Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[mainiac]

On top of all this imagine the US government could dish out titles and knighthoods and Lordships and even peer titles (i.e. being able to sit in the House of Lords) to wealthy party benefactors and people they think deserve it. They just take it to the Queen and she does what the government asks her to do. So even though she's giving out knighthoods on her own terms, the PM is effectively knighting people just as much. If you have enough money you can basically bribe your way into a knighthood or peer title with well placed donations, so if you have enough money you can become a part of the country's legislature for life. This is called Cash for Honours. Tony Blair was particularly bad for this.

Which is a rather good thing, no?

As long as the house of commons can appoint party line hacks as lords if need be, the house of lords is a rubber stamp.  That makes it a perfect dumping ground for dangerous individuals you want to remove from the legislature or old guard idiots who are holding the party back.  Let them play act that they are politicians while the real government does the work of governing.

I'd say I'd want something like that in the US but it probably would be difficult to hit the same balance.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Yeah, no. The very thought of unelected religious figures and plutocrats having a say in legislature makes me feel ill. They have far too much influence as is.

[Owlbread]

Essentially the government in power is allowed to appoint a very small minority of people in the legislature.

How on earth are they a "very small minority of people" when they number at over 700? The House of Commons only has 650. Granted their power might make them a minority but the Lords have enough power to cause trouble, and like I said they can request revisions to legislation put forward by the Commons and filibuster it to hell.

Which is .... uh.. unusual, but I support the theory because too frequent elections causes short term thinking and popularism which can have devastating consequences...

How frequent is "too frequent" for you?

As long as the house of commons can appoint party line hacks as lords if need be, the house of lords is a rubber stamp.  That makes it a perfect dumping ground for dangerous individuals you want to remove from the legislature or old guard idiots who are holding the party back.  Let them play act that they are politicians while the real government does the work of governing.

A rubber stamp that can delay the passing of bills by two years?

They're not removed from the legislature anyway. They're a part of the legislature and are until they die. The problem in Britain at the moment actually has nothing to do with the "old guard" causing problems - if Labour had a powerful old guard they'd be a party I'd consider voting for (if the SNP didn't exist) because then they'd be a lot more left leaning. Instead new cabals form that are just as powerful and just as prohibitive as any old guard, like the New Labour lot and Cameron's Eurosceptics.

I'd say I'd want something like that in the US but it probably would be difficult to hit the same balance.

Why the hell would you want people in your legislature forever? You're fine as it is. I know you've got problems with your Old Guards, particularly in the Republican Party, but the House of Lords is not an answer.

Yeah, no. The very thought of unelected religious figures and plutocrats having a say in legislature makes me feel ill. They have far too much influence as is.

It is morally reprehensible.

[mainiac]

They're not removed from the legislature anyway. They're a part of the legislature and are until they die. The problem in Britain at the moment actually has nothing to do with the "old guard" causing problems

Agree to disagree with the rest, but on this point...

I said that it's a system that prevents old guard problems.
You say you don't need to prevent them because there aren't such problems.
Kinda the point, no?

[Owlbread]

If you removed all the nonsense from the House of Lords (clerics, titles,  aristocrats, robes etc), cut down the size a bit and renamed it as the British Senate then maybe it would be more acceptable.  That said, are you really sure about a lifelong tenure?

[mainiac]

Lifelong tenure just makes it more effective.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It's not going to function as a dumping ground no matter how much you want it to. All it will do is create a standard of conservatism by which all things will be judged and is only pushed forward by the icy hand of death. You will have a society that is permanently stuck with their oldest and most reactionary having a perfect vehicle for preventing all progress.

[LordSlowpoke]

It's not going to function as a dumping ground no matter how much you want it to. All it will do is create a standard of conservatism by which all things will be judged and is only pushed forward by the icy hand of death. You will have a society that is permanently stuck with their oldest and most reactionary having a perfect vehicle for preventing all progress.

