On 19/11/2008, at 6:20 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
I agree. I would have thought that Australia, New Zealand Canada
would be
least as good if not better choices than the US Western Europe.
Maybe, unless you're born indigenous - which was the point of the
thought experiment. Australia, for
On 20/11/2008, at 12:03 AM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
On 19/11/2008, at 6:20 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
I agree. I would have thought that Australia, New Zealand Canada
would be
least as good if not better choices than the US Western Europe.
Maybe, unless you're born indigenous - which was the point
Olin Elliott wrote:
I agree. Ask just about anyone this question: supposing you were
going to be placed, at random, into any soceity on Earth -- you do
not know what social status you will have, what your income level
will be, even what gender or nationality you will be -- the only
On 20/11/2008, at 12:18 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:
It's a fuck-load better than 40 or
even 20 years ago, but Oz has a way to go to be the egalitarian fair-
go for all that she would like to portray herself to be.
...responding to my own post... but I'd like to say that in the
corporate world in
On 19/11/2008, at 6:20 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
I agree. I would have thought that Australia, New Zealand Canada
would be
least as good if not better choices than the US Western Europe.
Maybe, unless you're born indigenous - which was the point of the
thought experiment. Australia, for all
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Euan Ritchie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which is why people like constitutional government. Pretty much everyone
means to include, when they trumpet the supremacy and desirability of
democracy, a definition of democracy that includes some form of
constitutional
Some minority rights. And even then it has not worked very well
historically.
I disagree, I think it has worked spectacularly well. Non-wealthy people
living in the modern democracies enjoy the greatest freedoms and wealth
available to the non-elite in human history.
With the possible
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Euan Ritchie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some minority rights. And even then it has not worked very well
historically.
I disagree, I think it has worked spectacularly well.
I meant that the constitutional protections have not been very
effective at protecting
of the world, the odds would be stacked against
you.
Olin
- Original Message -
From: Euan Ritchiemailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussionmailto:brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: On Topic shocker!
Some
PM
Subject: Re: On Topic shocker!
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Euan Ritchie [EMAIL
PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some minority rights. And even then it has not worked very well
historically.
I disagree, I think it has worked spectacularly well.
I meant
supposing you were going to be placed, at random, into any society on
Earth
you do not know what social status you will have, what your income level
will be, even what gender or nationality you will be
the only choice you get is the initial choice of countries.
In what country would you most
Subject: Re: On Topic shocker!
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Ray Ludenia [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of a shadow scientific Congress sounds like an idea with
merit. (Unfortunately perhaps), I suppose this idea could be extended
to economists, lawyers
Ray Ludenia wrote:
On Nov 16, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Olin Elliott wrote:
I'm a little surprised, since this is a David Brin discussion group,
that no one has suggested that the best possible fix for government
waste and courruption is greater transparency and accountability.
Speaking of
Nick Arnett wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Ray Ludenia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of a shadow scientific Congress sounds like an idea with
merit. (Unfortunately perhaps), I suppose this idea could be extended
to economists, lawyers, artists etc.
Posting on topic? You
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Claes Wallin
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
When I saw that your name in the comments was clickable, I was expecting
to see a link to your blog. Clever as you are, you showed me that I am
already reading it. ;-)
Ah, you have discovered what
Olin Elliott wrote:
For one thing, politicians will tend to choose science advisers who tell them
what they want to hear, *especially* if the advisers are organized into a
body that has any sort of transparency.
What if the members of the council were somehow chosen by the professional
Message -
From: Claes Wallinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: brin-l@mccmedia.commailto:brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: On Topic shocker!
Olin Elliott wrote:
For one thing, politicians will tend to choose science advisers who tell
them
what
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Olin Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is starting to sound like Asimov's Meritocracy branch of power.
But how would a Meritocracy play in a time when even pronouncing the names
of foreign countries correctly gets you labeled an elitist? The Right has
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, we just elected an elitist as president, by a substantial majority.
