Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 9918 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #405 on: March 31, 2018, 06:56:48 pm »
Only someone who has no clue how the dynamics of minority governments work

Only someone who has no clue about reality would continue spouting tired old rhetoric. Minority governments do not give power to the smallest party. If you have 40% blue, 35% red, and 25% orange then orange does not hold power over blue. In fact if orange does something that blue and red disagree with then they can get together against orange. Any other interpretation is pure fear mongering from the power hungry establishment that wants to hold onto power regardless. First Past the Poll is purely a means of keeping power in the hands of those who have it - no ifs buts or ands.

You can throw out all the fear mongering and pejoratives you want, but in the end of the day only the clueless would believe you.
Like Like x 2 Dislike Dislike x 1 View List

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2237
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #406 on: March 31, 2018, 07:11:21 pm »
Only someone who has no clue how the dynamics of minority governments work. In every system with PR you either have the two major center parties in a coalition or you have the largest or second largest party propped up by minority parties. This gives minority parties way more power than they deserve. We don't need government policy driven by the needs to narrow minded single interest parties like the greens. We want parties that represent the interests of the majority of the population and that is what we have now.

But if the coalition combined has more seats, they ARE representing the interests of the majority of voters. 

Like Like x 1 Dislike Dislike x 1 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #407 on: March 31, 2018, 09:31:58 pm »
Only someone who has no clue about reality would continue spouting tired old rhetoric.
Sorry, you are the spouting myths about governments only representing the people that voted for them. In FPTP, governments like to be re-elected so they must consider the desires of all voters - not just the ones that elected them. With PR the parties only care about the voters that elected them. The end result is the obsession of small parties get more consideration than they deserve under PR. LNG and Site C are a perfect example. Horgan, who needs to think about the needs of the province, choose to move forward with those policies. Weaver, only cares about a tiny minority of voters, opposes them and would have brought down the government if wasn't for his other successful blackmail effort to force BCers to vote for the 3rd time on electoral reform. The only reason you are even considering PR is you naively believe that extreme right parties like Germany's AFD would never arise here and the new system would only mean parties you support will forever be in power. That I not a bet I would make.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2018, 09:36:09 pm by TimG »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #408 on: March 31, 2018, 09:57:20 pm »
In FPTP, governments like to be re-elected so they must consider the desires of all voters - not just the ones that elected them. With PR the parties only care about the voters that elected them. The end result is the obsession of small parties get more consideration than they deserve under PR.

What complete nonsense. All parties care about getting reelected, and care about getting a larger share of the vote. The end result of PR is consideration directly linked to the population that supported them, where the end result of FPTP is most often 100% power for a minority.

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2237
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #409 on: March 31, 2018, 10:25:04 pm »
The only reason you are even considering PR is you naively believe that extreme right parties like Germany's AFD would never arise here and the new system would only mean parties you support will forever be in power. That I not a bet I would make.


Because FPTP worked sooooo well in keeping out the far-right like UKIP and Donald Trump.   ::)

But sure, let's use that tired old argument to deprive democracy from the voters.  Liberals winning majorities with 40% of the votes, that's 'fair'.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #410 on: March 31, 2018, 11:38:18 pm »
Because FPTP worked sooooo well in keeping out the far-right like UKIP and Donald Trump.
Logic fail. Presidential elections are FPTP - can't be any other way cause there can only be one president. UKIP was largely an electoral failure because of FPTP (only getting 1 seat with 12.5% of the vote). Where UKIP did well in the European Parliament and council elections which use PR. IOW, you are making my argument for me.

But sure, let's use that tired old argument to deprive democracy from the voters.  Liberals winning majorities with 40% of the votes, that's 'fair'.
A fallacy with no basis in reality. The  FPTP system forces Liberals to consider what happens in the next election so they can't afford to alienate marginal voters so the do represent the voters that did not vote for them. Under PR, we get these fringe parties that don't care about governing the country. They on care about imposing their policies on the majority and PR gives those parties the power. PR is the true tyranny of the minority because of the incentives the system creates.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9120
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #411 on: April 01, 2018, 01:26:42 pm »
But if the coalition combined has more seats, they ARE representing the interests of the majority of voters.

Not necessarily. In a coalition the compromises made are going to leave a number of people in both parties  upset. With only a two seat majority, I wouldn’t be surprised if the present BC government did not represent the majority of voters. Of course the same could be said if the Greens had joined the Liberals to form a government.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 01:59:14 pm by wilber »
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #412 on: April 01, 2018, 02:09:02 pm »
In a coalition the compromises made are going to leave a number of people in both parties  upset. With only a two seat majority, I wouldn’t be surprised if the present BC government did not represent the majority of voters.

In FPTP systems, you are almost 100% guaranteed that the majority are upset. How often do we have minority, or even majority governments with a majority of support? Almost never.

