Conservative Party can run on proportional representation reform

[Yzermandius19]

16 minutes ago, myata said:

That is a dubious statement. Inability to change and adapt can be as bad as it gets.

your idea will make Canada less likely to change and adapt, in actually important ways

it can easily get worse

change for the sake of change

claiming it can't get any worse than the status quo

is the kind of bullshit that commies fall for

FPTP is just your Capitalism

it's the same utopian thinking

the idea that tearing down the system will bring that utopia about

because the only reason utopia doesn't exist already is the system prevents it

your "logic" is communist "logic"

Edited June 21, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

change for the sake of change

You just keep saying random stuff out of your mind reality flow. The reasons have been stated and repeated multiple times: the body that makes important decision for the society has to reflect the society, its complexity varying interests. If you're stuck with a default, permanent manager it's only a matter of time before they'll begin to see the country as their own. The status quo system cannot do that. It was designed in and for 17th century.

[Yzermandius19]

7 minutes ago, myata said:

You just keep saying random stuff out of your mind reality flow. The reasons have been stated and repeated multiple times: the body that makes important decision for the society has to reflect the society, its complexity varying interests. If you're stuck with a default, permanent manager it's only a matter of time before they'll begin to see the country as their own. The status quo system cannot do that. It was designed in and for 17th century.

none of your reasons are good

most of them are just lies that you find palatable

wishful thinking that goes against all historical evidence and the reality of the Canadian electorate

that ain't gonna cut it

Edited June 21, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

none of your reasons are good

They aren't "mine" they are a fact. In 160 something years of history there hasn't been another governing party. Our last significant national project was completed in the early 1900. Countries in Europe, even Vietnam routinely build high speed train lines and long distance bridges connecting populations and economy. We are stuck in the 1930 and can't move anywhere, any trivial step takes years and billions and why fix it. Once the world is weaned off fossils, we'll be in a serious trouble. And we have no ways of implementing non trivial change long forgot how it's done and even thinking of it is anathema. Good luck.

[Yzermandius19]

7 minutes ago, myata said:

They aren't "mine" they are a fact. In 160 something years of history there hasn't been another governing party. Our last significant national project was completed in the early 1900. Countries in Europe, even Vietnam routinely build high speed train lines and long distance bridges connecting populations and economy. We are stuck in the 1930 and can't move anywhere, any trivial step takes years and billions and why fix it. Once the world is weaned off fossils, we'll be in a serious trouble. And we have no ways of implementing non trivial change long forgot how it's done and even thinking of it is anathema. Good luck.

fossil fuels ain't going anywhere

high speed trains suck

and Canada electing another party that is nearly identical to the Liberals

will fix fuck all

[myata]

Yep, a difficult case. Dinosaurs learned it the hard way.

[Yzermandius19]

13 minutes ago, myata said:

Yep, a difficult case. Dinosaurs learned it the hard way.

with energy prices on the rise

that fake environmentalist crap is going to lose steam real fast

drill baby drill

[myata]

7 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

drill baby drill

Yep, a one way trajectory. Dinosaurs know.

[Queenmandy85]

32 minutes ago, myata said:

Yep, a difficult case. Dinosaurs learned it the hard way.

The dinosaurs were thriving until the asteroid hit.

The problem with FPTP is people claim some members did not win a majority of votes in their riding. As I asked before, what about having run off elections in those ridings where no candidate wins a majority? The top two candidates face off against each other two weeks after the main election. It is simple and assures every member has a mandate.

[Yzermandius19]

20 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The dinosaurs were thriving until the asteroid hit.

The problem with FPTP is people claim some members did not win a majority of votes in their riding. As I asked before, what about having run off elections in those ridings where no candidate wins a majority? The top two candidates face off against each other two weeks after the main election. It is simple and assures every member has a mandate.

that's better than PR

though that will notably increase the cost of elections

and will put the right at more of a disadvantage to the left, just like PR

Canada is too far left as it is

let's not change the system in a way that will make that worse

Edited June 21, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

53 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The dinosaurs were thriving until the asteroid hit.