Before getting too excited about a substantial majority, note that
Obama got 52% of the popular vote. I think it is worth remembering
that 48% of the
. I haven't looked it up
on Conservapedia yet.
Olin
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnettmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussionmailto:brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: On Topic shocker!
On Mon, Nov 17
Nick Arnett wrote:
Meanwhile, I'm wondering what the Conservapedia people are doing
with the recently raised possibility that atomic decay rates vary
with solar activity. I couldn't help immediately imagining somebody
using that idea to show that the earth really is only a few thousand
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:25 AM, John Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
That is tens of
millions of people who did not choose to be ruled by Obama.
Ruled???! I don't think we elected a dictator.
If it were
me, I would be extremely reluctant to force my ideas on tens of
millions of
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Olin Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, we just elected an elitist as president, by a substantial majority.
Well, we elected an elite president, not he same thing as being eletiest
-- unless being raised by a single mother and grandmother, earning a
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ruled???! I don't think we elected a dictator.
What happens if someone breaks a law that Obama manages to push
through Congress because of a perceived mandate? How is that not being
ruled?
If I hadn't consented to be so
Well, we just elected an elitist as president, by a substantial majority.
A 7 ~ 8% margin isn't substantial. Surely it only seems that way
compared to recent razor thin elections?
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
What happens if someone breaks a law that Obama manages to push
through Congress because of a perceived mandate? How is that not being
ruled?
Being tried in court by an independent judiciary charged to protect
constitutional rights is the difference between governed by law and
ruled by
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 3:32 PM, John Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ruled???! I don't think we elected a dictator.
What happens if someone breaks a law that Obama manages to push
through Congress because of a
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Euan Ritchie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What happens if someone breaks a law that Obama manages to push
through Congress because of a perceived mandate? How is that not being
ruled?
Being tried in court by an independent judiciary charged to protect
What happens if someone breaks a law that Obama manages to push
through Congress because of a perceived mandate? How is that not being
ruled?
Being tried in court by an independent judiciary charged to protect
constitutional rights is the difference between governed by law and
ruled by
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:32 PM, John Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
What happens if someone breaks a law that Obama manages to push
through Congress because of a perceived mandate? How is that not being
ruled?
Missed high school civics class, did you?
Wikipedia probably has an article
On 17 Nov 2008, at 21:43, Euan Ritchie wrote:
There's a philosophical thought experiment about designing societies
and
how we should do it - imagine you're a disembodied spirit that will be
born in the future to completely random parents. You have no idea what
their station or fortune will
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wikipedia probably has an article on the subject. Try searching on
democracy.
Couldn't find it. But I found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority
Lapsing into sarcasm far too often
Excellent! That's
Nick Arnett wrote:
Wikipedia probably has an article on the subject. Try searching on
democracy.
Found it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptocracy#The_Bush_Administration
Oops, the page was vandalized :-(
Alberto Monteiro
___
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 3:37 PM, John Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wikipedia probably has an article on the subject. Try searching on
democracy.
Couldn't find it. But I found this:
- Original Message -
From: John Williamsmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussionmailto:brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: On Topic shocker!
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Nick Arnett [EMAIL
PROTECTED]mailto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority
Which is why people like constitutional government. Pretty much everyone
means to include, when they trumpet the supremacy and desirability of
democracy, a definition of democracy that includes some form of
constitutional protection for
On Nov 16, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Olin Elliott wrote:
I'm a little surprised, since this is a David Brin discussion group,
that no one has suggested that the best possible fix for government
waste and courruption is greater transparency and accountability.
Speaking of the illustrious patron,
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Ray Ludenia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of a shadow scientific Congress sounds like an idea with
merit. (Unfortunately perhaps), I suppose this idea could be extended
to economists, lawyers, artists etc.
Posting on topic? You just asking to be
38 matches
Mail list logo
