If I were in charge ...

[Askan Nightbringer]

Ooo...so many ideas.

1. I would take the Union Jack out of our flag (Australian).

2. I would make the Queen of England work for her title as our Head of State. I'de have her sitting in our parliament trying to administer our pit-fighting style system of political debate ("Would the member for Bankstown stop calling the member for Bendigo a skumbag"). If she refuses to work I'de put her on unemployment benefits and make her live in Bondi, then let the Head of State be chosen from an annual "Chook" raffle.

3. I'de set up a joint currency with New Zealnd and Fiji and call it the Trans-Tasman Peso. I would mint the coins using opium extract to give them a real worth on the international market (well at least in the USA).

4. I'de instigate an "eat your own dogfood" policy for all politicians. This means that if your a politician you must use public services for everything. For example.
a) You must travel exclusively on the public transport system
b) Send your kids to public schools (for you UK types these are what we call the government schools in the colonies)
c) Use public hospitals
d) Invest all you money in a typical 0.01% interest rate savings account at your local bank branch (which has probabaly been closed down...but don't worry, there is another a mere 150km away!)

5. I would ban the use of "sensitive" phrases to describe anything. Things like "humanitarian intervention" (first coined by Hitler I believe) would have to be described as "Yes we are invading that damn country for our own reasons so just shut up".
"Downsizing" would have to be changed to "We're sacking lots of people so our directors can get fatter"
"Surgical Strike" would have to be changed to "We're gonna bomb that building +/- 15km/miles" (Anyone remember that "smart bomb" that hit Hungary during the "humanitarian intervention" in Serbia)
"Experimenting with drugs" would have to be changed to "he is a crackfiend"
I could go the phrases for days so I'll shut up on those ones. Maybe that would be another cool topic?

6. I'de reappoint Steve Waugh as the captain of the one-day cricket team.


As for some of the raging debates going on.

Seat-belts are compulsory by law here. It has always been so in my lifetime. I feel naked if I'm in a car without a seatbelt...go figure.

Taxes on fuel guzzling cars is very European, where everything is close. I drive 400km to go away for a weekend, screw the big car tax.

USA doesn't need to give military aide to the South Americans to solve drug problems. If the USA just stopped being such a big consumer of drugs then no market and no problem.

There's nothing wrong with a national debt. Every good investor knows that debt maximises your returns.

Stop picking on China.


Cheers all,
Askan

[Growltigga]

Askan,

I would take the Union Jack out of our flag (Australian

We wish you would, we would love to be rid but there are so many antipodeans over here in Blighty... need I say more?

. I would make the Queen of England work for her title as our Head of State.

She does, do you not realise the stigma she carries over being the head of state of a nation of people whose parliamentary procedure allows the representative for say Wallamalloo to be called a skumbag????

Your point 4 I agree with completely

[Askan Nightbringer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Growltigga:

I would take the Union Jack out of our flag (Australian

We wish you would, we would love to be rid but there are so many antipodeans over here in Blighty... need I say more?

. I would make the Queen of England work for her title as our Head of State.

She does, do you not realise the stigma she carries over being the head of state of a nation of people whose parliamentary procedure allows the representative for say Wallamalloo to be called a skumbag????

Your point 4 I agree with completely

---

You worry bout the antipodeans over there? Should see my street...its like a mecca for british backpackers. And the singing...what's with the singing?

During the queen's Last visit here I've hypothesised an arrangement that would work well for both countries and put her to good use.
Apparently elections in Britian won't be held if the queen is out of the country.
Also true is that if the queen is in Australia we will not hold elections (something about upsetting her with the name calling that goes on during our elections).
If we could lock her up in one of our illegal immigrant detention centres (putting the things to good use) then no Australian or British citizen would ever have to hear pre-election prattle ever again.
Surely a cause worth fighting for.


Askan

[ 10 April 2002: Message edited by: askan ]

[Growltigga]

Askan, I will swop you the Brits yodelling in your street for Earls Court and Kings Cross anyday - I here you can even get a good meat pie floater in Earls Court now

Well the singing is because of an phenomena called excess drinking - it is not just restricted to British Backpackers, lots of nations indulge and I myself have seen hordes of 'Westies' indulging in the same in Kuta

[Mephisto]

Grmpf, my DSL was down.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
"Those who are irresponsible enough not to wear seatbelts usually aren't prepared to fork out major amounts of cash to pay for their medical bills. Then what do you do? Let them die on the road, or treat them and never get the money?"

Let their family deal with the bills, the immediate ones anyway. The ones after that too, if they go there.
I'm not a big fan of protecting people from their own bad choices by laws.
Phoenix-D

---

Problem in Germany is, you cannot do this. Our constitution forces the state to care for your health (free hospitals, EMS). Of course it is not �free�, you give a certain amount of the cash you earn in a insurance. However, EVERYBODY has to pay into this so if you go out and do something most stupid we all have to pay the bill. I know, you want to say that everybody has to care for his own and your are right, to a certain degree at least. But this system has its benefits: We don�t have poor people that are in very bad health or die because they cannot afford to get treatment.

Re: Safety belts. Dmm, you said it all. I was thinking about the anti-drug-law reference myself but you already posted it.


Regarding Germany:
We do have states in Germany, too, you know?

You have to report where your lat/house/something is to the community you live in as it they get taxes from you. You don't report this to the police. How do you do this in the US with IRS anyway? I�m curious.

There are two situations you have to report your religion to the IRS. You are either a member of the catholic church or of the protestant church. Why? Because these two big churches collect their fees over the German IRS.
If you are a Jew, Moslem or Hindu or not a member of a church at all for example you are not required to report anything about your faith to the Government.
Some people in the US (some Hollywood people, I remember Dustin Hoffman) called us �religious intolerant� because one faith did not have to report membership to it to the IRS. This faith made not very friendly statements in magazines throughout the US about it. The background was (but of course they never told it this way) that this faith wanted to be recognized as a church in the way the big two churches are so the IRS would collect their money for them. German courts denied that for several reasons but not because they were not a church in the sense of a religion. Everyone is free to believe (or not believe) what he wants. But not everybody can have the state collect money for him.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PvK:
This is also why I said I'd call for a public referendum - that means asking for a vote to make sure that the people really want to be policed in these ways, and that it's not just something being imposed upon them.

---

Yea, but this insight isn't that popular in the world after 11th of September around the world anymore. Every community has to defend itself against terrorism but I sometimes ask myself if not to many of our liberties as citizen are going down the hill. At least here in Germany many politicians where very eager to bring up laws that they could not pass before the 11th September.

[Krsqk]

"Let their family deal with the bills, the immediate ones anyway. The ones after that too, if they go there.
"I'm not a big fan of protecting people from their own bad choices by laws."

No, I'm not either. I'm just saying there are three choices

• Have "rich" (evil, greedy, etc.) insurance companies pay for everybody's injuries equally, no matter the cause. This means we all pay for each other's injuries, even ones from stupidity.
• Have individuals responsible for their own injuries also be responsible for their own bills. This usually results in the hospital having to eat much of the cost, as few people have enough money to pay for extended medical care. This in turn means that medical costs are raised, costing the insurance companies more, costing us more.
• Have government be responsible to pick up the tab for those who can't pay themselves. That's just a short step away from covering everybody, which makes the government a giant insurance company (albeit an inefficent one). Since we all fund the government, we would all pay for each other, except that the wealthier you are, the higher your share of taxes (and probably, the lower your share of benefits).

Currently, there is no way to make people totally responsible for their own injuries--at least not as long as you can default on medical bills and not be affected (they don't go on your credit history).

[ 10 April 2002: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

[Askan Nightbringer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Growltigga:
Askan, I will swop you the Brits yodelling in your street for Earls Court and Kings Cross anyday - I here you can even get a good meat pie floater in Earls Court now

Well the singing is because of an phenomena called excess drinking - it is not just restricted to British Backpackers, lots of nations indulge and I myself have seen hordes of 'Westies' indulging in the same in Kuta

---

Oh come on, what's wrong with Earl's Court? I especially like that Walkabout Pub with all that iconic Australian stuff, mainly coz we don't get iconic Australian stuff down here. Nothing better than a pie floater when your drunk too, the pea soup helps soak up all the alcohol making you less prone to singing outbursts.
And I can't imagine westies singing to anything, except maybe ACDC. What's a Brit doing in Kuta anyhows? Shouldn't you be in Ibiza scoring with some Essex girs?


And not to get too off topic.

1. Religious intolerance. If it prevents Mormons and Scientologists then I'm all for some.

2. Health Insurance. Government health care all the way. If a government doesn't provide for the health, education and general well being of all its citizens then what's the point of it. I understand that as a younger member of this society that the the medicare levy (government tax for health insurance) I pay is much higher than the cost of the medical treatment I receive (which amounts to around none), but one day when I'm older I'm gonna need a hip replacement or be committed to an institute for the criminally insane and it will all even out in the end. Thats the beauty of a non-profit system.


Cheers all,
Askan

[Cyrien]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Instar:
"But I do Believe that some Nuclear arsenal should be kept; just for the sake that responsible scientists can actually develop fusion power."
Huh? Just a point, but generally you dont need nuclear weapons to build fusion power.

