I think, not?
GeforceSteve
Well, Steve, it’s way too early to find out wheter Gulf War II TM was a real succes. Afghanistan was also going to become a democracy … well, the burka’s are back, and women are still treated bad, girls don’t get an education. We’ll see about Iraq in two to ten years.
When Hans Blix asked the “coalition” to wait some more months so UNMOVIC could find the WMD’s – if there were any – Bush simply said no and started the war. Now the same Bush asks us to wait some more months so the US Army could find the WMD’s. BS
If a byproduct of this is that Saddam is gone
You are talking about byproducts. My god, so there are also spin-offs in war these days? It’s like the little toys you can find in your Mc Donnald’s happy meal or Corn Flakes. A nice extra. Sorry guys, we missed the goal “WMD’s”, but hé, we can give you something else “democracy”. Give me a break!
What do the explosives themselves or the possesion of them have to do with anything though Ben?
Ask that to SOC. I don’t know why he said that in the first place because it has little to do with WMD’s.
as they certainly seem capable of in Basra from the MoD reports I’ve read
MoD Reports huh? Well, these reports I would class in the same category as comical Ali’s reports. Only the latter can’t post his on a website.
GeforceSteve
Well, Steve, it’s way too early to find out wheter Gulf War II TM was a real succes. Afghanistan was also going to become a democracy … well, the burka’s are back, and women are still treated bad, girls don’t get an education. We’ll see about Iraq in two to ten years.
When Hans Blix asked the “coalition” to wait some more months so UNMOVIC could find the WMD’s – if there were any – Bush simply said no and started the war. Now the same Bush asks us to wait some more months so the US Army could find the WMD’s. BS
If a byproduct of this is that Saddam is gone
You are talking about byproducts. My god, so there are also spin-offs in war these days? It’s like the little toys you can find in your Mc Donnald’s happy meal or Corn Flakes. A nice extra. Sorry guys, we missed the goal “WMD’s”, but hé, we can give you something else “democracy”. Give me a break!
What do the explosives themselves or the possesion of them have to do with anything though Ben?
Ask that to SOC. I don’t know why he said that in the first place because it has little to do with WMD’s.
as they certainly seem capable of in Basra from the MoD reports I’ve read
MoD Reports huh? Well, these reports I would class in the same category as comical Ali’s reports. Only the latter can’t post his on a website.
GeforceOriginally posted by Florida Dude
… why argue over different opinions when ours don’t even matter?
Hehe, I never said your opinion doesn’t matter. Otherwise I wouldn’t have posted it in the first place. But I don’t think this subject – the fact that a so called “just” war might have been manipulated – is so unimportant that it doesn’t deserve a place on a military forum like this. And since this is a forum, why should I avoid these subjects? The fact that you don’t like to hear them or don’t find any arguments will only makes it easier for us to win this conversation.
Ben
GeforceOriginally posted by Florida Dude
… why argue over different opinions when ours don’t even matter?
Hehe, I never said your opinion doesn’t matter. Otherwise I wouldn’t have posted it in the first place. But I don’t think this subject – the fact that a so called “just” war might have been manipulated – is so unimportant that it doesn’t deserve a place on a military forum like this. And since this is a forum, why should I avoid these subjects? The fact that you don’t like to hear them or don’t find any arguments will only makes it easier for us to win this conversation.
Ben
GeforceOriginally posted by Florida Dude
If you feel that “the big bad democracies” are able to just take over another countrie then why be afraid, you can’t stop it from happening.If you are afraid and we have struck fear into your life then we succeded in what we hoped to do, scare you so you can’t resist.
Remember there is only one guarentee in life.
What is the point you are trying to make?
GeforceOriginally posted by Florida Dude
If you feel that “the big bad democracies” are able to just take over another countrie then why be afraid, you can’t stop it from happening.If you are afraid and we have struck fear into your life then we succeded in what we hoped to do, scare you so you can’t resist.
Remember there is only one guarentee in life.
What is the point you are trying to make?
GeforceOriginally posted by dhfan
I would have thought with arrogant know-alls like USagent it was bl**dy obvious.
The US has managed to unite the world. Everybody hates them (except Blair).
Well, this kind of talk will only make it worse. You see, arrogance doesn’t only come from the Americans themselves, but also from the so called anti-Americans. Not everyone hates them, there are many nice things about the US (not so much the people but he 😎 ). If Americans were only willing to understand that not everyone who doesn’t align with the current Bush administration is anti-US or even worse, a commie. But it only shows once again that the American unilateralism is now being copied all over the world. Either you are with the US, or against it. And most people are just not with the US, sorry, that’s reality. So, theoretically spoken, I am against the US.
Also, I think that USAgent is not worth the conversation. Even on this board, there are more moderate Americans. Talk to them and forget about this guy. Getting angry only makes him smile even more. Fat chance he’s not even an American, but the opposite and he just posts stupid comments to make the US look bad. We had that once, but it was an Indian making himself look like a Pakistani I think.
GeforceOriginally posted by dhfan
I would have thought with arrogant know-alls like USagent it was bl**dy obvious.
The US has managed to unite the world. Everybody hates them (except Blair).
Well, this kind of talk will only make it worse. You see, arrogance doesn’t only come from the Americans themselves, but also from the so called anti-Americans. Not everyone hates them, there are many nice things about the US (not so much the people but he 😎 ). If Americans were only willing to understand that not everyone who doesn’t align with the current Bush administration is anti-US or even worse, a commie. But it only shows once again that the American unilateralism is now being copied all over the world. Either you are with the US, or against it. And most people are just not with the US, sorry, that’s reality. So, theoretically spoken, I am against the US.
Also, I think that USAgent is not worth the conversation. Even on this board, there are more moderate Americans. Talk to them and forget about this guy. Getting angry only makes him smile even more. Fat chance he’s not even an American, but the opposite and he just posts stupid comments to make the US look bad. We had that once, but it was an Indian making himself look like a Pakistani I think.
GeforceOriginally posted by ELP
Oh yippee. Yet another government run program. Should be entertaining to watch.And what flavor of nonsense are you pushing this week Geforce ?
Than prove I’m wrong with arguments. I mean, how many Americans actually died because of “terrorism”. Is it really the worst problem for the US?
GeforceOriginally posted by ELP
Oh yippee. Yet another government run program. Should be entertaining to watch.And what flavor of nonsense are you pushing this week Geforce ?
Than prove I’m wrong with arguments. I mean, how many Americans actually died because of “terrorism”. Is it really the worst problem for the US?
Sign In
