An Australian Republic

[Kralizec]

Oh yeah I am hesitant about that, but as long as the position is a fairly limited one then I don't have too much problem with this.

Just rename the current office of Governor General "President" and leave the Commonwealth. Instant republic

It isn't cheaper. The German President costs more than many monarchs, and he does even less than most of them.

I've heard this before, and I seriously question this. I don't feel like looking it up though.
Fortunately it's you who made the claim here, wich means you get to do the work
Remember, you must also include the costs for all the monarch's useless relatives in your calculations

Still, even if it costs more...take the President of Iceland, for example. The veto he cast on the Icesave bill was highly unusual. But at least he was elected to his job (by their parliament)
In contrast, this guy and this guy got where they were by virtue of birth and deluded themselves into thinking it was acceptable for them to refuse signing a law passed by the legislature. That alone is a good reason to be in favour of a republic

[Megas Methuselah]

You should find an old, illustrious Aborigine family and crown its paterfamilias your king.

[CountArach]

Also, if Australia becomes a republic does that mean your going to change your flag?

Probably. A lot of people (myself included) favour changing it to the Eureka Flag.

Just rename the current office of Governor General "President" and leave the Commonwealth. Instant republic

At the previous referendum the question was whether we wanted to remain a Monarchy or whether we wanted to change to a Republic. The problem with it was that the design chosen for a Republic was the one you just suggested, which was unpopular amongst a lot of people. I would have voted against it at the time, as did quite a number of more reformist Republicans. The most likely step forward is the two-step process, where we are first asked if we want to be a Republic and then asked what form it would take. I can't find the data but I believe that 70 or so percent of Republicans want the leader directly elected.

[Fragony]

A President cheaper? Really? I doubt it.

Depends on wether or not you take a 4 your term over a lifetime of preparation to cut ribbons.

[Husar]

So you get rid of the monarchs, and suddenly you find that a whole industry has gone bankrupt and bored housewives go and riot on the streets during the times they used to read the, now gone, yellow press. -> country collapses!

[Lemur]

Probably. A lot of people (myself included) favour changing it to the Eureka Flag.

Too many pointy bits on that one. Looks like you're crucifying a bunch of shuriken.

[CountArach]

Too many pointy bits on that one. Looks like you're crucifying a bunch of shuriken.

Ninjas on a flag has to count for something, right?

[rory_20_uk]

Depends on wether or not you take a 4 your term over a lifetime of preparation to cut ribbons.

And don't forget that every one requires state paid for security guards for the rest of their life.

[Louis VI the Fat]

The freedom to choose my own leaders. I can't put a price on that.

This proud freedom is worth a century of revolutions, reactionary counter-revolutions, and the whole of Europe declaring war against you.

[Beskar]

Do away with Monarchy, sooner the better.

It is not as if she is British anyway, she is German. As Evil_Maniac from Mars really wants a monarchy, we can send him our Queen back.

[Furunculus]

This proud freedom is worth a century of revolutions, reactionary counter-revolutions, and the whole of Europe declaring war against you.

and god knows that a frenchman, above anyone else, is well qualified to offer this bit of wisdom to you.

[miotas]

Just rename the current office of Governor General "President" and leave the Commonwealth. Instant republic

For all the jokes that are made about not being able to play in the games anymore, we wouldn't actually leave the commonwealth if we became a republic. I'm in the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" crowd, but if someone showed me a system that was superior to what we have now then I'd go with it. Gaining some freedom which we already have isn't enough of a reason for me.

[Beskar]

For all the jokes that are made about not being able to play in the games anymore, we wouldn't actually leave the commonwealth if we became a republic. I'm in the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" crowd, but if someone showed me a system that was superior to what we have now then I'd go with it. Gaining some freedom which we already have isn't enough of a reason for me.

That comment is quite oxymoronic. The "If it ain't broke don't fix it" is against progress and advancement as it is a very 'status quo' belief.

Just letting you know. You can't really declare to be two opposites. You can be some where in the middle, though.

[miotas]

Well I'm against progress for progress' sake, if there's going to be a change then it should be better.

[Furunculus]

That comment is quite oxymoronic. The "If it ain't broke don't fix it" is against progress and advancement as it is a very 'status quo' belief.

Just letting you know. You can't really declare to be two opposites. You can be some where in the middle, though.

that's because you believe progress for the sake of progress is an end in itself.

[CountArach]

The very word "Progress" implies that you are moving towards something. Isn't that a goal worth exploring?

[Furunculus]

The very word "Progress" implies that you are moving towards something. Isn't that a goal worth exploring?

sure it is, but too many people mistake change for progress.

and progress itself is in the eye of the beholder.

and if you accept that change is not necessarily a good thing, and that the appreciation of progress is subjective, what does "explore" actually mean; an intellectual study of the new idea, or a wholesale gutting of extant institutions that already function very well in the hope that some new change/progress will be 'better'?

[Beskar]

that's because you believe progress for the sake of progress is an end in itself.

Nope, it is a strive for perfection. In order to get some where, you got to do something. Either through studying, physical training and other things.

You study so you can progress to the state of being a doctor, for incidence. You practise running till you become a track record winner. You do things constantly and bit by bit, you get to this things. Cars didn't suddenly just appear on the roads, neither did roads appear there magically either. It was years of progress, from seeing the advantage of having a flat surface to travel on, to horse and carts, to generation of energy without beast. It is this progress that got us from running over rocky, muddy, and uneven surfaces taking days to reach a destination, to cutting down the time significantly.

The whole idea of standing still is counter-productive, it is meaningless, it is goal-less. For clarification, slow progress doesn't equal standing still. Progress is a constant process.

[Furunculus]

regardless of the fact that i am willing to separate social 'science' from engineering............ see above.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

It is not as if she is British anyway, she is German. As Evil_Maniac from Mars really wants a monarchy, we can send him our Queen back.

She isn't German anymore. An outstanding leader though she is, I don't want her to rule my country. I want the legitimate dynasty back, to replace the useless, expensive, undemocratic, and ineffectual President.

But I only want it if that is the will of the people, to be decided in a referendum, after thoughtful and open debate on the issue.

[The Wizard]

Actually the Royal family are the biggest land owners in the country. I don't even want to think about how much land they own combined. They're pretty self sustaining really.

Also, if Australia becomes a republic does that mean your going to change your flag?

"Self-sustaining"? Have a care, read up a bit. Your tax money pays it and that land is private property. Most presidents, moreover, are a lot cheaper than royalty with all their crowns, thrones, palaces, and fancy marriages. Except in Italy, of course, but hey. You can't take that as an example.

[Fragony]

And don't forget that every one requires state paid for security guards for the rest of their life.

Don't they do that anyway despite having a monarchy or not

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Except in Italy, of course, but hey. You can't take that as an example.

Germany as well. I haven't yet found the statistics, but I know I have found and quoted them in the past. The Backroom doesn't have a search function, does it?

[tibilicus]

"Self-sustaining"? Have a care, read up a bit. Your tax money pays it and that land is private property. Most presidents, moreover, are a lot cheaper than royalty with all their crowns, thrones, palaces, and fancy marriages. Except in Italy, of course, but hey. You can't take that as an example.

As it has already been mentioned, the upkeep is fairly minimal.

[aimlesswanderer]

It will happen at some stage, bloody Howard set it back by decades. Though really only a ceremonial post we should definitely have our own president. Come on, Warnie for president!!

The press were falling over themselves to cover the visit because they didn't want to cover any real news. Why would they want to cover something important when the could cover what Paris/brangelina/willy have been wearing? That is of earth shattering importance.

[pevergreen]

@CA: I would vote against the Eureka Flag.

Chuck the abo flag instead of the British one and we'll be fine.

[CountArach]

@CA: I would vote against the Eureka Flag.

I have some qualms about it, mostly that the Southern Cross is a badge of pride for racists, but I think the historical implications of the flag are an important lesson worth remembering.

Chuck the abo flag instead of the British one and we'll be fine.

That would be a nice idea for sure, but on the other hand can you see many people supporting that?

[pevergreen]

I can actually. If the media got into it, they could just saturate the idea that to not accept it would be unaustralian.

[CountArach]

I can actually. If the media got into it, they could just saturate the idea that to not accept it would be unaustralian.

Except that Murdoch owns a good half of our media.

[Furunculus]

I have some qualms about it, mostly that the Southern Cross is a badge of pride for racists, but I think the historical implications of the flag are an important lesson worth remembering.

that would seem a fairly facile and spineless reason to reject a symbol of historical and cultural significance?