Laws, wars, protests and ANGRY OLD UNCLES

[wyly]

The current government has as legitimate a majority as most of the other governments for the last few decades, you don't agree with it, well boohoo, who cares what you think anyway. Btw, do you have proof that most people don't agree with the current gov't policies? I take issue with a number of them, but I get the feeling that Harper could cure cancer and you would somehow be against it.

well fuck your worthless opinion...over 60% did not vote for the smiling fat beaver or is the electoral % of the vote of an election too difficult for you understand....

[wyly]

It's interesting isn't it, that this country is envied by much of the world and yet our political system is in some peoples eyes so terribly broken, but then for some of those people communism would be their choice, so maybe they are best ignored. Of course we could always do better, but we are doing pretty well here, some of these other countries with prop rep can't seem to get anything done.

we're envied are we you know this how ?... you took a poll of entire world?...come back when you're done playing super patriot waving your little canadian flag, as if your opinion matters...

[wyly]

If we're going to improve things by adding more democratic input, then we need to make the system more responsive and efficient at the same time. If you increase the input, you must increase the throughput or the machines breaks.

in no way does improved fair representation equal more input...

this government is big on adding seats to the house claiming it better represents canadians but it doesn't it only endorses the same inequalities... alberta gains more seats but those of us who don't vote cpc in alberta are still shut out of representation and for many the lack of voice in government goes back many decades...

democracy can be messy and slow but expediency/less democracy should not be valued more than equal representation...

[Smallc]

Interesting idea, Smallc - it seems that both Italy and Greece use proportional representation.

And many other places. Their governments are in perpetual chaos, and so nothing gets done that should, and all of the fringe pet projects come to the forefront.

[Smallc]

And believe it or not, there are advantages to that too. Democracy isn't a magic spell that fixes all problems.

That's true. Also, democracy is not an end unto itself, but rather a means to an end. Ours seems to be working well enough.

[lukin]

in no way does improved fair representation equal more input...

this government is big on adding seats to the house claiming it better represents canadians but it doesn't it only endorses the same inequalities... alberta gains more seats but those of us who don't vote cpc in alberta are still shut out of representation and for many the lack of voice in government goes back many decades...

democracy can be messy and slow but expediency/less democracy should not be valued more than equal representation...

So you don't like something that doesn't benefit you.If you want your guy(party) to win get out and do what you need to do to convince people to vote that way. Complaining on the couch is the biggest problem for whiners of your ilk.

[dre]

So you don't like something that doesn't benefit you.If you want your guy(party) to win get out and do what you need to do to convince people to vote that way. Complaining on the couch is the biggest problem for whiners of your ilk.

And generalizing about people and their "ilk" is the biggest problem for.... well... ideologically obsessed idiots.

[cybercoma]

You really shouldn't speak for others, and i, like most people, think a lot of things, so do you disagree with every aspect of the crime bill?

Your implied premise is entirely false. One need not disagree with an entire bill to want it voted down. If any part of the bill is problematic it should not pass, so it can be reworked.

[Michael Hardner]

democracy can be messy and slow but expediency/less democracy should not be valued more than equal representation...

Again with absolutes... If that's true, then I guess you favor direct democracy.

[Smallc]

Does that mean that 50% + 1 is considered fair under wyly's system?

[eyeball]

So let me get this straight....you want the voters to have a choice and exercise their right to vote on matters of great import, except when they don't vote the way you like?

Do I have that right?

No, I want Conservative voters to take responsibility for the monster they've created.

[CPCFTW]

Interesting idea, Smallc - it seems that both Italy and Greece use proportional representation.

Don't forget Portugal, Spain, Ireland, and Belgium (aka every country involved in the European sovereign debt crisis).

Pic of PR awesomeness

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence when your neighbor is borrowing money from China to buy the best fertilizer and pay for landscaping.

Is that how the saying goes?

Edited November 16, 2011 by CPCFTW

[Michael Hardner]

in no way does improved fair representation equal more input...

How so ? Isn't the whole point of PR to give a voice to more voters ? In other words, to represent their views and give their representatives more power ? That equals more talking, more negotiation and therefore more politics.

