"Robert J. Chassell" wrote: > Should international legislation be based on the current UN two-fold > system in which, on the one hand, individual states, no matter how > small, have one vote when they become temporary members of the UN > Security Council; but which other states are permanent members and > have a "states' right" of veto? > > A disadvantage of a system like this is that it is hard to adjust to > changes in relative power. Some have said that World War I occurred > because Great Britain, France, and Russia were not willing to give > peacefully some of their power to newcomer Germany. > > Or should decision making be based on population, so that China and > India, gain power, and smaller states, like France or the US, have > less? The `one adult, one vote' method enjoys widespread legitimacy. > > Or should decision making be based on the amount of taxes paid, so > that wealthier countries receive overt power in proportion, more or > less, to their actual power? > > Or should decison making occur in a two `house' legislature, in which > one house is based on population, and another is based on the amount > of taxes a state pays to the new government? > > An advantage of a population and tax-based allocation of power is that > states can adjust relatively simply to changes in their relative > population or economic power. > > Under a population-based power distribution, France would receive less > than 1% of the total, the US would receive about 5% and China about > 20%. > > Under a tax-based power distribution, the US would receive 23% of the > total, if it paid taxes according to the current apportionment for UN > dues. I could not find dues info on the UN Web site, but France has a > GDP about 1/6 the size of the US and China has one that is perhaps > 1/10 the size of the US. Based on these figures, France would receive > less than 4% of the power and China less than 3%. > > Or should another criterion be used to allocate power? If so what? > > What do you think?
I like the idea of some sort of bicameral body. I'd want one to be "one nation, one seat". What would a tricameral body look like? I'm thinking of one with "one nation, one seat" in one house, representation proportional to population a second, and the third with representation based on the resources poured into the body. What would the responsibilities of each be? Julia _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l