Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Bay12 Presidential Focus Polling 2016

Ted Cruz
- 7 (6.5%)
Rick Santorum
- 16 (14.8%)
Michelle Bachmann
- 13 (12%)
Chris Christie
- 23 (21.3%)
Rand Paul
- 49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107


Pages: 1 ... 485 486 [487] 488 489 ... 667

Author Topic: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party  (Read 832218 times)

10ebbor10

  • Bay Watcher
  • DON'T PANIC
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7290 on: June 23, 2014, 03:04:46 pm »

An exagerration, but not as much of one as I would like, given the huge percentage of the world food supply that's held up directly or indirectly by US grain. Taking 20 or 30 percent out of the equation would result in massive famine.
I think the US actually did that when they signed those bioethanol laws, and certainly if you include the meat industry.
Logged

Descan

  • Bay Watcher
  • [HEADING INTENSIFIES]
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7291 on: June 23, 2014, 03:08:52 pm »

I don't think giving 5 blokes and their dog a stranglehold on democracy is a cure, though. :v
Logged
Quote from: SalmonGod
Your innocent viking escapades for canadian social justice and immortality make my flagellum wiggle, too.
Quote from: Myroc
Descan confirmed for antichrist.
Quote from: LeoLeonardoIII
I wonder if any of us don't love Descan.

RedKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • hoo hoo motherfucker
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7292 on: June 23, 2014, 03:23:11 pm »

Maybe because, if urban voters carelessly wreck rural areas through legislation, the entire world starves. Isn't that farfetched when you've seen literally hundreds of business ruined because "It smells bad!" or "I don't want to hear those engines running until 10:00 AM!"


Except that it's the party of the rural plebs that denies climate change and thinks "environmentalism" is a dirty hippie word.
Logged

Remember, knowledge is power. The power to make other people feel stupid.
Quote from: Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

Culise

  • Bay Watcher
  • General Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7293 on: June 23, 2014, 03:44:27 pm »

It's far from a stranglehold.  The House of Representatives is assigned based on proportional population - districts are apportioned by population between states, and must be districted within states to be roughly equal in population (since a 1964 court case).  The number of electors each state sends to the electoral college, likewise, is determined proportionately according to population due to this (the minimum number is thus 3 electors - one Representative and two Senators).  Certainly, each state must have a minimum of one Representative, but in that manner, at least one person is (theoretically; practical issues do exist) guaranteed to represent their local interests and requirements on Capitol Hill.  If you weighed it purely by population, ignoring state boundaries entirely, you would actually end up with something very close to what we actually have - only three states and the District of Columbia have a population below 730k (the total population of the US divided by the number of Representatives), and even they're fairly close.  Now, the Senate is the only part of the legislature that ignores this, being a flat two per state, but bear in mind the consequences of this in the House.  If you say that population alone is sufficient, you end up with a situation in which all you need to push through any bill through both the House is the support of the population of nine states - that's enough to give you an absolute majority.  You can easily end up with a situation of "tyranny of the majority," or as the old joke goes, three wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.  Every single flyover state combined, the breadbasket of America, together literally cannot put up the votes to counter this.  It literally entrenches the urban-rural divide, and disenfranchises the minority completely and utterly.

Besides, the major power of the rural farmers comes not from the Senate, but rather, from agribusiness lobbying groups.  That's true of many political powers, really. 
Maybe because, if urban voters carelessly wreck rural areas through legislation, the entire world starves. Isn't that farfetched when you've seen literally hundreds of business ruined because "It smells bad!" or "I don't want to hear those engines running until 10:00 AM!"
Except that it's the party of the rural plebs that denies climate change and thinks "environmentalism" is a dirty hippie word.
My, you keep villainizing me with political opinions I don't hold, I might have to change my user title.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 03:46:58 pm by Culise »
Logged

Darvi

  • Bay Watcher
  • <Cript> Darvi is my wifi.
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7294 on: June 23, 2014, 03:49:51 pm »

The House of Representatives is assigned based on proportional population
That's technically wrong. The way it works, there's fewer representatives per capita in the more populated areas than the less inhabited ones.
Logged

RedKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • hoo hoo motherfucker
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7295 on: June 23, 2014, 03:51:08 pm »

Culise, I defy you to make an honest argument that the Republican Party ISN'T the party of anti-environmentalism, industrial deregulation and climate change denial.

