• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.

Madness in the USA

Here's an interesting one - https://www.axios.com/2025/02/27/global-democracy-score-record-low-report (I find axios a reasonably impartial site for US news)
The U.S. was downgraded from a "full democracy" to a "flawed democracy" in 2016.
Other flawed democracies with a similar score include chile, south africa, hungary and botswana. It seems the number of "full democracies" worldwide is decreasing.
 
I am so glad that my daughter and son in law decided to leave the US for good and settle in the UK as it seems that the shredders are working overtime to make things not now approved of evaporate as though they were never OK.
People are making digital copies of information, forms, letters, documents of all kinds in case they are suddenly accused of - for instance, practicing medicine without a licence or other crazy situations making a disaster out of good intentions.
 
Not at all bothered to be honest, we the public only get fed what we are supposed to see and hear, far more goes on in the background that we will ever find out so it’s pointless having a meaningful opinion without being in possession of the full facts.
 
Dave_Z1a said:
Not at all bothered to be honest, we the public only get fed what we are supposed to see and hear, far more goes on in the background that we will ever find out so it’s pointless having a meaningful opinion without being in possession of the full facts.
Click to expand...
If we can never be "in possession of the full facts" about political matters, surely we have to form "a meaningful opinion" based on whatever 'partial facts' we can glean? If not, how do you decide for whom to vote?
 
CliffH said:
If we can never be "in possession of the full facts" about political matters, surely we have to form "a meaningful opinion" based on whatever 'partial facts' we can glean? If not, how do you decide for whom to vote?
Click to expand...
Opinion can't be meaningful, I personally am so done with the rotten politicians and the way the political system is set up in this country I don't bother to vote anymore, they lie, cheat, go back on their word and the manifestos are just a fairy story, many of them have never had a proper job, and are career politicians on the gravy train.
 
Dave_Z1a said:
Opinion can't be meaningful, I personally am so done with the rotten politicians and the way the political system is set up in this country I don't bother to vote anymore, they lie, cheat, go back on their word and the manifestos are just a fairy story, many of them have never had a proper job, and are career politicians on the gravy train.
Click to expand...
Well Keir Starmer got his Knighthood for doing "a proper job" - and could still be earning far more than his PM salary if he chose to.

You raise at least two key questions:
1) Is it better for politicians to have had "a real job" before entering politics?
2) How much is the 'right' amount to pay MPs?

Regarding the first question, I think it's a difficult balance to get right. There aren't going to be many people (such as Sir Keir Starmer) who become highly successful in one career and are prepared to give it up for the uncertainty of becoming an MP. On the other hand, I can see the value of having at least some 'real world' experience in Government.

In terms of how much to pay MPs, I'd hate to see us go back to the days in which only people who were independently rich could afford to become MPs. I think that the pay needs to be high (certainly more than £100k) to attract talented people - especially given that being an MP is only a five-year fixed-term post.
 
Last edited:
It is a shame all this is happening. I have friends in the States and have been there a few times plus met many Americans on holiday in Europe. They are always very kind and friendly. My hubby and I have had a few minor problems on one occasion we were visiting the US on a fly drive and no one could have been more helpful.
 
CliffH said:
In terms of how much to pay MPs, I'd hate to see us go back to the days in which only people who were independently rich could afford to become MPs. I think that the pay needs to be high (certainly more than £100k) to attract talented people - especially given that being an MP is only a five-year fixed-term post.
Click to expand...
I think your logic is sound, but possibly overlooks that there can be significant benefits to being an MP. Their allowances for running a constituency office is already generous and much of their travel from home to place of work is also fully reimbursed. Wining and dining within the Houses of Parliament is heavily subsidised. Even after a single term as an MP the pension arrangements are also very generous. So overall I don't think the salary needs to be particularly high and £100k is, in my opinion, excessive, except for ministerial positions. And, of course, the final reward is the status that goes with the position!
 
I don't personally think being an MP can be compared to any other job, therefore you can't compare salaries. When you have a normal paid job, you get time off from it, when you cease to be eg Governor of the Bank of England, or CEO of a multinational company and become an ordinary man/woman on holiday with his family - only resume that Governor/CEO persona, once you go back into work.

Not sure you can get time off in the usual sense once you become an MP. Too many nutters at large potentially threatening to kidnap, rape, maim or murder you and yours once you're in the public eye.
 
Proud to be erratic said:
I think your logic is sound, but possibly overlooks that there can be significant benefits to being an MP. Their allowances for running a constituency office is already generous and much of their travel from home to place of work is also fully reimbursed. Wining and dining within the Houses of Parliament is heavily subsidised. Even after a single term as an MP the pension arrangements are also very generous. So overall I don't think the salary needs to be particularly high and £100k is, in my opinion, excessive, except for ministerial positions. And, of course, the final reward is the status that goes with the position!
Click to expand...
Well I'm not into the politics of envy and given that we live in a capitalist society, we need to pay people with scarce, important skills a high salary.

I wouldn't want able people to reject a career as an MP on financial grounds - and I'd love more 'working class' people to become MPs. I think you'd find that most MPs are talented enough to be able to attract salaries above £100k (in one field or another) outside politics.
 
There's a lot of similarity in how Hitler behaved, with popular support initially to allow him to behave how he did.
 
"Miller isn't the only presence America First Legal has inside the Trump White House.
  • His co-founder, Gene Hamilton, joined the White House as senior counsel. And Reed Rubinstein, America First Legal's senior vice president, has been nominated to be the State Department's legal adviser."
Anerica First Legal's web site - https://aflegal.org/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top