Author Topic: Impact of US government spending impasse  (Read 6310 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3110
  • Country: ch
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #50 on: January 13, 2019, 01:30:34 am »
It amazes me that a first world nation can reneage on its liabilities to pay its employees at the drop of a hat and, it would seem, to be exempt from, at least some, employment law. These shutdowns, although they usually don't last long, must cause a great deal of hardship to loyal employees.
IMHO it’s shameful — but also highly emblematic of American politics in general. The American legislative and executive branches long ago abdicated their job of governing, instead having become astoundingly comfortable at using various groups and issues as pawns in their power plays within and between parties. Meanwhile, the well-being of the country and its citizens (or rather, the ignoring of these) is simply collateral damage. (The judicial branch held onto its nonpartisan ideals far longer, but it’s now following suit with the other two, to finish the complete rot of our government.)
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #51 on: January 13, 2019, 01:42:39 am »
If we aren't bright enough to put an end to this nonsense, we have no one but ourselves to blame.
Yes. It seems to me the American political system is still very much like the Britisch political system from the 1800's. This system is designed to make the rich richer and keep people from having an actual say about who is ruling them. It is very interesting that a presidential candidate with the most votes can still lose. That shouldn't be possible. Another thing is that not everyone's vote counts equal in the US.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5074
  • Country: 00
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #52 on: January 13, 2019, 07:53:38 am »
Keep in mind that with the shift of authority to global, non-elected bodies in places like (Geneva) Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, and Washington DC (orgs like OECD, WTO, UNCITRAL and World Bank) legislators have less they can actually legislate about than ever before.

And the 'policy space' that remains to them is shrinking daily.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 10:27:18 am by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #53 on: January 13, 2019, 08:07:00 am »
Anyway, if you take a job where a slow period or shutdown is a possibility and you do not account for this in your financial planning then yes it is your fault if you find yourself short on money. Managing your funds and planning for negative events is part of being an adult.
Unfortunately the complexity of today's financial products makes that very hard. The whole crisis of 2008 originated from selling bad financial products and lending too much money to people. Most of these financial products are very hard to fully understand by financial experts at the PhD level so you can't blame people for getting into financial problems due to bad financial products. Often people went to an expert for financial advice but instead got tricked into a financial product which wasn't suitable for them INSTEAD of telling people they couldn't afford to lend money or buy a bigger home. Lack of government regulations made this perfectly legal but still you can't go around and say people didn't do their financial planning correctly.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline mrpackethead

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2343
  • Country: nz
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #54 on: January 13, 2019, 08:09:05 am »
I find it amusing that someone can think it's OK for an employer (any employer) to not pay you on time and think it's your fault if you don't have savings to cope with it.

You conveniently ignore the fact the affected employees are made whole with full back pay, effectively giving them a "free" vacation.


We've had too many of these shutdowns since the mid 70's and it is now the norm.  The federal workers are a bargaining chip and the folks doing the bargaining don't have to worry about their pay being withheld.  On the question of saving enough for a rainy day ... that sounds great but life throws lots of curve balls that can't be planned or budgeted.  So a flood destroyed your home and insurance will only cover  part of the cost -- there goes every penny of your 6 months cushion and them some.  Your 4 year old car just went out of warranty and wouldn't you know that's when the transmission would die -- there goes you 6 months cushion.  You son just got excepted to a good university when you's expected him to go to community college and now you need to drop twenty-large just for starters -- there goes you 6 months cushion and then some.

I guess we can spend all evening fabricating all sorts of hypothetical sob stories in an attempt to justify people's poor financial management practices.

Curious are you are republican?
On a quest to find increasingly complicated ways to blink things
 

Offline retrolefty

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1592
  • Country: us
  • measurement changes behavior
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #55 on: January 13, 2019, 08:21:23 am »
If we aren't bright enough to put an end to this nonsense, we have no one but ourselves to blame.
Yes. It seems to me the American political system is still very much like the Britisch political system from the 1800's. This system is designed to make the rich richer and keep people from having an actual say about who is ruling them. It is very interesting that a presidential candidate with the most votes can still lose. That shouldn't be possible. Another thing is that not everyone's vote counts equal in the US.

