Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55

Thread: Royalty - Do we really need them?




  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Here.....of course!
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Who gives a furk about the royal family, they cant get their heads out of the sky long enough to know what's happening down here on the ground anyway :?:

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    I find this to be an interesting topic for sure.
    Australia's ties to the English Royalty keeps them closely allied with England on several levels. Hence this serves to keep them closely allied with British allies. England being the powerful country that it is regarding the world scene and all, that isn't a bad thing. (not to imply that Australia isn't powerful on it's own, or that being closely allied doesn't have its's ups and downs)
    England writes it's own rules, even though they are closely tied to the European Union they maintain their own currency for example.
    Do you need royalty - I have no clue?
    Royalty as a figurehead does seem to be dead weight in a way, at the same time it also provides a cultural cornerstone. Cornerstones do provide a level of percieved comfort in a way.

    It is the figurehead role that bothers me somewhat.
    I personally think that in this day in age, with modern communications and information exchange that elected officials operating under a parliamentary type government are at best inefficient. (I guess that's the term for a group of folks who get together and discuss what the heck rule they are going to impose next?? - perhaps that's not the correct terminology?) By the time they hash out a situation, the problem has morphed or moved on entirely.
    Look at any governments attempts to regulate the internet. At best an elected body can only provide a shoddy patchwork that is lame in effect. The technology evolves much faster than they can cope.

    I have to wonder at times, if a monarchy or a dictatorship is the only type of government that could effectively deal with issues in the fast paced world we live in today.

    Don't get me wrong, I am not a revolutionary or anything like that, but just some food for thought concerning the world we live in today.
    Elected bodies do a decent job, they are just horribly slow at times and that can lead to a lot of things slipping away as they debate them.
    One person making policy decisions would stand a much better chance of keeping up.
    So what do you think?
    The reason a diamond shines so brightly is because it has many facets which reflect light.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    my pen is a pistola.
    Posts
    412

    Default

    I never even thought about Austrailia's government or how it worked. its a shame communism and socialism work in theory but not in practice. democracy is great, but it has it's faults like every other style. dunno. :?:
    [space saving sig]
    AMD 0wn3z j00!
    [/space saving sig]

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Wizard
    ...... communism and socialism work in theory but not in practice.
    LOL
    Of course they work - haven't you heard of the military??
    You live in the exact society which you are protecting us from. Life is full of conundrums Ain't it!
    The reason a diamond shines so brightly is because it has many facets which reflect light.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    my pen is a pistola.
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. C


    LOL
    Of course they work - haven't you heard of the military??
    You live in the exact society which you are protecting us from. Life is full of conundrums Ain't it!
    i thought that for the longest time, and its true, to a point. we dont all get paid the same. and there are tiers or levels that differentiate your pay. (rank) as far as occupation wise at the same level, ie 1st year of working in the chow hall and 1st year of being a network adminsitrator or a jet mechanic are the same pay. :)
    [space saving sig]
    AMD 0wn3z j00!
    [/space saving sig]

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Here.....of course!
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    In any job it works like that, first year cook, hair-dresser, mechanic, etc..... they all get paid by their years of experience until they r fully qualified.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    Hmm - I guess I need to study the writings of Karl Marx. I don't recall pay differentiation being a non-qualifier for communism.
    Something about each working to meet the need of all wasn't it??
    Of course there is a heirarchy! Pay is part of that.
    Consider for a moment - what part of the rank structure would be the equivalent of card-carrying party members. You think they are party members if they get the same pay and perks?
    OK - now who's the Politbereau - the peasants?
    Not trying to imply anything now, don't get me wrong. I served myself - my period of government-owned indentured-servitude.
    Or maybe the military has changed so much since I was in it, it's been a few years.
    The reason a diamond shines so brightly is because it has many facets which reflect light.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Ballarat, VIC
    Posts
    1,011

    Default

    My thought is that we don't need England at all. The only reason they are so powerful is because they are defending an island the size of tasmania.

    We don't need them as allies. We are covered under the ANZUS treaty. This treaty links us with the most powerful nation on earth, the US.

    **** England, if I had to choose allies I'd go with George Dubya.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,166

    Default

    mmm..Australia becoming a republic is inevitable, its just a question of how long. Becoming a republic would give Australia a stronger national identity and no-one can complain about that. It would also make me more secure knowing that the head-of-state is actually Australian.

    People complain about that fact that the politicians would be the ones electing the president...who give a flipp, we are the ones who elect the politicians in the first place, correct ?
    <Insert Witty Comment Here.>

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    6,297

    Default

    I would rather have a say in who was going to be my president, rather than allow a few ppl decide, call a vote and see ;)

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •