I hear that the opponents of the new Stuttgart station objected that, as well as eliminating a historic (but ugly) building and a few trees, it would do nothing for freight traffic and that there are too few passengers to justify it. Now they admit that the improvements will help freight traffic too. Regarding “too few passengers”, I am reminded that the first TV transmitters were not needed, because nobody watched TV in those days!
Regarding rubbish disposal in Naples, everybody agrees that it is needed, but that it should rather take place near to other people.
In France, the young people want the seniors pushed early into retirement, to make room at the workplace. The seniors want to retire early and live longer without reducing pensions. People find car burning and stone throwing good arguments in this context.
In Greece, good public services are desirable, but few people want to pay taxes. Nobody really likes to pay taxes, so why do democracies elect parties that are in favour of taxes?
Direct democracy is proposed as a solution to all this. But there are problems. Who should decide what questions to vote on? It has been shown that slight changes in the wording can change the result, without affecting the meaning. And who should vote; with the Stuttgart station, should it be all in Stuttgart, or all in Baden-Württemberg, or all within 100Km of a line from Paris to Bratislava? Should it be restricted to people who use the railway, or should everybody in Europe vote because European money is involved?
Our doubly representative democracy suits me better. With my family, I leave it to normal Germans to choose a government. We cranks should not meddle!
Loading ...