“Based on trias politcal yes you do.” what are you trying to say?
And I said nothing about corruption or ‘people with money’
Again, what are you trying to say?
Sorry, but I assume everybody here at least has a basic level of understanding on the political system most democratic countries are at least somewhat based on.
Trias Political is the sense that you have the government, the police and the judges. Everybody needs to follow the law, the government makes that law, the judges judge who gets punished and how long and the police enact that punishment. (Very broadly explained).
If the system works like intended or at least close to, then everybody has the same rights and need to follow the same low.
You are were talking about “the regime” what regime are you talking about? Generally people mean the 1%er’s or at least the actual rich. Corruption is what allows the inequality between people, but removing the corruption can also cause issues. Just look at the situation in Brazil.
Facial recognition is not something any company can just use in a GDPR country in the way they do in China or in this example. Again, we have rights.
My original comment was more an “if” question about what IF the US actually functioned like a democracy instead of a consuming focussed, angelo-saxton country.
" Sorry, but I assume everybody here at least has a basic level of understanding on the political system"
I certainly do and know the pretty concept of separation of power, if you have trouble with spelling and forming coherent sentences that’s another matter.
When you say "most democratic countries " That means you believe in the solely theoretical concept of democracy, it doesn’t exist.
Or what countries do ypu think have that?
And LOL at using China as a negative example of FR.
England for one is far worse.
And no I do not mean the 1%ers which is a silly concept. I mean the regime/government whose rights and powers far exceed the powers of normal citizens.
Even when the theory/law doesn’t say that in your imaginary democratic state.
“a consuming focussed angelo-saxton country” again, what do you mean?
That is exactly what we in the west call democracies.
It is merely an ultra-capitalist ,so consumer and profit focused concept. The rights are there on paper.
The TLDR about Anglo-Saxon vs Rheinland’s is different cultures in companies and the Anglo-Saxon (mistranslated in my previous comment) mindset is more along the lines of profit and shareholder value optimalisation (you see this a lot in the English-speaking countries) and the Rheinland’s model has more focus for other things like the other stakeholders like the employees. (You see this more in NL and DE, among others). The Rheinland’s model isn’t the greatest, it is slower because there is more to consider than profit maximisation. And pretty sure it is also worse for startups for similar reasons.
The US is also really consuming focussed, they really want you to consume aka buy as much as possible. That’s why big box stores exist, and that is generally how they seem to act.
The modern NL had a good monetary head start due to our past, but in general our system is pretty decent. It will take a while to get something done and the government will fall pretty often, but everybody can get into it, at least in some levels if they get enough votes. In local politics, this isn’t the hardest thing to do if you want it and believe you can make a difference.
We have a lot of issues (uneven taxes, people missing out on social security due to faults of others, discrimination, etc.). But I do truly believe that our government, the rule of law and the executive power is at least pretty decent.
Edit: I don’t believe the US is a good democracy in electoral votes and the mainly 2 party system. Then again the US is just to big and more comparable to the EU than to one country.
Based on trias politcal yes you do.
If your country is corrupt then yes the people with money have power. Not every country is corrupt enough for people to really buy into it.
“Based on trias politcal yes you do.” what are you trying to say?
And I said nothing about corruption or ‘people with money’
Again, what are you trying to say?
Sorry, but I assume everybody here at least has a basic level of understanding on the political system most democratic countries are at least somewhat based on.
Trias Political is the sense that you have the government, the police and the judges. Everybody needs to follow the law, the government makes that law, the judges judge who gets punished and how long and the police enact that punishment. (Very broadly explained).
If the system works like intended or at least close to, then everybody has the same rights and need to follow the same low. You are were talking about “the regime” what regime are you talking about? Generally people mean the 1%er’s or at least the actual rich. Corruption is what allows the inequality between people, but removing the corruption can also cause issues. Just look at the situation in Brazil.
Facial recognition is not something any company can just use in a GDPR country in the way they do in China or in this example. Again, we have rights.
My original comment was more an “if” question about what IF the US actually functioned like a democracy instead of a consuming focussed, angelo-saxton country.
" Sorry, but I assume everybody here at least has a basic level of understanding on the political system"
I certainly do and know the pretty concept of separation of power, if you have trouble with spelling and forming coherent sentences that’s another matter.
When you say "most democratic countries " That means you believe in the solely theoretical concept of democracy, it doesn’t exist.
Or what countries do ypu think have that?
And LOL at using China as a negative example of FR.
England for one is far worse.
And no I do not mean the 1%ers which is a silly concept. I mean the regime/government whose rights and powers far exceed the powers of normal citizens.
Even when the theory/law doesn’t say that in your imaginary democratic state.
“a consuming focussed angelo-saxton country” again, what do you mean?
That is exactly what we in the west call democracies.
It is merely an ultra-capitalist ,so consumer and profit focused concept. The rights are there on paper.
The TLDR about Anglo-Saxon vs Rheinland’s is different cultures in companies and the Anglo-Saxon (mistranslated in my previous comment) mindset is more along the lines of profit and shareholder value optimalisation (you see this a lot in the English-speaking countries) and the Rheinland’s model has more focus for other things like the other stakeholders like the employees. (You see this more in NL and DE, among others). The Rheinland’s model isn’t the greatest, it is slower because there is more to consider than profit maximisation. And pretty sure it is also worse for startups for similar reasons.
The US is also really consuming focussed, they really want you to consume aka buy as much as possible. That’s why big box stores exist, and that is generally how they seem to act.
The modern NL had a good monetary head start due to our past, but in general our system is pretty decent. It will take a while to get something done and the government will fall pretty often, but everybody can get into it, at least in some levels if they get enough votes. In local politics, this isn’t the hardest thing to do if you want it and believe you can make a difference. We have a lot of issues (uneven taxes, people missing out on social security due to faults of others, discrimination, etc.). But I do truly believe that our government, the rule of law and the executive power is at least pretty decent.
Edit: I don’t believe the US is a good democracy in electoral votes and the mainly 2 party system. Then again the US is just to big and more comparable to the EU than to one country.