Your favorite form of government?
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 10, 2012 20:13:21 GMT
What is your favorite form of government?
I prefer for you to answer based in practicality and not on your own country. Ergo, try to vote on what you like in theory, not what your home state is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zrined on Apr 10, 2012 20:32:20 GMT
Parliamentary Democracy (I.e. The United Kingdom)
|
|
|
|
Post by nmagain on Apr 10, 2012 20:58:13 GMT
Motherfucking Anarchy, that's for sure. Who wouldn't like a world with survival for the fittest? Not Americans.
|
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Apr 10, 2012 21:39:24 GMT
I believe a technocracy is in order here. To be honest I didn't know what Technocracy was before this thread. I quick google search fixed that and I must say, it's definitely my favourite.
|
|
|
|
Post by priok on Apr 10, 2012 22:30:38 GMT
Democracy, but I think that it is way more important than just the term, it has to do with many other things.
|
|
|
|
Post by D_M-01 on Apr 10, 2012 22:32:25 GMT
Democracy. Equal opportunity for all individuals, etc., etc..
|
|
|
|
Post by GloveParty on Apr 10, 2012 22:53:36 GMT
Most CERTAINLY A Democracy/Republic.
Googling a Technocracy, technocracies sound silly tbh. Not quite sure how you'd run a country with science.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 0:12:35 GMT
Democracies, especially republics, are often actually one of the most corrupt forms of government, if they aren't transparent and don't have any safe guards. A poorly set up democracy is worst than a blatant dictatorship.
|
|
|
|
Post by GloveParty on Apr 11, 2012 1:56:02 GMT
No, a blatant dictatorship would be worse than a poorly set up democracy. Governments doing things behind backs is not worse than plain dictatorial stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 2:00:57 GMT
An bad democracy is just a oligarchy or a dictatorship, except people don't realize it.
I see you have been thoroughly brainwashed.
|
|
|
|
Post by priok on Apr 11, 2012 3:06:50 GMT
A democracy is not always good, yeah. A blatant dictatorship could be good, it really depends more on the other things. Democracy has some good ideals, but some of the very good ones are not always transferred into every democracy.
I would not say that you can judge something based entirely off of the term you use, things are way more complicated than just the title they're given.
|
|
|
|
Post by GloveParty on Apr 11, 2012 3:30:49 GMT
An bad democracy is just a oligarchy or a dictatorship, except people don't realize it. I see you have been thoroughly brainwashed. Ack, yes, it sounded like I was condoning doing stuff behind backs. No. Stuff like executive agreements and then "Hey gaiz I kinda made a treaty so no legislative process" makes me mad. But it goes slower and if an actual democratic system is kept in place can never reach the points that a dictatorship can without significant backlash. If by poorly run you men votes are fudged then it's not even a democracy. Also, I haven't been "brainwashed", which seems to be a word you are quite fond of using. You should cut down on it in serious arguments, as it seems to be your major argument whenever anything involving government comes up. |
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 11, 2012 12:29:30 GMT
No, a blatant dictatorship would be worse than a poorly set up democracy. Governments doing things behind backs is not worse than plain dictatorial stuff. Governments always do things behind their citizen's backs. |
|
|
|
Post by Artifact123 on Apr 11, 2012 13:07:42 GMT
The idea behind communism is perfect but leaders just have to be such egoistic d*ckheads.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 11, 2012 14:02:51 GMT
Communism isn't perfect, not because of leaders, because of citizens and the how the workforce is set up.
There would be no free enterprise and people would have jobs selected. Aspirations wouldn't matter anyways, you'd be paid the same as someone who is 10 times less skilled as you. Or gets 10 times less work done. There's no reason to work hard or to motivate you in the workforce. Communism is perfect in theory but it doesn't take into account the people.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 14:04:58 GMT
Here is the major issue with any Democracy.
For Pure Democracies, the average person does NOT know how to run a country. Also, chances are the majority will oppress the minority.