[wyly]

How so ? Isn't the whole point of PR to give a voice to more voters ? In other words, to represent their views and give their representatives more power ? That equals more talking, more negotiation and therefore more politics.

talking and negotiating are part of the democratic procedure if that's an issue with you maybe less representation is what you want... how about FPTP on a national scale, the leading party gets every seat in the HOC, completely eliminating all that annoying talking and negotiating...

your viewpoint is likely a result of where you live, you don't see it as an issue as in most parts of canada there is movement politically over the years between parties so everyone gets a representation at sometime in their lives, the perception you likely have and many canadians share is alberta is single mindless entity of conservative voting drones...but that's far from reality...

living in sask I went through conservative, liberal and NDP representation, in alberta it's like living in a one party state voters blindly voting for the same party regardless how atrocious their representative...for 33% representing 1,233,000 of albertans who did not vote conservative share one MP who is not conservative and that NDP MP does not represent the liberal voters...and now the CPC wants to add another 6 ridings that will only increase the under representation, 66% will get 33 MPs while 33%/1,2333,000 still have only one MP to speak for them...

[grogy]

No, I want Conservative voters to take responsibility for the monster they've created.

Are you suffering from monsteritis?

[Wild Bill]

talking and negotiating are part of the democratic procedure if that's an issue with you maybe less representation is what you want... how about FPTP on a national scale, the leading party gets every seat in the HOC, completely eliminating all that annoying talking and negotiating...

your viewpoint is likely a result of where you live, you don't see it as an issue as in most parts of canada there is movement politically over the years between parties so everyone gets a representation at sometime in their lives, the perception you likely have and many canadians share is alberta is single mindless entity of conservative voting drones...but that's far from reality...

living in sask I went through conservative, liberal and NDP representation, in alberta it's like living in a one party state voters blindly voting for the same party regardless how atrocious their representative...for 33% representing 1,233,000 of albertans who did not vote conservative share one MP who is not conservative and that NDP MP does not represent the liberal voters...and now the CPC wants to add another 6 ridings that will only increase the under representation, 66% will get 33 MPs while 33%/1,2333,000 still have only one MP to speak for them...

You've put your finger on it, Wyly. If one party stays in power for too many terms it tends to foster a sense of hopelessness, resentment and powerlessness with those who don't like the incumbent.

Conservatives and Reformers shared this feeling for about a decade and a half of Chretien and the Liberals.

I agree it's not usually a healthy situation but in Alberta you have to remember that the Liberals hurt an entire generation of people so badly that they will have to grow old and die before the liberals will have another chance at winning a significant number of seats. When you lose your job and/or your home it tends to be branded strongly in your memory.

When the Liberals were strong it probably seemed an easy trade -some resentment and losses in Alberta for huge numbers of votes in the East. It worked too! At least for the short term. Likely the Liberals also underestimated the degree of resentment in Alberta and how long it would last. Many pundits have said that Diefenbaker had no idea of the depth of the negative repercussions with cancelling the Arrow project. There's a quote kicking around about a Tory aide calling A V Roe after the layoffs hit the papers, inquiring if they were truly necessary and asking why a manufacturing plant couldn't just retool and make tractors or refrigerators or something!

So politicians can make mistakes and usually they have to pay for them. I've no doubt that many Albertans are also getting tired of the CPC but so far they have seen nothing attractive or having changed in the Liberal Party. As an old salesman I love to keep preaching that it's not enough to have your competition look bad. You also have to give the customer a reason to think that your choice is better! Otherwise it's just human nature to stay with "the devil you know".

This is also the same mistake the provincial Tories keep making here in Ontario. Hudak just kept hoping people would keep disliking McGuinty. He did little or nothing during his campaign to tell anyone why he was a better choice.

So I understand your pain! I just think that there's not much that can be done about it, at least for a while. Someday, all those pissed off Albertans will be dead. Someday those Liberals will finally get back to the real world and get their act together.

Meanwhile, relax, have a beer and watch them all make fools of themselves!

[Michael Hardner]

talking and negotiating are part of the democratic procedure if that's an issue with you maybe less representation is what you want... how about FPTP on a national scale, the leading party gets every seat in the HOC, completely eliminating all that annoying talking and negotiating...

Ok... and how about everybody gets to vote directly ?

The thing about this strawman is that I'm not advocating to change the system - you are. And I'm saying if you want more talking, negotiating and shoe-staring... then we have to redo the entire system to support that as well.

your viewpoint is likely a result of where you live, you don't see it as an issue as in most parts of canada there is movement politically over the years between parties so everyone gets a representation at sometime in their lives, the perception you likely have and many canadians share is alberta is single mindless entity of conservative voting drones...but that's far from reality...

True - I have been represented by all three major parties at various times, at provincial and federal levels. I have lived under majority governments from all three major parties as well.

If I lived in Alberta, I don't think I would feel differently about things.

living in sask I went through conservative, liberal and NDP representation, in alberta it's like living in a one party state voters blindly voting for the same party regardless how atrocious their representative...for 33% representing 1,233,000 of albertans who did not vote conservative share one MP who is not conservative and that NDP MP does not represent the liberal voters...and now the CPC wants to add another 6 ridings that will only increase the under representation, 66% will get 33 MPs while 33%/1,2333,000 still have only one MP to speak for them...

I don't think the popularity of a party is evidence that the system is broken, though. We have three levels of government that provide services, and representation on some level from all political stripes.

But you do have a point.

[cybercoma]

The problem with pure PR is that it become nearly impossible to move forward. There is such thing as too much debate. If the system is completely inflexible, nothing will be accomplished. A balance needs to be struck between the more appropriate representation of PR and the legislative pragmatism of FPTP.

[Evening Star]

And many other places. Their governments are in perpetual chaos, and so nothing gets done that should, and all of the fringe pet projects come to the forefront.

But e.g. Sweden and Norway also use PR. Also Germany (way near the bottom of CPCFTW's graph.) I'm not even really an advocate of PR but this line of reasoning does seem problematic to me.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Evening Star

[Smallc]

But e.g. Sweden and Norway also use PR. I'm not even a big advocate of PR but this line of reasoning does seem problematic to me.

That's true, but those seem to be more inherently stable countries, one of which also happens to be blessed with vast oil wealth. I'm not sure that PR would be a very good thing in our varied federation.

Minorities are generally less stable, and because PR leads to nearly continuous minorities, it leads to issues, including overspending.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Smallc

[Evening Star]

That's true, but those seem to be more inherently stable countries, one of which also happens to be blessed with vast oil wealth. I'm not sure that PR would be a very good thing in our varied federation.

Minorities are generally less stable, and because PR leads to nearly continuous minorities, it leads to issues, including overspending.

I'm a big fan of minority governments! However, like I said, I don't necessarily advocate PR for Canada. I just had an issue with the argument that proportional representation systems lead to poor budgeting and economic disaster.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Evening Star

[Smallc]

I'm a big fan of minority governments! However, like I said, I don't necessarily advocate PR for Canada. I just had an issue with the argument that proportional representation systems lead to poor budgeting and economic disaster.

Well, unfortunately, while I see the appeal of minorities, they do lead to problems with decision making, quick action, and long term planning.

[blueblood]

Well, unfortunately, while I see the appeal of minorities, they do lead to problems with decision making, quick action, and long term planning.

That's why we pick people to lead, not to hand us out referendums when they come up with ideas.

[Wild Bill]

That's why we pick people to lead, not to hand us out referendums when they come up with ideas.

Yeah, but little parties that just can't attract enough votes to get into power LOVE PR and referendums! It means they get a chance to stand in front of a microphone in the Commons and act like they're more important than they actually are! In a real Italian style PR "pizza parliament" such small parties with more limited public support can force large parties to make deals with them, even though such deals subvert the will of the majority.

Eventually you get a whole pack of little tails wagging the dog...

[eyeball]

Eventually you get a whole pack of little tails wagging the dog...

Which, strangely enough is pretty much exactly what we have in Harper's gang.