BL> To me, that's the definition of democracy; you might not like
 BL> the laws but at least you know what they are.

 DW> Indeed, and knowing seems to be half the problem, at least with
 DW> some sections of the community.

  We have an old-time politician in NSW who thought the law did not
apply to him when he made telephone death treats to a bloke in the
Local Council who opposed development. He started a 2-year sentence
yesterday at the age of 70.

 DW>> It describes the upper echelon of most large businesses and
 DW>> govt departments. 
 BL> Yair... groups of people making up their own rules and
 BL> enforcing them free from prosecution. They protect themselves
 BL> from the law with a layer of stooges.

 DW> yes, the one thing that springs to mind is parliamentary
 DW> privilege.

  Pasrliamentary privilege is different, and not above the Law. The
reality is that Parliament is supreme because it writes the law. If a
politician abuses his power, Parliament's Privileges Committee takes
action. It *has* to be this way - unless you would prefer a pack of
judges running things. Democracy doesn't work very well, but it works
better than anything else.

 BL> The computer would be programmed to follow the law; not go off
 BL> and write its own. It's interesting if you look at the function
 BL> of the

 DW> Though sometimes, compassion is needed and this is why you cant
 DW> really leave things to a computer, unless you included
 DW> parameters that enabled it to think outside the given
 DW> implication and ramifications of the strict letter of the law. 

  This is the problem; as soon as you give bureaucrats the right to
make exceptions they rewrite the law. Exceptions is the province of
the Member of Parliament. The problem is that lazy politicians are
happy to let the bureaucracy do it. Without a bureaucracy, *they*
would have to do it.

 DW> Things would be run strictly according to the law, but there
 DW> would be no "fairness" 

  Like all human endeavour, the Law is not perfect. It sets the goal
posts so that everything between the posts is a goal and everyone can
see the posts. The bureaucracy keeps moving the posts (or selling
them). Fairness is built into the law itself, with a judge and jury,
and on top of that the local Member of Parliament. But politicians
prefer to delegate decisions to a bureaucracy so they can't be held
responsible.

  We need to change this and put it back the way it was: a King open
to appeal by everyone, and a defined set of laws that applies to
everyone... and shoot the lawyers.

 BL> Why have a Health Department when you already have hospital
 BL> accounting departments? Why have a Police Department when you
 BL> already have police stations?

 DW> because they have to acountable to someone, or else you would
 DW> have autonomous departments, each with possiblly different
 DW> rules. 

  They would be accountable to the ones providing the money:
Parliament. And what's wrong with slightly different rules for
slightly different conditions? A bush police station or hospital *has*
to be run differently than the one at Kings Cross or St Vinnies.

 BL> Why have diplomats when you can use a FAX to get the same
 BL> result? 

 DW> somethings just need to be said in person, to get the right
 DW> inflection, you know what it's like when someone takes a
 DW> message the wrong way, even if it wasnt intended that way,
 DW> thats how wars start. 

  It's not the way it works in 1996. War? You're kidding! If the
Minister needs to tell Mahatir he's a wanker, he can jump on a jet and
tell it to him in person that afternoon... and does.

 BL> It worked in Russia and it's already happening in the West as
 BL> our

 DW> what worked in russia??? I dont think you could class anything
 DW> as actually working in Russia 

  Russia is in the process of getting rid of its bureaucracy, and has
already cut it to the bone. They have 70 years of ballsup to correct,
so it will take some time... just as it will take some time here in
Australia.

 BL> ballooning bureaucracy at an average cost of $100K each.
 BL> They're not a service industry, they're an anti-service
 BL> industry (like the AntiChrist only with a shorter tail).

 DW> I can see that middle management are sometimes more prolific
 DW> than they need to me, but what you are speaking off is more
 DW> than just a revolution, it's the complete opposite of what
 DW> happens now, convincing people that it's for their own good
 DW> would be the hard part. 

  It *will* happen becasue it's not possible to run a competitive
economy in a free world with 20% of the workforce as highly-paid
drones. Australia has been overspending $18,000M a year for the last
10 years, and that equates to 200,000 bureaucrats. It's too simple an
equation to be resisted for much longer.

Regards,
Bob
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---