 Clearly you don't understand the U.S. Constitution. It purposely limits the central Federal government to specific enumerated powers only, the rest being reserved to the 50 States and the people. Such rights are protected from a
'"tyranny  of the majority" that a national presidential vote would be rather then the existing 50 states each electing a president based on their State elections. It's a rational system for a representative republic government that has to represent both rural and urban states, it works. I would prefer term limits of congressional offices, like the Presidential two term limit, but maybe a future Constitutional Amendment could fix that, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
The following users thanked this post: JoeO

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #56 on: January 13, 2019, 08:33:31 am »
If we aren't bright enough to put an end to this nonsense, we have no one but ourselves to blame.
Yes. It seems to me the American political system is still very much like the Britisch political system from the 1800's. This system is designed to make the rich richer and keep people from having an actual say about who is ruling them. It is very interesting that a presidential candidate with the most votes can still lose. That shouldn't be possible. Another thing is that not everyone's vote counts equal in the US.
Clearly you don't understand the U.S. Constitution. It purposely limits the central Federal government to specific enumerated powers only, the rest being reserved to the 50 States and the people. Such rights are protected from a
'"tyranny  of the majority" that a national presidential vote would be rather then the existing 50 states each electing a president based on their State elections. It's a rational system for a representative republic government that has to represent both rural and urban states, it works. I would prefer term limits of congressional offices, like the Presidential two term limit, but maybe a future Constitutional Amendment could fix that, but I'm not holding my breath.
The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 08:36:02 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline retrolefty

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1592
  • Country: us
  • measurement changes behavior
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #57 on: January 13, 2019, 08:44:49 am »
If we aren't bright enough to put an end to this nonsense, we have no one but ourselves to blame.
Yes. It seems to me the American political system is still very much like the Britisch political system from the 1800's. This system is designed to make the rich richer and keep people from having an actual say about who is ruling them. It is very interesting that a presidential candidate with the most votes can still lose. That shouldn't be possible. Another thing is that not everyone's vote counts equal in the US.
Clearly you don't understand the U.S. Constitution. It purposely limits the central Federal government to specific enumerated powers only, the rest being reserved to the 50 States and the people. Such rights are protected from a
'"tyranny  of the majority" that a national presidential vote would be rather then the existing 50 states each electing a president based on their State elections. It's a rational system for a representative republic government that has to represent both rural and urban states, it works. I would prefer term limits of congressional offices, like the Presidential two term limit, but maybe a future Constitutional Amendment could fix that, but I'm not holding my breath.
The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.

 Clearly we are just talking past each other. I'm happy to keep our system and leave you the EU flavor.
 
The following users thanked this post: JoeO, Stray Electron

Online Stray Electron

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 473
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #58 on: January 13, 2019, 09:44:18 am »
Another thing is that not everyone's vote counts equal in the US.

  It's supposed to be that way.  The popular vote is balanced against the wishes of the various STATES.  That's why there is a Electoral College.  It's also why we have a both a US Senate and a US House of Representatives, to balance the power of the wishes of the various States against the wishes of the People.  The US is not a populist Democracy or a Federal Republic, it is a Union of what were, as of in 1776, independent, POLITICAL, States.  The United States.  Get it???  That's why the framers of the US Constitution designed our political system as they did. 
 
The following users thanked this post: vtwin@cox.net

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5074
  • Country: 00
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #59 on: January 13, 2019, 10:13:35 am »
There are MANY core values we share and one is democracy.

I think people are likely to realize also that its under attack soon because many of the rights which had been held by the states are now being preempted by obscure treaties.

All the aforementioned 'unenumerated rights' are being traded away.
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6081
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #60 on: January 13, 2019, 10:18:19 am »
The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.
One problem is that the people of Belgian can never collectively decide against the will of those of Germany. The German national interests will logically always prevail over the Belgian ones. How is that fair? Imagine the Germans voting for measures which would severely impact ports for say, environmental reasons. The German economy isn't nearly as dependent on its ports as the Belgian economy is. That's unlikely to happen in real life due to the German economy being fairly dependent on manufacturing and therefore export, but it illustrates how issues could arise. It'd be a mistake to view people as constituents of a homogeneous continent.

That being said, there's some very obvious problems with the US system as well. Gerrymandering is blatantly anti democratic.
 

