401–410 of 602 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What prominent lies from Remain? There was a lot of what people were calling scaremongering, but if you look at the markets it looks like it was pretty accurate. I've seen thorough takedowns of blatant lies from Leave, but haven't seen anything similar for Remain.
The markets are in panic mode for the moment, but it will recover, it always does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The title is a pretty clear and accurate summary of what's happening.
I wonder how they measure the franticness of the Googling: Are they sure they aren't just casually Googling about it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We basically already have this. During the economic crisis, there wasn't a lot of voting on how to save the banks. It's interesting whether brexit and trump will really have that much of an effect, or if we are already mostly living in a technocracy. England also has the house of lords.
We should just put machines in charge. I don't trust any humans to rule over me anymore. Power corrupts, absolutely
We should try it :-)
I'm strangely moved by this whole thing. It's a pretty decent status check on where we are with democracy ATM. I'm not against democracy, but I do think we need to pay attention to what it can & can't do. On one hand, this has been a model of democracy. A primary election agenda and referendum. The phrasing of the question was simple, clear and unbiased. The "will of the people" won over the will of the ruling struct…
This is the smug style in the new politics. The notion that the people don't know what's best for them. Bottom line is the working man hasn't cashed in like the global elite and their sympathizers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the contrary, the fact the EU had enormous power over British people, yet barely anyone knew what it was, what it did, or why it was important, was a compelling reason for the UK to leave.
I'm genuinely curious how someone living in an EU state does not know what it is and some of the stuff the org does day-to-day. How does this happen?
http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/
It's worse than not knowing stuff, most UK people have negative knowledge of the EU since their heads are full of lies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The UK is a much more divided society than Switzerland, in terms of the base level of income and education. The median income in Switzerland is double that of the UK. Education is harder to compare, but you can't really expect the same level of discourse
I remember listening to a Ted talk where the speaker basically said, Get income inequality in check by whatever means and most of your problems go away.
The point in discussion, everyone likes equality in a way they having it, without they having to do anything about it. Or in other words making the rich poor in some way. Wasn't this what communism was all about.
The real issue is equality in access to basic resources, which is by and large there already. Beyond this you need to let people win and lose on merit.
You don't go around paying the same money for a haircut and brain surgery. That sort of equality doesn't work. Or to be more precise that's inequality of a very worst kind.
I'm strangely moved by this whole thing. It's a pretty decent status check on where we are with democracy ATM. I'm not against democracy, but I do think we need to pay attention to what it can & can't do. On one hand, this has been a model of democracy. A primary election agenda and referendum. The phrasing of the question was simple, clear and unbiased. The "will of the people" won over the will of the ruling struct…
The problem with democracy is the people are easily influenced by false truths. I'm all for democracy, but I also realize that a well informed vote and an uninformed vote are equal and therein lies the problem. It's not really something that can be fixed within a true democracy.
What I're read so far about pro-leavers: -They are stupid. -They are xenophobic racists (over 50% of the population!). -Trump welcomes the Brexit, so being pro-leave is stupid. -Old people vote "leave" since they don't have to face the consequences as long as the young people, and old people have no clue. -"Leave" votes come mainly from E.U. subsidized areas, thus they bite the hand that feeds them. -Pro-leave doesn'…
What else do you expect to read they day afterwards? The arguments have been made before the referendum repeatedly and in detail. There is no point in going over them now.
Isn't that expected? People who voted for the establishment status quo want to know what might happen in the years to come now that the vote has gone against them. Voting to stay meant no change, therefore they knew more or less the outcome, but now that the outcome is opposite their votes, they want to look into the repercussions --this informs that it's likely they stay vote didn't investigate the alternative befor…
I think you're drawing conclusions based on your biases just as much as wapo is. You don't know who is googling the EU right now, or what their motivations are. Just as much as some remain votes were blind votes for the status quo, some leave votes were blind votes for change.
Please don't use Google Trends for political gain. It's ridiculous on either side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My favored election procedure works like this: Every citizen takes a standardized test when they reach the age of majority, preferably Raven's matrices. This test would be used for scholastic and career purposes, aside from government. A representative body of 150 people is randomly selected from those in the top 0.1 percent every N years. The IQ test filters for intelligence, obviously. Random sampling serves as an…
I like the random selection part as anti-corruption measure. But the top 0.1 percent IQ filter is not very democratic. You can train for those (if you have the time and money) and there will always be some cultural bias built into the test. It's uncomfortably close to excluding a whole race or sex.