You mean, the age of information and technology arrived, requiring prompt, intelligent and effective decisions?

 

54 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The problem with FPTP is people claim some members did not win a majority of votes in their riding.

That is not the main problem, or problems with the system. The main one is that it naturally limits the choice and hugely skews the representation. If there's one gang (organized political group) the only way to compete with it is to make another one. There's a place only for two. That creates partisanship, simplification of the society and its issues to a bare minimum that prevents understanding of problems and working out effective solutions.

[Yzermandius19]

9 minutes ago, myata said:

You mean, the age of information and technology arrived, requiring prompt, intelligent and effective decisions?

 

That is not the main problem, or problems with the system. The main one is that it naturally limits the choice and hugely skews the representation. If there's one gang (organized political group) the only way to compete with it is to make another one. There's a place only for two. That creates partisanship, simplification of the society and its issues to a bare minimum that prevents understanding of problems and working out effective solutions.

more parties is not better

America has only two major parties

and is better governed than nations with more than two

the problem is not FPTP

because it's possible to be governed better than PR nations with multiple major parties

while still being FPTP and only having two

Canada has more parties that win a decent amount of seats

but America has better choice, even with less parties

because the American electorate allows a wider range of choice than the Canadian electorate does

 

it's not FPTP that's the problem

it's the electorate, stupid

Edited June 21, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[Queenmandy85]

47 minutes ago, myata said:

You mean, the age of information and technology arrived, requiring prompt, intelligent and effective decisions?

 

That is not the main problem, or problems with the system. The main one is that it naturally limits the choice and hugely skews the representation. If there's one gang (organized political group) the only way to compete with it is to make another one. There's a place only for two. That creates partisanship, simplification of the society and its issues to a bare minimum that prevents understanding of problems and working out effective solutions.

There are five parties in the House of Commons. You can choose between the landed class (CPC), the merchant class (Grits), the socialists (NDP), the Bloc or the Greens. That is a pretty wide range of choices. You can also take a flyer on the PPC. If communism is your thing, you have a choice of two parties, the Marxist- Leninists, or the Maoists. Then there are Tamara Lich's Maverick Party, the Christian Heritage Party Canada, the Canadian Nationalist Party (although their leader is facing charges of assault), the Social Credit Party (aka the Reform Party), the Saskatchewan Party, the Ontario Party, and my own party,the Progressive Conservative party (Tories). So, I don't see how you can say you don't have a choice. If your party doesn't do well, it is because their platform is not popular or the members did not work hard enough to make voters aware of the platform and secure the vote. Or, if you prefer, there are Independents . Jodi Wilson Raybould won re-election as an independent. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by Queenmandy85

[myata]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That is a pretty wide range of choices.

Sure. Let's try it with your breakfast, shall we? So there's this stale porridge... another kind of stale, tired porridge and look, some nice stuff here, printed on the paper! Excited, yes? Bon appetite!

Edited June 21, 2022 by myata

[Queenmandy85]

28 minutes ago, myata said:

Sure. Let's try it with your breakfast, shall we? So there's this stale porridge... another kind of stale, tired porridge and look, some nice stuff here, printed on the paper! Excited, yes? Bon appetite!

So, for the benifit of slow people like me, can you tell me precisely what kind of choice is missing? You say you want something new, okay what do you want? Please be specific so we know what we have to work with. 

[myata]

18 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

can you tell me precisely what kind of choice is missing? You say you want something new, okay what do you want?

This comes down to, as usual, the meaning. What is the meaning of choice? A choice of squares on a sheet of papers, sent to nowhere not even Santa? That would be "choice" in your interpretation. Sure can be plenty but why bother going through the ritual can dream wish anytime anywhere. I understand choice though as a real possibility of having my interests and questions and agendas represented.

See it's not about faces attached to stickers, not even about processes. It's about our representation, who is making important and essential decisions for us and on our behalf? Do they look anything like us, know the issues we have? Should they?

