Sometimes we read about horrific violence in our safe and secure areas of Australia and wonder where it comes from. Today we got a little sample from this story in the Herald Sun about a mother encouraging her daughter to beat up another, disabled, girl.
I don't know how we punish people like this but whatever we do it should be truly terrible. But more than that, here is a warning, the violence that appears to be emerging is part of a cycle, we have to find a way to break the chain!
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Restricting the vote - my theory
I'm 42 years old and everyday I still wake up to find I'm smarter than I was yesterday. I know more, I understand what I know much better, I know my limitations and I have a clue how to work around them. Everyday I look back at work I've done in the past, whether that's 5 years or 5 weeks and think "How did I write that?, How was I so ignorant and simplistic?" Going further I find myself wondering, if I get a little more knowledgeable and a little wiser everyday how dumb was I when I was twenty something?
And this goes to the core of my problem with the idealization of youth and in particular the insane notion of giving people under the age of 18 the vote.
In the main people don't really fully develop their moral sense until their late teens, brain development doesn't stop until their mid to late twenties so why would we actually go out of our way to give people, clearly still in the process of becoming adults the single most important right most of them will ever use, the right to elect a government? In fact I'd like to go further, how about we raise the voting age until something like 21.
Better still how about we throw some other requirements in as well. These would be some of mine:
a. You cant vote until you have a job and earn at least 80% of your disposable income yourself. People with trust funds, inheritances, allowances etc need not apply.
b. You cant vote until you've moved out of home and been responsible from running a household. If you live at home and mummy and daddy take care of you how can you be trusted to have a say in the running of the country.
In addition to controlling who can vote at all, I also think we need to control whose vote counts. This would be pretty simple. On the back of the ballot would be a test with simple questions relating to some of the key issues of the day at the time of the election. So using an example from one of the more shameful parts of Australia's past it could be something like:
Under the UN convention for refugees (to which Australia is a signatory), people seeking asylum are required to stop:
a. at the first country outside their own,
b. at a country in their region,
c. at a country similar in race, religion and/or political system like their own, or
d. only when they feel safe.
or alternatively
Last year the number of asylum seekers arriving at Australia by boat was closest to:
a) 500
b)2500
c)5000
d)20000
Have just (say) four questions and make them absolutely factual with no room for interpretation. Get two wrong and your vote isn't counted. Really this seems pretty obvious, if you simply don't know anything about the key issues of an election why should you get the ability to impose your ignorance on others?
Ok, clearly none of this is going to happen, and on mature reflection I'm not even sure it should but it would be nice to think of a government actually elected by people who had some grasp on reality.
And this goes to the core of my problem with the idealization of youth and in particular the insane notion of giving people under the age of 18 the vote.
In the main people don't really fully develop their moral sense until their late teens, brain development doesn't stop until their mid to late twenties so why would we actually go out of our way to give people, clearly still in the process of becoming adults the single most important right most of them will ever use, the right to elect a government? In fact I'd like to go further, how about we raise the voting age until something like 21.
Better still how about we throw some other requirements in as well. These would be some of mine:
a. You cant vote until you have a job and earn at least 80% of your disposable income yourself. People with trust funds, inheritances, allowances etc need not apply.
b. You cant vote until you've moved out of home and been responsible from running a household. If you live at home and mummy and daddy take care of you how can you be trusted to have a say in the running of the country.
In addition to controlling who can vote at all, I also think we need to control whose vote counts. This would be pretty simple. On the back of the ballot would be a test with simple questions relating to some of the key issues of the day at the time of the election. So using an example from one of the more shameful parts of Australia's past it could be something like:
Under the UN convention for refugees (to which Australia is a signatory), people seeking asylum are required to stop:
a. at the first country outside their own,
b. at a country in their region,
c. at a country similar in race, religion and/or political system like their own, or
d. only when they feel safe.
or alternatively
Last year the number of asylum seekers arriving at Australia by boat was closest to:
a) 500
b)2500
c)5000
d)20000
Have just (say) four questions and make them absolutely factual with no room for interpretation. Get two wrong and your vote isn't counted. Really this seems pretty obvious, if you simply don't know anything about the key issues of an election why should you get the ability to impose your ignorance on others?
