Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 85 86 [87] 88 89 ... 297

Author Topic: Occupying Wallstreet  (Read 294428 times)

Dsarker

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ἱησους Χριστος Θεου Υἱος Σωτηρ
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1290 on: October 31, 2011, 02:30:05 am »

Lets say you have a choice between two extremes - compulsory voting with no abstain option or completely free voting. Which would you choose?
Logged
Quote from: NewsMuffin
Dsarker is the trolliest Catholic
Quote
[Dsarker is] a good for nothing troll.
You do not convince me. You rationalize your actions and because the result is favorable you become right.
"There are times, Sember, when I could believe your mother had a secret lover. Looking at you makes me wonder if it was one of my goats."

kaijyuu

  • Bay Watcher
  • Hrm...
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1291 on: October 31, 2011, 02:32:08 am »

Neither. I'd picket the horrible voting system we'd have in place.
Logged
Quote from: Chesterton
For, in order that men should resist injustice, something more is necessary than that they should think injustice unpleasant. They must think injustice absurd; above all, they must think it startling. They must retain the violence of a virgin astonishment. When the pessimist looks at any infamy, it is to him, after all, only a repetition of the infamy of existence. But the optimist sees injustice as something discordant and unexpected, and it stings him into action.

Impending Doom

  • Bay Watcher
  • has gone stark raving mad!
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1292 on: October 31, 2011, 02:52:28 am »

No, it's more like having two quacks who prescribe homeopathic remedies while insisting on how good they are, when it's plain they are just sugar pills. Moreover, they refuse to start prescribing anything else.

And you are the guy who stubbornly insists on trying to treat his cancer with that, and shouts at everyone who says that maybe chemo would be better. Guess how the above scenario usually turns out.

Usually? they both end up just as dead in the end. One just has to suffer a lot of really nasty side effects for a few years before they go.

I know it's a metaphor, but just sayin'.
Logged
Quote from: Robert A.Heinlein
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion, that violence has never solved anything, is wishful thinking at its worst.

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1293 on: October 31, 2011, 03:43:02 am »

What you said wasn't a governing ideology, it was a vague complaint against bad stuff being bad.  They are non issues politically.  It's like complaining about a doctor who proscribes medicine when you have a fever instead of proscribing that you have a lower temperature.  Then you get a second opinion and he proscribes a different medicine.  Then you bitch about not having any choices.  If there was a third medicine that you are denied by the cruel two doctor system that would be a legitimate complaint.  But what you are asking for is for a doctor to proscribe that you no longer be sick.

No, it's more like having two quacks who prescribe homeopathic remedies while insisting on how good they are, when it's plain they are just sugar pills. Moreover, they refuse to start prescribing anything else.

And you are the guy who stubbornly insists on trying to treat his cancer with that, and shouts at everyone who says that maybe chemo would be better. Guess how the above scenario usually turns out.

Okay wow, this argument is getting fucking crazy.  What was this thread for again?  Oh right.


This is among the most important things you need to see:



Courtesy of a study by the Congressional Budget Office, commissioned by the government itself.  For everyone outside of the Top 20% Income Earning households, their effective wealth relative to the size of the country has noticeably shrunk over the past generation, the Wealthiest 20% except the very top has kept pace with overall economic growth, while the wealthiest 1% of households have seen their share of the nation's combined wealth rise dramatically.  As if anyone needed to tell you that, but this study is significant for two reasons.

One, it was asked for the Congress, and delivered by the body established to give them numbers.  Anybody who denies these numbers as less that facts, especially Congressmen, has no quantifiable platform to make an argument from.

Two, if you are not a member of the wealthiest 1% of America, which is a combined household income of roughly $300,000, your share of the nation's economy has at best remained static.  If your whole household is making less than $300k, which by the way is about six times the median household income, you have lost out on economic growth during the last 30 years.


