• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Gutter Boy said:
Should replace the HoL with the old Irish upper chamber system - people elected from within their professions in proportion to their prevelance in society. 2 doctors, 4 nurses, 3 lawyers, 10 amazon delivery drivers etc., with elections overseen by their own professional associations

The essential thing with a new HoL is that it can't be directly elected. It can still be elected, but not in a way that makes it equal to the HoC. It needs to have no ex-politicians either
Click to expand...

That is interesting.
We do need some lay people in to help see the passage of bills through parliament to highlight and then eliminate fudge. Some professional bodies have too loud a voice and the people themselves are not always well served by complex bills ping ponging between the houses with amendments that are not considered in full.
 
Anyone with a postgraduate or professional qualification should be automatically enrolled in a pool which renders one liable to be called up at random for three years service in the upper house. This should be just as tricky to escape as jury service. It would be compensated at the highest of any preceding three years declared earnings. If juror peers want to stay on, they may do so by supermajority acclamation from fellow peers.

I also think that the pool of randomly elevated legislators who then stay on would be a good pool from which to allow the head of state to be elected.
 
Diamond Lights said:
My son goes private and my second will do when older, i'm not against private schools (well, actually principally i am, champagne socialist i guess). Just because someone goes to a private school does not necessitate they will be smarter than all kids in a state school.

But that's besides the point. My point is, and i see this first hand, the kids who go to a private school do not grow up how i did in a state school. So to be told it's "real life experience" that MPs have, well, it's flimflam frankly.

Now, on to current issues such as Owen Paterson (and his "real world" experience). we have Tories saying "well they can always be voted out if the population doesn't want them in". But thanks to our archaic political system, you cant really. Look at Dominic Grieve, who lost his seat once losing the Tory Whip to a literal nobody, because she was a Conservative. And even if you can vote them out, Boris just brings them in to the house of Lords. Hi Zac Goldsmith.

Speaking of the House of Lords, 92 Hereditary Peers sit in the House of Lords. When Daddy kicks it, their children inherit the title. What. A. Democracy.
Click to expand...

Not digging but curious if you feel the above point then why send them to private school?
 
P.D. said:
Not digging but curious if you feel the above point then why send them to private school?
Click to expand...

Fair question. i went to a state school, i've come from little (parents emigrated from India and i was born here), no family wealth.

I don't agree with private schools as a concept, especially given the 'charity' status they claim. It's an elites vs the common, the haves vs the haves not. And as we can see, politically, the cycle of private schooling leads to those privleged few going to the same universities and going to the same jobs and leading to the same circles in our parliament. It's not a meritocracy, far from it. you'll do well out of it regardless of whether you excel at school or not.

So to the point, not a fan, don't like them. But, the standard of schooling is incredible, there's no denying that. My kid has 20 kids in his class and 2 teachers. Compare that to 30 kids and 1 teacher in a state school. I was singing "Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes" to my 1 year old and the 6 year old started singing it in Spanish. i didn't learn Spanish until i was 12.

even if i don't like it, It'll give them the chances i wasn't afforded and maybe open doors that were closed to me. I can't change the system. I don't have massive amounts of wealth, i mean, there's some kids in this class who's parents drive Bentley's and Aston's, so financially we're not even close to competing. But, i can send them to a good school and hopefully means they can build well from that.

This isn't to slander state schools btw, i'm a product of one. But there's not many stand out ones. In fact, the best ones in our area are Church schools, which is funny because it's effectively a closed door to people like me. I know loads of people who get their kid baptised or go to church for a year to get their kid into school and then sack it off.
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
Anyone with a postgraduate or professional qualification should be automatically enrolled in a pool which renders one liable to be called up at random for three years service in the upper house. This should be just as tricky to escape as jury service. It would be compensated at the highest of any preceding three years declared earnings. If juror peers want to stay on, they may do so by supermajority acclamation from fellow peers.

I also think that the pool of randomly elevated legislators who then stay on would be a good pool from which to allow the head of state to be elected.
Click to expand...
Lots were the first place the Greeks moved too after direct democracy became impractical
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
Anyone with a postgraduate or professional qualification should be automatically enrolled in a pool which renders one liable to be called up at random for three years service in the upper house. This should be just as tricky to escape as jury service. It would be compensated at the highest of any preceding three years declared earnings. If juror peers want to stay on, they may do so by supermajority acclamation from fellow peers.