For republics, the people still really don't know anything, so the politicians can use this to their adanvantage. Also, their motivation needs to be staying in office, not bettering the people. The traits required to become popular as a politian are the same as the symptoms of NPD. If terms are limited, the president doesn't need to keep any of his damn presidents once he is elected.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 14:07:53 GMT
Communism isn't perfect, not because of leaders, because of citizens and the how the workforce is set up. There would be no free enterprise and people would have jobs selected. Aspirations wouldn't matter anyways, you'd be paid the same as someone who is 10 times less skilled as you. Or gets 10 times less work done. There's no reason to work hard or to motivate you in the workforce. Communism is perfect in theory but it doesn't take into account the people. Money is a terrible way to motivate people. If someone's main motivation is wealth than they are not a good person. |
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 11, 2012 14:09:46 GMT
Money is the only way to motivate people. If you think it's terrible then most of the people in the USA are terrible. Money and promotions, as well as not getting fired, are the best motivators for a job. It's how we keep the economy working. And stop double posting. It's against the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 14:16:38 GMT
Money is the only way to motivate people. If you think it's terrible then most of the people in the USA are terrible. Money and promotions, as well as not getting fired, are the best motivators for a job. It's how we keep the economy working. And stop double posting. It's against the rules. I double posted on a quotation, that's different. Anyway, if you think money is the only motivation for people than you are an idiot. People do not select their occupations based on money alone. The primary motivation people have is passion, and more money may make it easier for someone to fuel their passion, but it may not. Money is just the easiest tool most companies have to motivate their employees as generally everyone likes money, every company has it, and you can do stuff with it. People need various things that are usually payed for with money to live, so they get payed, but money isn't what they want the most. And yes, I'm willing to say most people in the US are terrible. |
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 11, 2012 14:20:58 GMT
Look, if you're going to insult people get the hell off the thread and go to serious debate. Money isn't the only motivative factor, there's also the chances of getting a raise, promotion, going higher up, being an authority, or being fired.
That is how they keep the economy moving, and that's how they keep products good. If there's no competition in the work environment, what's the point of taking your time on a product? Or a service? If you want some examples, look at Russia.
|
|
|
|
Post by Artifact123 on Apr 11, 2012 15:55:26 GMT
Money is the only way to motivate people. If you think it's terrible then most of the people in the USA are terrible. Money and promotions, as well as not getting fired, are the best motivators for a job. It's how we keep the economy working. And stop double posting. It's against the rules. I double posted on a quotation, that's different. Anyway, if you think money is the only motivation for people than you are an idiot. People do not select their occupations based on money alone. The primary motivation people have is passion, and more money may make it easier for someone to fuel their passion, but it may not. Money is just the easiest tool most companies have to motivate their employees as generally everyone likes money, every company has it, and you can do stuff with it. People need various things that are usually payed for with money to live, so they get payed, but money isn't what they want the most. And yes, I'm willing to say most people in the US are terrible. For most people money is their main motivation. We live in a sad world. My main motivation? Enlightment and experience. |
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 19:11:57 GMT
Look, if you're going to insult people get the hell off the thread and go to serious debate. Money isn't the only motivative factor, there's also the chances of getting a raise, promotion, going higher up, being an authority, or being fired. That is how they keep the economy moving, and that's how they keep products good. If there's no competition in the work environment, what's the point of taking your time on a product? Or a service? If you want some examples, look at Russia. Look, money and all these other stuff are not the main motivation. Money is a means to meet an end, not an end in itself. Money has no heart, it's just fabric, metal or paper, nothing more. The reason money is desired is because it's used to full fill are desire to have food to eat and a roof over our head, so we are motivated to get something to get us food and shelter, and it's also used as motivation on our imaginary totem poles were more money means higher status, and the motivation is to raise in status. The reason those methods are as motivation in a corporate setting is because thats what corporations can motivate people. Corporations are motivated by solely money as they are designed as such, corporations are not people. One of the problems with our society is that we place too much value on money, which leads to depression once we realize it has no inherent value at all and we were just running on a meaningless treadmill our whole lives. That's the problem with communism, there is no passion, and thus no motivation. Jobs are assigned, so there is no motivation to do your job out of the love for it, and there is no financial motive, so people aren't motivated to work any harder as they get nothing out of it. If you get nothing out of anything you do, why bother doing anything at all? We build a wall, and watch as it falls in front of our eyes, and then we ask "why?". |
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 11, 2012 19:31:11 GMT