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5074
  • Country: 00
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #61 on: January 13, 2019, 10:23:13 am »
People should be aware that the WTO in theory works similarly to the EU model - one country, one vote- however in practice its very different. Also countries like the US's 'trade policy' is controlled entirely by huge corporations. Whose priorities are totally different and in many ways in opposition to those of the people here.


The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.

 Clearly we are just talking past each other. I'm happy to keep our system and leave you the EU flavor.

Well, if what you're saying is you want peoples votes to determine actual policy, i.e. what is done thats not what we have now as shown by study after study.

There seems to be a consensus at least that developed countries all around the world are stuck in what is called the "golden straightjacket" of hyperglobalization.

Look up "golden straightjacket" Trilemma, globalization. in your favorite search engines. We dont have (democratic governance) any more as we need because that would scare investors and they are terrified of that because as real wealth creation diminishes more and more of it is likely fluff, a ponzi scheme.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 11:13:34 am by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline beanflying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2111
  • Country: au
  • Toys so very many Toys.
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #62 on: January 13, 2019, 10:39:44 am »
Federation such as we have or a Union of States does have issues when that forms part of the distribution of power in a Federal Government and over time it tends to skew what the majority wants or needs.

Our Upper House (Senate) is made up of equal numbers from each State (+2 from each mainland territory) for example regardless of population in those states. Therefore disproportional giving a lesser number more say for their vote. The USA Electoral College is similar and has similar issues. While both are imperfect in a strict Democratic sense they do tend to make sure the smaller less populated states don't get forgotten. There is downsides to this as it drives the values expressed in these chambers typically more conservative than the majority too.

On Balance it is flawed like all Democratic models but it works sort of sometimes. It also doesn't mean the system invented 100 or 200+ years ago doesn't need to be looked at either.
Coffee, Food, R/C and electronics nerd in no particular order :)
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6081
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #63 on: January 13, 2019, 11:12:06 am »
There are MANY core values we share and one is democracy.

I think people are likely to realize also that its under attack soon because many of the rights which had been held by the states are now being preempted by obscure treaties.

All the aforementioned 'unenumerated rights' are being traded away.
Can you please, for the love of all that's electronic, stop inserting trade treaties into almost every single discussion you partake in?
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, newbrain

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #64 on: January 13, 2019, 11:21:31 am »
The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.
One problem is that the people of Belgian can never collectively decide against the will of those of Germany. The German national interests will logically always prevail over the Belgian ones. How is that fair? Imagine the Germans voting for measures which would severely impact ports for say, environmental reasons. The German economy isn't nearly as dependent on its ports as the Belgian economy is. That's unlikely to happen in real life due to the German economy being fairly dependent on manufacturing and therefore export, but it illustrates how issues could arise. It'd be a mistake to view people as constituents of a homogeneous continent.
It doesn't work that way. At some point Germany will need the support from other countries to pass a European law. This means that compromises will need to be made all the time. Sure some rules may favour Germany but the Belgians can ask the Germans to vote for something the Belgians really want in return. That is how politics should work: navigate the ship through an optimum of compromises. Never perfect for everyone but not really bad for anyone. This is what is so broken in the US. There is too much power in a single person.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4445
  • Country: au
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #65 on: January 13, 2019, 11:32:59 am »
Another thing is that not everyone's vote counts equal in the US.

  It's supposed to be that way.  The popular vote is balanced against the wishes of the various STATES.  That's why there is a Electoral College.  It's also why we have a both a US Senate and a US House of Representatives, to balance the power of the wishes of the various States against the wishes of the People.  The US is not a populist Democracy or a Federal Republic, it is a Union of what were, as of in 1776, independent, POLITICAL, States.  The United States.  Get it???  That's why the framers of the US Constitution designed our political system as they did.

This is where the US terminology differs from that used in the rest of the world.
"United" to most of us, refers to something like the "United Kingdom", where the constituent States have had their sovereignty submerged into that of the "Union".

What you are describing is what most people outside the USA would call a "Federation", not very different from that of Australia, the Federal Republic of Germany, Canada, amongst others, where the States retain substantial legislative powers.
(One significant difference is your Executive Presidents--- many other Federations have either a Monarch, or a President neither of which have any real power)

There are definite "trade-offs" in setting up such a country, as the States need to see definite benefits in belonging.

