Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: MP or not MP - that is the question

  1. #1
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default MP or not MP - that is the question

    Having watched the latest parliamentary elections in Ukraine (as well as - rather cursorily - suchlike procedures in other countries) I can't help expressing some thoughts connected with them.
    1. If you want to have a tooth filled you go to a dentist, if you want to buy tasty pastry you go to the baker's, if you want to learn a foreign language you go to a teacher, if you have problems with your plumbery you invite a plumber, if you want to be entertained you go to the movies to watch actors doing it. You would never think of calling a plumber to have your bad tooth extracted, visiting a dentist to buy some buns from him or going to an actress to teach you French (if you really mean to study).
    The parliament is a legislative body, so its job is to create laws. Why on earth do we elect dentists, teachers, journalists, soldiers, actors to create laws? What education or experience do they have to do that?
    Conclusion 1: only lawyers must be allowed to run for the parliament.
    2. Can you imagine, say, FIFA holding sessions all the year round and adopting new football rules all the time (changing the pitch size, ball diameter, goalheight, match duration and so on)? Rules can't be constantly changed.
    Laws are rules according to which a state lives. How can they be constantly shifting, updating and vacillating and people who are in charge of them inventing reasons to get money for it? Once adopted they must hold for at least ten years or more (like American constitution with minor chages is 200 years old) and not provide those eager for easy money with a temptation to try and get it.
    Conclusion 2: parliaments must be at work, say, three months a year (April, October, December) and MPs get their salaries accordingly.
    Last edited by Gilrandir; 11-10-2014 at 09:47.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  2. #2

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    1. We need a certain amount of dentists, teachers, journalists, soldiers and actors in government to provide insight into laws governing dentists, teachers, journalists, soldiers and actors without having to rely entirely on third party interest groups. A handful of good lawyers in the mix is more than sufficient to adequately help draft laws for their party, not to mention outside lawyers specializing in Constitutional law can be hired by a party for purposes of drafting legislation.

    2. The world operates much faster than the world of the 1770s. Can you imagine waiting 5 months before legislative action was taken to fund bombing campaigns against ISIS? 5 months before legislation helping Ukraine arrives? The scope of a government is much larger than the scope of FIFA, so the comparison is not apt. Imagine a single organization that drafted laws for every sport ever created, soccer, baseball, american football, cricket, sumo, rugby, basketball, racquetball, weight lifting, etc... and then you might understand why laws are changing constantly in government. It's not the same laws being changed many times but many, many fields having one to a handful of regulations changed.

    Members thankful for this post (3):



  3. #3
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Conclusion 1: only lawyers must be allowed to run for the parliament.
    Holy hell, never! I'd rather having a rule that restricts the amount of lawyers in parliament(preferably 0, or 1 at most).

    An abundance of lawyers creates a political environment where the technicalities matter more than the bigger picture. And why would being a lawyer give a good insight into the needs of the armed forces? Or what tax levels are appropriate? Or how one should relate to other countries?

    Further, it is not the MP's themselves who write the laws. That's the job of the various departments, and they have extensive legal teams. They check that the new laws are good, and then the MP's vote on their proposals.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Conclusion 2: parliaments must be at work, say, three months a year (April, October, December) and MPs get their salaries accordingly.
    Unlike football, society is constantly changing, thus needs constantly changing laws. The fundamental flaw of the USSR was that it couldn't update their rules as fast as the world changed.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  4. #4
    Ranting madman of the .org Senior Member Fly Shoot Champion, Helicopter Champion, Pedestrian Killer Champion, Sharpshooter Champion, NFS Underground Champion Rhyfelwyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    In a hopeless place with no future
    Posts
    8,646

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    So in other words you want a limited and technocratic government?

    I would rather have a parliament that represents the broad spectrum of society. If you think about all the issues they have to deal with, you would need a lot more than just legal expertise to pass effective laws.
    At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.

  5. #5
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr View Post
    So in other words you want a limited and technocratic government?

    I would rather have a parliament that represents the broad spectrum of society. If you think about all the issues they have to deal with, you would need a lot more than just legal expertise to pass effective laws.
    The problem with that, is of course that you end up with situations like this.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  6. #6
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    1. We need a certain amount of dentists, teachers, journalists, soldiers and actors in government to provide insight into laws governing dentists, teachers, journalists, soldiers and actors without having to rely entirely on third party interest groups.
    Why should the taxpayers pay for such essentially advisory services? They can be rendered free if MP lawyers need to clarify something within the field of dentistry, journalism and so on or at least they are to be paid fee for such advice instead of keeping them on payroll or the year round. While currently they are paid for passing the laws they didn't create, in fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post

