Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 9965 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #420 on: April 01, 2018, 03:05:58 pm »
First, Donald Trump does point out major flaws in the FPTP whether or not you want to accept it.
Huh. Presidential elections have *nothing* to do with FPTP and the Trump example does nothing make your case. The fact that you think so illustrates how little understanding you have of the system you think needs changing.

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.
Irrelevant in Canada where the system does not allow this.

Third, if why bother even having a multi-party system if we are essentially a two-party system?
Huh? We have multiple parties. A multi party system does not mean that every party gets a turn at government. Some parties represent fringes views.

Fourth, you are trying to equate the Greens with extremism, but they're not.
The point is the parties chosen by the majority  in BC want LNG resource development and Site C so if the Greens had blocked those efforts it would have been a minority imposing their will on the majority yet it appears they would have got that if they did not want the make sure the electoral system gets rigged to suit them in the future.

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?
I am very much in favor of representative democracy where people in a riding elect 1 MP/MLA to represent them in parliament. That MP is expected to represents the interests of all their constituents as best as they are able no matter what party they belong to. You seem to want to throw that out and place the entire system under the the control of the parties. No more independent MPs. No more discussion of free votes. The entire system would exists to perpetuate parties. I want a system with less party control and more independent representatives.

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.
Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 03:09:07 pm by TimG »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #421 on: April 01, 2018, 03:15:47 pm »
Italy's present government will be the 65th since WW2. That's an average of a new government every 13 months.

You keep bringing up Italy. How about comparing Germany to Canada, we have had far more and shorter governments during that timeframe than Germany. Equally we have had far more Prime Ministers (13) compared to Chancellors (8\) during the time.

I agree that Italy has problems with government, not that we all don't. They also suffer economic problems, but that doesn't make them an overall bad economy. Remember they are 8th largest in the world. They have about 11% unemployment, although they also have a very large informal (underground) economy where many work. They do have significant public debt (132% GDP) that they need to address (compared to 106% US, and 92% Canada). Their biggest problem appears to be very slow recovery from major world events like the '73 oil crisis, and '08 recession. I think blaming all their problems on PR is ridiculous, when we have many other successful examples of PR.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 03:18:09 pm by ?Impact »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #422 on: April 01, 2018, 03:21:16 pm »
I am very much in favor of representative democracy where people in a riding elect 1 MP/MLA to represent them in parliament.

I am as well, but that is not what we have. We have a system where the MP/MLA represents a party, not the riding. It is a significant problem with the party system, and if we are to have parties then we need to address that problem. That is what systems like PR are trying to do.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #423 on: April 01, 2018, 03:25:31 pm »
I am as well, but that is not what we have. We have a system where the MP/MLA represents a party, not the riding. It is a significant problem with the party system, and if we are to have parties then we need to address that problem. That is what systems like PR are trying to do.
We could also fix the system by requiring sitting MPs to choose the party leader (as it was originally supposed to happen). This would completely change the power dynamic and reduce the power that parties have over MPs. PR is not fixing anything. It is taking the worst parts of the system and amplifying it.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #424 on: April 01, 2018, 03:34:50 pm »
We could also fix the system by requiring sitting MPs to choose the party leader (as it was originally supposed to happen).

I agree that would fix a major problem within parties, but it would do absolutely nothing about having the minority rule with 100% of the power.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #425 on: April 01, 2018, 03:41:39 pm »
I am as well, but that is not what we have. We have a system where the MP/MLA represents a party, not the riding. It is a significant problem with the party system, and if we are to have parties then we need to address that problem. That is what systems like PR are trying to do.

As long as you have a party system where the leader has the power to kick members out of caucus, I don't see that it matters whether you have FPP or PR.
To me, this is a bigger issue for our system than how we vote.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #426 on: April 01, 2018, 03:45:18 pm »
First, it was TimG that equated the far-right party with anti-immigrantion by bringing up Germany.

That's a stretch. He actually mentioned the Greens re Germany. But that still doesn't make UKIP far-right. I'll grant you that many of the anti-immigration political groups in Europe ARE far-right, however. And their rise is largely due to centrist parties ignoring the will of the people on immigration. Angela Merkel could not find enough support for a governing coalition because of the rise of far right anti-immigration parties she refused to deal with, and the only reason Germany finally has a government is the main opposition party finally gave in and agreed to join them again.