...yes, because the united kingdom is turning out to be a reactionary hellhole just like the one you are describing

i understand that owlbread has views that would be in good old england considered good enough to slice week old baguettes with, but you have little excuse

[mainiac]

It's not going to function as a dumping ground no matter how much you want it to. All it will do is create a standard of conservatism by which all things will be judged and is only pushed forward by the icy hand of death. You will have a society that is permanently stuck with their oldest and most reactionary having a perfect vehicle for preventing all progress.

Care to name for me what pressing issues the house of lords is blocking action on?

This list might help: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/parliament/house-of-lords/lords-defeats

Meanwhile the ruling coalition got it's policy through on things like election reform and those wonderful budgets of the past few years.  The government can screw things up without the help of the lords.

[MarcAFK]

Essentially the government in power is allowed to appoint a very small minority of people in the legislature.

How on earth are they a "very small minority of people" when they number at over 700? The House of Commons only has 650. Granted their power might make them a minority but the Lords have enough power to cause trouble, and like I said they can request revisions to legislation put forward by the Commons and filibuster it to hell.



I'm not saying the lords are a minority, just that only a small minority can ever be appointed by the current government in power. 

Which is .... uh.. unusual, but I support the theory because too frequent elections causes short term thinking and popularism which can have devastating consequences...

How frequent is "too frequent" for you?
er, every four years?

As long as the house of commons can appoint party line hacks as lords if need be, the house of lords is a rubber stamp.  That makes it a perfect dumping ground for dangerous individuals you want to remove from the legislature or old guard idiots who are holding the party back.  Let them play act that they are politicians while the real government does the work of governing.

A rubber stamp that can delay the passing of bills by two years?

They're not removed from the legislature anyway. They're a part of the legislature and are until they die. The problem in Britain at the moment actually has nothing to do with the "old guard" causing problems - if Labour had a powerful old guard they'd be a party I'd consider voting for (if the SNP didn't exist) because then they'd be a lot more left leaning. Instead new cabals form that are just as powerful and just as prohibitive as any old guard, like the New Labour lot and Cameron's Eurosceptics.

I'd say I'd want something like that in the US but it probably would be difficult to hit the same balance.

Why the hell would you want people in your legislature forever? You're fine as it is. I know you've got problems with your Old Guards, particularly in the Republican Party, but the House of Lords is not an answer.

  I wouldn't want people in power permenantly either, heritity is illogical and dangerous. I think there should be a House of Lords but appointed by referendum, voted into power. Varius offices related to industries or sciences to create a representative slice of the intelligencia and industry to counter the more popularist elected officials. The offices would be for relitively long terms and rules should force reelection when nessicary 

[Ukrainian Ranger]

So, column of white shit entered in Ukraine. Looks like without Red Cross representatives...

Poroshenko, your move. I do hope that those will be burning wrecks soon

[martinuzz]

Russian inspectors found 'components for insecticide' in Jack Daniels exported from the US to Russia.
At the very least, this will prolong the ban on Jack Daniels import, at worst, they'll accuse US of chemical warfare against Russia.

[LordSlowpoke]

it's legit

for russia standards, anyway

jack daniels contains eugenol oil which was supposedly a hyped up thing in pest control

it's pretty bullshit though, it's easier to kill yourself with it than to remove insects

[Detharon]

Russian inspectors found 'components for insecticide' in Jack Daniels exported from the US to Russia.
At the very least, this will prolong the ban on Jack Daniels import, at worst, they'll accuse US of chemical warfare against Russia.

Russian creativity in making up embargo reasons never ceases to astound me. I wonder if their citizens actually believe in that.

[da_nang]

So, column of white shit entered in Ukraine. Looks like without Red Cross representatives...

Poroshenko, your move. I do hope that those will be burning wrecks soon

They're also said to be escorted by separatists. If I'm not mistaken, that makes it a legitimate military target.

So yeah, you have my support.

If only there was NATO ground presence. At least then there would be proper deterrence.