I will bury you in an avalanche of quotes.
Logged

Remember, knowledge is power. The power to make other people feel stupid.
Quote from: Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

Mictlantecuhtli

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinning God of Death
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7296 on: June 23, 2014, 03:52:31 pm »

My, you keep villainizing me with political opinions I don't hold, I might have to change my user title.

http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_America/

Protecting Our Environment
The environment is getting cleaner and healthier. The nation’s air and waterways, as a whole, are much healthier than they were just a few decades ago. Efforts to reduce pollution, encourage recycling, educate the public, and avoid ecological degradation have been a success. To ensure their continued support by the American people, however, we need a dramatic change in the attitude of officials in Washington, a shift from a job-killing punitive mentality to a spirit of cooperation with producers, landowners, and the public. An important factor is full transparency in development of the data and modeling that drive regulations. Legislation to restore the authority of States in environmental protection is essential. We encourage the use of agricultural best management practices among the States to reduce pollution.


Our Republican Party’s Commitment to Conservation
Conservation is a conservative value. As the pioneer of conservation over a century ago, the Republican Party believes in the moral obligation of the people to be good stewards of the God-given natural beauty and resources of our country and bases environmental policy on several common-sense principles. For example, we believe people are the most valuable resource, and human health and safety are the most important measurements of success. A policy protecting these objectives, however, must balance economic development and private property rights in the short run with conservation goals over the long run. Also, public access to public lands for recreational activities such as hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting should be permitted on all appropriate federal lands.
Moreover, the advance of science and technology advances environmentalism as well. Science allows us to weigh the costs and benefits of a policy so that we can prudently deal with our resources. This is especially important when the causes and long-range effects of a phenomenon are uncertain. We must restore scientific integrity to our public research institutions and remove political incentives from publicly funded research.


Private Stewardship of the Environment
Experience has shown that, in caring for the land and water, private ownership has been our best guarantee of conscientious stewardship, while the worst instances of environmental degradation have occurred under government control. By the same token, the most economically advanced countries – those that respect and protect private property rights – also have the strongest environmental protections, because their economic progress makes possible the conservation of natural resources. In this context, Congress should reconsider whether parts of the federal government’s enormous landholdings and control of water in the West could be better used for ranching, mining, or forestry through private ownership. Timber is a renewable natural resource, which provides jobs to thousands of Americans. All efforts should be made to make federal lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service available for harvesting. The enduring truth is that people best protect what they own.
It makes sense that those closest to a situation are best able to determine its remedy. That is why a site- and situation-specific approach to an environmental problem is more likely to solve it, instead of a national rule based on the ideological concerns of politicized central planning. We therefore endorse legislation to require congressional approval before any rule projected to cost in excess of $100 million to American consumers can go into effect.
The Republican Party supports appointing public officials to federal agencies who will properly and correctly apply environmental laws and regulations, always in support of economic development, job creation, and American prosperity and leadership. Federal agencies charged with enforcing environmental laws must stop regulating beyond their authority. There is no place in regulatory agencies for activist regulators.


Reining in the EPA
Since 2009, the EPA has moved forward with expansive regulations that will impose tens of billions of dollars in new costs on American businesses and consumers. Many of these new rules are creating regulatory uncertainty, preventing new projects from going forward, discouraging new investment, and stifling job creation.
We demand an end to the EPA’s participation in “sue and settle” lawsuits, sweetheart litigation brought by environmental groups to expand the Agency’s regulatory activities against the wishes of Congress and the public. We will require full transparency in litigation under the nation’s environmental laws, including advance notice to all State and local governments, tribes, businesses, landowners, and the public who could be adversely affected. We likewise support pending legislation to ensure cumulative analysis of EPA regulations, and to require full transparency in all EPA decisions, so that the public will know in advance their full impact on jobs and the economy. We oppose the EPA’s unwarranted revocation of existing permits. We also call on Congress to take quick action to prohibit the EPA from moving forward with new greenhouse gas regulations that will harm the nation’s economy and threaten millions of jobs over the next quarter century. The most powerful environmental policy is liberty, the central organizing principle of the American Republic and its people. Liberty alone fosters scientific inquiry, technological innovation, entrepreneurship, and information exchange. Liberty must remain the core energy behind America’s environmental improvement.