    A handful of good lawyers in the mix is more than sufficient to adequately help draft laws for their party, not to mention outside lawyers specializing in Constitutional law can be hired by a party for purposes of drafting legislation.
    Again out of pocket expenses for doing the job MPs get paid for. Double salaries for the same job. Not bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    2. The world operates much faster than the world of the 1770s. Can you imagine waiting 5 months before legislative action was taken to fund bombing campaigns against ISIS? 5 months before legislation helping Ukraine arrives?
    There should be emergency meetings of the parliament stipulated for such cases.
    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    The scope of a government is much larger than the scope of FIFA, so the comparison is not apt. Imagine a single organization that drafted laws for every sport ever created, soccer, baseball, american football, cricket, sumo, rugby, basketball, racquetball, weight lifting, etc... and then you might understand why laws are changing constantly in government.
    So you think that if we had World Sports Parliament responsible for the rules in all sports it would change the rules in different sports constantly? I'm sure that each sport has a set of stable rules which get changed once in a blue moon. Like the football rule of two substitutions was valid for several decades when about thirty years ago the three substitution rule was superimposed.
    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    It's not the same laws being changed many times but many, many fields having one to a handful of regulations changed.
    In Ukraine the former is often the case - MPs adopt laws which turn out to be inadequate so they have to repeal them or correct them .
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  7. #7
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    Further, it is not the MP's themselves who write the laws. That's the job of the various departments, and they have extensive legal teams. They check that the new laws are good, and then the MP's vote on their proposals.
    Thus they may fool the laymen who are supposed to vote for the things they don't understand. Yet they get paid for it so they may forget the scruples.
    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post

    Unlike football, society is constantly changing, thus needs constantly changing laws. The fundamental flaw of the USSR was that it couldn't update their rules as fast as the world changed.
    Look at the football of today and the football of 1990s and you will see five referees instead of three, special equipment registering goals, growth of contract sums and money spent on buying players, new tournaments (Europa League instead of UEFA Cup and Cup holders' Cup)... So football is changing but it doesn't neccessitate creation of a special FIFA body in constant session.
    Last edited by Gilrandir; 11-10-2014 at 13:16.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  8. #8
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr View Post
    So in other words you want a limited and technocratic government?

    I would rather have a parliament that represents the broad spectrum of society. If you think about all the issues they have to deal with, you would need a lot more than just legal expertise to pass effective laws.
    The first would be better. A bunch of people who have no idea of how to do the job they are paid for is not my idea of effective government. I don't second Lenin's idea that "every cook can run the country". The USSR had tried to implement this tenet for seventy years and see what it led to.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  9. #9
    Iron Fist Senior Member Husar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    15,617

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Do you want effective or efficient government? Saving money (e.g. on advisors) usually doesn't aid effectiveness but can help with efficiency.

    If you reduce the time MPs get to discuss proposals, you may reduce effectiveness even further because views and issues may be forgotten or overlooked, laws may become more prone to have loopholes etc. And the US government has plenty of unpaid advisors, in fact these advisors even pay (parts of) the government to do their advising. If you really think that is a great achievement, I suggest you think again.


    "Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu

  10. #10
    Needs more flowers Moderator drone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moral High Grounds
    Posts
    9,276

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Conclusion 1: only lawyers must be allowed to run for the parliament.
    God no. The US Senate is already majority lawyers, and we all know how much work they manage to accomplish. A broader range of expertise and backgrounds is more important for a representative government.

    The .Org's MTW Reference Guide Wiki - now taking comments, corrections, suggestions, and submissions

    If I werent playing games Id be killing small animals at a higher rate than I am now - SFTS
    Si je n'étais pas jouer à des jeux que je serais mort de petits animaux à un taux plus élevé que je suis maintenant - Louis VI The Fat

    "Why do you hate the extremely limited Spartan version of freedom?" - Lemur

  11. #11
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Thus they may fool the laymen who are supposed to vote for the things they don't understand. Yet they get paid for it so they may forget the scruples.
    They may, but they don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Look at the football of today and the football of 1990s and you will see five referees instead of three, special equipment registering goals, growth of contract sums and money spent on buying players, new tournaments (Europa League instead of UEFA Cup and Cup holders' Cup)... So football is changing but it doesn't neccessitate creation of a special FIFA body in constant session.
    Yeah.........

    While you're at it, take a look at how hilariously crappy they've done those jobs, how many loopholes exist and how they have managed to put 2 extra refs in who are specifically not allowed to do anything important, simply because they've taken 20 years and still can't decide the obvious(introducing goal line tech).

