Questions Thread

[StanSP]

Ahhhhh - speilings never bean my strong point

There's bad spelling. And then there's just retardation.

P.S. I know you're taking the piss!!

[Zingari]

Is Democracy real or a myth ?

Is it really possible to have a truly democratic society ?

[Trav Le Bleu]

Is Democracy real or a myth ?

Is it really possible to have a truly democratic society ?

Let's have a vote on it!

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Is Democracy real or a myth ?

Is it really possible to have a truly democratic society ?

Funny - I would have thought this is one you would have answered not posed. In short, no, there is no democracy any notion of it is always destroyed somewhere along the way. It is simply a method of getting people to buy into conformism.

[Fox You Forest]

Who's the bird on the skateboard in the visit California ad?

Edited 25 January 2011 by Fox You Forest

[Zingari]

Funny - I would have thought this is one you would have answered not posed. In short, no, there is no democracy any notion of it is always destroyed somewhere along the way. It is simply a method of getting people to buy into conformism.

yes ,

i don't believe we live in any real type of democracy and your answer pretty well sums up my opinion , but i suppose i was hoping , ( albeit against expectation ) that we can be proven (or at least given hope ) that we are wrong .

i don't enjoy being a cynical old git

[Alexikokopops]

fashion is a form of ugliness so unbearable we have to change it 4 times a year (can't remember who said that - heard it on qi once)

Oscar Wilde I believe

[DJ Barry Hammond]

i don't enjoy being a cynical old git

Liar!

[Captain...]

Is Democracy real or a myth ?

Is it really possible to have a truly democratic society ?

It is possible to have a truely democratic society, but it is unweildy and highly inefficient and a vote would need to be taken by all members of the society on all aspects that effect the society.

In theory, what we have is a form of democracy whereby we vote to choose the people we believe are in the best position and have the knowledge to make the right decisions about our society. In reality what we have is a limited pool of people who subscribe to 1 of 2 or 3 ways of thinking that are then arbitrarily bestowed roles on which we have no say in whether or not they are suitable for that role.

True we elect the members of parliament but we have no say in what role they take, we have no say in who becomes the PM (Gordon Borwn and Major were both unelected leaders) nor who becomes responsible for the Economy, Health, Education etc. Not to mention that we are lied to constantly during campaiging and have no means to enforce the government to stick to their manifesto nor holding them to account for their mistakes.

Democracy is not a myth, but what we have isn't it. The Electoral reforms and alternative vote system will help to change that but until we elect people for roles, or the role they will take is outlined before we vote and we are able to remove the politicians we elect should we see fit, we will not have democracy in the true sense of the word.

[Webbo]

It is possible to have a truely democratic society, but it is unweildy and highly inefficient and a vote would need to be taken by all members of the society on all aspects that effect the society.

In theory, what we have is a form of democracy whereby we vote to choose the people we believe are in the best position and have the knowledge to make the right decisions about our society. In reality what we have is a limited pool of people who subscribe to 1 of 2 or 3 ways of thinking that are then arbitrarily bestowed roles on which we have no say in whether or not they are suitable for that role.

True we elect the members of parliament but we have no say in what role they take, we have no say in who becomes the PM (Gordon Borwn and Major were both unelected leaders) nor who becomes responsible for the Economy, Health, Education etc. Not to mention that we are lied to constantly during campaiging and have no means to enforce the government to stick to their manifesto nor holding them to account for their mistakes.

Democracy is not a myth, but what we have isn't it. The Electoral reforms and alternative vote system will help to change that but until we elect people for roles, or the role they will take is outlined before we vote and we are able to remove the politicians we elect should we see fit, we will not have democracy in the true sense of the word.

John Major was elected in his own right in 1992.

[Captain...]

John Major was elected in his own right in 1992.

True but when he became PM in 1990 it was not following an election and therefore not democratically decided.

[Zingari]

a good book for anyone with an interest in our "democracy"

edit;

ps. a genuine thanks to all contributors in this thread

Edited 26 January 2011 by Zingari

[Guest BlueBrett]

That Charlie Brooker is such a wannabe anarchist but with a bit too much posh in him to do anything about it other than satirise. I think I like him though and we definitely share many of the same opinions with regard to the media and 'society'.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Who's the bird on the skateboard in the visit California ad?

Right - this is difficult, but I think it could be Kim Kardashin.

The following link mentions people who are in the add.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erCdo6HWmOA

Now going through the names, I know it's not the Jonas Brothers and she's on after them so I'm thinking Kim Kardashin. Must admit I'm not 100% convinced it is her judging by the pictures of her on google images (like the one below) against the advert but there's not much to go on.

How's that for you - go with Kim until someone tells you different? Oh, and by any chance do you have another alter ego of mrfclarke on other sites?

Scrap this, Kim Kardashin is the first bird in the Bikini isn't she? Ah well - keep on searching

Edited 26 January 2011 by DJ Barry Hammond

[Kitchandro]

Well obviously you can blame the train driver in the 3rd one.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Who's the bird on the skateboard in the visit California ad?

Think I have it - Lyn-z Adams Hawkins

Professional skateboarder born in Cardiff-by-the Sea, California wiki

Why don't you ask her to be your friend?

Edited 26 January 2011 by DJ Barry Hammond

[AoWW]

That's one hell of a delayed reaction.

[Kitchandro]

That's one hell of a delayed reaction.

This is the first time I've read this thread

Edited 26 January 2011 by Kitchandro

[Kitchandro]

Why do people say 'that's my understanding', when they are speculating about something? You either understand it or you don't. If you're wrong then you haven't understood

Edited 26 January 2011 by Kitchandro

[StanSP]

Why do people say 'that's my understanding', when they are speculating about something? You either understand it or you don't. If you're wrong then you haven't understood

If they're hearing it from someone else, it's how they've taken it on board.

Sounds like an alternative to 'apparently'.

[Kitchandro]

If they're hearing it from someone else, it's how they've taken it on board.

Sounds like an alternative to 'apparently'.

I think they should just use apparently. It's much more accurate.

[Guest BlueBrett]

They do it to reduce their accountability if they are asked about what they have said at a later date. If you say 'this is my undertanding' it implies that you may not be aware of all of the relevant facts but you have a cursory knowledge based on information you have gathered from various sources of debatable reliability.

[Kitchandro]

They do it to reduce their accountability if they are asked about what they have said at a later date. If you say 'this is my undertanding' it implies that you may not be aware of all of the relevant facts but you have a cursory knowledge based on information you have gathered from various sources of debatable reliability.

OK

But surely then there is a possibility that they haven't understood, therefore the use of the word 'understanding' is misplaced?

Because really, they are not sure whether they understand or not. So it is not necessarily their understanding.

[The Blur]

Got a new glasses yesterday, was told to use it for long distance purpose such as cinema and driving but I'm wearing them 24/7 cause it make me see everything bit more clearer now and make me look cleverer so the question is......

Would wearing it 24/7 damage my eyes or not?

Bit of a daft question but I didn't created this thread for nowt....

Edited 27 January 2011 by ChickenBoy

[StanSP]

Got a new glasses yesterday, was told to use it for long distance purpose such as cinema and driving but I'm wearing them 24/7 cause it make me see everything bit more clearer now and make me look cleverer so the question is......

Would wearing it 24/7 damage my eyes or not?

Bit of a daft question but I didn't created this thread for nowt....

It might put strain on your eyes cos they're focussing on looking through the lens of your glasses 24/7 when at times they don't need the glasses

I wear glasses for short distance - there was a period where I just wouldn't wear them at all. Next time I went to the opticians, he did the usual check-up and said my eyes had got better and reduced the lens thickness ::