Is that what we consider environmentalism now?

Here's your chance to speak out against the platform of the people who claim to represent rural voters, also.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 03:54:24 pm by Mictlantecuhtli »
Logged
I am surrounded by flesh and bone, I am a temple of living. Maybe I'll maybe my life away.

Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth,
Card-carrying Liberaltarian

Culise

  • Bay Watcher
  • General Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7297 on: June 23, 2014, 04:01:55 pm »

The House of Representatives is assigned based on proportional population
That's technically wrong. The way it works, there's fewer representatives per capita in the more populated areas than the less inhabited ones.
I apologize for the lexical ambiguity, but I don't mean pure proportional population.  Each state receives a certain number of representatives based on its population, with each receiving a minimum of one, such that the sum of all representatives is 435.  This is calculated at present using the method of equal proportions, based on that state's population.  Because each state receives a minimum of one representative, and because states don't evenly divide into the "730k heads per representative" that you get the relative variation per capital that you outline.

As for the rest of you, kinda funny that you all assume my political party is completely contrary to what I stated before in this thread, and , for that matter, implied that very post I stated.  Plainly, sticking my head in here was a bad idea.  Someone disagrees with you, so they must be Republican, and very possibly evil.  I'm honestly not sure which implication I find more insulting.  I'll just leave off, then, and leave you to discuss my disenfranchisement in a civil manner. 
Logged

Darvi

  • Bay Watcher
  • <Cript> Darvi is my wifi.
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7298 on: June 23, 2014, 04:10:29 pm »

Actually they all get a minimum of three representatives. And the divide is less because of the maths behind it, and more because the system has been designed specifically to benefit the smaller states because apparently majority rule is worse than minority rule or something.
Logged

LordSlowpoke

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7299 on: June 23, 2014, 04:23:18 pm »

Someone disagrees with you, so they must be Republican, and very possibly evil.  I'm honestly not sure which implication I find more insulting.  I'll just leave off, then, and leave you to discuss my disenfranchisement in a civil manner.

may i give you my warmest welcomes as you enter the world of bay12 discussion threads

i could have sworn you already participated in these
Logged

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7300 on: June 23, 2014, 04:26:19 pm »

As for the rest of you, kinda funny that you all assume my political party is completely contrary to what I stated before in this thread, and , for that matter, implied that very post I stated.
Culise, no one said you were republican. The reason people were referencing republican policy in response to you is because the bit from RedKing you quoted as villainizing your position was specifically in relation to the republican party. Which means you were, perhaps unintentionally, specifically aligning your views on the subject in question with theirs, regardless as to if you're a member of the party or not. Which is why Mict and RK responded as they did.
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

misko27

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lawful Neutral; Prophet of Pestilence
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7301 on: June 23, 2014, 04:34:22 pm »

Well I had something I was going to say about why I will never live to see a multi-party system, but we've moved on somewhat, and it would have taken too long anyway. So briefly I'll just say the Electoral college is both incredibly well-trenched, and seriously unduly demonized. Yeah sure the numbers scare some people but, just like a comparison between Nuclear power and, say, coal, if we look at the actual damage done per year instead of the implications, it's small potatoes.

Also if we could all be nice and considerate here that would be dandy.
Logged
The Age of Man is over. It is the Fire's turn now

RedKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • hoo hoo motherfucker
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7302 on: June 23, 2014, 04:35:08 pm »

The House of Representatives is assigned based on proportional population
That's technically wrong. The way it works, there's fewer representatives per capita in the more populated areas than the less inhabited ones.
I apologize for the lexical ambiguity, but I don't mean pure proportional population.  Each state receives a certain number of representatives based on its population, with each receiving a minimum of one, such that the sum of all representatives is 435.  This is calculated at present using the method of equal proportions, based on that state's population.  Because each state receives a minimum of one representative, and because states don't evenly divide into the "730k heads per representative" that you get the relative variation per capital that you outline.