Meanwhile, Denver sucks.  And if you can ignore the godawful sidebars, Scott Olsen still can't talk which is indeed due the skull fracture itself being right at the speech center.  They're hopeful he'll regain his speaking ability after more brain surgery.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

Dsarker

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ἱησους Χριστος Θεου Υἱος Σωτηρ
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1294 on: October 31, 2011, 03:46:25 am »

Simply can't speak or can't communicate? I'm fuzzy on brain areas.
Logged
Quote from: NewsMuffin
Dsarker is the trolliest Catholic
Quote
[Dsarker is] a good for nothing troll.
You do not convince me. You rationalize your actions and because the result is favorable you become right.
"There are times, Sember, when I could believe your mother had a secret lover. Looking at you makes me wonder if it was one of my goats."

Derekristow

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • Steam ID
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1295 on: October 31, 2011, 04:09:38 am »

Simply can't speak or can't communicate? I'm fuzzy on brain areas.
In the article it says he just can't speak.  He can still hear and talk through writing notes. 

It's rather convenient that Oakland was both the first to take a massively violent approach and the first to hit exactly the wrong person upside the head.  Doesn't get much more media friendly than a young white war veteran.
Logged
So my crundles are staying intact unless they're newly spawned... until they are exposed to anything that isn't at room temperature.  This mostly seems to mean blood, specifically, their own.  Then they go poof very quickly.

KaelGotDwarves

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CREATURE:FIRE_ELF]
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1296 on: October 31, 2011, 04:25:21 am »

Oakland and other cities are taking it to the streets again Nov. 2nd, in some places as a general strike. I will be joining them in Oakland.

Dsarker

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ἱησους Χριστος Θεου Υἱος Σωτηρ
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1297 on: October 31, 2011, 04:33:36 am »

Well, I'm nowhere near any of this stuff, so I can merely wish you well and that you be safe, Kael.


Not saying there's anything out there that could harm you, but just in case.
Logged
Quote from: NewsMuffin
Dsarker is the trolliest Catholic
Quote
[Dsarker is] a good for nothing troll.
You do not convince me. You rationalize your actions and because the result is favorable you become right.
"There are times, Sember, when I could believe your mother had a secret lover. Looking at you makes me wonder if it was one of my goats."

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1298 on: October 31, 2011, 07:06:31 am »

Okay wow, this argument is getting fucking crazy.  What was this thread for again?  Oh right.

Income inequality is a concept I understand and which the solutions to are well known.  His complaints that the democratic parties were sellouts were neither.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1299 on: October 31, 2011, 07:11:40 am »

No, it's more like having two quacks who prescribe homeopathic remedies while insisting on how good they are, when it's plain they are just sugar pills. Moreover, they refuse to start prescribing anything else.

I'd really like to see your degree then, dioctor.  And I'd really like to see how you know that SCHIIP didn't result in any children getting healthcare or the repeal of don't ask don't tell didn't result in any gays receiving more equal treatment under the law.  I'd really like to know how you know that the affordable healthcare act didn't result in more healthcare opportunities for the poor and how none of it's healthcare opportunities won't work.  I'd like to know how you know that the hundreds of soldiers who are still alive because we got out of Iraq don't matter.  I'd like to know why it doesn't matter that we did the ARRA or the payroll tax cut.  Why the Dodd-Frank ammendment doesn't matter.  Why it doesn't matter that Raptor fighter jet got canned.

I will freely admit that I wanted more on every one of these issues.  However saying that none of them did the slightest bit of good?  Comparing them to sugar pills?  Which one of us is naive?
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

palsch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1300 on: October 31, 2011, 12:37:30 pm »

Because in 160 areas, people chose to pick the conservatives over the others.
I'm sorry to bring this up again, but I actually ran the on this for another forum after the last Canadian election.

Data from here.

Of 308 seats, 145 were won with an outright majority (>50%) of the votes. That's roughly 47%, with 53% won with only a plurality.

The Conservatives actually did better than average, holding an outright majority in a full 107 seats of their 160 seat total. But that's still far from them having clear majority support in a majority of wards.