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

The problem with this discussion is both of you are correct. FPTP does result in more stable government and does keep those further from the center largely unrepresented. PR does more properly represent the will of All the people but it also allows for extremists far more control of the government than their numbers warrant if that government needs their votes in a coalition. Israel is a good representative there. It also makes it very hard for parties to make tough decisions which are necessary but which go against either popular wishes or the wishes of these tiny minority parties.

PR in Canada would unquestionably result in more political parties in every parliament at every level. Most of them would be single-issue, making it hard for a centrist party to form a governing coalition without giving in to each of their pet causes, regardless of whether that cause is the environment or immigration. So these parties could actually wield a very disproportionate amount of power.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 03:49:49 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 ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #427 on: April 01, 2018, 03:48:35 pm »
Most of them would be single-issue

What single issue parties do you see gaining seats in Parliament/legislature?

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #428 on: April 01, 2018, 03:51:31 pm »
You keep bringing up Italy. How about comparing Germany to Canada, we have had far more and shorter governments during that timeframe than Germany. Equally we have had far more Prime Ministers (13) compared to Chancellors (8\) during the time.

I agree that Italy has problems with government, not that we all don't. They also suffer economic problems, but that doesn't make them an overall bad economy. Remember they are 8th largest in the world. They have about 11% unemployment, although they also have a very large informal (underground) economy where many work. They do have significant public debt (132% GDP) that they need to address (compared to 106% US, and 92% Canada). Their biggest problem appears to be very slow recovery from major world events like the '73 oil crisis, and '08 recession. I think blaming all their problems on PR is ridiculous, when we have many other successful examples of PR.

A government's function is to govern. The more time and energy spent on elections and screwing around trying to form a government just gets in the way of doing real work. Many of Italy's problems can be blamed on the fact the place is to a large extent, ungovernable.  That's also an issue with the US system, those guys are in perpetual campaign mode and it shows.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #429 on: April 01, 2018, 03:53:36 pm »
What single issue parties do you see gaining seats in Parliament/legislature?

Who knows what will pop up, groups that had no chance of electing anyone before could have a real shot.

17 different parties have seats in Israel's Knesset. and they aren't the only country in that kind of situation.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 03:55:39 pm by wilber »
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #430 on: April 01, 2018, 04:00:14 pm »
What single issue parties do you see gaining seats in Parliament/legislature?

On the federal scene Anti-immigration for a certainty. Anti-abortion for another. I think there's also a genuine possibility of ethnic/religious parties forming on behalf of groups like the Sikhs, Muslims and Aborigines, depending on where the cutoff % is set. But aborigines are more than 10% of the population in a number of provinces. We could also see a fracturing among the Left, particularly the NDP with its harder core left wing group the socialist caucus breaking off.
"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 ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #431 on: April 01, 2018, 04:07:36 pm »
17 different parties have seats in Israel's Knesset. and they aren't the only country in that kind of situation.

Yet they have only had one government defeat by non-confidence motion in 70 years.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #432 on: April 01, 2018, 04:11:52 pm »
I agree that would fix a major problem within parties, but it would do absolutely nothing about having the minority rule with 100% of the power.
I don't accept the premise because you fail to account the electoral dynamics which makes it impossible for parties to ignore the will of the majority because every government wants to be reelected. This means that governments of all parties abandon their base on numerous issues simply because that is what is better for the country (LNG and SiteC anyone?). With PR the electoral dynamics are reversed. All of the hell we are seeing from micro-targeting political advertising would now apply to entire parties who would have no need to caring about what is better for the country and only what is needed to attract a slice of the voting public.

Anyone who is concerned about the rise of echo chambers and directed news should be concerned about any policy change that undermines the need to have a big tent political party if you want to have influence on government.

Offline JMT

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3462
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #433 on: April 01, 2018, 04:34:58 pm »
Let’s refrain from calling each other insane...
Like Like x 1 Optimistic Optimistic x 1 View List

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #434 on: April 01, 2018, 05:00:09 pm »
depending on where the cutoff % is set. But aborigines are more than 10% of the population in a number of provinces

I don't think that regions used for % cutoff should be provinces, because many provinces don't have enough seats (ie. PEI has only 4 seats, and in fact 1 seat is way out of proportion to population). If there are to be multiple regions (ie. not just entirety of Canada) then it should be fairly large regions so the % cutoff has some meaning. One example would be 3 regions (west, Ontario, Quebec+east - territories would be lumped with either west or east or possible divided between them).