x
This website is using cookies. We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. More info. That's Fine
HPC:Factor Logo 
 
Latest Forum Activity

Brexit: Because Jake wanted to know....

Moderators: insurgent, C:Amie

Jump to page : First : Prev : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 : Next : Last
Now viewing page 4 [15 messages per page]

C:Amie Page Icon Posted 2018-12-25 5:23 PM
#
Avatar image of C:Amie
Administrator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
14,961
Location:
Fields End, UK
Status:
Quote
Mjolnir - 2018-12-25 3:38 PM

Just a guess: Your system is "a weak separation of powers" (A. V. Dicey) better characterized as a "fusion of powers" put forth by Walter Bagehot and expounded upon in "The Harmonious Constitution" - https://web.archive.org/web/20090507183313/http://www.ncl.ac.uk/nuls...


Give that man Half a cookie, look at that. You only get half a cookie because you got the right author but quoted the wrong book

The answer is that the two branches are "The Dignified" and "The Efficient" from Bagehot, Walter "The English Constitution" (1867). Bagehot didn't consider the Judiciary in his work, so it isn't covered especially, however you could assume that the Law Lords / Supreme Court would fall under The Dignified; if not the circuit and magistrate also.

The Dignified
The Monarchy
The House of Lords
The Lord Chancellor
The Speaker of the House of Commons

The Efficient
The House of Commons
First Lord of The Treasury
The Cabinet
Second Lord of The Treasury
Ministers of State
Ministers
Ministries
The Civil Service

Spaghetti if you literally attempt to apply the Montesquieu model.

Why is it weak and fusive? Unlike with the US implementation of the Montesquieu model where boundaries are pretty clear. In our model, the Four branches: Monarchy, Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary all hold a grasp on each others throats and don't let go, with the Legislature (Commons) having by far the most powerful grip.

- The Commons holds the Monarchy at bay by threat of disillusionment.
- The Monarchy holds the Commons, Cabinet, First & Second Lords / the Executive by threat of dismissal.
- The Legislature holds the Executive by threat of it being subordinate to the Commons and the commons allows it to exist and can also prevent it from existing.
- The Judiciary holds the Monarchy, Executive and Legislature by threat of secondary legislations.
- The Executive holds the legislature by threat of relevancy, use of emergency power and use of Royal Prerogative (power of the Monarchy) as well as the threat that if the Executive misbehaves it'll bring the Legislature down with it so they have to work it out.
- The legislature obviously holds the Judiciary by being able to pass primary legislation and undertake repeals (but they can only do so within the bounds of secondary legislation) it also has a stake on appointments.
- The executive similarly has a stake in judicial appointments.
- The First Lord of the Treasury holds all other ministers by the throat because he/she can dismiss them.
- The Second Lord of the Treasury holds everyone else by the throat because he/she can refuse to fund anything.
- The Cabinet (in effect), Commons and the Monarch (and their own political party) can dismiss the First Lord of the Treasury.
- The executive could easily turn around one day and say we're forcing an act to repeal the Monarchy, and if the Judiciary and the Legislature agreed... no more Monarchy.
- The Monarchy on the other hand could dismiss all of the Armed services, replace all of the officers in all of the military branches, declare war and revoke the passports of anyone in the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary (or quite literally anyone). He/she could also technically unilaterally replace the executive, but it would have to fall to approval by Parliament to be valid; so in practice it might have been used if say the 1984 Brighton Bombing by the IRA had worked and the entire executive branch had been assassinated, requiring an emergency government to be formed.


Total Spaghetti!
Or if you like a simplification. The Executive, Legislature and Judiciary all have chains around each others necks and if just takes one of them to pull the chain to restore democratic normality. Parliament on the other hand, holds a musket (originally loaded in 1651) to the head of the Monarchy to keep it in its box.

And you all thought you were crazy
 Top of the page
Mjolnir Page Icon Posted 2018-12-25 5:46 PM
#
Avatar image of Mjolnir
Factorite (Senior)

Posts:
87
Location:
United States
Status:
Quote
C:Amie - 2018-12-25 5:23 PM

Quote
Mjolnir - 2018-12-25 3:38 PM

Just a guess: Your system is "a weak separation of powers" (A. V. Dicey) better characterized as a "fusion of powers" put forth by Walter Bagehot and expounded upon in "The Harmonious Constitution" - https://web.archive.org/web/20090507183313/http://www.ncl.ac.uk/nuls...


Give that man Half a cookie, look at that. You only get half a cookie because you got the right author but quoted the wrong book


And you all thought you were crazy
Lol, half a cookie will be quite sufficient considering the caloric over-indulgence in which I have engaged for the last two days.
 Top of the page
CE Geek Page Icon Posted 2018-12-25 7:59 PM
#
Avatar image of CE Geek
Global Moderator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
12,023
Location:
Southern California
Status:
Quote
C:Amie - 2018-12-25 9:23 AM

Why is it weak and fusive? Unlike with the US implementation of the Montesquieu model where boundaries are pretty clear. In our model, the Four branches: Monarchy, Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary all hold a grasp on each others throats and don't let go, with the Legislature (Commons) having by far the most powerful grip.

Or if you like a simplification. The Executive, Legislature and Judiciary all have chains around each others necks and if just takes one of them to pull the chain to restore democratic normality.


Here in the US we call that "checks and balances" (not the monetary kind, though that kind clearly plays a role as well). And if you think the boundaries are clear here, you haven't been following things over here lately.
 Top of the page
Rich Hawley Page Icon Posted 2018-12-25 9:40 PM
#
Avatar image of Rich Hawley
Global Moderator
H/PC Guru

Posts:
6,907
Location:
USA
Status:
I thought your monarchy was a toothless holdover from previous eras. More tradition than an actual governing body.

And I second CEGeek. Boundaries are exceeded all the time. We have Federal judges overriding the principle intent of the President's actions. We have the President spending monies allocated for nation defense on his desire to have a wall. We have congressmen and senators making proposals not based on the best interest of the nation, but based on affiliation of their political party…impeding the smooth operation of the legislative branches.

Supreme court judges acting as policemen, military acting like politicians, executive leaders acting like reality tv stars, everyone doing everything except for their own jobs.

And we have Nancy Pelosi...who just makes my skin crawl…
 Top of the page
HPC:Fan Page Icon Posted 2018-12-25 10:09 PM
#
Avatar image of HPC:Fan
H/PC Elite

Posts:
688
Location:
Europe/USA
Status:
Rich, it's been that way for decades it seems. And Pelosi? Looks more like the Cryptkeeper in drag!
 Top of the page
C:Amie Page Icon Posted 2018-12-25 10:42 PM
#
Avatar image of C:Amie
Administrator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
14,961
Location:
Fields End, UK
Status:
The way to think of the monarchy is as the monarchy being the guarantor of last resort. If the monarchy ever had to move, it would likely end itself, so if it did move, it would really believe that the country was tearing itself to pieces. Like us surrendering democracy and anointing a dictator.

I mentioned when I addressed this in my essay unlikely scenarios creating a constitutional crisis. This is basically what I am referring to. The calamity of the Queen having to get involved would be unthinkable. If the Queen ever moved against Parliament, she would have to be carrying the will of the people, in which case, Parliament would not longer be and the system will have failed.

It is almost unimaginable. The Handmaids Tale level unthinkable.
The surprising thing to be aware of however is that it has happened several times since 1660.

Outside of that scenario, yes. It is basically ceremonial.
 Top of the page
CE Geek Page Icon Posted 2018-12-26 3:46 AM
#
Avatar image of CE Geek
Global Moderator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
12,023
Location:
Southern California
Status:
Quote
Rich Hawley - 2018-12-25 1:40 PM

And we have Nancy Pelosi...who just makes my skin crawl…


Funny, but Mitch McConnell has the same effect on me.
 Top of the page
Rich Hawley Page Icon Posted 2018-12-26 10:21 PM
#
Avatar image of Rich Hawley
Global Moderator
H/PC Guru

Posts:
6,907
Location:
USA
Status:
Damn liberals…
 Top of the page
Mjolnir Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 1:31 PM
#
Avatar image of Mjolnir
Factorite (Senior)

Posts:
87
Location:
United States
Status:
Quote
C:Amie - 2018-12-23 5:44 PM ...On the crop issue you've identified. What is the actual issue that is concerning; so I can understand the issue?
I just had a quick look and the USDA states that in 1800 wheat yields were 13.3 bushels per-acre and in 2013 were 42.7 bushels - the same productivity on 3.2 times less land. You suggest that land use has all but halved, which would imply that net production is 1.72 time higher now vs 1800 and that US agricultural mechanisation is vastly efficient?

We have similar numbers over here (I would assume, I've not checked DeFRA [our USDA of sorts]). We have such little land, we've been putting forests back in left right and centre to try and repair the environment or using it to 'pretend' to build housing. Unlike the US though, we hate GM food as a concept. We don't want it. ...
It appears that I'm a little more confident in U.S. agriculture than some of my compadres. The attachment is a picture of a page I put together earlier in the year for another forum. It summarizes the steady and inexorable rise in production of seven or eight staples that feed the World. 2018 data won't be finalized till sometime in Feb. 2019 but all forecasts are that it will be another cross-spectrum record year. The data is in 3 year increments from 1959 to 2016 when I decided to go yearly.



(Crops3.jpg)



Attachments
----------------
Attachments Crops3.jpg (46KB - 0 downloads)
 Top of the page
C:Amie Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 3:56 PM
#
Avatar image of C:Amie
Administrator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
14,961
Location:
Fields End, UK
Status:
Focusing on wheat, your numbers suggest a 2.14 time increase since 1959? Which is more extreme than the numbers that I sourced, but do I infer that you concur with my general proposition? The US agricultural titan has become more efficient rather than constricted (unlike some parts of the EU which has become more dependent on subsidisation, small holdings and clinging inefficiency).
 Top of the page
Mjolnir Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 4:28 PM
#
Avatar image of Mjolnir
Factorite (Senior)

Posts:
87
Location:
United States
Status:
Quote
C:Amie - 2018-12-27 3:56 PM

Focusing on wheat, your numbers suggest a 2.14 time increase since 1959? Which is more extreme than the numbers that I sourced, but do I infer that you concur with my general proposition? The US agricultural titan has become more efficient rather than constricted (unlike some parts of the EU which has become more dependent on subsidisation, small holdings and clinging inefficiency).
Exactly! Of course we started with an enormously rich medium that we TOOK from the original inhabitants but I believe advances in agriculture, spear headed by the U.S., are one of the great under appreciated achievements of the last two centuries.
I firmly believe that as technology, robotics especially, filters down from other industries, yields will continue at a record pace.
 Top of the page
Mjolnir Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 4:31 PM
#
Avatar image of Mjolnir
Factorite (Senior)

Posts:
87
Location:
United States
Status:
2018 forecast: "USDA Forecasts Record High Corn Yield and Soybean Production for 2018
WASHINGTON, August 10, 2018 – U.S. farmers are expected to produce a record-high soybean crop this year, according to the Crop Production report issued today by the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service. Up 4 percent from 2017, soybean production is forecast at record high 4.59 billion bushels, while corn growers are expected to decrease their production slightly from last year, forecast at 14.6 billion bushels... ...Average corn yield is forecast at 178.4 bushels per acre, up 1.8 bushels from last year. If realized, this will be the highest yield on record for the United States. ... ....Wheat production is forecast at 1.88 billion bushels, up 8 percent from 2017. Growers are expected to produce 1.19 billion bushels of winter wheat this year, down 6 percent from last year." https://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/2018/08-10-2018.php
 Top of the page
CE Geek Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 7:13 PM
#
Avatar image of CE Geek
Global Moderator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
12,023
Location:
Southern California
Status:
The problem is that developed nations are still discarding consumable foodstuffs at alarming rates while millions go hungry. Here in the US the estimates by the Department of Agriculture are 30-40% food waste.
 Top of the page
Paianni Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 8:37 PM
#
Avatar image of Paianni
H/PC Elite

Posts:
712
Location:
England, UK
Status:
Naturally this thread has blown up, to no surprise from me whatsoever.

I think cancelling Brexit would be the most peaceful option at this moment, bearing in mind the deficiency in preparation for the program as it stands. The debate won't end for a long time though.
 Top of the page
C:Amie Page Icon Posted 2018-12-27 9:06 PM
#
Avatar image of C:Amie
Administrator
H/PC Oracle

Posts:
14,961
Location:
Fields End, UK
Status:
Quote
CE Geek - 2018-12-27 7:13 PM

The problem is that developed nations are still discarding consumable foodstuffs at alarming rates while millions go hungry. Here in the US the estimates by the Department of Agriculture are 30-40% food waste.


You're right. Eliminating global food waste will save 70.5GT of CO2 emissions; Nearly 4.5 times the CO2 saving of going full-tilt on nuclear power. As I'm sure you know, the EU is famous for it food mountains and lakes because of its quotas and subsidies.
 Top of the page
hpc:factor« View previous thread · Off Topic · View next thread »

Jump to page : First : Prev : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 : Next : Last
Now viewing page 4 [15 messages per page]

Jump to forum:
Seconds to generate: 0.296 - Cached queries : 71 - Executed queries : 9
Server Time now is: Wednesday, 16 October 2019 - 5:14