FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Running the uk?

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Often wonder why politics is structured the way it is. With a party having a vision and the people voting for them as result of what they say going to do but never do.

I find it funny half the time the minister chosen for ?....say health has little or no ground roots NHS experience.

Why can't we have a government made up of the best people for the job.

Like we would for any position we the people have a panel of experts to interview prospective candidates.

Their vision relating to say health or the environment.

The panel for each area of expertise. Select say three candidates to go forward to the public vote.

I know its all pie in the sky stuff but surely in this day and age it should be about employing the beat people we can get to do the job and fix this broken country.

Clearly the current political process and actions there after is a joke. They all the same

So maybe change is what's needed?

They could televise the interviews so public can watch.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emmefataleWoman
over a year ago

dirtybigbadsgirlville


"Often wonder why politics is structured the way it is. With a party having a vision and the people voting for them as result of what they say going to do but never do.

I find it funny half the time the minister chosen for ?....say health has little or no ground roots NHS experience.

Why can't we have a government made up of the best people for the job.

Like we would for any position we the people have a panel of experts to interview prospective candidates.

Their vision relating to say health or the environment.

The panel for each area of expertise. Select say three candidates to go forward to the public vote.

I know its all pie in the sky stuff but surely in this day and age it should be about employing the beat people we can get to do the job and fix this broken country.

Clearly the current political process and actions there after is a joke. They all the same

So maybe change is what's needed?

They could televise the interviews so public can watch.

"
Or you could concentrate on NSA sex....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

Sounds a lot better than democracy so called

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the uk is run by the newspapers camorron and co are merely the puppets on show

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 09/03/15 22:52:14]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Often wonder why politics is structured the way it is. With a party having a vision and the people voting for them as result of what they say going to do but never do.

I find it funny half the time the minister chosen for ?....say health has little or no ground roots NHS experience.

Why can't we have a government made up of the best people for the job.

Like we would for any position we the people have a panel of experts to interview prospective candidates.

Their vision relating to say health or the environment.

The panel for each area of expertise. Select say three candidates to go forward to the public vote.

I know its all pie in the sky stuff but surely in this day and age it should be about employing the beat people we can get to do the job and fix this broken country.

Clearly the current political process and actions there after is a joke. They all the same

So maybe change is what's needed?

They could televise the interviews so public can watch.

"
government of the people by the people, for the people.

Ive heard that somewhere before

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"

government of the people by the people, for the people.

Ive heard that somewhere before "

Where?

Point me in the general direction

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ngieandMrManCouple
over a year ago

hereford

In principal it might seem like a good idea. But history shows that the Workers aka Public sometimes think they know better than the Bosses aka Government.

When this happens the Workers/Public loose faith in the Bosses/Government which sometimes results in a Protest/Strike and a refusal to cooperate which in turn has in the past lead to the total destruction of the Business/Country in question.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"In principal it might seem like a good idea. But history shows that the Workers aka Public sometimes think they know better than the Bosses aka Government.

When this happens the Workers/Public loose faith in the Bosses/Government which sometimes results in a Protest/Strike and a refusal to cooperate which in turn has in the past lead to the total destruction of the Business/Country in question. "

I guess this is a valid point however surely this can...be ironed out...through a panpanel of experts are going to select say three candidates for each job including the head of country. So public still will vote someone better than current surely?

I had not thought deep on it...just played with idea in mind

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

OP, have you any idea just how many people on the public payroll, eg a typical quango, often being your very "panel of experts" type are milking the country for all it is worth for their own agenda? And the cost of them?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"In principal it might seem like a good idea. But history shows that the Workers aka Public sometimes think they know better than the Bosses aka Government.

When this happens the Workers/Public loose faith in the Bosses/Government which sometimes results in a Protest/Strike and a refusal to cooperate which in turn has in the past lead to the total destruction of the Business/Country in question.

I guess this is a valid point however surely this can...be ironed out...through a panpanel of experts are going to select say three candidates for each job including the head of country. So public still will vote someone better than current surely?

I had not thought deep on it...just played with idea in mind "

if we're going to tinker with the constitution why don't we go the full distance and remove the queen as head of state and install a demarchy as the political system instead of the unitary democracy governed within the framework of a constitutional monarchy that we're stuck with today and is outmoded by about 100 years?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago

Titz Towers, North Notts

Do we get free Jaffa Cakes?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"Do we get free Jaffa Cakes? "

as things are you'll be doing well to get half a rich tea

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"

OP, have you any idea just how many people on the public payroll, eg a typical quango, often being your very "panel of experts" type are milking the country for all it is worth for their own agenda? And the cost of them?"

Perhaps so but not always the case. I would say a panel of environmentalists would have nothing but a good agenda of their own for the good of the planet. And so what if so. The public would still get....to see the CV and hear what that person is going to do in their roll.

We the people would choose the right people to run the country for the people. Its supposed to be our country after all and whatever period you refer to it all seems like we more often than not had the wrong people doing the job and so on

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"

OP, have you any idea just how many people on the public payroll, eg a typical quango, often being your very "panel of experts" type are milking the country for all it is worth for their own agenda? And the cost of them?

Perhaps so but not always the case. I would say a panel of environmentalists would have nothing but a good agenda of their own for the good of the planet. And so what if so. The public would still get....to see the CV and hear what that person is going to do in their roll.

We the people would choose the right people to run the country for the people. Its supposed to be our country after all and whatever period you refer to it all seems like we more often than not had the wrong people doing the job and so on"

type "politics of switzerland" into google and read what comes up on wiki. see if you think this is along the lines of what you're getting at coz it seems to be.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"In principal it might seem like a good idea. But history shows that the Workers aka Public sometimes think they know better than the Bosses aka Government.

When this happens the Workers/Public loose faith in the Bosses/Government which sometimes results in a Protest/Strike and a refusal to cooperate which in turn has in the past lead to the total destruction of the Business/Country in question.

I guess this is a valid point however surely this can...be ironed out...through a panpanel of experts are going to select say three candidates for each job including the head of country. So public still will vote someone better than current surely?

I had not thought deep on it...just played with idea in mind

if we're going to tinker with the constitution why don't we go the full distance and remove the queen as head of state and install a demarchy as the political system instead of the unitary democracy governed within the framework of a constitutional monarchy that we're stuck with today and is outmoded by about 100 years?"

Im not so sure get rid of her totally. It be good to wheel her out the odd time as still quite lot of public like her and well sure she has some benefit to our country.

Would put this one to public vote.

However have often thought she should not be subsidised by public and all of her assets should be sold off for the good of the country. Fix the roads in Britain or bring rail up to date. Sure her assets would fix lot in Broken Britain

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"

OP, have you any idea just how many people on the public payroll, eg a typical quango, often being your very "panel of experts" type are milking the country for all it is worth for their own agenda? And the cost of them?

Perhaps so but not always the case. I would say a panel of environmentalists would have nothing but a good agenda of their own for the good of the planet. And so what if so. The public would still get....to see the CV and hear what that person is going to do in their roll.

We the people would choose the right people to run the country for the people. Its supposed to be our country after all and whatever period you refer to it all seems like we more often than not had the wrong people doing the job and so on

type "politics of switzerland" into google and read what comes up on wiki. see if you think this is along the lines of what you're getting at coz it seems to be."

Cheers will do just that thanks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Any citizen may challenge a law that has been passed by parliament. If that person is able to gather 50,000 signatures against the law within 100 days, a national vote has to be scheduled where voters decide by a simple majority of the voters whether to accept or reject the law.

This sounds better than our system for sure. Like that idea

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

OP, have you any idea just how many people on the public payroll, eg a typical quango, often being your very "panel of experts" type are milking the country for all it is worth for their own agenda? And the cost of them?

Perhaps so but not always the case. I would say a panel of environmentalists would have nothing but a good agenda of their own for the good of the planet. And so what if so. The public would still get....to see the CV and hear what that person is going to do in their roll.

We the people would choose the right people to run the country for the people. Its supposed to be our country after all and whatever period you refer to it all seems like we more often than not had the wrong people doing the job and so on"

We, the people, the right minded right thinking people are never the ones who appoint this type of person in the first place, many of whom have multiple appointments in cahoots with all their like minded mates ( think Tonys Cronies). Self serving corruption.

Commendable that you think that way but there has to be some sort of "revolution" to clear the decks in the first place.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"In principal it might seem like a good idea. But history shows that the Workers aka Public sometimes think they know better than the Bosses aka Government.

When this happens the Workers/Public loose faith in the Bosses/Government which sometimes results in a Protest/Strike and a refusal to cooperate which in turn has in the past lead to the total destruction of the Business/Country in question.

I guess this is a valid point however surely this can...be ironed out...through a panpanel of experts are going to select say three candidates for each job including the head of country. So public still will vote someone better than current surely?

