cybercoma Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 #1 remove all "support" or legal recognition of political parties. If people want to party they can do it unofficially like the old daysPeople will form into parties anyway. Eliminating them is pointless.#2. Make all voting public with people registering their vote openly.We don't do this because it leads to intimidation and coercion. Terrible idea.#3. require people to vote or say "none" but require everyone to vote who is a citizen.It doesn't make a difference even if people say "none". By not voting, they're saying "none". Having the freedom to vote means also having the freedom not to vote. #4. only let the legislators elected suggest laws, make sure every"change" to law is put to referendum. Requiring a referendum for every single law would make it impossible for the government to get anything done. Quote
-TSS- Posted March 4, 2012 Author Report Posted March 4, 2012 I think Canada is a reasonably well-functioning society. It always ranks very high on the list of countries with good quality of life and low levels of corruption. After all, given that Canada is the second largest country in the world by area, its sheer vastness makes it difficult to govern and if it were not a well governed country it would have disintegrated long time ago. Quote
eyeball Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 And why would you assume that (and I was speaking far more broadly about Canada's system of government, not just the electoral system)? How do countries become such good places to live, if not through competent management? How does competent management come about? It certainly isn't by accident. Perhaps your view is an example of misplaced concreteness and good governments are just as often an effect as a cause. OTOH I've seen at least three industries and five occupations go tits up in my region - cases in which government mismanagement seemed to be at the centre of things. They're apparently far more competent at mismanagement. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 How do people think electoral reform would get implemented? Quote
eyeball Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 How do people think electoral reform would get implemented? It's more a matter of when I think - perhaps after the system crashes or it just becomes to painfully or embarrassingly redundant to ignore. That's why I ask how far will voter turnout have to fall before anyone in authority feels compelled to do something about it? Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 It's more a matter of when I think - perhaps after the system crashes or it just becomes to painfully or embarrassingly redundant to ignore. That's why I ask how far will voter turnout have to fall before anyone in authority feels compelled to do something about it? While turnout is low it grew last May, who's to say it won't increase in 2015? Quote
UofGPolitico Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 While turnout is low it grew last May, who's to say it won't increase in 2015? If the opposition can do its job and mobilize these forces that are anti-Harper and anti-Conservative, it should. Quote
j44 Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 We dont have prosperity because of our government. And run some numbers. Without natural resources like timber, oil, gas etc, our economy would be completely hosed. Unemployment would be around 22%. Canadians are prosperous IN SPITE of their government, for exactly the reasons I mentioned. Not because of it. And its getting worse and worse. . If I assume what you are doing is simply subtracting the number of people employed in natural resource industries that isn't really a way to conclude the standing of the country if those industries didn't exist. It we didn't have natural resources efforts would be concentrated on developing other parts of the economy. What is getting worse and worse? Quote
eyeball Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 While turnout is low it grew last May, who's to say it won't increase in 2015? The general tone of the times and trend lines say it's likely it will continue to fall but anything's possible. In any case I lean towards the idea that anarchy and collapse are necessary ingredients in any reform of what looks like an increasingly unsustainable status quo. Electoral reform seems so yesterday and merely skims the surface of a deep ocean of dysfunction. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
eyeball Posted March 4, 2012 Report Posted March 4, 2012 If I assume what you are doing is simply subtracting the number of people employed in natural resource industries that isn't really a way to conclude the standing of the country if those industries didn't exist. It we didn't have natural resources efforts would be concentrated on developing other parts of the economy. What is getting worse and worse? Two of the industries I mentioned that have collapsed in my region were logging and fishing. The third industry that collapsed was the renewal of these through restoration of the watersheds that fish and trees grow in. None of these have gotten any better and it has not mattered one bit who's been elected. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Sa'adoni Posted March 6, 2012 Report Posted March 6, 2012 One very important item that must to debated is bring voting into the 21 century with technology, but this scares most people because of the fraud that can be created and mostly likely undetected. There MUST be a high price to pay for going so I would think life in prison or kicked out of the country for life isn't high enough. Any software can be hacked and has been so how do we protect voting stations from it? We now have the robocalls now and I don't feel safe by voting by computer until its 100% fail proof. In part the reason electronic voting hasn't gone ahead is the exact opposite reason, it can be detected through the machines electronic emissions, meaning peoples votes arn't secret with most voting machines.And tempest systems are cost prohibitive ususally. There is no vote secrecy. Also the systems can be hijacked. Quote
Smallc Posted March 6, 2012 Report Posted March 6, 2012 Really, how hard is it to mark an x on a piece of paper? Making the system overly complex through computerization isn't necessary. Quote
Sa'adoni Posted March 6, 2012 Report Posted March 6, 2012 (edited) Really, how hard is it to mark an x on a piece of paper? Making the system overly complex through computerization isn't necessary. Human error, the major parties (top 2 in the previous elections) control the polls, and nominate elections the staff, making it a potentially biased an partisan cotrolled process, not an unbiased process. There are many potential issues with human oversight of elections, only overshadowed by the fact judges are politically appointed not voted into office. The only way voting will be known to be fair is to make it public and have people confirm their votes as correct. A public roll, that is able to be verified is the only way elections can't be directly rigged. There is no reason in a free and democratic society that Canada is suppose to be that voting cannot be public. Edited March 6, 2012 by Sa'adoni Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.