bluemonday Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Greater recognition of the value and use of the extended family. China and other countries do this, the west doesn't seem keen. excellent manx example - the last of The Atholl's (Murray family) - installed his family in most positions of power (Bishop etc) - generally known as nepotism, once established difficult to get rid of - the Manx managed it via riots which forced London to intervene I was refering to the practice of extended families living together thus providing amongst other things a source of childcare by grand/great grand parents, a source of guidance and education to the young and much more. And in return are cared for in a family environment That is instead of sticking them in homes and letting them waste away when in many cases they can still (and happily want to) contribute. A more efficient use of resources and brings about better understanding of age and youth as just one of many benefits. Nothing to do with Manx nepotism. We're talking about a new way not the old crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 I was refering to the practice of extended families living together thus providing amongst other things a source of childcare by grand/great grand parents, a source of guidance and education to the young and much more. And in return are cared for in a family environment That is instead of sticking them in homes and letting them waste away when in many cases they can still (and happily want to) contribute. A more efficient use of resources and brings about better understanding of age and youth as just one of many benefits. Nothing to do with Manx nepotism. We're talking about a new way not the old crap. I must say I agree with you fully there it is one of the main things that is unique here and in my opinion a reason the people here are more friendly, a high standard of family values seems to install a degree of respect for different generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spermann Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 I was refering to the practice of extended families living together thus providing amongst other things a source of childcare by grand/great grand parents, a source of guidance and education to the young and much more. And in return are cared for in a family environment That is instead of sticking them in homes and letting them waste away when in many cases they can still (and happily want to) contribute. A more efficient use of resources and brings about better understanding of age and youth as just one of many benefits. Nothing to do with Manx nepotism. We're talking about a new way not the old crap. I must say I agree with you fully there it is one of the main things that is unique here and in my opinion a reason the people here are more friendly, a high standard of family values seems to install a degree of respect for different generations. # i agree with JIMBMS and we dont always agree so thats good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spermann Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 I'm surprised Albert advocates it - say goodbye to your 'precious civil liberties' if this were to be enacted. The majority of voters have little interest/knowledge in most topics, giving them a vote on such would just lead them to impulse choices - pushed by lobbies. Perhaps a system where people could vote to dismiss bills (in a majority have veto-style approach), would be more realistic. We would be at the leading edge of political change so this is why we would need to find out what is effective and works - and what doesn't. But IMO it is better to try ideas and to experiment than to dismiss them outright. For example the idea you have put forward. Or, it might be best to have 2/3rds majority for ideas to be accepted into law and a certain minimum number of votes cast; there could be some system of allowing people to nominate things they want to be done; the Manx people might be given choice over capital expenditure projects; there might be some method of prioritising the legislative options. As far as I know there is no example (other than trivial) where there has been an attempt to update the political process to reflect the changed communication and technology environment that we live in. At present the main 'democratic' advance we have made is lowering the voting age... Some process would be needed to drive investigation of this type of change. Maybe to get an internationally renowned university to use us as a 'test-bed' for 'future democracy'. we have been leading edge for some time, the female vote and more recently the 16 year old vote! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theman Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 The thread about 'ecological debt', the credit crunch and numerous other ongoing events got me thinking... ...could we build here on the island: a sustainable political, economic, social and technological model that would be the envy of the world? Could we build up and live in such a successful model on our own, and what would it actually involve and require to make it happen? If you had the budget, could set the required legislation, and had a remit to redesign/rework every aspect of life on the island and how it operated etc. what would be your plan, and what would be included/excluded in it? Though environmental issues are important, I don't mean this thread to be taken over by environmentalists: and I'm looking here for big picture thinking and specific ideas - so maybe rather than concentrate on and get bogged down arguing over specifics like wind farms etc. covered in other threads, it might be best to try and gear your answer around the acronym 'PEST' i.e. Brief overview of your model...and the changes required to implement it in terms of: Political Changes Economic Changes Social Changes Technological Changes Generator for electric from hydrogen & the production of the hydrogen would be from the neutreon rod generator that's free to run & make's electic to make the hydrogen FREE . and the neutreon rod generator with nanowire battry to start the motor that run's of hydrogen. then we are fully sustainable. then travel space & then time my friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theman Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGXxHUd-MCk...feature=related link's for the neutreon generator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Unpopular, but don't renew any work permits and don't grant any more. Sure, give an appeal for very, very needed worker, but at 10,000 per annum, can we really sustain that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Unpopular, but don't renew any work permits and don't grant any more. Sure, give an appeal for very, very needed worker, but at 10,000 per annum, can we really sustain that? And what are you going to do when the UK and EU turn around and stop Manx people from working off island? Protectionism is always the most short sighted kind of short-termism. Further restricting work permits would also potentially stifle the local economy and more or less rule out the possibility of new businesses opening up here. The last thing that companies want to deal with are restrictive practices - which are exactly the opposite of the Freedom To Flourish message. It would be better to end the work permits system completely - and at the same time encourage any local unemployed to look away for work if necessary. And to encourage the young to go to university instead of expecting to get jobs in banks or on building sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 Unpopular, but don't renew any work permits and don't grant any more. Sure, give an appeal for very, very needed worker, but at 10,000 per annum, can we really sustain that? There are a thousand unemployed, and ten thousand workers subject to work permits. Who is going to do the other nine thousand jobs when you've withdrawn the permits? S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 I would like to echo the 'more involved Democracy' ideas, with ever increasing communication and social networking more people can have their say on more things. A system could be introduced where social concepts that had large impacts would be voted on by all, and the numerous smaller issues would be handed out to random pockets of voters which would still be large enough to give a fair census of public opinion. in a similar manner to jury duty. Who would decide which were the 'social concepts that had large impacts?' A Jury is present to hear all of the facts surrounding a case and the arguments for and against. What guarantee would there be that the 'random pockets of voters' would have the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 California has a system of participatory democracy. 90% of the time it does a pretty bad job. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lao Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 I would like to echo the 'more involved Democracy' ideas, with ever increasing communication and social networking more people can have their say on more things. A system could be introduced where social concepts that had large impacts would be voted on by all, and the numerous smaller issues would be handed out to random pockets of voters which would still be large enough to give a fair census of public opinion. in a similar manner to jury duty. Who would decide which were the 'social concepts that had large impacts?' A Jury is present to hear all of the facts surrounding a case and the arguments for and against. What guarantee would there be that the 'random pockets of voters' would have the same? I dont really think that you need to dig that deep to find problems with my suggestions, after all my goverment model requires increasing the individual and group intelligence of the population. it was meant as a sort of (personal) utopian daydream. however to answer your questions, the randomly selected voters would be presented with evidence/arguments for and against the proposal in question and because of an increased social education would/should be able to make an informed choice. social concepts that would have large impact could be decided by representatives elected by the people but if the people felt that they wanted to vito a decision or have a full public vote they would have a mechanism for doing so. told you i was daydreaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 15, 2009 Author Share Posted April 15, 2009 Keep em coming folks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'm surprised Albert advocates it - say goodbye to your 'precious civil liberties' if this were to be enacted. The majority of voters have little interest/knowledge in most topics, giving them a vote on such would just lead them to impulse choices - pushed by lobbies. Perhaps a system where people could vote to dismiss bills (in a majority have veto-style approach), would be more realistic. We would be at the leading edge of political change so this is why we would need to find out what is effective and works - and what doesn't. But IMO it is better to try ideas and to experiment than to dismiss them outright. For example the idea you have put forward. Or, it might be best to have 2/3rds majority for ideas to be accepted into law and a certain minimum number of votes cast; there could be some system of allowing people to nominate things they want to be done; the Manx people might be given choice over capital expenditure projects; there might be some method of prioritising the legislative options. As far as I know there is no example (other than trivial) where there has been an attempt to update the political process to reflect the changed communication and technology environment that we live in. At present the main 'democratic' advance we have made is lowering the voting age... Some process would be needed to drive investigation of this type of change. Maybe to get an internationally renowned university to use us as a 'test-bed' for 'future democracy'. we have been leading edge for some time, the female vote and more recently the 16 year old vote! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 leading edge?-give us a break. Contemporary examples please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.