The SMB = God



Dave Herbal said:
I’ve just had a road to Damascus moment.

The SMB comprises thousands of people from every profession and walk of life. Consequently, we represent pretty much every level of western society.
Question: would you be happy if the government was removed and every decision was decided by an SMB poll?
Click to expand...

No. The public have proved repeatedly in the past three or four years that they shouldn't be trusted with important decisions. I've said for many years that I think you should need a license to vote in elections, like you do to drive a car. Take lessons and a test to get your license in the same way, proving you have the knowledge and ability to handle having the right to vote before being given that right.
 
yamar1 said:
What could possibly go wrong.
Click to expand...

Nowt, we'd just have a good laugh at the minority like we do now.
fyl2u said:
No. The public have proved repeatedly in the past three or four years that they shouldn't be trusted with important decisions. I've said for many years that I think you should need a license to vote in elections, like you do to drive a car. Take lessons and a test to get your license in the same way, proving you have the knowledge and ability to handle having the right to vote before being given that right.
Click to expand...

No one votes then, simple.
I'm quite happy with that.
We don't make important decisions anyway.
 
Last edited:
Frijj said:
Errr :lol:

Logon or register to see this image
Click to expand...
That’s fair enough, I count myself in that.
fyl2u said:
No. The public have proved repeatedly in the past three or four years that they shouldn't be trusted with important decisions. I've said for many years that I think you should need a license to vote in elections, like you do to drive a car. Take lessons and a test to get your license in the same way, proving you have the knowledge and ability to handle having the right to vote before being given that right.
Click to expand...
But that’s how a democracy works. You do everything based on the majority decision. You can’t stop people voting cos you don’t agree with them. And this post smells like a thinly veiled “Brexiteers are thick” one to me.
 
Last edited:
Dave Herbal said:
But that’s how a democracy works. You do everything based on the majority decision. You can’t stop people voting cos you don’t agree with them. And this post smells like a thinly veiled “Brexiteers are thick” one to me.
Click to expand...

Well, compared to experts in politics, the public in general is "thick" to use your word.

When you need heart surgery or to get a cancer diagnosis you would go to someone that has trained for years in it, rather than to your local butcher or hairdresser, so why should people with little to no knowledge (comparably) about politics be making important political decisions?

We're a representative democracy, not a pure direct democracy. We vote for people to make these decisions for us, which is far better than letting the general public make the decisions. Sometimes the decisions made are not what the public would vote for given the chance, but the politicians (hopefully) do what's right for the country rather than pandering to the masses (in theory but not necessarily always in practice).

Given the public opinion, we'd probably bring back the death penalty and have it used for rapists and paedophiles. There would have been a public execution for the likes of Rolf Harris and Adam Johnson. Personally I'm glad we don't live in a country where that could happen.
 
Dave Herbal said:
That’s fair enough, I count myself in that.

But that’s how a democracy works. You do everything based on the majority decision. You can’t stop people voting cos you don’t agree with them. And this post smells like a thinly veiled “Brexiteers are thick” one to me.
Click to expand...

but Dave, that assumes that a majority of people will always

a) be presented with fair information and
b) vote in a rational manner

Since we know conditions A and B will never be fully met, is direct democracy really the answer?
 
fyl2u said:
Well, compared to experts in politics, the public in general is "thick" to use your word.

When you need heart surgery or to get a cancer diagnosis you would go to someone that has trained for years in it, rather than to your local butcher or hairdresser, so why should people with little to no knowledge (comparably) about politics be making important political decisions?

We're a representative democracy, not a pure direct democracy. We vote for people to make these decisions for us, which is far better than letting the general public make the decisions. Sometimes the decisions made are not what the public would vote for given the chance, but the politicians (hopefully) do what's right for the country rather than pandering to the masses (in theory but not necessarily always in practice).

Given the public opinion, we'd probably bring back the death penalty and have it used for rapists and paedophiles. There would have been a public execution for the likes of Rolf Harris and Adam Johnson. Personally I'm glad we don't live in a country where that could happen.
Click to expand...
I’d vote for that
Frijj said:
but Dave, that assumes that a majority of people will always

a) be presented with fair information and
b) vote in a rational manner

Since we know conditions A and B will never be fully met, is direct democracy really the answer?
Click to expand...
I suppose people would never vote for things that were bad for them personally, even if it was for the good of the country. That would be a problem.
 
Last edited:
Dave Herbal said:
I’ve just had a road to Damascus moment.

The SMB comprises thousands of people from every profession and walk of life. Consequently, we represent pretty much every level of western society.
Question: would you be happy if the government was removed and every decision was decided by an SMB poll?
Click to expand...

There would be a vote for a monorail in the first month which would be unanimous. Then the board would argue for years about the route and colour.

That’s before any important decisions needed to be made.
 
I would prefer an autocratic despotic totalitarian state, led by me.

I don’t think that thickie plebs really want to make decisions. You can have free TV and burgers though.
 
fyl2u said:
Well, compared to experts in politics, the public in general is "thick" to use your word.

When you need heart surgery or to get a cancer diagnosis you would go to someone that has trained for years in it, rather than to your local butcher or hairdresser, so why should people with little to no knowledge (comparably) about politics be making important political decisions?

We're a representative democracy, not a pure direct democracy. We vote for people to make these decisions for us, which is far better than letting the general public make the decisions. Sometimes the decisions made are not what the public would vote for given the chance, but the politicians (hopefully) do what's right for the country rather than pandering to the masses (in theory but not necessarily always in practice).

Given the public opinion, we'd probably bring back the death penalty and have it used for rapists and paedophiles. There would have been a public execution for the likes of Rolf Harris and Adam Johnson. Personally I'm glad we don't live in a country where that could happen.
Click to expand...
Really disagree with this, it's the route to dictatorship...who decides what credentials you need to vote? If the tories for example wanted to restrict licence eligibility to over 40's? Would criminals qualify for voting licences? An elite of vote qualified citizens versus non-qualified citizens....

I can't tell if you're being serious although I think you are, and if so I think it's a really poor post.
 
Dave Herbal said:
I’ve just had a road to Damascus moment.

The SMB comprises thousands of people from every profession and walk of life. Consequently, we represent pretty much every level of western society.
Question: would you be happy if the government was removed and every decision was decided by an SMB poll?
Click to expand...

have you seen pure football?
 
daveydavey said:
Really disagree with this, it's the route to dictatorship...who decides what credentials you need to vote? If the tories for example wanted to restrict licence eligibility to over 40's? Would criminals qualify for voting licences? An elite of vote qualified citizens versus non-qualified citizens....

I can't tell if you're being serious although I think you are, and if so I think it's a really poor post.
Click to expand...

Why would you need so many restrictions? Continuing my driving licence analogy, are criminals prevented from getting a driving licence? (Other than those that committed serious driving offenses)

Are under 40's prevented from driving?

You're using the "slippery slope" argument, which doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top