I also think that the pool of randomly elevated legislators who then stay on would be a good pool from which to allow the head of state to be elected.
Click to expand...

I've never understood why people are not innovating more in political structures. It is not like we have political perfection. There are huge issues with our setup. Though what we have is far more than many other nations, and it has stood the test of time. The success of our political setup is it placates a lot of people, no one is outraged. But in that it keeps a lid on it too, and stifles change. Democracy can be the success of the 'lowest common denominator' ideas, rather than the best.

I'm not always a fan of elected political actors. I think it is nice to have a mix. So you can let people act without constantly worrying about how things are reported etc.

Like your idea, there is so much potential to make politics more engaging. The use of social media, and entertainment is underappreciated/utalised. Politics is both practical - governing the nation - and also entertainment - a soap opera. So it makes sense to engage people more via democratic electronic means.
 
Diamond Lights said:
Fair question. i went to a state school, i've come from little (parents emigrated from India and i was born here), no family wealth.

I don't agree with private schools as a concept, especially given the 'charity' status they claim. It's an elites vs the common, the haves vs the haves not. And as we can see, politically, the cycle of private schooling leads to those privleged few going to the same universities and going to the same jobs and leading to the same circles in our parliament. It's not a meritocracy, far from it. you'll do well out of it regardless of whether you excel at school or not.

So to the point, not a fan, don't like them. But, the standard of schooling is incredible, there's no denying that. My kid has 20 kids in his class and 2 teachers. Compare that to 30 kids and 1 teacher in a state school. I was singing "Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes" to my 1 year old and the 6 year old started singing it in Spanish. i didn't learn Spanish until i was 12.

even if i don't like it, It'll give them the chances i wasn't afforded and maybe open doors that were closed to me. I can't change the system. I don't have massive amounts of wealth, i mean, there's some kids in this class who's parents drive Bentley's and Aston's, so financially we're not even close to competing. But, i can send them to a good school and hopefully means they can build well from that.

This isn't to slander state schools btw, i'm a product of one. But there's not many stand out ones. In fact, the best ones in our area are Church schools, which is funny because it's effectively a closed door to people like me. I know loads of people who get their kid baptised or go to church for a year to get their kid into school and then sack it off.
Click to expand...

Just to add to this @P.D. - given Rafiq's statements today.

7% of children in England go to a private school. in 2020, 37.5% of the England Test cricket team were privately educated. Surprising no?
 
Gutter Boy said:
Should replace the HoL with the old Irish upper chamber system - people elected from within their professions in proportion to their prevelance in society. 2 doctors, 4 nurses, 3 lawyers, 10 amazon delivery drivers etc., with elections overseen by their own professional associations

The essential thing with a new HoL is that it can't be directly elected. It can still be elected, but not in a way that makes it equal to the HoC. It needs to have no ex-politicians either
Click to expand...
How the fudge will Amazon delivery drivers make important political decisions when they can't even read a fudging house number at the end of a driveway?
 
Diamond Lights said:
Just to add to this @P.D. - given Rafiq's statements today.

7% of children in England go to a private school. in 2020, 37.5% of the England Test cricket team were privately educated. Surprising no?
Click to expand...

Not really. Cricket and rugby union has always been more popular with middle, upper middle class while football, and rugby league were working class.it wasn't long ago that rugby union became professional.
 
Lilbaz said:
Not really. Cricket and rugby union has always been more popular with middle, upper middle class it wasn't long ago that rugby union became professional.
Click to expand...


And that is why you can always understand and enjoy the commentry and conversations during games and after, unlike the m orons who usually talk gonad*s on the football talk.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
How the fudge will Amazon delivery drivers make important political decisions when they can't even read a fudging house number at the end of a driveway?
Click to expand...

They aren't making important political decisions. They are there to stop the Commons trying to take the tinkle. Some more 'pleb logic' actually suits an upper chamber.
 
Gutter Boy said:
They aren't making important political decisions. They are there to stop the Commons trying to take the tinkle. Some more 'pleb logic' actually suits an upper chamber.
Click to expand...

Isn't the house of lords meant to be the law makers? The highest court in the land?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back