Parties for proportional representation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

TheHeretic -> Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:32:39 AM)

Say that through a remarkable chain of events, the US was to shift from the two party crap currently inflicted on us, to a legislature of proportional representation.

What sort of platform would you be inclined to support?

(Moved from Off Topic, into the right section)



mnottertail -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:34:20 AM)

socio-democratic.  but one that took away corporate personhood, lobbyists and other rather fucked up shit that has us all gullivered up and tied down in the legislature.

(yeah, we need a quick take back button or something.)



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:55:25 AM)

I'd be looking for some pro-choice, pro-drug legalization, pragmatic fiscal conservatives. It is possible I'd have to start the damn thing myself.



Hillwilliam -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:56:41 AM)

Copied and pasted from version 1 that was in the wrong place.


Modified Goldwater Republican.

Do you want assistance? Fine, if you're able bodied, this road has litter that needs to be picked up.

Education, mandatory. Heavy on science, math and logic. Learn to take data and analyze it for yourself instead of parroting someone else. Drop out and you forfeit your right to half your future benefits in the event you need a govt bailout. That's right. If you drop out and the govt is paying some other unemployed person who went to school $12/hour to pick up trash on the side of the road, you get 6.

Energy. Crash program on renewable. There's only so much oil and it needs to be saved for manufacturing, lubricants and petrochemicals.
If we can produce electricity renewably, those people that have been nonconsensually buttfucking us over an oil barrel for the last 6 decades can go eat shit and die. Without oil money, the terrorists will have a harder time operating. Remember that old post 9-11 government ad about "Every time you light up a joint, you're bankrolling terrorists". Bullshit. It's more like "Every time you fill your gas tank, you're bankrolling terrorists"
In the mean time, we produce American jobs and non-coincidentally a few more American millionaires. Why is it that someone who makes their millions by hiring a bunch of third world people to make shoes in a sweatshop is a good thing but someone who makes millions investing in homegrown green energy is unamerican?

Single payer health care.

Religion the fuck OUT of government.

Pro choice. Consider it an investment in govt spending. I'd a lot rather a thousand of my tax dollars go to birth control whether pre or post conception than to have to spend a hundred thousand to educate and raise the unwanted result.

Let doctors make decisions on whether a drug has any medical value.

Do away with Blue Laws on a Federal level. They're anti-business and not everyone has their Sabbath on Sunday.

Do away with so-called "Sodomy Laws" on a Federal level. 2 or more consenting adults doing something they enjoy in private is none of your fucking business Mr Preacherman.

Gay marriage. Damn right. See the above plus why the hell should straight people be the only ones to get divorced and lose all their house and half their shit?




DesideriScuri -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 10:59:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Say that through a remarkable chain of events, the US was to shift from the two party crap currently inflicted on us, to a legislature of proportional representation.
What sort of platform would you be inclined to support?
(Moved from Off Topic, into the right section)


Fiscal Conservatism.
Less Regulation rather than more Regulation (but, definitely not "no" regulation)
Laissez faire policies regarding people's lives (ie. stay outta my bedroom, etc.)
Less imperialist Foreign policies.
More personal Responsibility
Supportive of charitable activities



Moonhead -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 11:01:57 AM)

Losing charitable donations as a tax dodge would be an interesting (if not necessarily productive) move: you'd soon find out just how charitable the ubermensch actually are if they don't get anything out of it besides their egos stroked...



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 11:06:57 AM)

I'm all for, "investing in our future," even for going into debt to do it, but that must mean we get something to show for it, down the road. Running up the credit card, slapping a two inch asphalt overlay on a decaying freeway doesn't meet the criteria. We'll still be paying for it, long after all the underlying problems have potholed it right back to where it was.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 11:29:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
Losing charitable donations as a tax dodge would be an interesting (if not necessarily productive) move: you'd soon find out just how charitable the ubermensch actually are if they don't get anything out of it besides their egos stroked...


I agree, though I'd still prefer government to support those who donate. Personally, I care less for why they are donating, as long as charities are being donated to. The whole "be your brother's keeper" thing is great, but whether or not they are doing it out of that sort of sense isn't any of my business.




Moonhead -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 11:34:59 AM)

I disagree. The notion that somebody should get bragging rights over a tax dodge is completely reprehensible.



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 11:45:56 AM)

Before the economy tanked, we were able to do a lot more than we can these days. I liked the charity auctions. We got an interesting evening, with interesting people, and usually wound up with some bit of bad art to stick in the downstairs bathroom. What you spend can be deducted off your taxable income, but it's hardly a refund.

Donating can be a pain, though. The dump is closer than a donation spot that will be able to take the old dining room table and chairs, and we really can't put more than $100 as the value. The truck is a lot easier to unload at the dump too. We'll wind up getting the extra fuel cost covered, maybe, along with the knowledge that a set of furniture a family can gather around is going to get more use, even if it is ugly, and too low for large folk like ourselves.

Tax policies that encourage and support those who try to do the charitable thing? I'm in for that.



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:02:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Copied and pasted from version 1 that was in the wrong place.


Modified Goldwater Republican.

Do you want assistance? Fine, if you're able bodied, this road has litter that needs to be picked up.

Education, mandatory. Heavy on science, math and logic. Learn to take data and analyze it for yourself instead of parroting someone else. Drop out and you forfeit your right to half your future benefits in the event you need a govt bailout. That's right. If you drop out and the govt is paying some other unemployed person who went to school $12/hour to pick up trash on the side of the road, you get 6.

Energy. Crash program on renewable. There's only so much oil and it needs to be saved for manufacturing, lubricants and petrochemicals.
If we can produce electricity renewably, those people that have been nonconsensually buttfucking us over an oil barrel for the last 6 decades can go eat shit and die. Without oil money, the terrorists will have a harder time operating. Remember that old post 9-11 government ad about "Every time you light up a joint, you're bankrolling terrorists". Bullshit. It's more like "Every time you fill your gas tank, you're bankrolling terrorists"
In the mean time, we produce American jobs and non-coincidentally a few more American millionaires. Why is it that someone who makes their millions by hiring a bunch of third world people to make shoes in a sweatshop is a good thing but someone who makes millions investing in homegrown green energy is unamerican?

Single payer health care.

Religion the fuck OUT of government.

Pro choice. Consider it an investment in govt spending. I'd a lot rather a thousand of my tax dollars go to birth control whether pre or post conception than to have to spend a hundred thousand to educate and raise the unwanted result.

Let doctors make decisions on whether a drug has any medical value.

Do away with Blue Laws on a Federal level. They're anti-business and not everyone has their Sabbath on Sunday.

Do away with so-called "Sodomy Laws" on a Federal level. 2 or more consenting adults doing something they enjoy in private is none of your fucking business Mr Preacherman.

Gay marriage. Damn right. See the above plus why the hell should straight people be the only ones to get divorced and lose all their house and half their shit?





We might wind up in the same camp, Hill, though I find it interesting that you disdain people parroting what they've had repeated to them, then say, "single payer health care," like it is some kind of magical incantation.



Hillwilliam -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:19:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Copied and pasted from version 1 that was in the wrong place.


Modified Goldwater Republican.

Do you want assistance? Fine, if you're able bodied, this road has litter that needs to be picked up.

Education, mandatory. Heavy on science, math and logic. Learn to take data and analyze it for yourself instead of parroting someone else. Drop out and you forfeit your right to half your future benefits in the event you need a govt bailout. That's right. If you drop out and the govt is paying some other unemployed person who went to school $12/hour to pick up trash on the side of the road, you get 6.

Energy. Crash program on renewable. There's only so much oil and it needs to be saved for manufacturing, lubricants and petrochemicals.
If we can produce electricity renewably, those people that have been nonconsensually buttfucking us over an oil barrel for the last 6 decades can go eat shit and die. Without oil money, the terrorists will have a harder time operating. Remember that old post 9-11 government ad about "Every time you light up a joint, you're bankrolling terrorists". Bullshit. It's more like "Every time you fill your gas tank, you're bankrolling terrorists"
In the mean time, we produce American jobs and non-coincidentally a few more American millionaires. Why is it that someone who makes their millions by hiring a bunch of third world people to make shoes in a sweatshop is a good thing but someone who makes millions investing in homegrown green energy is unamerican?

Single payer health care.

Religion the fuck OUT of government.

Pro choice. Consider it an investment in govt spending. I'd a lot rather a thousand of my tax dollars go to birth control whether pre or post conception than to have to spend a hundred thousand to educate and raise the unwanted result.

Let doctors make decisions on whether a drug has any medical value.

Do away with Blue Laws on a Federal level. They're anti-business and not everyone has their Sabbath on Sunday.

Do away with so-called "Sodomy Laws" on a Federal level. 2 or more consenting adults doing something they enjoy in private is none of your fucking business Mr Preacherman.

Gay marriage. Damn right. See the above plus why the hell should straight people be the only ones to get divorced and lose all their house and half their shit?





We might wind up in the same camp, Hill, though I find it interesting that you disdain people parroting what they've had repeated to them, then say, "single payer health care," like it is some kind of magical incantation.


Because it's the name of the plan. Unfortunately, both parties hated it because their lobbyists told them to.



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:29:08 PM)

The only lobbyists I ever encounter are cats that want to be fed, and dogs that want to play fetch until they collapse.

Single payer is a doomed half measure. Nationalization, with rapidly diminishing entitlements for end of life care is the way to go. Want hospice, and easy access to good painkillers? Stay on the plan. Want to be hooked up to machines, and get a replacement liver for the one you've destroyed with 50 years of boozing? Buy a supplemental package.



WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:38:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Say that through a remarkable chain of events, the US was to shift from the two party crap currently inflicted on us, to a legislature of proportional representation.

dont like proportional representation. tha one man one vote rule would be broken.



Marini -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:40:00 PM)

quote:

Say that through a remarkable chain of events, the US was to shift from the two party crap currently inflicted on us, to a legislature of proportional representation.

What sort of platform would you be inclined to support?


Very interesting topic, Rich.
This is certainly some political food for thought.

I have to think/look into what platform I would be inclined to support.
It would certainly change many people's narrow minded political paradigms.
I love that word "paradigm" nice to be able to use it.



Moonhead -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:41:03 PM)

Really? How'd you work that out, pray tell?



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:45:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh

dont like proportional representation. tha one man one vote rule would be broken.



I think we have unclear communication. I mean proportional representation in terms of the residents of the states electing their House Reps on a statewide basis, rather than by individual district, with the various parties being seated according their proportion of the vote in the statewide election. You still vote, your vote still counts.

California has 53 seats in the House, and is one of the most diverse places in the world, yet every one of those seatholders is of the two main parties. I think we would be much better served by a legislature that reflected our diversity of ideology



Moonhead -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:52:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
I think we have unclear communication. I mean proportional representation in terms of the residents of the states electing their House Reps on a statewide basis, rather than by individual district, with the various parties being seated according their proportion of the vote in the statewide election. You still vote, your vote still counts.

Your vote would actually count more if such a measure stops somebody slinking into office with 40% of the turnout because the opposing vote was split by fuckwits too stupid to have heard of tactical voting, wouldn't it?

That said, the minority votes and fringe parties aren't half the problem in the States that they are over here, so PR might not be all that useful on your side of the pond. I'd have thought taking steps to prevent gerrymandering would be a lot more helpful, but Christ only knows how the mess you've got with zoning electoral districts to favour one party or the other could possibly fixed permanently.



WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 12:53:21 PM)

ah you mean reforming the vote districts. yup smaller parties might get more of a look in taking a statewide count

not a fan of the winner takes all system for president either coz it undermines tha individual vote.



TheHeretic -> RE: Parties for proportional representation (2/18/2013 1:05:15 PM)

Eliminating the districts entirely would do the job, Moon.

Obviously, doing that removes the sort of direct contact, and direct representation we get from having districts. We could always just draw much simpler lines, creating apolitical blocks of 700,000 odd people each, and assign them to the legislators, but that isn't going to give us the sort of accountability needed. Maybe give the assigned districts the power to approve or reject their individual Rep's eligibility to serve in the seat?



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875