For instance, New Zealand came close to being an Australian State, but the trade-offs were not sufficiently beneficial, whilst Western Australia came very close to declining the invitation, but the vote "got over the line" due to two things:-An influx of Gold miners from the other States, along with  the promise of a Railway linking WA to the Eastern States.



 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6081
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #66 on: January 13, 2019, 11:34:06 am »
It doesn't work that way. At some point Germany will need the support from other countries to pass a European law. This means that compromises will need to be made all the time. Sure some rules may favour Germany but the Belgians can ask the Germans to vote for something the Belgians really want in return. That is how politics should work: navigate the ship through an optimum of compromises. Never perfect for everyone but not really bad for anyone. This is what is so broken in the US. There is too much power in a single person.
If a vote is a vote it's going to work that way. There are 82 million Germans and 11 million Belgians. There's very little the latter has to offer the former. If France and Germany get together, they can outvote all the other nations combined.

Power in a single person has its advantages. Putin is able to do what he does simply because he can play the long game. He doesn't have to change course every few years. In the US this is already a problem and in the EU it is even more of a problem. Compromising can lead to results which are acceptable to everyone, but it can also result in inertia and not going anywhere. Putin is able to play the EU due to too many factions having too many interests. The infighting means there will never be a harsh, coordinated response to provocations like those in Ukraine.
 

Offline vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4445
  • Country: au
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #67 on: January 13, 2019, 11:52:11 am »
"But wait! there's more!

Even in countries without a Senate or States, the majority opinion does not always prevail.
Many countries have "single Member electorates".

A political party can increase its vote massively in "safe" seats giving them a "majority" of the votes cast throughout the country, but still not win enough seats to form government.

Just looking at the total votes for each party, you would think this was some sort of fraud, but it's just a side effect of the electoral system.

Another effect is that of "first past the post" voting, where one candidate gets, say 40% of the vote, with the other 60% divided among the others, so that the person that most people didn't vote for wins!

Or people just not voting at all, & then moaning about the "Guvmint"!

In Australia, both of these latter problems are addressed, by preferential voting & compulsory voting respectively.

The first one still exists, however.
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #68 on: January 13, 2019, 12:31:42 pm »
It doesn't work that way. At some point Germany will need the support from other countries to pass a European law. This means that compromises will need to be made all the time. Sure some rules may favour Germany but the Belgians can ask the Germans to vote for something the Belgians really want in return. That is how politics should work: navigate the ship through an optimum of compromises. Never perfect for everyone but not really bad for anyone. This is what is so broken in the US. There is too much power in a single person.
If a vote is a vote it's going to work that way. There are 82 million Germans and 11 million Belgians. There's very little the latter has to offer the former.
You are looking at this with a way too narrow view! It is not about voting for 1 law but 100 laws. Some Belgium will vote against and some for which Belgium may vote in favour. If Germany wants a law to pass they need enough votes for their idea because it is not just Belgium which can vote against it but all the other countries in the EU. Germany has a lot of votes but not a majority or veto. So if Germany votes for something which helps Belgium, Belgium can vote for something which helps Germany.

Power in a single person is a bad idea because power corrupts. See how paranoia struck Putin and Erdogan. Trump is on the same path to self destruction.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 12:33:56 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline BrianHG

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2747
  • Country: ca
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #69 on: January 13, 2019, 12:42:08 pm »
Actual Impact of US government spending impasse on technology:
(I figured this aspect is being ignored and this is a tech forum...)

__________
BrianHG.
 
The following users thanked this post: station240, gnavigator1007, beanflying

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6081
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #70 on: January 13, 2019, 01:13:37 pm »
You are looking at this with a way too narrow view! It is not about voting for 1 law but 100 laws. Some Belgium will vote against and some for which Belgium may vote in favour. If Germany wants a law to pass they need enough votes for their idea because it is not just Belgium which can vote against it but all the other countries in the EU. Germany has a lot of votes but not a majority or veto. So if Germany votes for something which helps Belgium, Belgium can vote for something which helps Germany.