---

just check the site www.iter.org for current fusion research. The science has been worked out. Now they are working on building the first test plant. (A project which the US feels isn't worth major investing so after years of being part of ITER they withdrew because $350mil is too much to pay for fusion power apparantly)

quote:

---

On that point, I would rather have nuclear arms than not. The unholy triad of megadeath weapons is too widespread. Fear of retaliation prevents attack. Biochemical attack must therefore equal nuclear retaliation.

---

This point can be argued, though I tend to agree with you. By keeping a stockpile of weaps of mass destruction you ensure that other countries won't use them against you because then you would use them against them. On the other hand it also makes it easier for smaller non nation organizations (read terrorists) to get their hands on one or the materials to make one. If a terrorist uses a weap of mass destruction they probably won't leave a return address that can be hit back with another weap of mass destruction. Also what happens if a nation like Iraq (not to focus on Iraq to much or anything) etc... gets a nuke and goes ahead and invades Kuwait or other again and says if you intervene we nuke you?

quote:

---

As for the armed forces, I would maintain them, if not slightly augment them. SpecFor is good, but they're only good in certain situations. China, for example, has an army of millions (literally), so we need to at least maintain a decent armored, cavalry, infantry, air, and other forces, even though a war with China is not very likely.

---

US Pop 288 mil
Europe Pop 727 mil (all European Coutries)
Added together = A little over 1 billion

China Pop 1.386 billion Standing Army about 300mil

So... ermm... there is no way here a conventional army could defeat those numbers if the US stood alone. Standing Army larger than whole US population and all. IF you throw in ALL of Europe... then there would be a chance utilizing modern technology that is better than Chinas to offset numerical superiority.

And of course... ask yourself how long the US and modern Europe democracies would be willing to take in the mass of casualties in such a conflict. In short I am saying short of weaps of mass destruction the US + Europe would have slim chances of actually winning a conventional engagement against China. There is no point in even looking at China as a guideline for military size. For China Nukes are the only line of defense. For other forms of conflict we already know that the US and other European power countries have militaries that can in conventional warfare win. Easily. The problem is these countries know that as well. They don't fight conventional warfares against these nations anymore. They do Guerrilla ops etc. How do you counter this? Vietnam and Russias Afgan shows it isn't with massive conventional forces. That just leads to massive conventional losses. The US had the right idea this time around. Support native dissident military forces while using your own specforces to find and lock in targets for modern smart weapons. It isn't perfect. But it is better than having say 100k in losses for your country and then pulling out and really changing nothing.

For future military engagement you have to realize that western democracies Dislike War and HATE wartime casualties. Especially with Mass Media covering it live right into our living rooms. We don't even like the enemies casualties, but that can be tolerated for short periods of time. Conventional forces should be kept in some number but not on the scale of refighting WW2, which is generally what we are looking at. There are only two types of modern wars anymore. All out wars, which will eventually lead to Nukes as one side or another realizes it can't win any other way and both sides realize this so avoid these wars, or specops and guerrilla wars.

That is the thinking behind my military policy of maintaining military arsenal of weaps of mass destruction and reduction of conventional military forces while expanding air and specops forces. Keep in mind I don't want to disband the conventional forces. Sometimes you need them. For the crazies that think they can challenge in conventional warfare like Sadam. But you don't need the massive sizes currently held by the US. Right now it is just a military industrial complex thing for supporting the economy. Gee... I think Nazi Germany used the same thing to support its economy.

[Askan Nightbringer]

You seem to have a stutter there Tigga

[Growltigga]

Oh come on, what's wrong with Earl's Court? I especially like that Walkabout Pub with all that iconic Australian stuff,

Well, you would like Earl's Court as you are Australian - we think it is full of load mouth yobs and brash Aussie girls

Nothing better than a pie floater when your drunk too

Well maybe, but I am never sure if I have eaten it already or are eating it again

the pea soup helps soak up all the alcohol making you less prone to singing outbursts.

and more prone to throwing up violently in the gutter - hmmmm, would I prefer a crowd of drunk Englishmen singing rugby songs or a crowd of drunk antipodeans being ill in the gutter and pretending to be Russell Crowe??

And I can't imagine westies singing to anything, except maybe ACDC

that is a bit harsh isn't it? we always understood Westies to be the cornerstone of your popular culture

What's a Brit doing in Kuta anyhows? Shouldn't you be in Ibiza scoring with some Essex girs?

done that, I was in Kuta hoping that all Australian lasses would look like Ella and/or Kylie - however, on getting to the Sari Club, it was more a case of Madge from Neighbours and Angry Andersen - no wonder so many of you are over here!! - much more fun on Lombok anyhow

[ 10 April 2002: Message edited by: Growltigga ]