    And anyway, that's 5 changes in 20 years. That's like an hour in the rest of society.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 11-10-2014 at 16:52.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  12. #12

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Why should the taxpayers pay for such essentially advisory services? They can be rendered free if MP lawyers need to clarify something within the field of dentistry, journalism and so on or at least they are to be paid fee for such advice instead of keeping them on payroll or the year round. While currently they are paid for passing the laws they didn't create, in fact.


    Again out of pocket expenses for doing the job MPs get paid for. Double salaries for the same job. Not bad.


    There should be emergency meetings of the parliament stipulated for such cases.

    So you think that if we had World Sports Parliament responsible for the rules in all sports it would change the rules in different sports constantly? I'm sure that each sport has a set of stable rules which get changed once in a blue moon. Like the football rule of two substitutions was valid for several decades when about thirty years ago the three substitution rule was superimposed.

    In Ukraine the former is often the case - MPs adopt laws which turn out to be inadequate so they have to repeal them or correct them .

    Your whole counterargument is just re-hashing "it's a waste of money" I know in the Ukraine corruption among politicians is probably very high, but for the most part the government is not spending any significant fraction of its GDP on the MP's. If there is one place where you want to spend money to get the job done right, it's hiring people who know the field that is being legislated on.


  13. #13
    Horse Archer Senior Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Novi Sad, Serbia
    Posts
    4,315

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Why should the taxpayers pay for such essentially advisory services? They can be rendered free if MP lawyers need to clarify something within the field of dentistry, journalism and so on or at least they are to be paid fee for such advice instead of keeping them on payroll or the year round. While currently they are paid for passing the laws they didn't create, in fact.
    1. Parliament is supposed to represent the people, which means everyone is welcome. A parliament of lawyers represents lawyers.

    2. Lawyers are more about phrasing the laws so they achieve their original purpose. The actual content of the law is made by the experts in the field and those the law will be affecting.

    3. Most laws don't affect just a single group of people (just dentist or just teachers). Pensions, social policies, preservation of cultural heritage, protection of minorities, foreign policy... affect entire nation, regardless of education type.

    4. Parliaments also choose a government in most cases.

  14. #14
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Re: MP or not MP - that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    While you're at it, take a look at how hilariously crappy they've done those jobs, how many loopholes exist and how they have managed to put 2 extra refs in who are specifically not allowed to do anything important, simply because they've taken 20 years and still can't decide the obvious(introducing goal line tech).

    And anyway, that's 5 changes in 20 years. That's like an hour in the rest of society.
    I mentioned the most conspicuous changes while I'm sure there are many more if one gets deeper into it. And you seem to be very critical about the changes introduced - so would you second the creation of FIFA parliament permanently in session able to discuss laws the way ordinary parliaments do?
    Ukrainian laws have as many loopholes while a bunch of eggheads have been sweating over them on a permanent basis. If both do their job sloppily, why not opt for the FIFA type of government?

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    Your whole counterargument is just re-hashing "it's a waste of money" I know in the Ukraine corruption among politicians is probably very high, but for the most part the government is not spending any significant fraction of its GDP on the MP's. If there is one place where you want to spend money to get the job done right, it's hiring people who know the field that is being legislated on.
    They say that people pay around 1 mln. hrivnas to get a place on the party roster which (place) is sure to guarantee "deputyship". The majority candidates spend twice as much for their electoral campaign. Once both are in they try to get their money back with a vengeance. So it is not only about official expenditures on the MPs (which are high enough considering all bonuses appended to the vacancy), but also about their further attempts to get the full value of the money they spent by creating various illegal opportunities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    1. Parliament is supposed to represent the people, which means everyone is welcome. A parliament of lawyers represents lawyers.
    Meaning lawyers and people are two opposite categories of homo sapiens?
    As for "people" in the parliament, see above.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    2. Lawyers are more about phrasing the laws so they achieve their original purpose. The actual content of the law is made by the experts in the field and those the law will be affecting.
    It seems that the Ukrainian parliament has problems both with the content and the phrasing if it repeals its own laws thus undoing the work they have been already paid for. There is no hope that the content part will be improved (at least 23 years of independece didn't instill that hope in me) so let at least the phrasing be perfect. Perhaps when it is done, the content will follow suit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    3. Most laws don't affect just a single group of people (just dentist or just teachers). Pensions, social policies, preservation of cultural heritage, protection of minorities, foreign policy... affect entire nation, regardless of education type.
    I'm sure all spheres can be checked and the need of this or that law will transpire. Then compile a list of these laws, develop them for each sphere and adopt. After initial year of preparation the laws, the further work of the parliament will require three months of work every year.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post

    4. Parliaments also choose a government in most cases.
    Not neccessarily from within the parliament. Government members may come from outside it, at least in Ukraine.
    Last edited by Gilrandir; 11-12-2014 at 15:29.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO