Saturday, 6 June 2009
Something Lawful
If you're the kind of person that's in awe of the hilarious stupidity of some people- you know, like hairdryers that come with warnings not to use them in the shower- then (if u dont already know it) i may have the blog for you. Lowering the bar is written by a guy in the law 'industry' about real life cases that are fucking stupid. Recent examples include a woman suing 'cap'n crunch' because she found out the crunchberries cereal was not made of real berries (hey if you dont believe me, the document is here) ; and a Taiwanese man who racked up a $2million debt in a las vegas casino, managed to leave the USA with this debt unpaid but came back to sue them because he blamed the presence of his hotel room towels. Just remember: if you ever need a good laugh, there's always humanity.
Thursday, 4 June 2009
Politicians are a bunch of skanky twats
.. but im sure you were hoping to hear something new.
these days i tend to lose track of the days, but luckily twitters little trending topics feature keeps me updated with any important key notes for the day.
Apparently, today is eu election day. (on a quick side note, spot the comical automated spam messages) I didnt realise this, which pretty much sums up how much ive been anticipating it. It's not that i don't care its just that looking at my options, theyre all the same: All my opinions will be made for me by a guy i've never met and theres no guarantee im going to like all of them.
I'll probably be hated for this but personally i think democracy is a bit of a joke in its current state. It seems to me the ballot paper is some kind of gimmick to make you feel better, and for the politicians to have a fun little competition over. The single tick i give on a ballot paper does *not* represent all my thoughts, opinions and suggestions for the state of the country, what we stand for and what we should be doing. It's just my authorisation to delegate this to somebody who is apparently, in his own boastful egocentric words, far more responsible, trustworthy, intelligent, experienced, caring, educated, aware, charmingly handsome and generally more capable at solving all societies problems than anyone else in the country. As if such human beings could possibly exist.
I probably wouldn't mind so much if it were possible for everyones subtley different opinions to be catergorised comfortably into a small handful of political packages. At least then i could vote for a party that apparently shares ALL my views, as could everyone else, and politics would be efficiently easy.
On trending topics someone posted a link to a very helpful website, that essentially demonstrates this problem.
Well, as i suspected, the truth is my closest (i emphasise closest) 'result' did not match me particularly closely. Ok so you agree it would be nice for doctors to access my records in an emergency but i disagree with your attitude to international peacekeeping missions, oooh.. conflicts..
Whilst doing the questionnaire though, a very important question crosses my mind.
Where are all the answers to these questions going?
They're going to a server, which is going to compute which of the given political packages in my area most closely approximates my opinions on the above given topics.. so that i can cast a vote which may or may not contribute to the choice of a politician who will then paraphrase most of the answers of his voters, if it suits him.
but wait.. why dont you just send all my- and everyone elses- answers straight to the EU, and make your little pie charts straight from that? after all, a lot of us probably agree on the same core topics anyway?
you know what, fuck the middle man. Why should the middle man's opinions override mine? and if we must have one, why do we all have to share one? and whats the middle man doing anyway except buying houses? if 70% of the country have stated they think something is right or wrong, surely (if democracy is followed) all thats left is to implement it? i which case should we really be selecting implementors based on their opinions, rather than straight up competance? in which case shouldn't we start replacing elections with intelligence tests?
One day, one day people.. i'll be the government and then you'll all see..
these days i tend to lose track of the days, but luckily twitters little trending topics feature keeps me updated with any important key notes for the day.
Apparently, today is eu election day. (on a quick side note, spot the comical automated spam messages) I didnt realise this, which pretty much sums up how much ive been anticipating it. It's not that i don't care its just that looking at my options, theyre all the same: All my opinions will be made for me by a guy i've never met and theres no guarantee im going to like all of them.
I'll probably be hated for this but personally i think democracy is a bit of a joke in its current state. It seems to me the ballot paper is some kind of gimmick to make you feel better, and for the politicians to have a fun little competition over. The single tick i give on a ballot paper does *not* represent all my thoughts, opinions and suggestions for the state of the country, what we stand for and what we should be doing. It's just my authorisation to delegate this to somebody who is apparently, in his own boastful egocentric words, far more responsible, trustworthy, intelligent, experienced, caring, educated, aware, charmingly handsome and generally more capable at solving all societies problems than anyone else in the country. As if such human beings could possibly exist.
I probably wouldn't mind so much if it were possible for everyones subtley different opinions to be catergorised comfortably into a small handful of political packages. At least then i could vote for a party that apparently shares ALL my views, as could everyone else, and politics would be efficiently easy.
On trending topics someone posted a link to a very helpful website, that essentially demonstrates this problem.
Well, as i suspected, the truth is my closest (i emphasise closest) 'result' did not match me particularly closely. Ok so you agree it would be nice for doctors to access my records in an emergency but i disagree with your attitude to international peacekeeping missions, oooh.. conflicts..
Whilst doing the questionnaire though, a very important question crosses my mind.
Where are all the answers to these questions going?
They're going to a server, which is going to compute which of the given political packages in my area most closely approximates my opinions on the above given topics.. so that i can cast a vote which may or may not contribute to the choice of a politician who will then paraphrase most of the answers of his voters, if it suits him.
but wait.. why dont you just send all my- and everyone elses- answers straight to the EU, and make your little pie charts straight from that? after all, a lot of us probably agree on the same core topics anyway?
you know what, fuck the middle man. Why should the middle man's opinions override mine? and if we must have one, why do we all have to share one? and whats the middle man doing anyway except buying houses? if 70% of the country have stated they think something is right or wrong, surely (if democracy is followed) all thats left is to implement it? i which case should we really be selecting implementors based on their opinions, rather than straight up competance? in which case shouldn't we start replacing elections with intelligence tests?
One day, one day people.. i'll be the government and then you'll all see..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)