Forum menu
Which will happen, with the way AI is going.
AI is going to magic matter and energy out of thin air, is it? Einstein would be proud...
Yep that is the problem with all these governments, not to mention funding them all and dealing with the interactions.
https://www.budget.gov.au/2007-08/bp3/html/bp3_main-03.htm
The distribution of revenue between states in Australia is a complete minefield as you literally have to take from one to give to the other.
AI is going to magic matter and energy out of thin air, is it? Einstein would be proud…
Heard of helium-3? How much energy have we yet to tap from the sun as well?
AI will be doing the R&D to get to that point. As I said, given the right R&D and time we don't need magic energy for the next billion or so years.
AI is going to magic matter and energy out of thin air, is it? Einstein would be proud…
I think somebody have read too much into the paperclip game...
Yes with a regional / federal UK you would need a redistribution method of riches and also of spending. London gets 100X the spending on public transport of Scotland at the moment for 3x the population for an example
But we already have this issue both with the devolved parliaments and with councils
The solar system will not be able to provide us with infinite resources ever. simple thermodynamics. The amount of energy needed to get stuff off earth accounts for that. Its not plausible.
The solar system will not be able to provide us with infinite resources ever. simple thermodynamics. The amount of energy needed to get stuff off earth accounts for that. Its not plausible.
And by then TJ when the universe goes dark, we'll all be ****ing dead anyway.
The amount of energy needed to get stuff off earth accounts for that. Its not plausible.
Again, that all depends on how much energy the stuff you are mining releases - or whether you actually need to use rockets to bring that energy directly down to earth as opposed to keeping it in orbit and cabling it in.
etc etc etc
Heard of helium-3? How much energy have we yet to tap from the sun as well?
AI will be doing the R&D to get to that point. As I said, given the right R&D and time we don’t need magic energy.
As as I said, certifiable. We don’t eat energy, we dont physically occupy energy. All the AI in the solar system isn’t going to resolve land shortages nor finite nutrients from which our food grows. It might at a pinch help resolve land degradation, but the fact remains that there is only so much land, and infinite growth means that we will one day run out of it.
Woosh - point missed again. Its about the amount of energy needed to get stuff off planet earth into the asteroid belt ( or wherever you want to get energy and material from) and the amount of energy required to get it back to earth safely means this is not a plausible way of getting more resources to earth.
As as I said, certifiable. We don’t eat energy, we dont physically occupy energy. All the AI in the solar system isn’t going to resolve land shortages nor finite nutrients from which our food grows. It might at a pinch help resolve land degradation, but the fact remains that there is only so much land, and infinite growth means that we will one day run out of it.
And yet capitalism isn't leading to run away population growth is it, it will peak at 11 billion because as soon as a country becomes affluent they stop having kids - and then we have NASA studies that predict past that - we may end up with such plummeting birth rates that we end up extinct.
Woosh – point missed again. Its about the amount of energy needed to get stuff off planet earth into the asteroid belt ( or wherever you want to get energy and material from) and the amount of energy required to get it back to earth safely means this is not a plausible way of getting more resources to earth.
Again, entirely depends on the amount of energy that can be released by the resource.
The status quo is in massively in the interests of both major parties. There is no way they would move for change.
I agree that politics or at least political representation in the UK is broken and has been for some time.
Right - can we get back on track? I do wish the killfile still worked.
But we already have this issue both with the devolved parliaments and with councils
Yep and you want to make it worse, it takes a brave federal level decision maker to give one area a cause to vote you out on in the name of equality.
And yet capitalism isn’t leading to run away population growth is it, it will peak at 11 billion because as soon as a country becomes affluent they stop having kids – and then we have NASA studies that predict past that – we may end up with such plummeting birth rates that we end up extinct.
Sounds great. So why do we want this again?
I'll be honest, if the last 2 years has taught me anything, I'd be happy for Wales (where I live) to quietly leave the UK when no one is looking and become a small country within the EU. Seems very unlikely, mostly because as a Country we voted leave, but we've done really well being part of the EU after a long time of being almost completely forgotten as part of the UK (well, at least unless our coal or water is needed, but we rarely actually get paid for them).
We don't have the wealth here to create much of a political elite, our politicians are generally so-so to okay, well, the ones who aren't laying trail traps whilst looking for badgers.
Sounds great. So why do we want this again?
Because all systems are self regulating and a natural population balance found through better living standards for all and better rights for women, is preferable to the lunacy that hard left and hard right nut****s who claim that humanity is sick and then operate on it with an axe, bring on.
