The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns
This wiki article might help make it clearer. Please note that under the UK Constitution it would be permissible for such advice to offered and acted upon, apolitically - it’s generally expected to be used with a light hand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_prerogative_in_the_United_Kingdom
Out of all the European colonial powers, Britain cemented a better foundation in their colonies. Their education system, their judicial system, their security system and their engineering and infrastructure is still very much still operational to this day. If you look at what the Dutch, Portuguese, French and Spaniards left behind after their colonies were liberated, one can appreciate the British. I could care less about kings or queens, but I have lived in different colonies and noticed that difference.
joanne said:
I’m not 100% sure. A few months ago there as a series of articles in the British and the Commonwealth press looking at some of the historical influence of monarchs on such things. I believe Elizabeth 2 was less likely to exert influence than earlier sovereigns however she was well-known to favour more environmentally friendly development, and the kind of policies that would ensure better health and housing outcomes for the less well-off. Given she met weekly to discuss such matters with PMs, High Commissioners, diplomats, etc I’d be surprised if some suggestions on greater clarity or clearing contradictions with other Acts/policies weren’t taken up.
There's the belief that the sovereigns do not get involved in political matters. Previously that wasn't true.
Before 1911 the House of Lords had absolute legislative veto power. Like the U.S. senate. That was very frustrating to the Commons considering at that time the Lords were reactionaries. For example the Lords (many were factory owners) vetoed child labor reforms.
King George V gave an ultimatum. Pass a parliament act, which would limit veto power or he would appoint new peers to the House of Lords in favor a parliament act to enable passage.
The Lords had a choice, resist and have liberal "riffraff" seated in their house or assent. In either case, a parliament act would have passed with the likely possibility the "riffraff" would have voted are more liberal act. Adding "riffraff' would also have diluted the incumbents power. They accepted the lesser evil, assent.
joanne said:
You’re missing the point: while outside politics the constitutional monarch does have powers and duties. Listen to Boris Johnston’s list again. Every piece of legislation must be ratified by the monarch or else it can’t be enacted, every domestic and foreign policy must be approved by the monarch; the entire military force and foreign service are loyal foremost to the monarch and report ultimately to the monarch not the PM who has no rank. Attorneys general come and go, but the monarch, who embodies the spirit of the nation, is the head of the justice system. And the monarch control the parliamentary seasons, opening each sitting and accepting each sitting member including the PM.
You try doing all that while remaining apolitical, charming, and the ultimate diplomat every day and see how far you get, never mind until the day you die.
(corrected spelling)
Also, you know those three articles you linked explaining her legacy?
Not one (that I could see) mentioned her influence in any of the areas you mentioned.
Pope Francis on the Queen’s passing…
Joanne, This hymn has been on my mind since Elizabeth’s death. Found this video by the Australia Catholics, so i had to share this …
GoSlugs said:
"Voting" is sort of a relative term in a country where the guy who lost the popular vote by a couple of million regularly wins the election.
All I am saying is that Americans ought to be very cautious about ridiculing other people's systems of government. From where I am sitting, in a functioning constitutional monarchy, that seems obvious. From where you are sitting, in the smoldering ashes of a dumpster fire that is constantly threatening to reignite, perhaps it is less so.
As a person with Irish heritage, I don't hold any warm feelings for the British monarchy. And as the Brexit vote showed, the typical English person still doesn't give a rat's **** about Ireland.
Yes, our country has many, many flaws. But I'm not going to engage in whataboutism. My disdain for the British royal family stands apart from my disdain for what is wrong with my own country.
So, as it’s now a deeply significant day in the US, I think we can suspend debating constitutional monarchy in the modern world for now.
May it be a peaceful day, spent with those who care.
Imagine respecting anyone who treats another human being like this pic.twitter.com/zA1VR6N9HZ
— j (@jrc1921) September 10, 2022
joanne said:
So, as it’s now a deeply significant day in the US, I think we can suspend debating constitutional monarchy in the modern world for now.
May it be a peaceful day, spent with those who care.
Imagine respecting anyone who treats this post from another human being as if it, and she, doesn’t exist.
ridski said:
Imagine respecting anyone who treats this post from another human being as if it, and she, doesn’t exist.
To be fair if a person opens their browser without refreshing since last night, intervening posts don't appear.
I saw the post. pfffft I'm as tired of 9/11 as I am of the queen.
Also, didn't realize Joanne was thread master.
Today on CNN, they spent 30 minutes watching the queen's hearse drive to where ever.
Then they had 3 young people who lost their fathers on 9/11. The first one was a bit too bubbly but maybe she didn't want to be too down because she was selling a memoir. The second was pushing some 9/11 related app. I shut it off before I got to number 3.
I declare today Cranky Sunday.
ridski said:
Jesus, I can’t believe people are still watching CNN.
for thirty odd minutes..
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
broadly speaking, I'd start with GDP per capita.
"As of 2021, The per capita income of the United States is 1.86 and 1.44 times higher than that of the European Union in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. The US had greater gdp per capita than the EU for data available since 1966"
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/united-states-vs-eu-economy.php
so that's your measure of the well-being of a country's people?
Sad.
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
broadly speaking, I'd start with GDP per capita.
"As of 2021, The per capita income of the United States is 1.86 and 1.44 times higher than that of the European Union in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. The US had greater gdp per capita than the EU for data available since 1966"
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/united-states-vs-eu-economy.php
so that's your measure of the well-being of a country's people?
Sad.
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.
You think other countries don't have entrepreneurs? (Not exactly sure what an "entrepreneurial culture" is, nor why we have one and others don't.)
In terms of economic opportunity, we rank pretty low. Many more countries have much better economic opportunity (i.e. mobility) than we do. Our "economic opportunity" is largely defined by our zip code and parents.
Who, exactly, gives a **** about a decentralized political system? And how is that an advantage anyway? In the U.S., it allows some states to be practically 3rd-world compared to other states. Move to the capital of Mississippi and see how that works out.
As for moving away from the U.S. - if you're financially comfortable (not wealthy, but comfortable), life in the U.S. is ok - though unnecessarily expensive - so why move? If you're not financially comfortable, it's kind of hard to pick up and move to another country. And who the hell wants to learn a new language as an adult?
ridski said:
Jesus, I can’t believe people are still watching CNN.
Must be db and who else?
Jesus.. I can’t believe people watch Fox and their friends OAN & newsmax
Smedley said:
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.
given the context of the discussion, yes it's sad that you couldn't even think of a metric that actually measures well-being and not wealth. The discussion was about how social services are provided. Not about how much wealth we amass.
mtierney said:
Must be db and who else?
You read the National Review, you don’t get to comment.
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.given the context of the discussion, yes it's sad that you couldn't even think of a metric that actually measures well-being and not wealth. The discussion was about how social services are provided. Not about how much wealth we amass.
"Per capita" isn't the appropriate measure for everything. If Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and I are in a room, the per capita wealth is astronomical, but that does nothing for my 401k.
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.given the context of the discussion, yes it's sad that you couldn't even think of a metric that actually measures well-being and not wealth. The discussion was about how social services are provided. Not about how much wealth we amass.
GDP per capita is a metric of wealth but also economic opportunity, and economic opportunity is closely related to well-being. There's a reason why many people immigrate to the US, take low-wage jobs, send money home, and still live better here than they did in their home country. Is it sad that I think that's a good thing about the US?
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
broadly speaking, I'd start with GDP per capita.
"As of 2021, The per capita income of the United States is 1.86 and 1.44 times higher than that of the European Union in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. The US had greater gdp per capita than the EU for data available since 1966"
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/united-states-vs-eu-economy.php
so that's your measure of the well-being of a country's people?
Sad.
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.You think other countries don't have entrepreneurs? (Not exactly sure what an "entrepreneurial culture" is, nor why we have one and others don't.)
In terms of economic opportunity, we rank pretty low. Many more countries have much better economic opportunity (i.e. mobility) than we do. Our "economic opportunity" is largely defined by our zip code and parents.
Who, exactly, gives a **** about a decentralized political system? And how is that an advantage anyway? In the U.S., it allows some states to be practically 3rd-world compared to other states. Move to the capital of Mississippi and see how that works out.
As for moving away from the U.S. - if you're financially comfortable (not wealthy, but comfortable), life in the U.S. is ok - though unnecessarily expensive - so why move? If you're not financially comfortable, it's kind of hard to pick up and move to another country. And who the hell wants to learn a new language as an adult?
This HBR piece should answer your questions.
https://hbr.org/2017/04/why-the-u-s-is-still-richer-than-every-other-large-country
ridski said:
You read the National Review, you don’t get to comment.
Why? Afraid to hear “the other side of the story?”
Getting back to college costs and student loans (I have a vested interest in the topic with 7 grands, 2 in school still) how and who pays for college stupidity?
mtierney said:
Why? Afraid to hear “the other side of the story?”
Getting back to college costs and student loans (I have a vested interest in the topic with 7 grands, 2 in school still) how and who pays for college stupidity?
That story has *zero* relevance for a discussion of "college costs and student loans".
From a news site: "The college acknowledged that the size of the judgment, which includes damages and interest, was 'significant.' But it said that 'with careful financial planning,' including insurance, it could be paid 'without impacting our academic and student experience.' Oberlin has a robust endowment of nearly $1 billion."
Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59 Million to a Local Bakery - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Now, if anyone wants to talk about the size of college endowments, to what uses they should be put, and the vast divergence in the size of endowments among colleges (where it seems that the rich get richer), those would be relevant to discussions of "college costs and student loans".
so you're back to who has the most money. And ignoring my brilliant ripostes.Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
broadly speaking, I'd start with GDP per capita.
"As of 2021, The per capita income of the United States is 1.86 and 1.44 times higher than that of the European Union in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. The US had greater gdp per capita than the EU for data available since 1966"
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/united-states-vs-eu-economy.php
so that's your measure of the well-being of a country's people?
Sad.
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.You think other countries don't have entrepreneurs? (Not exactly sure what an "entrepreneurial culture" is, nor why we have one and others don't.)
In terms of economic opportunity, we rank pretty low. Many more countries have much better economic opportunity (i.e. mobility) than we do. Our "economic opportunity" is largely defined by our zip code and parents.
Who, exactly, gives a **** about a decentralized political system? And how is that an advantage anyway? In the U.S., it allows some states to be practically 3rd-world compared to other states. Move to the capital of Mississippi and see how that works out.
As for moving away from the U.S. - if you're financially comfortable (not wealthy, but comfortable), life in the U.S. is ok - though unnecessarily expensive - so why move? If you're not financially comfortable, it's kind of hard to pick up and move to another country. And who the hell wants to learn a new language as an adult?
This HBR piece should answer your questions.
https://hbr.org/2017/04/why-the-u-s-is-still-richer-than-every-other-large-country
Feldstein, of course, was kind of a conservative crank. He wanted to decrease Social Security. And advised Reagan through our supply side glory.
I love this part from the link:
A culture (and a tax system) that encourages hard work and long hours. The average employee in the United States works 1,800 hours per year, substantially more than the 1,500 hours worked in France and the 1,400 hours worked in Germany (though not as much as the 2,200+ in Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea). In general, working longer means producing more, which means higher real incomes.
Yeah working us to death with practically no vacation. Sounds like paradise to me.
nohero said:
mtierney said:
Why? Afraid to hear “the other side of the story?”
Getting back to college costs and student loans (I have a vested interest in the topic with 7 grands, 2 in school still) how and who pays for college stupidity?
That story has *zero* relevance for a discussion of "college costs and student loans".
From a news site: "The college acknowledged that the size of the judgment, which includes damages and interest, was 'significant.' But it said that 'with careful financial planning,' including insurance, it could be paid 'without impacting our academic and student experience.' Oberlin has a robust endowment of nearly $1 billion."
Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59 Million to a Local Bakery - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Now, if anyone wants to talk about the size of college endowments, to what uses they should be put, and the vast divergence in the size of endowments among colleges (where it seems that the rich get richer), those would be relevant to discussions of "college costs and student loans".
I have to say though, reading the story in the Times kind of got me sick to my stomach. That's a ridiculous amount of money.
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
Ah, what is a progressive argument without some good virtue signaling. Couldn’t leave that box unchecked.
Yes, I do believe here in the U.S. we have plenty of government, and generally speaking, our system is better than that of the European countries which have even more government. Life is about tradeoffs, and I’ll take the economic opportunity, decentralized political system and entrepreneurial culture over a few extra years of life expectancy, any day.
Serious question - have you ever considered moving to a country that is a better fit with your values? The U.S. is far from perfect, and there’s always room for improvement, but overall I think it’s the best country for me. I always wonder why people who are so fundamentally at odds and terminally unhappy with the U.S. system stay here.given the context of the discussion, yes it's sad that you couldn't even think of a metric that actually measures well-being and not wealth. The discussion was about how social services are provided. Not about how much wealth we amass.
GDP per capita is a metric of wealth but also economic opportunity, and economic opportunity is closely related to well-being. There's a reason why many people immigrate to the US, take low-wage jobs, send money home, and still live better here than they did in their home country. Is it sad that I think that's a good thing about the US?
no it's sad that that's the only thing you're considering. and it's sad that your comparison seems to be the world's poorest countries.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
For Sale
-
2007 Honda Fit $4,400
More info -
REVO luggage $100
More info
I’m not 100% sure. A few months ago there as a series of articles in the British and the Commonwealth press looking at some of the historical influence of monarchs on such things. I believe Elizabeth 2 was less likely to exert influence than earlier sovereigns however she was well-known to favour more environmentally friendly development, and the kind of policies that would ensure better health and housing outcomes for the less well-off. Given she met weekly to discuss such matters with PMs, High Commissioners, diplomats, etc I’d be surprised if some suggestions on greater clarity or clearing contradictions with other Acts/policies weren’t taken up.