KitemanSA wrote:
Suffice it to say that NO voting system will yield proper results as long as there is no option to vote AGAINST a candidate. And most any system with "full option voting" will work to one degree or other.
Check out the wikipedia article on approval voting, and the linked articles on other election methods. Approval voting allows to to vote against one or more candidates by voting for the other candidates.
Of course even the best election method can't save us if a majority of the voters are petulant children begging for their bennies, not caring how that impacts society at large.
Diogenes, one way or another the welfare state will be cut way back, if not come to an end. I'm not sure if it will be an orderly reform with people seeing the cost of wealth transfer, or chaos as the economy as a whole implodes under the weight. Either way I expect an violent response.
I see large-scale violence in our future if/when we scale back many socially and financially liberal programs. Now, if you provide alternative programs to these that appeal to the populace, you might avoid said violence. It's a tough call, but the pendellum has swung far right and then far left, which is the sign of instability.
ScottL wrote:I see large-scale violence in our future if/when we scale back many socially and financially liberal programs. Now, if you provide alternative programs to these that appeal to the populace, you might avoid said violence. It's a tough call, but the pendellum has swung far right and then far left, which is the sign of instability.
hanelyp wrote:
Of course even the best election method can't save us if a majority of the voters are petulant children begging for their bennies, not caring how that impacts society at large.
Diogenes, one way or another the welfare state will be cut way back, if not come to an end. I'm not sure if it will be an orderly reform with people seeing the cost of wealth transfer, or chaos as the economy as a whole implodes under the weight. Either way I expect an violent response.
That is what I fear, and the breaks will occur along every fault line in the social structure. Racial/ethnic/religion/financial class.
The Liberals will have succeeded in creating a Cloward–Piven event, but they shall reap the whirlwind first, just as they did in the French Revolution.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
He and I are internet buddies. So far with all the people working on it we have convinced between 67% and 85% of the American Public that the game is not worth the candle. It is only a matter of time until that causes a political cascade.
And D what do you think will happen to your precious morality when the American people figure out how many of their loved ones were denied medicine because of Drug Prohibition? I figure the death toll from that at around 100,000 per year. And of course the number suffering is far higher.
Patient's Out Of Time says what is holding back medicinal use is Federal Prohibition.
It is not just guys like me who have lost a relative in the crossfire who will be pissed. I can think of no better way to discredit religion in America. Keep up the good work my friend. I understand unkindness to strangers is a civilization killer according to some old book. Well cities anyway.
===
How long can a civilization last that makes war on 10% of its own people? Rather a long time I'd say. And then. All of a sudden phtttttt.
What happens when one or more of those people gets pissed and opens the gates of the city?
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
KitemanSA wrote:
Suffice it to say that NO voting system will yield proper results as long as there is no option to vote AGAINST a candidate. And most any system with "full option voting" will work to one degree or other.
Check out the wikipedia article on approval voting, and the linked articles on other election methods. Approval voting allows to to vote against one or more candidates by voting for the other candidates.
Nope. You just can say "yes" in greater or lesser degrees to a larger number and "enh" to the rest. In all the "approval" systems, the message sent is "APPROVAL". How do you DISapprove? You can't without Full Option Voting.
Fix congress by campaign finance reform. Where politicians can only receive campaign funds from their constituents. Congress raises funds in there district, Senate from there State, President from the Country. Special interest can still run ads with disclosure (Free Speech), just not thru the politicians coffers. Forces politicians to represent local interest not special interest. Not going to happen!
Special interests are often distributed interests. One good example is the recent Boeing case in which the NRLB has shut down a Boeing plant because it is not union. So the union in Seattle controls a plant in some other part of the country. Who should prevail and should the local pol be deprived of Seattle cash?
The problem is more fundamental than you have imagined.
When politicians control what is bought and sold the first thing bought and sold is politicians.
The only rule that can prevent that is to shrink government and limit what it can control.
Screwing around with voting schemes will change none of the above. What is required is a fundamental change in voter philosophy.
Which brings me back to the drug prohibition case. Given the great profitability to the cartels of prohibition who do you really think controls the politicians on the issue? The pietists are cover. The real power is the cartels.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