[Queenmandy85]

People like Richard Cannings, Kevin Waugh, and Guide Hutchings are not aliens from another planet. They actually look like us and know the issues we have.

When I asked what you are looking for and how to achieve it, I was thinking we could all work together to come up with something. The members of this forum are a pretty smart bunch. Get you, Yzer, Viet, Michael, Doug , Eyeball, Aristides, to put aside our differences of opinions and come up with something to revolutionize the nation.

[myata]

11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

come up with something to revolutionize the nation.

If you're behind of the pack and dropping further and further behind - think of high-speed trains, amazing bridges connecting islands we cannot do any of these things anymore, forgot how; think of sustainable and efficient at the same time world's marvel economy, not ugly pictures of devastation and more of the same, with automatic annual increases; then you have a choice: dream of how in an instant you will invent something marvelous to revolutionize and jump ahead; and the more and longer you dream nothing would happen in the reality of course because it would only take you further and further from it; or you can pull up your ..ss from the bed and start working on catching up. What I suggest falls in the latter category. To invent anything new and marvelous we should at least be comfortable with the best of what already known. And sure much work would still be needed to adapt it to the conditions of the country. What isn't going to work is sticking another set of decorations on the status quo, itself a decoration of a centuries old colonial governance machine and hope that it would make it fit for the time and its challenges.

[Yzermandius19]

6 minutes ago, myata said:

If you're behind of the pack and dropping further and further behind - think of high-speed trains, amazing bridges connecting islands we cannot do any of these things anymore, forgot how; think of sustainable and efficient at the same time world's marvel economy, not ugly pictures of devastation and more of the same, with automatic annual increases; then you have a choice: dream of how in an instant you will invent something marvelous to revolutionize and jump ahead; and the more and longer you dream nothing would happen in the reality of course because it would only take you further and further from it; or you can pull up your ..ss from the bed and start working on catching up. What I suggest falls in the latter category. To invent anything new and marvelous we should at least be comfortable with the best of what already known. And sure much work would still be needed to adapt it to the conditions of the country. What isn't going to work is sticking another set of decorations on the status quo, itself a decoration of a centuries old colonial governance machine and hope that it would make it fit for the time and its challenges.

more centrally planned boondoggles will not help Canada

the governments lack of capacity is helpful in this regard

more government is not the answer

Canada would benefit from less government

Edited June 22, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

more centrally planned boondoggles will not help Canada

Who said anything about centrally planned? You are answering your own echoes. As said, near complete disconnection. And yes, it may be related to two centuries of quasi-representation where the government you see looks nothing like the reality you live.

[Yzermandius19]

5 minutes ago, myata said:

Who said anything about centrally planned?

you keep talking about how great high speed trains are

that will involve a lot of central planning

if they were economical, private companies would already be building them

no country on earth that has high speed trains

has built them without a massive centrally planned boondoggle to do so

Edited June 22, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

33 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

you keep talking about how great high speed trains are

that will involve a lot of central planning

So you've never been to Europe? A high speed train has been running between London and Paris via Eurotunnel for some 30 years now.

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, myata said:

So you've never been to Europe? A high speed train has been running between London and Paris via Eurotunnel for some 30 years now.

and that's a centrally planned boondoggle

high speed trains are garbage

total waste of taxpayer dollars

Canada needs that like it needs a hole in the head

 

Edited June 22, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

24 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

total waste of taxpayer dollars

Canada needs that like it needs a hole in the head

Bridges in Norway. But sure, we're stuck here in the 1930s (that's a hundred years ago) can go from the city to the cottage what else would a human being need? Need any change like a hole in the head and will coast happily for another century or two because it's guaranteed. Sure. Dinosaurs thought that too. Only one way to find out.

[Yzermandius19]

32 minutes ago, myata said:

Bridges in Norway. But sure, we're stuck here in the 1930s (that's a hundred years ago) can go from the city to the cottage what else would a human being need? Need any change like a hole in the head and will coast happily for another century or two because it's guaranteed. Sure. Dinosaurs thought that too. Only one way to find out.

not having European style centrally planned boondoggles will not result in extinction