Power in a single person is a bad idea because power corrupts. See how paranoia struck Putin and Erdogan. Trump is on the same path to self destruction.
I'm not looking at this with a too narrow view. That's how a dry majority vote works and how issues can arise. Germany only needs France to outvote almost all the other nations combined. Not to mention those other countries tend to have clumped together along shared interests and will not be able to make a coherent fist. It's quite literally the tyranny of the majority. Luckily other factors mitigate the issue, but we can't pretend Belgium can trade equally with Germany as that's the whole point of a vote being a vote. Germany has almost an order of magnitude more say in matters than Belgium. If you want an equal trading of interests, you're explicitly pleading against a one vote per vote system.
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #71 on: January 13, 2019, 01:17:09 pm »
You shouldn't assume Germany and France are always aligned (usually they are not). Anway I'm convinced that a system in which every person's vote has the same weight will work the best.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 01:20:57 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6081
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #72 on: January 13, 2019, 04:43:29 pm »
You shouldn't assume Germany and France are always aligned (usually they are not). Anway I'm convinced that a system in which every person's vote has the same weight will work the best.
I'm not assuming that. I'm just explaining why a one vote system can be problematic and why this has resulted in people using different systems to attempt to mitigate that. If you don't recognize the potential pitfalls, you're not going to understand why alternatives have been developed. It's not as if they started off with more a complicated system. Those are usually a response to the simple system having been found to have shortcomings.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 04:46:04 pm by Mr. Scram »
 

Offline soldar

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 438
  • Country: es
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #73 on: January 13, 2019, 09:12:40 pm »
The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.
You are clearly very misinformed on both American and European political matters.

In Europe the legislative process is such that a bill has to be approved by the European Parliament (equivalent to the USA House of Representatives, allocated proportionally to the people) and by the Council of the European Union (equivalent to the USA Senate, with equal representation for each member state).

The American and the European political systems may be very different in some ways but just saying that the only representation should be strictly proportional to each individual vote shows a very simplistic view and quite ignorant of history because I do not think it has ever strictly happened.  There are innumerable voting systems and they all have their pros and cons. To pretend there such thing as a "best" political system or a "best" voting system only shows a total lack of understanding of the problem. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_system

A huge problem today is that people think they can find simple solutions to very complex problems and populist politicians find easy votes in those groups.

Belgium may have smaller population than Germany but they would not have joined the EU institutions if they were told they would just have to do whatever Germany said every time. A compromise, both in the USA and in Europe, is to have an upper chamber where all states have equal representation. Any opinions based on not understanding this very basic concept are worthless.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 09:15:08 pm by soldar »
All my posts are made with 100% recycled electrons and bare traces of grey matter.
 
The following users thanked this post: JoeO, Mr. Scram

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15999
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Impact of US government spending impasse
« Reply #74 on: January 13, 2019, 09:55:55 pm »
The problem is that it is not a representative government because it simply means that very few people determine what is going to happen to the most. That is a not a democracy! Also such a system is easy to rig because persuading a handful of people can swing the outcome.

The European Parliament OTOH is based on the number of inhabitants of each state so every vote counts equally. Somehow that has been working since 1952. It would be absurd that a small country like Belgium would have an equal say to a matter which would affect Germany very badly. There has to be a balance where the need of the many outweigh the need of the few.
In Europe the legislative process is such that a bill has to be approved by the European Parliament (equivalent to the USA House of Representatives, allocated proportionally to the people) and by the Council of the European Union (equivalent to the USA Senate, with equal representation for each member state).
Still in the US there is too much power in a few persons.
Quote
The American and the European political systems may be very different in some ways but just saying that the only representation should be strictly proportional to each individual vote shows a very simplistic view and quite ignorant of history because I do not think it has ever strictly happened.  There are innumerable voting systems and they all have their pros and cons. To pretend there such thing as a "best" political system or a "best" voting system only shows a total lack of understanding of the problem. 
I actually wrote that there isn't a perfect system but you have to distinguish between systems which are democratic and semi-democratic (the latter designed to keep control away from 'the people'). Read up on the history of the US and Brittain. Systems which put too much power in a few people are much more likely to develop excesses than systems where each vote counts equally. There is no need to go into the technical details because in (almost) every country the democratic system has evolved from having an absolute ruler.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 09:58:22 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf