Safe Speed Forums

While they themselves break the laws. It's just for us lot downstairs.

Enjoy your break dcb; this has been an interesting thread for me. I'm not sure what conclusion I've arrived at.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

All that this argument shows is that "You" dont believe that such policies are acceptable. It says nothing about whether or not they actually are...

"Morals and ethics are merely the costume jewelry of civilisation!" Me, Some years ago....

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

The wise men, one of whom, declared with confidence that each computer on the internet was identified buy a unique Intellectual Property address?

He's the one who was assigned the task of delivering the 'Digital Britain' plan.

Personally, I do not find their wisdom, in areas that they do not have proven experience or education, particularly comforting

_________________
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

What emotive language!

They are "wise" how?
A great many politicians are wise in terms of protecting their own interests.

A truly wise leader would be able to allow debate and be able to convince the populous that their wisdom should be the one that prevails; if they fail to convince then they have immediate feedback to correct their argument/expectations.

The "mob rule" as you term it, at least allows social progress (even with the occasional hiccup), instead of self-serving political stagnation resulting from external conflicts.
It seems to me that you don't believe society is not capable of learning from its mistakes.

Granted current events shows what mobs can do, but the great majority of the population are disappointed at how the situation has allowed to become so out of control.



Your logic is false; it didn't account for the "portion of the populous".

Even then I still can't accept your argument. With a referendum, voter know they have to live with the consequences of their decision, funded by their own money. What better incentive to get it right than that? Surely that has to be better than being allowed to take decisions in total secrecy!


Judging by recent events (bank bailouts, fiddled expenses, market tumble), I can’t help but think your faith in governments is overly optimistic. Remember, our government forcibly takes away half of what we all earn, yet even with all that revenue they still mess it up. However, it could (and probably would) be voted to allow economists to 'get on with it', while still allowing the public to vote on other issues.


Only if you define 'appeal to popularity' in a peculiar way. But yes: touché

I think both fallacies can be resolved with the "truly wise leader" I described earlier.


Theses checks and balances is why it took then so freaking long to even begin to consider the common sense fair use policy of “format shifting” (let alone act upon it).

"Elections" are no test of government competence; they are merely a test of the strength of promises. They are effectively phenomenally infrequent votes for on ideologies that are subject to change at a moment's notice - an illusion of choice.

Like I said, if these men really are so wise, then the should be able to successfully convey that wisdom to society, or to learn from any failures.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Quite the contrary. Hitler's power base was the mob not the wise men in the Reichstag. Those classic films of the Nuremberg rallies are the definitive example of of where pandering to the mob leads

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Now hold on; Hitler may have had popular support, but his decisions and dictats were very much autocratic.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

But he was only able to be autocratic because he had that popular support. It was that popular support that allowed him to ignore the more moderate members of his party to the extent of murdering several of them in 1934

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

With use of intense propaganda, then a change in ideology, ramping up his Secret Service, and finishing off with dictatorial rule (no 'elections' either)

Given what the Germans had gone through a few years earlier (WW1 - and lost), I believe their populous wouldn't have voted for Hitler if they had known his plan.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Deliberately so.


You have a more sanguine view of the averages voters' intelligence and their ability to understand complex issues and their inability to take a wide view. A cursory glance at the correspondence pages of the "popular" press would give you some idea of the appalling society in which we would be living if their readers were allowed to run the country.

.
Most real social progress has been made in the teeth of opposition both from the masses (is that less emotive than mob?) and from the government of the day. Women's suffrage and the abolition of slavery are two examples.


I certainly don't believe in using confusing double negatives A look at the history books doesn't convince me that Society is good at learning from earlier mistakes. J M Keynes published a seminal essay in which he demonstrated that financial crises re-occur when the current operators have no personal memories of the previous crisis.


I am not sure that the criminal behaviour of a large number of people is relevant to the argument since convicted criminals are excluded from the decision making process.



You will have to spell that out in terms that my simple mind can grasp


Once again you hold a very optimistic opinion of the ability of the average person to make informed decisions and to understand the consequences of their actions.
And I have never suggested that my "wise men" -who are epitomised by the better members of the upper house such as Baroness James - should take their decisions in secret let alone total secrecy. They would consider the views of the mass, enter into dialogues but always consider the long term consequences


I have never any expressed faith in governments elected by universal suffrage. All the ills and problems you list are the direct consequence of elected politicians ignoring wise economists' advice and, instead, pandering to the masses desire for unsustainable prosperity.

Riposte in tierce


Another touching example of your misplaced faith in the ability of the average punter to rub two brain cells together.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I could also so easily make unsubstantiated claims of the nature of your perspective - and I thought I was cynical


One SUBSET does not make a SET.


Actually, woman's suffrage is a perfect example of the masses (at least 50% of) rightly gaining control - from the government, and I think Asquith would (reluctantly) agree with me.

There were a great many people who wanted slavery abolished, and not just the slaves themselves.

I think you will struggle to justify your claim of "most".


That a redundant point. That's what governments do anyway; their view is only 1 term long.
(Thanks for not dwelling on my double-negative error.)


You tried to equate centralised governance with referendums; I pointed out the difference is the permission of the majority.


But that's exactly the downside of your stance: you wouldn't get the choice! There is no assured means of accountability or transparency.
Even today we don't get that choice.

Consideration of the views of the masses means nothing of those views are subsequently ignored.


So do you have faith in this type of elected governance (democracy), or not?
What do you place your faith in? Dictatorships?


The majority of the masses seem to handle their mortgages/credit adequately, so I don't accept your argument here.

And you missed a previous point: the masses can still choose to defer, or even acquiesce, on economics or otherwise.
Your preferred system doesn't even allow that choice.


Parry riposte

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

There is a big distinction between realism and cynicism, My realism is well substantiated.


It does if it is sufficiently large.


I am not sure of that. My reading and speaking to old people in my youth suggests that a large proportion of women were quite content with not having the vote.

My thesis relies on the fact that truly wise people have no desire for power for its own sake only for the good they can do with it. And you call me a cynic


Which is why Parliamentry democracy is so flawed.


Watch my lips. I have no faith in a democracy with universal sufferage. A benevolent dictatorship would be better but benevolent dictators are in the hens teeth category and, in those circumstances, benevolence seems more volatile than petrol.
I lean towards a system of democracy where voters can have more than one vote. Every one to have a single vote (which could be removed for anti-social and criminal behaviour), then extra votes to be earned for education, achievement and , err, wisdom etc .


Balderdash, Steve. The current financial mess is mainly due to the masses taking on more debt than they can handle. Financial institutions, building societies, used to be run by wise men who would not allow their clients to overextend themselves; now they are run by self seeking individuals who have a personal interest in lending more than the punter can comfortably repay.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Again, I could so easily say exactly the same.


<Spartans>
If
</Spartans>

I don't see any of this "well substantiated" evidence/reasoning.


That's not quite the same as your earlier "teeth of opposition".

What is a "large proportion"?

I'm going to assume you're not going to apply that to your example with the slaves !!


Indeed. Until the authorities can show they are truly wise, then it should be us who governs our future, funded by our own resource.


With this I agree, but I suspect not for the same reasons as you.


There is merit to that type of system (and I'm not saying that because I would likely be entitled to loads of votes ).

However, we would still be voting for strength of promises, by the same selfish politicians, towards an ideology that is subject to change at a moment's notice - it is still merely an illusion of choice.

However, the integration of your system of weighted votes, with mine of voting of policies, would go a long way to redressing your earlier concerns. There are social implications, but we could vote on it


If by "masses" you mean majority, then I'm afraid you will have to demonstrate for your point to be "well substantiated". Otherwise your point here is redundant.

Honestly, I personally know of no family who have lived beyond their means. Yes I know there are some who do, but my perspective suggests these are a minority.

And yet again I say: the masses can still choose to defer, or even acquiesce, on economics or otherwise.
Your preferred system doesn't even allow that choice.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Can I just quickly say, I think you both would have a great chat at a pub - and I would like to be there. I'm really enjoying this thread. Good points all round and gentlemanly

If Carlsberg made a forum it would be like this.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Thanks for that, Tone. I was on the point of suggesting to Steve that we took the discussion off-line because it must be boring everyone else. I am a bit busy today but I will respond to Steve though I suspect that we might have to agree to differ.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Well it may well be soon be if the wings of the Court in Strasbourg are not clipped.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 0-0002.htm