As for the rest of you, kinda funny that you all assume my political party is completely contrary to what I stated before in this thread, and , for that matter, implied that very post I stated.  Plainly, sticking my head in here was a bad idea.  Someone disagrees with you, so they must be Republican, and very possibly evil.  I'm honestly not sure which implication I find more insulting.  I'll just leave off, then, and leave you to discuss my disenfranchisement in a civil manner.

1. I made a comment that the "party of the rural plebs" (i.e. the Republican Party) held a particular stance.
2. You accused me of straw-manning you.
3. If you're not a Republican, then #1 didn't apply to you in the first place.

Unless you're arguing that the "party of the rural plebs" ISN'T the Republicans, in which case there are plenty of statistics to back up that assertion.
Logged

Remember, knowledge is power. The power to make other people feel stupid.
Quote from: Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

Descan

  • Bay Watcher
  • [HEADING INTENSIFIES]
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7303 on: June 23, 2014, 04:49:39 pm »

I'm actually okay with having two senators per state, as long as the House of Representatives balances that. I do not feel that it does so adequately.

I think I've said before my dream-bicameral-system (the unicameral system is similar only... well, I'll explain in the end), but in a nutshell: Party-proportional senate with a party list of who gets in (5% green, 5 green seats, the 5 being the first 5 listed in a preference order published by the Greens), House of Rep for each district, decided in a non-gerrymandering manner, so that each district has an equal number of people in it. Say... 300 reps at the minimum, each representing 1 million Americans. 600 reps I think would be the ceiling, of 500k American men women and children, because beyond that I think you get into way too many people. Perhaps current electronic technologies can allow more, I don't know.

And vote for the leader of the government a la Romney v. Obama.

And of course, an instant-run-off or preferential-vote system (I.e. vote for your first choice, if they're 3rd place or lower your vote goes instead to your second choice, and so on and so forth until you get only two people left, who then get the seat/presidency)

(the unicameral system would be that you have a floating number of representatives, which is at the minimum the number of districts, and if the party vote percentages and the rep-seats percentages don't line up, you add people from those lists I mentioned earlier until the percentages even up. I think it's called "Mixed Member Proportional" or something? I would prefer a two-chamber system, so each can be a check on the other, but I'd be fine with the single system as long as it's proportional and representative)

It wouldn't take a whole lot of finagling to make this work with the American system, or the Canadian system, and I feel it would get rid of a lot of undemocratic problems while still allowing things to happen, which could be a problem in a system designed to emulate the population too closely.

Edit: Also, the problem with the Electoral College is that it creates battleground states, i.e. Ohio and Florida. Other places where because of FPTP, as long as you get 50% of the vote or higher, you get 100% of the electors, which means if the population is solidly 60%+ Republican, the candidates don't bother with campaigning in that area. Neither of them, the Democrat would figure "It'd be trying to push a truck with a string" while the Republican would figure "I already got that without even trying". If it was instead a purely popular vote, then they would instead campaign in the places with... you know, actual people. Yes, that means New York, Texas, California, etc. But... What's the problem with pandering to the actual majority of the population, rather than randos that happened to be born in or live in a place that the system preferences? Either way, someone is getting pandered to, but at least with the popular vote, it's the actual people.

The problem with the vote not matching who wins, while an issue, is not a great issue, I think it's only happened once or twice? Gore and one other president. It's a visceral reaction to not like that, but in terms of actual outcomes, it's not a big deal. It's turned into a bit of a red herring on the Electoral College debate.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 04:57:35 pm by Descan »
Logged
Quote from: SalmonGod
Your innocent viking escapades for canadian social justice and immortality make my flagellum wiggle, too.
Quote from: Myroc
Descan confirmed for antichrist.
Quote from: LeoLeonardoIII
I wonder if any of us don't love Descan.

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7304 on: June 23, 2014, 04:53:52 pm »

Soooo... basically the German system.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.
Pages: 1 ... 485 486 [487] 488 489 ... 667