[GenManagerS]

Sorry, I didn't post this thread as a bais for arguement or debate. but simply as a discussion.As a general principle, I object to all prescriptions of 'solutions' to address 'problems' that haven't been properly defined at the outset.You seem to be a theorist rather than an Activist, My error

To begin with, it is not 'self-evident' that the United States Government is "likely the best in the world". Let's see now, "self evident that it is "LIKELY"???? I think that is quite obvious, at least to the majority of the people on this forum.

It might be, but it might not be - that has not yet been definitively determined by anyone to my knowledge. HMM, I beleive that has been determined by the majority of the people of the United States. Don't you know anyone who lives south of your border, and north of mine????

Indeed, the parliamentarian model has been more widely and successfully adopted than the American presidential model - if anything remotely democratic is your concern (that is to say, the presidential model has more real-world examples of perversions to autocracy than the parliamentarian model). I'm not saying (here) that one is better than the other - only that your assumption that the American model is better than the other is totally unsubstantiated.Well, I got to admit--------------
You've lost me there

That being said, you also assert that there seems to be something wrong with the present American format of governance (and I generally agree with that assertion), but you haven't said just what is the key problem to which your solution is meant to address? SEE MY FIRST COMMENT, Further, for your edification, It is my government, and I see many things wrong with it, and my plan is just a partial solution(subject of course to being put into effect)

From a theoretical perspective, this is critically important in the process of evaluating the efficiency or effectiveness of any of your proposals in achieving that desired goal. HMM, back to my original response AGAIN.

Thus, doniston, if you want a learned and reasonable critique of any aspect of your proposals from me, you shall have to first provide some kind of answer to the above.

My reason for insisting upon the point is because I detect quite a bit of 'parliamentary' type changes in your suggestions, amongst other theoretical directions. Evaluation is impossible without a framework.REPEAT

That wasn't what I was looking for. "T'was discussion." Apparently "My mistake"