|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Somebody needs to get over himself... |
Nope. Someone needs to get a grip. You're still inaccurately describing the situation. |
This is not a rebuttal of the points I made. Neither was your previous post. So I guess I'll just have to take your inability to properly respond to mean that you are wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| If going into debt means a polity is unable to govern, then the entire Western world can fairly be characterized as barbaric and beyond hope. |
Absolutely. The US federal government is the largest debtor on the planet. Some states, like California, are literally (by any realistic definition) bankrupt. I guess they should be put into receivership and have their democratic processes suspended as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| CentralCali wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Somebody needs to get over himself... |
Nope. Someone needs to get a grip. You're still inaccurately describing the situation. |
This is not a rebuttal of the points I made. Neither was your previous post. So I guess I'll just have to take your inability to properly respond to mean that you are wrong. |
What points, valid points, did you make? The citizens of that city have not lost the right to democratic governance. They still vote for their state government. And the city is chartered by the state. The state, however, is not chartered by the federal government. A city government and a state government are two quite different things. Care to take a guess on how they're different? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| CentralCali wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Somebody needs to get over himself... |
Nope. Someone needs to get a grip. You're still inaccurately describing the situation. |
This is not a rebuttal of the points I made. Neither was your previous post. So I guess I'll just have to take your inability to properly respond to mean that you are wrong. |
What points, valid points, did you make? The citizens of that city have not lost the right to democratic governance. They still vote for their state government. And the city is chartered by the state. The state, however, is not chartered by the federal government. A city government and a state government are two quite different things. Care to take a guess on how they're different? |
What, in principle? No, I don't think I care to guess. I think I'd like to hear you spell it out. And perhaps you could produce the law that shows the state has the authority to suspend municipal democracy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| If going into debt means a polity is unable to govern, then the entire Western world can fairly be characterized as barbaric and beyond hope. |
Absolutely. The US federal government is the largest debtor on the planet. Some states, like California, are literally (by any realistic definition) bankrupt. I guess they should be put into receivership and have their democratic processes suspended as well? |
I cringe to say this... but possibly, yes.
If you're unable to manage your finances properly, you loose certain options. I'm not sure about the whole 'lack of democracy' bit, but I think that they should be dealt with differently than states/municipalities that manage their coffers better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| If going into debt means a polity is unable to govern, then the entire Western world can fairly be characterized as barbaric and beyond hope. |
Absolutely. The US federal government is the largest debtor on the planet. Some states, like California, are literally (by any realistic definition) bankrupt. I guess they should be put into receivership and have their democratic processes suspended as well? |
I cringe to say this... but possibly, yes. |
Alrighty then... So the fact that that would literally put the entire country into formal banker receivership (and effectively render the population debt slaves) doesn't figure into your decision?
| Quote: |
| If you're unable to manage your finances properly, you loose certain options. |
That's fine. Nowhere did I say they should get off scot-free and without any consequences.
| Quote: |
| I'm not sure about the whole 'lack of democracy' bit, but I think that they should be dealt with differently than states/municipalities that manage their coffers better. |
Such as? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Such as... is a very good question. If they continue to elect politicians and leaders that are unable to solve/resolve the financial shortcomings... should they lose that democratic right? I can see where there's tons of room for abuse in his direction, but I also think that politicians, and the public that elected them, need to be accountable for their folly.
Perhaps something like...
-restrictions/total oversight on ALL Federal funds being used/moved to the state.
-budgetary restrictions regarding deficits - basically, barred from running one.
-auditing/advisory commities moving the region back to fiscal stability.
I'm sure ppl better versed than I could go on. But basically, something akin to a personal bankruptcy - you don't lose your rights, but your ability to function in the monetary system is curtained until you get your house in order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| CentralCali wrote: |
| Oh, get off it. They aren't being governed without elected representatives. They're being governed by the state. Unless there's been a major rebellion in the United States that has escaped my notice, the folks in that city still get to vote for their state representatives and their governor. The municipal government has not fulfilled its duties as required by law and, as provided for by law, the state government has taken over those duties. The state government, mind you, is still an elected government. |
Oh, so I guess we should just do away with municipal governments altogether then? Hell, why have levels of government or checks and balances at all? Maybe we can just vote to give nation-wide dictatorial power to an emperor each 4 years, let him appoint state and municipal legates (also with dictatorial power over their people) and hope they do a good job?  |
He never said that. He clearly pointed out "The municipal government has not fulfilled its duties as required by law."
It would seem that you are proposing that we ignore such things? If the municipal government is UNABLE TO GOVERN...then another level of government needs to step in and re-order things properly. |
The municipal government is not unable to govern . . . unless the trash isn't collected, police aren't patrolling the streets, the courts aren't functioning (assuming it has its own courts), firemen aren't fighting fires, etc.
No, the town's operating expenses exceeded its income plus its reserves. . |
And given that just how long do you expect trash to be collected, police to patrol the streets, the courts to function, firemen to fight fires, etc...?
So yes they've clearly shown themselves unable to govern.
|
If going into debt means a polity is unable to govern, then the entire Western world can fairly be characterized as barbaric and beyond hope. |
Except there is a very big difference between going into debt and becoming bankrupt.
I'd say that following policies that make you bankrupt are one measure of bad governing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 5:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| Such as... is a very good question. If they continue to elect politicians and leaders that are unable to solve/resolve the financial shortcomings... should they lose that democratic right? I can see where there's tons of room for abuse in his direction, but I also think that politicians, and the public that elected them, need to be accountable for their folly. |
The same politician who declared the town bankrupt has become its administrator in bankruptcy.
I'm not sure who we're holding accountable, besides the pensioners who are losing all their contributions (I admit there's no other choice, bankrupt or solvent). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
