Author Topic: Government Day-to-Day  (Read 13160 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Black Dog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Location: Deathbridge
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #870 on: November 23, 2020, 11:48:49 am »
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/wage-push-inflation.asp

"Economists track wages closely because of their wage push inflation effects. Wage push inflation has an inflationary spiral effect that occurs when wages are increased and businesses must — to pay the higher wages — charge more for their products and/or services. Additionally, any wage increase that occurs will increase the money supply of consumers. With a higher money supply, consumers have more spending power, so the demand for goods increases. An increase in demand for goods then increases the price of goods in the broader market. Companies charge more for their goods to pay higher wages, and the higher wages also increase the price of goods in the broader market."


Yeah that's the theory. Yet time and time again we've seen examples where wages increase and prices don't jump up.

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #871 on: November 23, 2020, 01:16:42 pm »
You can also find several instances of issues with FPTP systems as well.

The Greens, a “fringe party”, held the deciding vote in the BC legislature for 3 years with a FPTP system.  Pointing to a few bad cases doesn’t negate the benefits of any system.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4799
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #872 on: November 23, 2020, 01:21:08 pm »
For every example of countries that have had issues with a proportional system, you can find several others where it has been a success.

and yet, somehow, you've never addressed the types of known failures possible; again, the word 'proportional' is your only driver - notwithstanding your questionable (unqualified and lacking in detail) references to Germany... to New Zealand... to Australia. Again, the principal Australia electoral system remains as AV - not proportional; again, Germany & New Zealand have MMP electoral systems that are only partially proportional. You appear to have no qualms in simply dropping country names as having proportional electoral systems - country name dropping without adding qualification and detail explaining the full nature of their respective electoral systems! 

The choice was clear with the first referendum and if it had been run under the same rules as the last one it would have passed comfortably. The last referendum was a joke, I knew it wouldn't pass as soon as I read the ballot. It was so amateurish it was like it was designed to fail and I'm not sure it wasn't.

again, notwithstanding both referendums failed to reach the necessary threshold percentage to realize a change to PR, for someone like you so steeped in the "mythology of proportional representation", the irony is off the charts in that you B.C. PR proponents would have had no objection to a fraction of B.C. voters choosing a new electoral system... one that was short on specifics and that few understood.

I don't know where you got those numbers but why wouldn't you be happy with 100%? But then for a guy who is happy with 39% majorities, that shouldn't be surprising.

again, unsurprisingly, your presumptive "100%" fell flat with the country examples you offered up. If you don't care for those numbers I provided for proportionality of past B.C. elections, please provide your alternative (presumably preferred) numbers - yes?
Agree Agree x 1 Informative Informative x 1 View List

Offline Montgomery

  • The Box
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 724
  • Location: vancouver Island
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #873 on: November 23, 2020, 01:24:28 pm »
You can also find several instances of issues with FPTP systems as well.

The Greens, a “fringe party”, held the deciding vote in the BC legislature for 3 years with a FPTP system.  Pointing to a few bad cases doesn’t negate the benefits of any system.

Yes it does but maybe now we can carry on a fruitful conversation without you, now that you've disqualified yourself from annoying me with your ridiculous spamming.

The only motivation for a PR system comes from a losing party that has resigned itself to having no other way to gain back power. And in both cases of federal and provincial elections, it's the extinction of conservatism that is causing the fuss. Get the fuk over it!
It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said. ~M.T.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4799
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #874 on: November 23, 2020, 01:25:35 pm »
Pointing to a few bad cases doesn’t negate the benefits of any system.

neither does being transparent as to known problems... you know, that lack of transparency by you PRorBust proponents here!

Offline Montgomery

  • The Box
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 724
  • Location: vancouver Island
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #875 on: November 23, 2020, 01:26:26 pm »
and yet, somehow, you've never addressed the types of known failures possible; again, the word 'proportional' is your only driver - notwithstanding your questionable (unqualified and lacking in detail) references to Germany... to New Zealand... to Australia. Again, the principal Australia electoral system remains as AV - not proportional; again, Germany & New Zealand have MMP electoral systems that are only partially proportional. You appear to have no qualms in simply dropping country names as having proportional electoral systems - country name dropping without adding qualification and detail explaining the full nature of their respective electoral systems! 

again, notwithstanding both referendums failed to reach the necessary threshold percentage to realize a change to PR, for someone like you so steeped in the "mythology of proportional representation", the irony is off the charts in that you B.C. PR proponents would have had no objection to a fraction of B.C. voters choosing a new electoral system... one that was short on specifics and that few understood.

again, unsurprisingly, your presumptive "100%" fell flat with the country examples you offered up. If you don't care for those numbers I provided for proportionality of past B.C. elections, please provide your alternative (presumably preferred) numbers - yes?

Sometimes you stay the course and get it right waldo!
It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said. ~M.T.

