[OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.

[tbontob]

I'll just wait for other opinions.

There is no rush to conclude this discussion.

I am sure there are a lot of people out there who know why.

So far it has just been you and me. Others should have the opportunity to participate.

[Loser]

As I understand the Canadian Legislature, you have a greater house where representatives, Senators I believe, come from districts and districts are formed based on population. From this, the larger centers of population basically control this body: more people means more representatives, means more votes. If I recall correctly, your second legislative body is a rubber-stamp institution, whose members are chosen by government from the government.

Tbontob, you seem to live in 'Western Canada'. Last I heard, most folks in the under populated West were generally displeased with this imbalance of power. Not to say they don't like being Canadians, but I've not heard once say they like the "yahoos in the East" making all their decisions for them.

Maybe this isn't the case anymore. Maybe you aren't that into national politics. Maybe I'm just dead wrong.

But in the U.S., both bodies of legislature have power, neither plays the rubber stamp because they tend to have different priorities, even if they are held by the same party.

Members of the Senate, Senators, do not represent specific amounts of the population, they are more creatures of geography: each State gets two, even Wyoming. Additionally, Senators serve a term of six years, giving them greater time to accomplish their goals and more leverage than a member of the lower house. This allows local interests to carry weight, to some degree, on a national level.

Members of the House of Representatives, called Representatives in another great show of creativity, are elected by specific quantities of the population: more people means more Representatives. For this reason Wyoming has only one, while California has something like fifty-three.

Both houses must agree on a bill before it can be passed into law.

This sort of balance between population and geography is one of the things that makes the U.S. the unstable wreck of a government that it is and this balance is not, if I recall correctly, duplicated anywhere else in the world. You're not going to get another country to pick up this model, and you're not going to get the Americans to give it up. The differences in our governments are just one of the reasons the vaste majority of Americans don't strongly favor international administrative bodies.

Next week, we can cover the peculiarities of the American Judicial System.

P.S. Any Canadians or Americans who feel that I do not understand their government are invited to educate me, in this thread or a PM. I will be attentive.

[Edi: Necessary quotes added to indicate a quotation. Thanks, Narrew.]

[ May 13, 2003, 18:47: Message edited by: Loser ]

[Fyron]

Tbontob, you giving an answer does not end the discussion, it helps continue it.

And I think you guys missed my post.

[Loser]

Quick note on populations.

Canada has approximately thirty-three million people.

The U.S. has approximately two hundred eighty-five million people.

The State of California has more people in it than all of Canada. I hope, for Canada's sake, that this new world government does not lean heavily on population (like a democracy would), to make it's decisions.

[Fyron]

This sort of balance between population and geography is one of the things that makes the U.S. the unstable wreck of a government that it is and this balance is not, if I recall correctly, duplicated anywhere else in the world.

This is precisely why the government was set up that way. The longer it takes and the harder it is to get anything done, the less likely a tyranny will be able to take over the government.

[ May 13, 2003, 18:34: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Narrew]

Originally posted by tbontob:
Care to guess the reason why?

That is the second time you said that, dont keep us in supense , unless you really dont know the answer to your question, but I think your stringing us along, your such a tease

I will tell you later about my UN thoughts, have to go do some things, so hold on for a bit.

Ohh, I got a chuckle when I noticed that your from WESTERN Canada

[Narrew]

hey Loser, them "yahoos in the East" you mentioned are actually French nationalists trying to get a foothold back on this part of the world

Group HUG

[tbontob]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Tbontob, you giving an answer does not end the discussion, it helps continue it.

And I think you guys missed my post.

Of course.

That's one of the reasons, I must confess.

The other reason was as stipulated...to give others the time and opportunity to state their opinions.

And if someone gets it right on the money, all I have to say is "Bingo"!

Just so I will not be deluged with abuse, I am using "Bingo" in the sense that it is my opinion too.

EDIT: Fyron I may have misinterpreted your statement and assumed that you omitted to put an extra "not" in it.

[ May 13, 2003, 18:51: Message edited by: tbontob ]

[Narrew]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
And I think you guys missed my post.

I didnt, I need to run, but I will amke a quick comment. If we became a one world goverment, then it wouldnt be illegal to get the mexicans up here to mow my lawn (I am just freaking kidding folks, I like stirring the pot, cant help it, I was born this way).

Ok, this would take it more off topic, but I think we could agree if for some reason WE (someone in the world) decided to make space eXploration/eXploitation/eXpansion, what would be better a 1 world goverment or multi-nationals racing out there? I dont think we would turn on each other if we had something to keep us busy out there.

Grr, I have to go

[Fyron]

EDIT: Fyron I may have misinterpreted your statement and assumed that you omitted to put an extra "not" in it.

I had an extra be in it because I changed the wording mid-sentence and forgot to remove it, but that is all.

The only thing that would make a good unified world government feasible would be great threat from alien lifeforms. But since it is impossible for stellar empires to expand beyond a single star system, that isn't a concern in reality.

[ May 13, 2003, 18:56: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]