[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Democracy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? I think its quite a bent system. Your statement appears to be premised on real choice. My point is that there is no real choice in a large majority of races. From past discussions, I thought you favored the types of reforms I am advocating (perhaps not): Multiple parties ...if that's what people want, fine. But we have multiple parties now...perhaps a dozen or so. The only problem is, 98% of the people vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans. Although I can't vote in the USA (although I live here) I always vote in Canadian elections by absentee ballot and will always vote Libertarian if that party fields a candidate. But the people are free to be the sheep that they are and here in the US the people, like, for the most part, the people in Canada, are sheep and don't vote for third parties. IRV -- Instant run-off voting Why we don't have that system now in this age of computers I don't know. Now one only needs a plurality to get elected...with instant run-off, only one who garners a majority of those voting gets elected... Abolish electoral college No, I'm not for that. That will skewer voting for president to the more populace states and virtually ignore the small ones. End jerrymandering of house districts Extensive campaign finance reform. Totally disagree. I think there should be ZERO limits on what either individuals or corporations spend on campaigns. Com'n. We live in a society where we are bombarded on a daily basis with advertising. Do YOU believe every claim made by an advertiser? Of course not. We discriminate. We can do the same thing with claims by politicians. All that campaign finance reform will do is give us the illustion that it will work. Four year house terms (to reduce campagin fund raising cycle) Totally disagree. If people don't want the representatives that are there for more than four terms, they can vote them out of office. etc. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Democracy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? I think its quite a bent system. Your statement appears to be premised on real choice. My point is that there is no real choice in a large majority of races. From past discussions, I thought you favored the types of reforms I am advocating (perhaps not): Multiple parties ...if that's what people want, fine. But we have multiple parties now...perhaps a dozen or so. The only problem is, 98% of the people vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans. Multiple parties won't work without Irv. Although I can't vote in the USA (although I live here) I always vote in Canadian elections by absentee ballot and will always vote Libertarian if that party fields a candidate. But the people are free to be the sheep that they are and here in the US the people, like, for the most part, the people in Canada, are sheep and don't vote for third parties. Because they know they waste their vote if they vote third party without IRV. IRV -- Instant run-off voting Why we don't have that system now in this age of computers I don't know. Now one only needs a plurality to get elected...with instant run-off, only one who garners a majority of those voting gets elected... Abolish electoral college No, I'm not for that. That will skewer voting for president to the more populace states and virtually ignore the small ones. HAHAHA. As opposed to the current system where many large states are ignored. End jerrymandering of house districts Extensive campaign finance reform. Totally disagree. I think there should be ZERO limits on what either individuals or corporations spend on campaigns. Did I say limts? your thinking is quite limited if thats all you think of as campaign financing reform. But that unlimited money is free speech is a bogus argument. But I don't care to debate it at this hour. Four year house terms (to reduce campagin fund raising cycle) Totally disagree. If people don't want the representatives that are there for more than four terms, they can vote them out of office. hahahha you don't even read what I wrote. I didnt say term limits. blah blah blah :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Democracy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip [Shemp wrote:] But the people are free to be the sheep that they are and here in the US the people, like, for the most part, the people in Canada, are sheep and don't vote for third parties. Because they know they waste their vote if they vote third party without IRV. Not just *waste* their vote, but possibly inadvertently elect the greater of the two major-party evils. Perennial Socialist candidate Norman Thomas used to say, If you only use your vote to choose between the lesser of two evils, that's the only choice you'll ever have. That's true only up to a point, though. If the greater evil who is elected because a third party siphons off votes for the lesser evil happens to be *particularly* evil, you may not even have a chance to vote for the *lesser* evil next time. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Democracy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? I think its quite a bent system. Your statement appears to be premised on real choice. My point is that there is no real choice in a large majority of races. From past discussions, I thought you favored the types of reforms I am advocating (perhaps not): Multiple parties ...if that's what people want, fine. But we have multiple parties now...perhaps a dozen or so. The only problem is, 98% of the people vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans. Multiple parties won't work without Irv. Although I can't vote in the USA (although I live here) I always vote in Canadian elections by absentee ballot and will always vote Libertarian if that party fields a candidate. But the people are free to be the sheep that they are and here in the US the people, like, for the most part, the people in Canada, are sheep and don't vote for third parties. Because they know they waste their vote if they vote third party without IRV. How is it a wasted vote under a non-IRV scenario? The way I think is that it is the only vote that counts! The more people vote for a third party candidate, the more the powers that be will listen to the platform of that third party. I believe it's a wasted vote to have your vote lost in the plethora of votes for the status quo parties... IRV -- Instant run-off voting Why we don't have that system now in this age of computers I don't know. Now one only needs a plurality to get elected...with instant run-off, only one who garners a majority of those voting gets elected... Abolish electoral college No, I'm not for that. That will skewer voting for president to the more populace states and virtually ignore the small ones. HAHAHA. As opposed to the current system where many large states are ignored. You mean like CA and NY? How were they ignored...did their electoral votes not get counted? End jerrymandering of house districts Extensive campaign finance reform. Totally disagree. I think there should be ZERO limits on what either individuals or corporations spend on campaigns. Did I say limts? your thinking is quite limited if thats all you think of as campaign financing reform. But that unlimited money is free speech is a bogus argument. But I don't care to debate it at this hour. Then why respond at all? Four year house terms (to reduce campagin fund raising cycle) Totally disagree. If people don't want the representatives that are there for more than four terms, they can vote them out of office. hahahha you don't even read what I wrote. I didnt say term limits. blah blah blah :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