Lowering the threshold, 42 seats were won with less than 40% of the vote (11 Conservative) while two were held with less than a third (Vancouver Centre by the Liberals and Ahuntsic by BQ).

These numbers are pretty good comparatively. In the 2010 UK elections, out of 650 seats, 432 were won with less than 50% of the vote. That's a full two thirds of Parliament, almost exactly. 110 (17%) were won with less than 40% and 10 seats were won with less than a third of votes behind them.

That's why I'm not a fan of FPTP. You can (and commonly do) have well under 50% of the voting public supporting the winning candidate. Even if you agree that you need a single representative for a given population, a representative elected under FPTP was likely dependent on only a minority of that population's support.

Under AV (or IRV; lots of different names for the same thing) a candidate needs at least the consent of 50% + 1 of the voters. They don't have to be their first choice, just ranked above other candidates. AV isn't necessarily more proportional on the national level, but it means the elected individual is more representative and answerable to their constituency.

For Westminster style parliaments it simply makes more sense.

And yes I'm still sore about that referendum.
Logged

Chaoswizkid

  • Bay Watcher
  • Bring on the Chaos
    • View Profile
    • Realms of Kar'Kaish New Site
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1301 on: October 31, 2011, 12:42:05 pm »

Oakland and other cities are taking it to the streets again Nov. 2nd, in some places as a general strike. I will be joining them in Oakland.

If you'd like, you could try incorporating that Nov. 2nd is All Soul's Day. Something about putting a focus on everyone as opposed to a select few. I wouldn't elaborate the metaphor too far, because then it might seem you're equating the top 1% with Saints. Just a thought though.
Logged
Administrator of the Realms of Kar'Kaish Project.

Andrew425

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1302 on: October 31, 2011, 01:53:01 pm »

Because in 160 areas, people chose to pick the conservatives over the others.
I'm sorry to bring this up again, but I actually ran the on this for another forum after the last Canadian election.

Data from here.

Of 308 seats, 145 were won with an outright majority (>50%) of the votes. That's roughly 47%, with 53% won with only a plurality.

The Conservatives actually did better than average, holding an outright majority in a full 107 seats of their 160 seat total. But that's still far from them having clear majority support in a majority of wards.

Lowering the threshold, 42 seats were won with less than 40% of the vote (11 Conservative) while two were held with less than a third (Vancouver Centre by the Liberals and Ahuntsic by BQ).

These numbers are pretty good comparatively. In the 2010 UK elections, out of 650 seats, 432 were won with less than 50% of the vote. That's a full two thirds of Parliament, almost exactly. 110 (17%) were won with less than 40% and 10 seats were won with less than a third of votes behind them.

That's why I'm not a fan of FPTP. You can (and commonly do) have well under 50% of the voting public supporting the winning candidate. Even if you agree that you need a single representative for a given population, a representative elected under FPTP was likely dependent on only a minority of that population's support.

Under AV (or IRV; lots of different names for the same thing) a candidate needs at least the consent of 50% + 1 of the voters. They don't have to be their first choice, just ranked above other candidates. AV isn't necessarily more proportional on the national level, but it means the elected individual is more representative and answerable to their constituency.

For Westminster style parliaments it simply makes more sense.

And yes I'm still sore about that referendum.

We maybe should make a seperate thread for this.

I don't see how AV would work for the places were the Conservatives win with 40% of the vote or above. The Liberals and the NDP would just have their vote split more evenly.

Also FPTP promotes regionalism,
Logged
May the mass times acceleration be with you

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1303 on: November 01, 2011, 07:33:11 pm »

Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

scriver

  • Bay Watcher
  • City streets ain't got much pity
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #1304 on: November 01, 2011, 08:02:13 pm »

Hah! Greece. Now there is an excellent example of how people were willingly part of the whole system when it was still giving them honey, and now pretends to not have known anything or have partaken in it when it's turned to acid.
Logged
Love, scriver~
Pages: 1 ... 85 86 [87] 88 89 ... 297