When we're young we often do foolish things not because we are fools, but because we want to explore. At least, that's how I like to think about it.
Yeah, let's go with that. ;-)
Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
81–90 of 109 posts
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're the finance ministers of member countries. For them to be there someone has to vote in the respective governments... Indirect democracy is still democracy. Heck, it's even the form of democracy 90% of democracies out there use.
> They're the finance ministers of members country. For them to be there someone has to vote in the respective governments... They don't keep records of what is said there, there is no official voting process, the pressures and blackmails inside the room are kept mum, and the decisions are then carried on. This is not indirect democracy in the sense a parliament of representatives are -- this still has procedures, of…
I'd want the source of your quote first ;)
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#83David Letterman has. Here he is with Howard Stern: https://www.howardstern.com/show/2017/8/16/david-letterman-h...
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're the finance ministers of member countries. For them to be there someone has to vote in the respective governments... Indirect democracy is still democracy. Heck, it's even the form of democracy 90% of democracies out there use.
> "Indirect democracy is still democracy" How about an oligarchy, is that still a democracy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
Of course not, but that's assuming that the shadowy "Eurogroup" decides everything.
Which is not true. The European Parliament is democratically elected, the European Council is (indirectly) democratically elected, the European Council is literally the heads of states elected, again, democratically, by member countries.
The European Commission is not democratically elected, because guess what, no public administration is fully democratically elected. No state could ever function if its "plumbers" are changed 100% every 4 years. The UK doesn't do it, Switzerland doesn't do it, Australia doesn't do it, France doesn't do it, etc.
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
an opaque process of decision-making (complete with several non-official-bodies, non-accountable to anyone, that nevertheless convene and take decisions that affect all member states) Can you specify what you mean by this?
Bodies like the Euro-group, a non-official body that "although it can impose tough conditions for bailing out struggling member countries or rescuing banks, it publishes no official minutes, has no headquarters, and the people who function as its secretariat have other day jobs".
Ok, I see what you mean. The fundamental problem is that the Euro group doesn't officially exist as a separate unit within the EU.
The constitutional agreements of the Union essentially pretend that all member states are also automatically members of the currency union... But obviously this is not the case, because so many members either opted out or haven't yet been admitted into the Euro.
Since the informal Euro group has no official function, its power is executed through whatever decisions the finance ministers can push forward in their home countries.
Should the meetings' minutes be public? I think so. But it's not clear to me where to draw the line. If the finance minister of Germany calls the finance minister of Italy, we don't expect a public transcript. If there are a few more counterparts on the conference call, same thing. What are the criteria for when it becomes an official meeting of an inofficial body?
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know enough about Brexit to form an opinion, which is good. It enables to to seriously ask this question. Have you actually considered that your opinion on Brexit could be wrong? Have you really given that any consideration? I don't have a nickel invested, so your answer doesn't matter to me. It may matter to you, however.
Agree. Unlike how most news outlets portray it, most issues have valid points on both sides. If someone doesn't understand both sides and can argue either, they don't really understand the problem. If they don't understand the problem and defer to news coverage, and are being manipulated. Based on most of the coverage of Brexit, I wouldn't have any idea what the pro-Brexit points are. I also don't have a horse in tha…
[deleted]
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#87Age != Wisdom. Wisdom comes from Experience and living life. If you sit on a couch all day watching t.v. your experiences do not equal someone who goes out of the house, builds things, etc... Wisdom is earned by doing, not by aging.
In my view, wisdom is gained by reflecting on what has been done, not by doing. Reflection is not a given at any age, but in my experience older people tend to afford more of their time to it.
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Indirect democracy is still democracy" How about an oligarchy, is that still a democracy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
Of course not, but that's assuming that the shadowy "Eurogroup" decides everything. Which is not true. The European Parliament is democratically elected, the European Council is (indirectly) democratically elected, the European Council is literally the heads of states elected, again, democratically, by member countries. The European Commission is not democratically elected, because guess what, no public administratio…
No state could ever function if its "plumbers" are changed 100% every 4 years.
To be fair, the United States tries to do mostly that -- and the utter dysfunction of 2017 has demonstrated the dangers of that approach.
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#89Age != Wisdom. Wisdom comes from Experience and living life. If you sit on a couch all day watching t.v. your experiences do not equal someone who goes out of the house, builds things, etc... Wisdom is earned by doing, not by aging.
I wouldn't fret over that distinction. If you try to spend 60 years sitting on your butt, staring at screens, you won't make it to 80 to enjoy your wisdom anyway.
Re: Yes, We Get Wiser with Age
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know enough about Brexit to form an opinion, which is good. It enables to to seriously ask this question. Have you actually considered that your opinion on Brexit could be wrong? Have you really given that any consideration? I don't have a nickel invested, so your answer doesn't matter to me. It may matter to you, however.
Agree. Unlike how most news outlets portray it, most issues have valid points on both sides. If someone doesn't understand both sides and can argue either, they don't really understand the problem. If they don't understand the problem and defer to news coverage, and are being manipulated. Based on most of the coverage of Brexit, I wouldn't have any idea what the pro-Brexit points are. I also don't have a horse in tha…
I have found that people, despite protestations to the contrary virtually always argue for policy that they believe would benefit them personally in some way.
I came to this realization after reading and watching fairly extensively the arguments against income inequality. I personally feel that lack of opportunity is a waste of human resources as surely countless great people who would have shaped society for the better have died without leaving that impact due to lack of access to capitol. Now 80% of the world lives on less than $10 a day, in my view these are the true victims of income inequity yet as I watched debate after debate these people were never mentioned. In fact the people debating seemed to believe that relatively wealthy, often educated Americans would be the beneficiaries of a more "fair" (fairness is debatable and outside of the scope of what I'm saying here) income distribution. That isn't the case as per capita incomes if all global GDP were distributed equally would be around ten thousand dollars per person before taxes, much less than the vast majority of Americans receive as cash income not counting government programs (remember all governmental services must be paid out of that ten thousand. Roads, police, healthcare, food stamps, etc). Thus income inequality isn't the problem they are attempting to resolve instead they are attempting to resolve it in a very limited arbitrary scope that happens to improve their own personal fortunes while ignoring most of the world that is suffering to a greater extent than they will ever experience.
This is not to say a particular group is bad, just that their ideas no matter how cleverly disguised are at their core about promoting self interest just like everyone else. I expect the people who voted leave had similar intentions as did the remain voters, naked self interest.