Elected by a similar system to Holyrood ie constituencies plus top up list.
This is the only thing in this thread that's caught my eye…
The top up system ensures :
- Everyone still has a local MP.
- All votes in "safe seats" count.
Bring it in for the UK parliament please. Local representatives AND a semblance of PR. Yes, coalition is more likely… but it's 'bout time politicians heads were knocked together… and what they do in office becomes as important as which tribe they're from.
Bring it in for the UK parliament please. Local representatives AND a semblance of PR. Yes, coalition is more likely… but it’s ’bout time politicians heads were knocked together… and what they do in office becomes as important as which tribe they’re from.
Also add a banner reminding that past performance is no indication of future gains...
The next time somebody gets upset about lib dems and tuition fees then get slapped and pointed out how many broken promises the big 2 have managed
I would get rid of political parties. Each area would have a representative chosen by the electorate based on what they are 'selling' as ideas, how they would vote on things etc,. Parliament would then discuss topics and bills and agreed stuff would go through based purely on the merit of the proposal
Each area could then closely monitor what their representative is up to, how they are voting, are they doing a good job etc,. and vote again based on that each year with max of 3 years for each representative.
This removes the "I vote tory because I always have" and gets people to actually think a bit more.
I would look at devolving more to local governments and forming a national government made up from local government representatives with a healthy core of civil servants thrown in on long term permanent roles. Certain key cabinet roles should be filled from outwith political parties with some policy decisions made and fixed for at least a decade. Health, education, defence and social security should require cross party support to get policies through. There should be an efficient way to sack an elected representative and trigger a by-election for another. We need to move away from the party first politics and towards constituency first. Second jobs and incomes need to be looked at for representatives, too many are taking the piss. Should be an easy to look up online register of all elected representatives and see their net worth, incomes, business interests etc. Radically change the way political parties are funded. Maximum donations per individual or business should be set fairly low, no more tax payer money going to political parties. If they want in, they need to work at it and come up with good policies worth voting for, not rely on big money donations to buy their way there.
Maximum donations per individual or business should be set fairly low, no more tax payer money going to political parties
I would rather that they were not able to take donations but had a set amount for party operations and campaigning provided by the tax payers
the idea being you cannot be swayed by donations if they are not allowed to raise revenue.
Right.
Westminster is profoundly undemocratic
Profound is stretching it, rather a lot. There might be democratic deficiencies, but banging on about 'democracy' like it's one thing is silly. It's a very loose high level term. The idea taken to extremes would be to have everyone vote on every single decision, which is clearly absurd, so you have to have a system. The system can be more or less democratic, and if you think it's insufficiently democratic then you can claim a democratic deficit - but not UN democratic.
So the question then is how much democracy is the right amount? Clearly asking people to vote on things they know bugger all about and haven't got time to properly research is a disaster as we've seen. Anyone whose position depends on the public vote is going to lie and cheat and expend a considerable amount of effort just to get people to vote for them. And the people who do well at this are the dishonest Machiavellian types. So we end up with a government full of scumbags - this has always been the issue.
So I'm going to propose two chambers. The House of Lords can stay, but no life peerages. You can be elected to it, but you are NOT allowed party affiliation. Close party involvement or a previous political career disqualifies you. And you get elected for 15 year periods. Minimum representation from geographical areas - so major cities over a certain size and then rural areas - and only hundred or so. And attendance compulsory.
Nah, it's all fine mate.
Many of the posts on this thread make Teresa and the robbing, lying, incompetent egotists that constitute the current UK cabinet look good.
As an extra level to look at the US are currently doing their Primaries,to go on the ballot you need to be chosen, seems to get people involved earlier in the process but does end up limiting smaller parties and independents more
Some very different ideas there but a long term length, healthy elected second chamber with proper review and scrutiny power would be the more important and quickest change to make
Kerley and Rene seem to be thinking of this.
Edit: …And reduce the voting age to 16 and cap it at 50. Got no skin in the “progress” game when you’re over 40 – all you want is Status Quo. Literally and metaphorically.
Maybe, in the forlorn, backward neck of the woods you call home. And while some 16yo’s have their heads screwed on, there are plenty I wouldn’t trust to tie their shoelaces up properly at 21, let alone 16!
Maybe, in the forlorn, backward neck of the woods you call home. And while some 16yo’s have their heads screwed on, there are plenty I wouldn’t trust to tie their shoelaces up properly at 21, let alone 16!
