Revision3.com Shows Schedule Inside Revision3 Store


Go Back   Revision3 Forums > General > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

  #1  
Old 11-26-2011, 08:52 PM
boldfire's Avatar
boldfire
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK, Europe
Posts: 1,120
Status: Offline
Default Boiling it down

Hi all,

In the UK we don't have a constitution as such (I think we should). However over the past few weeks I've been thinking more and more about liberties and rights we should have. This is where my thoughts have developed so far...

Everybody have primary-liberties of good health, food, shelter, safety, security and then lesser-liberties to do as they please as long as it does not stand on someone's primary-liberty. They have the right to earn money and spend money as they like, with the condition that they contribute tax to support these liberties for themselves and others.

People’s rights should always trump those of corporations and/or government - because both are made up of people anyway.


I think you can boil many/most subjects to "allowed liberty" or "disallowed liberty" based on the above mantra - of course the more variables, the more complicated it becomes. How it's enforced and legislated is a grey area, which democracy should decide.

Here's just a quick example:-
Smoking bans in public (for examples sake, pubs) enclosed spaces because the right to health wins over the right to smoke.

Clearly the real world doesn't operate on these terms which makes me think there's a huge flaw in my logic. It's got me scratching my head...

Also, is there a term for this way of thinking? I tend to consider myself liberal-left (supporting Labour in the UK)

Last edited by boldfire : 11-26-2011 at 08:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-26-2011, 11:41 PM
tokenuser's Avatar
tokenuser
Cranky Old Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Lost in States
Posts: 15,125
Status: Offline
Default

No constitution per se, but you do have the Magna Carta.

And to be honest ... just about every law in the western world, and the constitutions that are in place, are derived from it.
__________________
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts...and beer." - Abraham Lincoln
"... connect the dots instead of assembling a jigsaw puzzle." - Wil Wheaton
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-30-2011, 04:40 PM
alaskalonewolf's Avatar
alaskalonewolf
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,349
Status: Offline
Default

....I couldn't agree more, in fact, here's how I boil it down:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RpLa5o5X90
__________________
"Don't wait for trouble." Chuck Yeager

Last edited by alaskalonewolf : 11-30-2011 at 04:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-06-2011, 01:32 PM
loug002's Avatar
loug002
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Greensburg, PA
Posts: 135
Status: Offline
Send a message via AIM to loug002 Send a message via MSN to loug002 Send a message via Yahoo to loug002 Send a message via Skype™ to loug002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boldfire View Post

Everybody have primary-liberties of good health,


Conservatives in the US would disagree with this. I'm glad the English and all that have common sense.

[quote]People’s rights should always trump those of corporations and/or government - because both are made up of people anyway.


Amen

I agreed with your points as a whole. These two things just stuck out to me.
__________________
I will ignore people. A simple fact of life. If I don't like what you have to say, or don't agree with it, I will ignore you. Deal with it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-06-2011, 05:56 PM
bobv13
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 230
Status: Offline
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boldfire View Post
Everybody have primary-liberties of good health, food, shelter, safety, security and then lesser-liberties to do as they please as long as it does not stand on someone's primary-liberty. They have the right to earn money and spend money as they like, with the condition that they contribute tax to support these liberties for themselves and others.
I don't understand how the liberty of good health works. For example, is a person who is born with a bad heart being denied his rights? I don't wish to sound like a conservative but I think as a society we should try to provide reasonable health care for those who can't afford it but promising everyone good health is well beyond any society's abilities.

Furthermore I don't think what you are referring to are liberties at all but are entitlements. However the problem with any entitlement is that it relies on the society to fund that entitlement. That is something that may not be doable over the long run. Yes today we do what we can but if something were to go honorably we not be able to tomorrow.

That is why the US Constitution and Bill of Rights speak to the rights of the individual and not government guaranteed entitlements. Even with that said all three branches ignore the constitution, create and pass laws as they see fit. Good luck.
__________________
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's free.

Last edited by bobv13 : 12-06-2011 at 06:03 PM. Reason: poor wording
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-06-2011, 07:20 PM
loug002's Avatar
loug002
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Greensburg, PA
Posts: 135
Status: Offline
Send a message via AIM to loug002 Send a message via MSN to loug002 Send a message via Yahoo to loug002 Send a message via Skype™ to loug002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobv13 View Post
I don't understand how the liberty of good health works. For example, is a person who is born with a bad heart being denied his rights? I don't wish to sound like a conservative but I think as a society we should try to provide reasonable health care for those who can't afford it but promising everyone good health is well beyond any society's abilities.
Is it? Smokers could just smoke at home instead of in public, companies could make their manufacturing cleaner, etc.



Quote:
Furthermore I don't think what you are referring to are liberties at all but are entitlements. However the problem with any entitlement is that it relies on the society to fund that entitlement. That is something that may not be doable over the long run. Yes today we do what we can but if something were to go honorably we not be able to tomorrow.
You're sounding like a typical conservative to be honest.

Quote:
That is why the US Constitution and Bill of Rights speak to the rights of the individual and not government guaranteed entitlements. Even with that said all three branches ignore the constitution, create and pass laws as they see fit. Good luck.
From Article 1, section 8:

Quote:
nd provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States
That surely points out that congress shall tax and spend on "health, happiness, prosperity or well-being".


BTW, the SCOTUS can't make laws. Technically, neither can the President. The President can not write a law, or automatically pass it. He can make an executive order, but that can be overridden with a law by Congress.

He can champion a bill, but that's it.

Only Congress can pass and create laws.
__________________
I will ignore people. A simple fact of life. If I don't like what you have to say, or don't agree with it, I will ignore you. Deal with it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-07-2011, 03:10 AM
zeo's Avatar
zeo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 333
Status: Offline
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loug002 View Post
Is it? Smokers could just smoke at home instead of in public, companies could make their manufacturing cleaner, etc.
Companies can only make their manufacturing as clean as technology allows. Even ignoring costs and practicality there is virtually nothing 100%, even so called green energy products often still have a carbon footprint or worse just hide the pollution by having it generated somewhere else.

Never mind the limited resources available to address the general health of everyone, nature itself exposes us to toxins, UV, diseases, radiation, natural disasters, etc. all the time and of course accidents and violence.

Ensuring anyone's health is hard enough under the most ideal of conditions, let alone an entire society with a wide diversity of lifestyles, many unwilling to change, and all the risk factors that even the most cautious of us face every single moment.

We have to solve a lot of other problems we face in the world, limited resources being high on the list, before we can start ensuring anything.



Quote:
Originally Posted by loug002 View Post
That surely points out that congress shall tax and spend on "health, happiness, prosperity or well-being".
Not really, you'll have to ignore that the framework gives most of the responsibility for citizens welfare to the state governments for one thing. The Federal primary just has to make sure the states play nice with each other and protect the union from any outside threats.

Like cops are responsible for the general welfare of the areas they are responsible for but you don't expect them to be your doctors too for example.

After all, the quote actually puts "defense" and "general welfare" in the same sentence!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-07-2011, 11:37 AM
bobv13
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 230
Status: Offline
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loug002 View Post
Is it? Smokers could just smoke at home instead of in public, companies could make their manufacturing cleaner, etc.
Ok, we have laws pertaining to smoking and OCHA but I think it is a stretch to call either a liberty however they do help provide for the common welfare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loug002 View Post
You're sounding like a typical conservative to be honest.
I believe the label you put on others says more about yourself than it does about the people you label.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loug002 View Post
BTW, the SCOTUS can't make laws. Technically, neither can the President. The President can not write a law, or automatically pass it. He can make an executive order, but that can be overridden with a law by Congress.

He can champion a bill, but that's it.

Only Congress can pass and create laws.
Well that is the way it supposed to go but often does not. More often than not lobbyist are writing our bills. We have the best congress money can buy.

FYI I consider myself an open minded fiscal conservative, social liberal, believe in preserving personal freedoms while promoting personal responsibility.
__________________
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's free.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-07-2011, 05:36 PM
loug002's Avatar
loug002
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Greensburg, PA
Posts: 135
Status: Offline
Send a message via AIM to loug002 Send a message via MSN to loug002 Send a message via Yahoo to loug002 Send a message via Skype™ to loug002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeo View Post
Companies can only make their manufacturing as clean as technology allows. Even ignoring costs and practicality there is virtually nothing 100%, even so called green energy products often still have a carbon footprint or worse just hide the pollution by having it generated somewhere else.

Never mind the limited resources available to address the general health of everyone, nature itself exposes us to toxins, UV, diseases, radiation, natural disasters, etc. all the time and of course accidents and violence.

Ensuring anyone's health is hard enough under the most ideal of conditions, let alone an entire society with a wide diversity of lifestyles, many unwilling to change, and all the risk factors that even the most cautious of us face every single moment.

We have to solve a lot of other problems we face in the world, limited resources being high on the list, before we can start ensuring anything.





Not really, you'll have to ignore that the framework gives most of the responsibility for citizens welfare to the state governments for one thing. The Federal primary just has to make sure the states play nice with each other and protect the union from any outside threats.

Like cops are responsible for the general welfare of the areas they are responsible for but you don't expect them to be your doctors too for example.

After all, the quote actually puts "defense" and "general welfare" in the same sentence!
And I think your entire post is being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse and that I shouldn't have taken you off of ignore.
__________________
I will ignore people. A simple fact of life. If I don't like what you have to say, or don't agree with it, I will ignore you. Deal with it.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-07-2011, 05:36 PM
loug002's Avatar
loug002
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Greensburg, PA
Posts: 135
Status: Offline
Send a message via AIM to loug002 Send a message via MSN to loug002 Send a message via Yahoo to loug002 Send a message via Skype™ to loug002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobv13 View Post
I believe the label you put on others says more about yourself than it does about the people you label.
Except I didn't call you anything. I said you sounded it like it, I never said you actually were.
__________________
I will ignore people. A simple fact of life. If I don't like what you have to say, or don't agree with it, I will ignore you. Deal with it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 08:41 AM.

Rev3 Forum RSS


© 2005-2010 Revision3 Corporation