I had not thought deep on it...just played with idea in mind

if we're going to tinker with the constitution why don't we go the full distance and remove the queen as head of state and install a demarchy as the political system instead of the unitary democracy governed within the framework of a constitutional monarchy that we're stuck with today and is outmoded by about 100 years?

Im not so sure get rid of her totally. It be good to wheel her out the odd time as still quite lot of public like her and well sure she has some benefit to our country.

Would put this one to public vote.

However have often thought she should not be subsidised by public and all of her assets should be sold off for the good of the country. Fix the roads in Britain or bring rail up to date. Sure her assets would fix lot in Broken Britain"

i just said remove her as head of state .... not get rid of her .... it would be bad for business to do that .... but she could be monarch without being head of state

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Maybe we could also improve things in another way.

If those who pursue a given agenda, say Salmond/Sturgeon re Scotland or say Barroso re Europe stand on a platform or issue and LOSE then they should immediately resign and be barred from politics for say 10 years.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

"

utter rubbish ..... you can't have a 5 years between referenda! try thinking outside the box for once... the swiss have about 4 every year at least and in any case it follows on from jacks idea to make voting mandatory. if there are regular votes then the initial investment in electoral infrastructure would make it extremely inexpensive after a very short time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

"

We tried that (two elections on one day) and people managed to fuck it up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

utter rubbish ..... you can't have a 5 years between referenda! try thinking outside the box for once... the swiss have about 4 every year at least and in any case it follows on from jacks idea to make voting mandatory. if there are regular votes then the initial investment in electoral infrastructure would make it extremely inexpensive after a very short time."

Think outside the box eh?

How about having Council Elections each and every year eh? Anyone reckon that could catch on?

Utter rubbish eh : Maybe they could stick a referenda voting slip to my bin on each collection day? That way we could vote each and every week except bank holidays and strikes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

utter rubbish ..... you can't have a 5 years between referenda! try thinking outside the box for once... the swiss have about 4 every year at least and in any case it follows on from jacks idea to make voting mandatory. if there are regular votes then the initial investment in electoral infrastructure would make it extremely inexpensive after a very short time.

Think outside the box eh?

How about having Council Elections each and every year eh? Anyone reckon that could catch on?

Utter rubbish eh : Maybe they could stick a referenda voting slip to my bin on each collection day? That way we could vote each and every week except bank holidays and strikes.

"

that's better .... you may be on to something there

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

utter rubbish ..... you can't have a 5 years between referenda! try thinking outside the box for once... the swiss have about 4 every year at least and in any case it follows on from jacks idea to make voting mandatory. if there are regular votes then the initial investment in electoral infrastructure would make it extremely inexpensive after a very short time.

Think outside the box eh?

How about having Council Elections each and every year eh? Anyone reckon that could catch on?

Utter rubbish eh : Maybe they could stick a referenda voting slip to my bin on each collection day? That way we could vote each and every week except bank holidays and strikes.

that's better .... you may be on to something there"

Nah bugger that, i think we should just appoint you to run the UK. I'll cover for your 48 weeks annual holidays.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

utter rubbish ..... you can't have a 5 years between referenda! try thinking outside the box for once... the swiss have about 4 every year at least and in any case it follows on from jacks idea to make voting mandatory. if there are regular votes then the initial investment in electoral infrastructure would make it extremely inexpensive after a very short time.

Think outside the box eh?

How about having Council Elections each and every year eh? Anyone reckon that could catch on?

Utter rubbish eh : Maybe they could stick a referenda voting slip to my bin on each collection day? That way we could vote each and every week except bank holidays and strikes.

that's better .... you may be on to something there

Nah bugger that, i think we should just appoint you to run the UK. I'll cover for your 48 weeks annual holidays. "

i'd rather part time to be honest can you cover 51 and 3/4 weeks?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

One argument for not holding referenda in the UK is the "excessive" cost.

One other concern is that the general public are apathetic and do not turn out for General Elections.

Simple idea, hold the two fucking things together on the same day.

utter rubbish ..... you can't have a 5 years between referenda! try thinking outside the box for once... the swiss have about 4 every year at least and in any case it follows on from jacks idea to make voting mandatory. if there are regular votes then the initial investment in electoral infrastructure would make it extremely inexpensive after a very short time.

Think outside the box eh?

How about having Council Elections each and every year eh? Anyone reckon that could catch on?

