Re: Suck Ses!
kreed
>
> Fortunatelly for us, Lieberals nominated Malcolm Turnbull to be a
> Communication expert.
> He need in his team former Lieberal communication experts like Minchin and a
> big tits woman (I forget her name). Their experience should lead us to
> fire&carpet, signaling flags, distant sign language and pigeon mesagging as
> a NBN replacement.
>
> Both parties are hopeless. It's time for a real democracy I suggested 8
> years ago so they kept me unemployed since.
>
> The solution is: On-line referendums - we don't need expensive and useless
> Parliament.
>
There are many things we need.
1> Preventing people who bludge off the welfare all their lives when
they can work, from voting for proposals or parties that will take the
money of those that do earn. One example would be to only allow senate
voting for people who own or have reasonable equity in their
property / own (or have reasonable equity in) their own business /
served in the military - in other words people who actually have a
stake in the country, have put their life on the line for it, have
something to lose, and will personally be adversely affected by bad
policy, ensuring that they give some real thought to the national
interest/economy etc before voting.
People who have a legitimate need for welfare assistance and cannot
provide for themselves and require benefits such as age pensioners,
genuinely invalid to be exempt from this rule.
Disallowing voting for both houses of parliament would probably result
in the gov arranging laws somehow selectively putting as many people
on benefits as possible,
to eliminate totally any right to vote.
Voting also needs to cover every issue, not this failed policy of
simply electing a "management team" that don't represent the public on
most of their decisions.
Conroy and his attitude on filtering are a prime example. There needs
to be a mechanism for the public to remove people like this during
their term and/or block these sort of policies. It breaches human
rights (freedom of speech and information) also.
2> Politicians to be subject to criminal/civil liability for
incompetence, mismanagement, fraud, dishonesty, corruption - ie exact
same things that a regular person would. Politicians voting for or
introducing any bill that violates constitutional or basic human
rights needs to be criminally charged and prosecuted.
To prevent corruption, groups external to the government must be able
to investigate these matters publicly and press charges as the police
and courts are compromised and cannot be relied on to handle these
matters.
There should be some legally binding status on election promises too.
This can force changes to unintended consequences of a policy that the
public wouldn't have wanted if they had known.
3> They think that police state style monitoring of every aspect of
the public's activities is necessary for "our safety" ?
As pollies spout "equal rights" crap, then how about we do the same
police state monitoring of every moment of government officials/
politicians/police and anyone who is remotely suspected of corruption.
Some kind of 24 / 7 wearable GPS, Audio, video linked device would be
ideal - as well as monitoring of all government facilites and
vehicles. After all, throughout history politicians and governments
have proved time and time again that they are the greatest danger to
life, liberty and property and their actions cause the greatest
damage, and there is a need to keep them on a very very short leash
and under tight scrutiny for our own safety and protection. This would
also kill corruption stone dead.
4> Contentious issues like the "carbon tax" that have a significant
amount of support for and against need to be done on a basis of "those
that want to participate - facilitate it so they can, those who don't
want to can keep out of it". This is one example of a group of people
voting the money out of other people's pockets on what many believe to
be false information. Give those that believe - the right to
voluntarily contribute of their own free will.
5> Equal campaign funding. Leading up to an election, the media should
supply an equal number of minutes of TV/radio or equal amounts of
newspaper adverts of political advertising to each candidate in each
seat to use as they see fit, also equal value of production of
adverts. Equal allowance for printing of flyers etc.
Would be good to see them provide this gratis as its only for a short
time every couple of years, all in the interests of democracy.
6>Strict limits on government borrowing.
We shouldn't bear the bill for incompetence or mismanagement - Keating
for example.
>
> People who use Internet are able to represent themselves and vote on-line.
> People who has no Internet (read no interest to learn to use it) should not
> make decisions about Australians future and should be excluded from voting
> just like children or mentally impaired people are excluded now.
>
I don't think that is very fair. Some don't have or want it. Some
physically impaired people might not even be able to use it.
>
> Existing Internet is fine for me and 90% of Australians. It's fast, cheap
> and reliable. Last year I have cancelled Foxtel and telephone rentals - my
> ISP & my satellite dish provide all Internet, TV and phone/fax services.
>
yes
> Please don't come back with idiocy that farmers do not have Internet as this
> is a LIE. Government subsidy pay almost 100% for Satellite Internet to
> everyfarmet who want it and it covers 100% of Australian teritory. And there
> is a lot of unused bandwith.
>
yes
> Why is Government involved in Internet? Only to control us.
>
> Internet should stay private business out of Government censors and spies.
>
There should be no form whatsoever of internet censorship, except for
those that voluntarily
and freely purchase/obtain their own internet censorship programs
(like "Net Nanny" etc) and set their own
filtering rules appropriate for their or their children's usage.
There are adequate laws around to investigate and punish criminal
activity on the net such as fraud, theft etc.
Make the police do the job they are paid for.
> NEXT PM
Jasen Betts
> The solution is: On-line referendums - we don't need expensive and useless
> Parliament.
so who writes the legislation?
> People who use Internet are able to represent themselves and vote on-line.
> People who has no Internet (read no interest to learn to use it) should not
> make decissions about Australians future and should be excluded from voting
> just like children or mentally impaired people are excluded now.
Just look at the success USA has had with computerised voting.
Now you can have the same in your own home!
Expect to see laws protecting botnet operators passed.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Michael A. Terrell
Of course. Then we can chose the 'winners' in all European
elections.
--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.
kreed
> On 2010-09-15, George Orwell <anonym...@rip.ax.lt> wrote:
>
> > The solution is: On-line referendums - we don't need expensive and useless
> > Parliament.
>
> so who writes the legislation?
>
Big business, illuminiati etc currently do. Little is written for the
benefit of the citizens.
In this regard, we would probably be better off if there wasnt any
written at all ;)
> > People who use Internet are able to represent themselves and vote on-line.
> > People who has no Internet (read no interest to learn to use it) should not
> > make decissions about Australians future and should be excluded from voting
> > just like children or mentally impaired people are excluded now.
>
> Just look at the success USA has had with computerised voting.
> Now you can have the same in your own home!
>
> Expect to see laws protecting botnet operators passed.
>
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---
Anything compute data can be (and often is) compromised, and it is all
but impossible to prove or disprove this tampering.
Only paper ballot or some physical method is reliable IMHO.