|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Universal Suffrage
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Abolish voting entirely. Better would be "conscriptive democracy". Your name is pulled like for jury duty. You must serve unless you've a case to make about undue hardship. You get paid the same as your current job, and you cannot serve twice. Much more democratic than allowing the filthy rich, mostly men who inherited their wealth and pompous attitudes to run things, pretending they care about the average person.
(I just made this up in a fit of pique, but it doesn't sound that bad even as I read it back to myself.)
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
I think you have just described sortition.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Why not let every one who is resident register to vote. Then let them decide whether they consider they have a sufficient stake, or potential stake, in the community where they are living to actually use the vote they're entitled to.
Given the range of your objections to LC, what's your justification for limiting the vote to residents? After all, under your proposal a resident would still be allowed to vote the day before moving to a new location, while a tourist staying in a hotel in the same town could be condemned to suffer, disenfranchised, for another whole week...
I would work on the principal of one vote per person. We have mechanisms to allow people to vote if they're absent at election time, or physically incapable of getting to the polling station (postal voting, proxy). Thus if I was a tourist at election time, my vote would be cast here. It would be inappropriate for me to have a second vote in another location. The same would work in reverse, a tourist with a vote in another location shouldn't have a second vote here (not that EK is overrun by tourists!).
But, generally I would want "residency" to be as wide as possible. In particular enabling homeless people (and others such as travellers) without a fixed address to be able to vote. I would say that some is still resident if they live most of the time in a given area - even if that's on the street, mobile home, hostels, the couch of friends etc.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Enoch, is the appointment of rector/vicar (and I do now in essence the difference) akin to becoming a corporation sole? It's certainly not the case here. Or is it a variation on all natural persons being legal ones, but not vice versa?
A corporation sole is an office that continues indefinitely, but from time to time is occupied by different people. Incumbents aren't the only examples. Secretaries of State are and so is the Crown.
How do corporations sole work in the various Australian jurisdictions? What makes you one?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
They do exist, but are not common and as far as I know all have been created by statute. For example, the Director General of the NSW Attorney General's Dept (As-G here are very different to those in the UK, more akin to those in the US) is constituted as a corporation sole for the purposes of the Suitors' Fund Act. Generally ministers of the Crown are not but some may be in some respects of their office, when carrying out powers given them by statute. A rector*, as rector, would not be.
*The title usually used for the incumbent of an Anglican Parish in NSW is rector; in Victoria at least it is vicar. I can't speak of other states. I do know the old difference in the C of E but that does not apply here and is not reflected in the title used in different states.
[ 08. February 2018, 09:49: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Of course, discussions of universal suffrage in the US have to take into consideration the fact that only about 30 percent of qualified citizens can be bothered to actually get out and vote. One impediment to voting here is the non- voting culture of many families — children have never seen their parents vote, have no idea how to do it even after compulsory civics classes, and are just disinclined to ever start.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
I think you have just described sortition.
Well there you go! Thankyou.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