If you can reproduce and die for your country you can vote. The older generation don't always come out that well
I suspect it's quite a hard problem to solve, with many different intermingled factors.
As always, for any complicated problem, there's a simple, obvious, straightforward answer that is wrong.
As an extra level to look at the US are currently doing their Primaries,to go on the ballot you need to be chosen,
Primaries seem fairly complicated and cover a wide range of different options depending on what elected position is being voted on and which state it is. For those positions closest to MPs I believe most of them end up being registered voters for that party only.
Most of the variants dont directly block smaller parties and independents as far as I am aware. Although there is the problem that it encourages more extreme candidates in those cases where it is registered voters only.
London gets 100X the spending on public transport of Scotland at the moment for 3x the population for an example
I've seen this sort of thing quoted and I'm curious- what population/area of London is that based on? London transport infrastructure supports a commuter belt that can stretch out as far as Brighton, Southampton (which is mad, but anyway). Does that population figure allow for all the families supported by people who use that infrastructure?
Also, comparing London with Scotland is surely not apples to apples? If you make the same comparison between London and Edinburgh, what sort of ratio do you get? Or if you compare an equivalent area of the southeast+London with Scotland?
Town and parish councils seem to have high number of incompetent people there. Parish being worst. (Note not all but a higher level of offciousness and incompetents to be found) a I like the idea of more devolved government I feel when the administration is below some threshold the people left doing the jobs tend to be a bit rubbish as all the good people have gone to other levels of government or different companies.
swanny - compare edinburgh to london you get the same sort of ratio and IIRC its within the M25
Regionalise England by restoring all the Kingdoms eg Wessex, Cumbria, Mercia etc etc.
England loves its royals and aristocrats, this gives you so many more, so instead of having to worry about political issues, it can be "...look, a new royal baby!". "...a royal wedding!", and to keep it up to date "...a royal divorce!" etc.
There's bound to be one of those events every few months to keep the proles from noticing their empty food bowls.
Another advantage is that with so many local royals, there won't be a need to import foreigners as brides for the princes. That's bound to go down well with the anti-immigration lower classes.
Also what with every kingdom needing an upper class full of lords, knights and so on, there's plenty of opportunity for social advancement, and politics will hardly get a mention in the media. And think of the increased opportunity for the professional sycophants.
And imagine the media frenzy when the ceremonial disposal of the existing royals takes place. Sadly we have to do that, but they could be disruptive if allowed to continue to exist in their present form. It's a proven fact that shortening a royal prevents any further disruption from them. It's bound to be good for tourism too, special tickets for front seats, tv rights etc, what a boost for the economy!
And no parliament needed because under the kindly rule of all those monarchs, it won't be necessary.
I's amazed no one has thought of this before.
We'll be watching with interest from the republic of Scotland. 🙂
Elected by a similar system to Holyrood ie constituencies plus top up list.
Who will decide this? Last time we had a vote on proportional representation it was massively (I've decided to go for TJ alike hyperbole from now on...) defeated, and presumably the mood hasn't sifted since then, so it'll get shot down at the first hurdle.
nickc - the system voted on for westminster was so flawed that even pro PR people wouldn't vote for it and had both tory and labour campaigning against it.
"Maybe, in the forlorn, backward neck of the woods you call home"
<span data-dobid="hdw">Q.E.D.
</span>
TJ do you honestly think the Conservative and Labour parties would welcome with open arms their own removal from power? Both of these parties are committed to the idea of a United Kingdom. Reform in the way you suggest isn't a goer.
I'm assuming that all anti Brexit types will agree that this is flawed. Surely in the spirit of union we should actually reduce the power of the subordinate regions with one central government. Only issues that have no effect on other regions should be decided by local assembly.
Last time we had a vote on proportional representation
When was that? I dont recall one ever happened unless you are confusing Alternate Vote referendum with a PR one.
Last time we had a vote on proportional representation
Never happened.
Or are you referring to the 1997 referendum North of the border?
[ edit - sorry people of wales - you as well ]
mattsccm
I’m assuming that all anti Brexit types will agree that this is flawed. Surely in the spirit of union we should actually reduce the power of the subordinate regions with one central government. Only issues that have no effect on other regions should be decided by local assembly.
Come back to us after you've cleared this with all parties in NI. 🙂
London Zones 1-5 is the only part of the country keeping you lot sane.
HA HA HA! I’m assuming this is a joke, right?
compare edinburgh to london you get the same sort of ratio and IIRC its within the M25
As in, for a major urban area in Scotland and a major urban area in England you get about the same amount of spend per head on public transport?