Look, if you're going to insult people get the hell off the thread and go to serious debate. Money isn't the only motivative factor, there's also the chances of getting a raise, promotion, going higher up, being an authority, or being fired. That is how they keep the economy moving, and that's how they keep products good. If there's no competition in the work environment, what's the point of taking your time on a product? Or a service? If you want some examples, look at Russia. Look, money and all these other stuff are not the main motivation. Money is a means to meet an end, not an end in itself. Money has no heart, it's just fabric, metal or paper, nothing more. The reason money is desired is because it's used to full fill are desire to have food to eat and a roof over our head, so we are motivated to get something to get us food and shelter, and it's also used as motivation on our imaginary totem poles were more money means higher status, and the motivation is to raise in status. The reason those methods are as motivation in a corporate setting is because thats what corporations can motivate people. Corporations are motivated by solely money as they are designed as such, corporations are not people. One of the problems with our society is that we place too much value on money, which leads to depression once we realize it has no inherent value at all and we were just running on a meaningless treadmill our whole lives. That's the problem with communism, there is no passion, and thus no motivation. Jobs are assigned, so there is no motivation to do your job out of the love for it, and there is no financial motive, so people aren't motivated to work any harder as they get nothing out of it. If you get nothing out of anything you do, why bother doing anything at all? We build a wall, and watch as it falls in front of our eyes, and then we ask "why?". What the hell are you talking about? Look, if you want a good example of why communism doesn't work in real life, take a look at Russia. All of their products are terrible. |
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 19:52:47 GMT
Look, money and all these other stuff are not the main motivation. Money is a means to meet an end, not an end in itself. Money has no heart, it's just fabric, metal or paper, nothing more. The reason money is desired is because it's used to full fill are desire to have food to eat and a roof over our head, so we are motivated to get something to get us food and shelter, and it's also used as motivation on our imaginary totem poles were more money means higher status, and the motivation is to raise in status. The reason those methods are as motivation in a corporate setting is because thats what corporations can motivate people. Corporations are motivated by solely money as they are designed as such, corporations are not people. One of the problems with our society is that we place too much value on money, which leads to depression once we realize it has no inherent value at all and we were just running on a meaningless treadmill our whole lives. That's the problem with communism, there is no passion, and thus no motivation. Jobs are assigned, so there is no motivation to do your job out of the love for it, and there is no financial motive, so people aren't motivated to work any harder as they get nothing out of it. If you get nothing out of anything you do, why bother doing anything at all? We build a wall, and watch as it falls in front of our eyes, and then we ask "why?". What the hell are you talking about? Look, if you want a good example of why communism doesn't work in real life, take a look at Russia. All of their products are terrible. Yeah, but their products weren't terrible because they didn't have competition, they had competition with the US. Their products sucked because they had no motivation to make anything good for whatever reason. They had no motivation because they didn't give a damn what they did, they had nothing to look forward to, and their work had no meaning for them. Meaningless work for meaningless pay. Stuff gets dome if you have one of the two, you need to lack both for nothing to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 11, 2012 21:10:44 GMT
Wrong competition broseph, I meant competition in the work environment, not competition with other nations. IE, why work hard when you have no worries about being fired, or why work hard when your co workers aren't working hard or aren't as skilled as you. Or why work hard when you won't be promoted or given a raise ANYWAYS. This is how the majority of people thing and this is why the majority of Russia's product is terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 11, 2012 22:35:04 GMT
Wrong competition broseph, I meant competition in the work environment, not competition with other nations. IE, why work hard when you have no worries about being fired, or why work hard when your co workers aren't working hard or aren't as skilled as you. Or why work hard when you won't be promoted or given a raise ANYWAYS. This is how the majority of people thing and this is why the majority of Russia's product is terrible. Ok. Charitable Organizations. Volunteers. Your arguement is invalid. |
|
|
|
Post by D_M-01 on Apr 11, 2012 23:40:19 GMT
EltonEyes, you need a political system to manage foreign policy, federal government, and maintain the rights of citizens. Scientists and engineers would be busy with their discoveries than rather listening to the demands of the people.
Also, I disagree that money is the main motivation for people to choose a profession. A profession, like Ganondorf said, is fueled by the passion a person has to engage in such a field.
The reason Russia was/is in such poor economic condition was not because they spent times on products on services, but rather because in a Communist government you are designated a set job and paid a certain amount that was standard for all people whether or not you wanted the job.
These people were also motivated not by money but by fear of being killed. Russia possessed a thriving economy until the death of Joseph Stalin. Stalin forced people to work and once that fear was gone, the people demanded reform which caused the collapse of the Russian economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Apr 12, 2012 1:57:38 GMT
People don't get a passion in a communism. They don't have free enterprise.
|
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Apr 12, 2012 3:14:06 GMT
People don't get a passion in a communism. They don't have free enterprise. Did I ever say they did? Anyway, I don't think free enterprise per se is required for passion in work, but there needs to be more freedom in career choice than in communism. |
|
|
|
Post by nmagain on Apr 12, 2012 12:43:13 GMT
|
|
|