PR will have better representation by a large margin than FPTP, guaranteed. Compromises are far better than dictation by the minority.
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2237
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #413 on: April 01, 2018, 02:11:27 pm »
Logic fail. Presidential elections are FPTP - can't be any other way cause there can only be one president. UKIP was largely an electoral failure because of FPTP (only getting 1 seat with 12.5% of the vote). Where UKIP did well in the European Parliament and council elections which use PR. IOW, you are making my argument for me.

A fallacy with no basis in reality. The  FPTP system forces Liberals to consider what happens in the next election so they can't afford to alienate marginal voters so the do represent the voters that did not vote for them. Under PR, we get these fringe parties that don't care about governing the country. They on care about imposing their policies on the majority and PR gives those parties the power. PR is the true tyranny of the minority because of the incentives the system creates.

 

First, Donald Trump does point out major flaws in the FPTP whether or not you want to accept it.  It refutes your assertion that it can keep extreme right-wing elements out of politics. 

Second, Republicans gerrymandering has led to the current system where a vote in the Midwest essentially counts as 1.25 votes in urban areas so face it, FPTP system has its own flaws.

Third, if why bother even having a multi-party system if we are essentially a two-party system? 

Fourth, you are trying to equate the Greens with extremism, but they're not.  They have major backing making them NOT a fringe party.  Reality check, just because TimG doesn't agree with something, does not make it 'extreme'.

Fifth, you are conflating federal system of government which controls immigration with provincial politics.  Though you're free to make it a point in a federal argument against PR, it has no place on this thread.

Sixth, even if a federal system, Canada is not Europe.  Even our European ancestry is mixed and we are not a homogenous society.  We are less nationalistic and less likely to fall into the fallacy argument you're making.

Seventh, minimum threshold.  Enough said.

Last but not least, even if your boogeyman argument comes true and we get to the point that extreme-right makes up a huge portion of Canada, what do you have against a true democracy where politicians represent the will of their constituents?

You are being very paternalistic in that you think you know everything and everyone else is just too stupid to know what's best for them.
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #414 on: April 01, 2018, 02:22:25 pm »

Because FPTP worked sooooo well in keeping out the far-right like UKIP and Donald Trump.   ::)

UKIP is not far right. That simply seems to be the pejorative du jour for the Left these days, against anyone with policies they don't like.
You are trying to equate UKIP with extremism, but they're not.  They have major backing making them NOT a fringe party.  Reality check, just because BC_cheque doesn't agree with something, does not make it 'extreme'.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 02:24:40 pm by SirJohn »
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9120
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #415 on: April 01, 2018, 02:27:27 pm »
In FPTP systems, you are almost 100% guaranteed that the majority are upset. How often do we have minority, or even majority governments with a majority of support? Almost never.

PR will have better representation by a large margin than FPTP, guaranteed. Compromises are far better than dictation by the minority.

Depends on how many parties you have. With only three parities you could be right but as the number of parties increases as is likely with PR, you can also wind up like Italy. I'm undecided on PR for that reason.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2237
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #416 on: April 01, 2018, 02:30:21 pm »
UKIP is not far right. That simply seems to be the pejorative du jour for the Left these days, against anyone with policies they don't like.
You are trying to equate UKIP with extremism, but they're not.  They have major backing making them NOT a fringe party.  Reality check, just because BC_cheque doesn't agree with something, does not make it 'extreme'.

First, it was TimG that equated the far-right party with anti-immigrantion by bringing up Germany.

Second, nice try, read my 8th and last point.  I don't have a problem with it if that's what people want.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #417 on: April 01, 2018, 02:32:55 pm »
you can also wind up like Italy

Yes, the old fear of Italy. Never a mention of the multitude of strong economies based on PR like Germany, Norway, Switzerland.....
Like Like x 1 Dislike Dislike x 1 Agree Agree x 2 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #418 on: April 01, 2018, 02:48:07 pm »
Yes, the old fear of Italy. Never a mention of the multitude of strong economies based on PR like Germany, Norway, Switzerland.....
Yes. Germany where the same parties have been in power for 40+ years. One big downside of PR Is it becomes practically impossible to clean house by giving power to a completely different group of people because the party's core support rarely changes. BTW - the only reason Germany has managed is because their equivalent of a Liberals and Conservatives have been in a coalition for a decade+ because that was the only way to keep ideologues like the greens from imposing  their minority views on the majority. A coalition of the center is the *exception* rather than the rule when it comes to PR.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9120
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #419 on: April 01, 2018, 02:51:03 pm »
Yes, the old fear of Italy. Never a mention of the multitude of strong economies based on PR like Germany, Norway, Switzerland.....

I'm not saying PR can't work but there can also be downsides. Italy is one example, Israel and Japan are others that require coalitions of more than two parties and it looks like Germany is now in that position or close to.

Italy's present government will be the 65th since WW2. That's an average of a new government every 13 months. In comparison the UK has had 25
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC