British Parliament: Why do MPs keep standing up during Prime Minister's questions?
Why do some MPs stand up after another MP has finished asking a question in the British Parliament?It is because they themselves want to speak. In the brief interval between one speech ending and the next speaker being called, MPs can stand up to indicate to the Speaker that they want to be called to speak – a process known as “catching the Speaker’s eye”.The order in which MPs speak is often determined in advance. MPs can write letters to the Speaker formally requesting to be called to speak if they have interest/expertise in a topic, and speaking slots at high-profile events such as Prime Minister’s Questions are distributed at random by ballot and printed in a special document called the “Order Paper” (literally, the document which sets out the order of speeches, questions and votes).Those MPs who have been unsuccessful at gaining a speaking slot in these ways, or are not automatically granted them by virtue of their position (e.g. the leader of the Opposition can always ask the PM 6 questions) will have to resort to “catching the Speaker’s eye”.The Speaker tries to call a few MPs who use this technique — usually those who haven’t spoken in a while — but, unsurprisingly, the success rate is not very high.Thanks for A2A.
Why did people vote for Trump when most people on the Internet condemned him?
People on the internet forget they live in a bubble. The internet doesn't make most people more worldly; it does the opposite. You select the news sources you agree with, and so the sane on social media. You are thus exposed to countless people who agree with you, and none who don't, which creates an echo chamber. The illusion is that everyone is like you.But people in rural America still live in the real world. And they voted accordingly. Hopefully, the political establishment (and public) will learn from this so things don't get this bad in the first place.
Where are the people living it up on welfare?
A lot of people here complain that welfare recipients get too much money and are enjoying expensive cars, HDTVs, and premium cable packages. Not all, but many of those complaining also imply that this is more common than people who use welfare temporarily to get back on their feet. I won't say they're not there, merely that I have not seen them personally. As such, can you show me these vast numbers of people who are leading affluent lifestyles via welfare? I would prefer a legitimate source of information so I can study and vote appropriately in the future. Anecdotal evidence and hearsay is of little value here since it can't be confirmed. Fraud exists everywhere. What I'm really looking for is proof that there is more welfare fraud than legitimate use, if that's the case. Or alternately, proof that there *isn't* as much fraud as some people claim.
Is it ok for a red foot tortoise and eastern box turtle to share a diet?
they eat roughly the same diet, but the problem you have is the husbandry of these two reptiles is different so they should not be housed together, you might also have a problem when they get bigger over territory, you really should think about getting separate housing for them as the temps you need to keep a red foot are not suitable for a box turtle, you should never mix the different species of turtle and tortoises sorry honey.
Why does foot voting increase the odds of affecting the outcome of a voting, in contrast with the extremely low odds of ballot box voting?
Firstly, you seem to be assuming that voting at the ballot box has little effect, in spite of the many major political shifts in history that can be traced to the outcome of elections.Foot voting, that is, leaving a tyrannical and oppressive polity for a better one, has been common throughout history, to the extent that it has been permitted. Slaves and serfs, for example, could not do so except by such devices as the Underground Railroad in the US before the Civil War.Substantial numbers of Jews, English Separatists, and others moved to the Netherlands after it declared Freedom of Conscience. Spinoza, the most famous of them, laid out the beginnings of the philosophy of Human Rights. Some English Separatists in England and the Netherlands moved to Massachusetts in order to escape both religious persecution and complete tolerance, and set up a theocracy of their own. Rhode Island and Connecticut were founded by religious refugees from Massachusetts in order to establish either tolerance or yet another theocracy. Pennsylvania was founded by English Quakers as a refuge from persecution. Maryland, though officially Church of England, was founded in part as a refuge for English Catholics.Immigrants flocked to the United States from every sort of oppression and calamity all over the world, and continue to do so, to the extent that we allow it.Migration of ex-slaves and their descendants out of the American South was a huge factor in the social development of the US. Later migration of northerners to the Sun Belt, likewise.But countries that deny voting rights also commonly deny emigration rights, as in North Korea.
Differential Calculus: Maxima and Minima: I'll vote for the best answer: A triangular corner lot has perpendic?
Draw a triangle with two perpendicular sides and draw a rectangle inside it, such that two sides of the rectangle coincide with the perpendicular sides of the triangle, AND the opposite corner of those sides of the rectangle is on the hypotenuse of the triangle. |\ | \ | . \ |_._\ | . . |\ |___|_\ Let a be the bottom side of the rectangle and b be the left side. Area of the rectangle is a*b When you decide on a, b will be determined by the size of the triangle. There is a relation between the two and you need to express one of these in terms of the other. Spot the smaller triangle to the right of the rectangle, this triangle has the same proportions among sides as the big one. The bottom of that triangle is (120-a), and height is b. 120/160 = (120-a)/b b = 160*(120-a)/120 = 160 - 4a/3 Now consider the area of the rectangle: a*b area = a*(160-4a/3) = -4a^2/3 + 160a Differentiate with respect to a and set it equal to 0 for a maximum point. -8a/3 + 160 = 0 a = 160*3/8 = 60 b = 160 - 4a/3 = 160 - 4*60/3 = 80 area = 60*80 = 4800
Would you support a compulsory voting system in the UK? Why?
Nope.While I don’t agree with those who don’t take voting seriously or choose not to as they are only disenfranchising themselves, I do however believe that they should have the right to abstain from voting, just as they have the right to vote. The UK is a liberal democracy, freedom and liberty is one of its key tenets. If voting were compulsory and subject to some sort of criminal punishment, then that freedom would be lost as the government would then be forcing people to the ballot box, against the will of those who wish to abstain. Democracy is all about choice, that freedom of choice is at risk under such a system. Many authoritarian states, such as North Korea and dictatorships of the past, had compulsory systems, and they were always rigged in some way. While a compulsory system does not have to be rigged, it is still authoritarian in nature and removes the freedom of choice. This may seem contradictory but in a democracy people should have the right not to vote if they so choose. The right to vote will however always be there for them.So while I don’t agree with those who don’t vote as they are only really shooting themselves in the foot, I do however defend their right of choosing not to do so.