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7414
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #876 on: November 23, 2020, 01:32:47 pm »
and yet, somehow, you've never addressed the types of known failures possible; again, the word 'proportional' is your only driver - notwithstanding your questionable (unqualified and lacking in detail) references to Germany... to New Zealand... to Australia. Again, the principal Australia electoral system remains as AV - not proportional; again, Germany & New Zealand have MMP electoral systems that are only partially proportional. You appear to have no qualms in simply dropping country names as having proportional electoral systems - country name dropping without adding qualification and detail explaining the full nature of their respective electoral systems! 



You can also add almost every country in Western Europe and Scandinavia other than the UK, which is hardly a poster child these days.
The only other exception is France which uses a run off system. Still more democratic than ours.

Quote
again, notwithstanding both referendums failed to reach the necessary threshold percentage to realize a change to PR, for someone like you so steeped in the "mythology of proportional representation", the irony is off the charts in that you B.C. PR proponents would have had no objection to a fraction of B.C. voters choosing a new electoral system... one that was short on specifics and that few understood.
The last referendum bar was 50% plus one. The first would have passed comfortably under the same rules. Should I be surprised that 57.7 percent isn't enough from someone who thinks 39% percent should get a party a majority? Nope, it's waldo.

Quote
again, unsurprisingly, your presumptive "100%" fell flat with the country examples you offered up. If you don't care for those numbers I provided for proportionality of past B.C. elections, please provide your alternative (presumably preferred) numbers - yes?

No



"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline JMT

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3457
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #877 on: November 23, 2020, 02:07:16 pm »
What reform? There hasn't been peep out of him on any kind of reform. He is quite happy with the status quo.

A committee was formed, and the committee was left to die as there was no consensus between any of the parties.

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7414
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #878 on: November 23, 2020, 02:19:58 pm »
A committee was formed, and the committee was left to die as there was no consensus between any of the parties.

There doesn’t have to be consensus between parties, put it in the hands of a non partisan group and let the people decide. We already have an agency for that, it’s called Elections Canada. Why would we trust politicians with vested interests to do it?
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #879 on: November 23, 2020, 02:31:43 pm »
A committee was formed, and the committee was left to die as there was no consensus between any of the parties.

Since when is consensus of all parties in parliament necessary to pass some sort of legislation?  It was a cop out by Trudeau and designed to fail.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Montgomery

  • The Box
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 724
  • Location: vancouver Island
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #880 on: November 23, 2020, 02:52:06 pm »
There's no doubt that Trudeau does what's best for his party and the Canadian people expect nothing less. The Cons will do the same if they ever make it back to be government.

What's the point of the spam twins belabouring the issue continually until it becomes just mindnumbing?

Let it go waldo, the spammers are rattling, clanking, and spewing smoke and steam as they stumble  their way down the tracks and will fall off the rails without you pushing them.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2020, 02:55:21 pm by Montgomery »
It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said. ~M.T.

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6206
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #881 on: November 23, 2020, 04:13:57 pm »
Yeah that's the theory. Yet time and time again we've seen examples where wages increase and prices don't jump up.

Most inflation goes into housing costs (which flows into rents), because supply is limited and prices are never set but float in competitive auctions and vary from town to town.  We've seen housing prices continually skyrocket.  As a society the non-rich aren't getting richer, they're just putting more money into their mortgage and burying themselves in more debt.

IMO if we want to help the poor and middle class we need a more regulated real estate industry including possibly price controls on housing, and then by extension rents (some of which currently happens).
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline Black Dog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Location: Deathbridge
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #882 on: November 23, 2020, 04:57:20 pm »
Most inflation goes into housing costs (which flows into rents), because supply is limited and prices are never set but float in competitive auctions and vary from town to town. We've seen housing prices continually skyrocket.  As a society the non-rich aren't getting richer, they're just putting more money into their mortgage and burying themselves in more debt.

IMO if we want to help the poor and middle class we need a more regulated real estate industry including possibly price controls on housing, and then by extension rents (some of which currently happens).

And housing price inflation seems to be completely decoupled from wages (which have pretty much flatlined since the mid 1970s.) I agree more needs to be done to make housing affordable and accessible which is why I think you need a full suite of reforms including some kind of UBI, but not a uBI alone.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7414
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #883 on: November 23, 2020, 05:19:31 pm »
There's no doubt that Trudeau does what's best for his party and the Canadian people expect nothing less.

So why did he promise 2105 would be the last election using FPTP? Don't you think he should come through for the people who voted for him instead of just going through the motions?

It's only mind numbing for you because you can't address it.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline JMT

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3457
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
Re: Government Day-to-Day
« Reply #884 on: November 23, 2020, 06:58:21 pm »
Since when is consensus of all parties in parliament necessary to pass some sort of legislation?  It was a cop out by Trudeau and designed to fail.

When you are changing the voting system, it would be pretty crass to push through your preferred solution (STV = Liberal governments forever) over the objections of the other major stakeholders. There was not even a path to compromise.