waldo Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 You should take all my meaning which is not on a specific PM, but all the PMs in the sufferings of a constitution without enough obvious resources for the healthy leadership of the executive power. The next PM will still be in the same situation. oh... you were serious then? Your post doesn't offer anything specific as to the nature of the "unconstitutional centralization" that you're alluding to... Quote
Exegesisme Posted September 7, 2015 Author Report Posted September 7, 2015 oh... you were serious then? Your post doesn't offer anything specific as to the nature of the "unconstitutional centralization" that you're alluding to... That is the topic of my another thread (4) http://www.mapleleaf...-be-ended-soon/ Quote
waldo Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 That is the topic of my another thread (4) http://www.mapleleaf...-be-ended-soon/ mea culpa... I'll give it a whirl and, if inclined, might respond. Quote
ToadBrother Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 The centralization of executive power in USA is very good, and is not a problem, the reason is that it is constitutional! The centralization of executive power in Canada is not very good, and is a problem, the reason is that the constitution does not provide enough resources for the executive power to be sustainable and play a good leadership in an obvious constitutional way. Therefore, the executive power in the system of Canada has been centralizing in an unconstitutional way by stealing the power of the legislative branch. This has to be one of the most absurd and confused things I've ever read. The US system was created to prevent centralization. That it has happened anyways tells you a lot about the nature of political power. Quote
ToadBrother Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 Well, good for you. If you keep your standards low enough, you'll never be disappointed. Is your standard for fine dining any food that doesn't give you botulism? Is your standard for a great novel that the words are spelled correctly and and the pages are numbered properly? Do you actually have a response that isn't petulant and content-free? Quote
Exegesisme Posted September 7, 2015 Author Report Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) This has to be one of the most absurd and confused things I've ever read. The US system was created to prevent centralization. That it has happened anyways tells you a lot about the nature of political power. If your eye is full of false, then the truth is absurd. Preventing random centralization is just for the constitutional centralizing leadership. If only for prevent centralization, then what is used to unite the states, and why they need the united states?! Edited September 7, 2015 by Exegesisme Quote
ReeferMadness Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 Do you actually have a response that isn't petulant and content-free? Don't even go there. I've put a ton of links in this thread to demonstrate that there are a range of different approaches to how powers are divided between elected heads of state (whether directly elected or elected by parliament) and heads of government. You and smallc have ignored them all and just bleated "but they're all the same". You want content-free? Go review your own posts. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Smallc Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 You want me to forget what I already know. Not going to happen. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 You want me to forget what I already know. Not going to happen. Excellent. Don't let any fresh ideas or knowledge influence you ever. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Smallc Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 Excellent. Don't let any fresh ideas or knowledge influence you ever. I think I'll trust the countless articles and books I've read on our system thanks. Quote
ToadBrother Posted September 8, 2015 Report Posted September 8, 2015 Don't even go there. I've put a ton of links in this thread to demonstrate that there are a range of different approaches to how powers are divided between elected heads of state (whether directly elected or elected by parliament) and heads of government. You and smallc have ignored them all and just bleated "but they're all the same". You want content-free? Go review your own posts. I haven't ignored anything. There are not really countless ways, but merely differences in how precisely certain powers are divided between the formal executive and the functional executive. In Israel, for instance, the President has no power to veto legislation, whereas in most Parliamentary governments, the formal executive still has at least nominal power to refuse to sign bills into law. Frankly, I think you just sort of chronically complain. You don't really have any sense of what is good or bad, and certainly can't point to a system that does it much better. Quote
Exegesisme Posted September 20, 2015 Author Report Posted September 20, 2015 Our present political system is leadership by party, what we need is leadership by value. Through Direct Election Of The Prime Minister, we can reestablish our national leadership by value. Quote
ToadBrother Posted September 20, 2015 Report Posted September 20, 2015 Our present political system is leadership by party, what we need is leadership by value. Through Direct Election Of The Prime Minister, we can reestablish our national leadership by value. BS. We just create a presidency. A PM is directly accountable to Parliament, and Parliament, may, at its pleasure, revoke its confidence in a PM and its government. I suspect there have been more than a few occasions when legislators in presidential systems have wished they could do the same. Beyond that, I simply don't see how it would improve the situation even the tiniest degree. There are a lot of people whose suggestions simply amount to "if we painted the roads yellow, everything would be better!" Quote
Exegesisme Posted December 19, 2015 Author Report Posted December 19, 2015 (edited) Strengthening Canadian dollars, refining Canadian collective desires and forming new Canadian common sense, all these need direct-election-of-the-prime-minister of Canada, and the qualified candidates should be widely inclusive by encouraging Canadian people taking part in politics of Canada with greater passion. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/25400-1-federal-politics-and-the-desire-of-people/ Edited December 19, 2015 by Exegesisme Quote
-TSS- Posted December 19, 2015 Report Posted December 19, 2015 The US-system is dysfunctional because it is centred too much around one personality ie. the President. If the President is in constitutional troubles then the whole system is paralysed, which happened with both Clinton with the Whitewater-case as well as with Reagan with the Iran-contra arms deals. Quote
Exegesisme Posted December 19, 2015 Author Report Posted December 19, 2015 (edited) You forget the vise President of US, its counterpart in Canadian political system also is a fault. Edited December 19, 2015 by Exegesisme Quote
PIK Posted December 22, 2015 Report Posted December 22, 2015 Our system does work, or other wise the progressives would not want to fix it. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Exegesisme Posted December 22, 2015 Author Report Posted December 22, 2015 It works behind US system, so does UK system. Quote
Smallc Posted December 22, 2015 Report Posted December 22, 2015 It appears that it works better than the US system in terms of actual governance. Quote
Exegesisme Posted December 22, 2015 Author Report Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) It is far behind US on real leadership nationally, internationally in all major areas. Just thinking this way: US system has the ability to replace UK system internationally and replaced it, but Canada system has not. Edited December 22, 2015 by Exegesisme Quote
Smallc Posted December 22, 2015 Report Posted December 22, 2015 Most of the world's most successful countries don't use the US system of government, and use one far more like ours. Quote
Exegesisme Posted December 22, 2015 Author Report Posted December 22, 2015 Which one plays a leadership greater than US does globally in any area in long run? So all of them are not successful as US is. Quote
Smallc Posted December 22, 2015 Report Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Which one plays a leadership greater than US does globally in any area in long run? So all of them are not successful as US is.You think if we change our government system we'll suddenly find $250M more people?China has a great government system too. Edited December 22, 2015 by Smallc Quote
Exegesisme Posted December 23, 2015 Author Report Posted December 23, 2015 Not more people, but greater leadership and then contributions on topics. Government system in China is much worse. Quote
Souriquois Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 I agree. In the last election, I really liked the Conservative guy in my riding but I could not stomach a vote for Harper. If I could have voted for the guy in my riding and someone else as PM, that would be good. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.