Ok, clearly none of this is going to happen, and on mature reflection I'm not even sure it should but it would be nice to think of a government actually elected by people who had some grasp on reality.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Beware - the stick shark
Well after my anti IMHO post I decided to try something a little lighter, after all life should be fun also shouldn't it?
So for a bit of fun, just as we seem to live in a world where stick figures are constantly being electrocuted, run over and crushed I wondered what was doing all the damage.
I've considered the stick car, the stick dog but first here's the big killer.
The stick shark - buy the t-shirt here.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Alain de Botton
Alain de Botton is not one of the worlds great philosophers, however, he is one of the very best at explaining philosophy and expressing its importance in our everyday lives.
It was seeing an episode of one of his first tv series - The Consolations of Philosophy (which itself is based on a book) that quite literally changed my life. He made me think - I dont mean idly day dream, I mean really really think. This makes him important to me.
It was seeing an episode of one of his first tv series - The Consolations of Philosophy (which itself is based on a book) that quite literally changed my life. He made me think - I dont mean idly day dream, I mean really really think. This makes him important to me.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
IMHO
I've written in my other blog about the curse of the interest phrase IMHO. I hate this phrase. Actually its not the phrase so much as the attitude that says "because its my opinion it requires no justification and cannot be challenged". Well that's bullshit.
In 99% of cases opinions aren't pure aesthetic choices like "I prefer blue" they are instead simply assessment that people aren't able to back up with any evidence or even a modicum of logic. A classic is something like ergonomics. People say crap like "a dial is better than a button" and when pressed as to why they say something stupid like "well its my opinion" as if that means there's nothing else to say.
Well I've had enough and I'm going to start my one man crusade against the dreaded curse of IMHO right now. If you are with me buy a shirt. I know this is pretty rough but its going to be the first in a series on the topic.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
I'm a left social libertarian - sounds about right
Facebook - gotta love it. One of the most inane aspects of all social networking sites are the quizes, polls and games. And yet, every now and then one comes along I'm motivated to try. This political views quiz is one that caught my fancy. Here are the results.
My Political Views
I am a left social libertarian
Left: 5.4, Libertarian: 3.73
Political Spectrum Quiz
So what did I say to get there? Well I hate the idea of abortion but I hate the idea of governments forbidding it more. I think that markets are wonderfully efficient but also essentially amoral (at best) so in need of regulation and their more egregious tendencies controlled. While progress is great only a fool could ignore that all change creates losers and I think its only fair that those who benefit from things entirely outside their control (like their inherent skill and abilities) should shoulder some of the burden for those who suffer from things totally outside their control. I believe in morality and want people to do the right thing, even think its fine for us to judge those people, but its never ok to try and enforce our will on people.
My Political Views
I am a left social libertarian
Left: 5.4, Libertarian: 3.73
Political Spectrum Quiz
So what did I say to get there? Well I hate the idea of abortion but I hate the idea of governments forbidding it more. I think that markets are wonderfully efficient but also essentially amoral (at best) so in need of regulation and their more egregious tendencies controlled. While progress is great only a fool could ignore that all change creates losers and I think its only fair that those who benefit from things entirely outside their control (like their inherent skill and abilities) should shoulder some of the burden for those who suffer from things totally outside their control. I believe in morality and want people to do the right thing, even think its fine for us to judge those people, but its never ok to try and enforce our will on people.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
The Australian medical system, ok but could be spectacular
Interestingly, considering yesterdays post, there are some issues of policy where the consequences of 'mere' inefficiency are so grievous that they can elicit a visceral response. One of those is health care.
I'm not going to write a great deal on that right now but I will over the next little while. However, I will point out that although I approach the problem from a very different point of view to Tony Abbott, a man with whom I share almost no ideological common ground, I actually think he might be on to something here when he suggests getting the government out of the health services business.
I'm not going to write a great deal on that right now but I will over the next little while. However, I will point out that although I approach the problem from a very different point of view to Tony Abbott, a man with whom I share almost no ideological common ground, I actually think he might be on to something here when he suggests getting the government out of the health services business.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)