Utter rubbish eh : Maybe they could stick a referenda voting slip to my bin on each collection day? That way we could vote each and every week except bank holidays and strikes.

that's better .... you may be on to something there

Nah bugger that, i think we should just appoint you to run the UK. I'll cover for your 48 weeks annual holidays.

i'd rather part time to be honest can you cover 51 and 3/4 weeks?"

Only if you can make it in on a Wednesday.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago

morning or afternoon?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Often wonder why politics is structured the way it is. With a party having a vision and the people voting for them as result of what they say going to do but never do.

I find it funny half the time the minister chosen for ?....say health has little or no ground roots NHS experience.

Why can't we have a government made up of the best people for the job.

Like we would for any position we the people have a panel of experts to interview prospective candidates.

Their vision relating to say health or the environment.

The panel for each area of expertise. Select say three candidates to go forward to the public vote.

I know its all pie in the sky stuff but surely in this day and age it should be about employing the beat people we can get to do the job and fix this broken country.

Clearly the current political process and actions there after is a joke. They all the same

So maybe change is what's needed?

They could televise the interviews so public can watch.

"

That's the craziest thing that I've possibly heard!!

I mean anymore talk like this & you'll be deemed so fucking stupid, you'll be offered a divinely aromatic polonium cÖffe!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Often wonder why politics is structured the way it is. With a party having a vision and the people voting for them as result of what they say going to do but never do.

I find it funny half the time the minister chosen for ?....say health has little or no ground roots NHS experience.

Why can't we have a government made up of the best people for the job.

Like we would for any position we the people have a panel of experts to interview prospective candidates.

Their vision relating to say health or the environment.

The panel for each area of expertise. Select say three candidates to go forward to the public vote.

I know its all pie in the sky stuff but surely in this day and age it should be about employing the beat people we can get to do the job and fix this broken country.

Clearly the current political process and actions there after is a joke. They all the same

So maybe change is what's needed?

They could televise the interviews so public can watch.

That's the craziest thing that I've possibly heard!!

I mean anymore talk like this & you'll be deemed so fucking stupid, you'll be offered a divinely aromatic polonium cÖffe! "

Look at Switzerland

And tell me its not basicly my idea and more. I like all sorts about Swiss politics now.

Yes you maybe right about the coffee.....but I'm more of a tea man myself

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago

what's not to like about the way they do stuff politically?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

government of the people by the people, for the people.

Ive heard that somewhere before

Where?

Point me in the general direction

"
.

Gettysburg address by Abraham Lincoln after the American civil war..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"

government of the people by the people, for the people.

Ive heard that somewhere before

Where?

Point me in the general direction

.

Gettysburg address by Abraham Lincoln after the American civil war..

"

Will have the check it out

Thanks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I'd prefer people with the right skill and feel that ministers at least should be banned from corporate involvement with anything theycve influenced for a long time after government.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

government of the people by the people, for the people.

Ive heard that somewhere before

Where?

Point me in the general direction

.

Gettysburg address by Abraham Lincoln after the American civil war..

Will have the check it out

Thanks "
.

The swiss system seems to work very well for all sections of society.

Why it's not adapted by others is probably more to do with people in power not wanting to lose power, which is what the Swiss system at heart does.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ere-for-my-convenienceWoman
over a year ago

Tenbury Wells


"Often wonder why politics is structured the way it is. With a party having a vision and the people voting for them as result of what they say going to do but never do.

I find it funny half the time the minister chosen for ?....say health has little or no ground roots NHS experience.

Why can't we have a government made up of the best people for the job.

Like we would for any position we the people have a panel of experts to interview prospective candidates.

Their vision relating to say health or the environment.

The panel for each area of expertise. Select say three candidates to go forward to the public vote.

I know its all pie in the sky stuff but surely in this day and age it should be about employing the beat people we can get to do the job and fix this broken country.

Clearly the current political process and actions there after is a joke. They all the same

So maybe change is what's needed?

They could televise the interviews so public can watch.

"

I agree with you

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icky999Man
over a year ago

warrington

If only there was some type of permanent secretary to the minister who were experts in their field...

... o hang on.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"

I agree with you "

Thought more would but 4 is not a lot.

Previous poster is right its just like the Swiss system and the Swiss system has to be the best for the people.

A peoples government, voted by the people for the good of the people instead of the good for themselves or good of the few.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I agree with you

Thought more would but 4 is not a lot.

Previous poster is right its just like the Swiss system and the Swiss system has to be the best for the people.

A peoples government, voted by the people for the good of the people instead of the good for themselves or good of the few.

"
apathy... It's got alot to answer for

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top