Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 343 posts

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#191

Post by marricks »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #167
marricks wrote: post #42

I always hate the framing as “polarized”. There’s tons of things Democrats and Republicans agree on. Military spending goes up every year. Save for Dodd-Frank, deregulation has been common across presidencies for 30 years along with corporate tax cuts... The establishment gets things done, they really do, it’s just not things that help everyday people. I’m not sure how this would help that.

I find this kind of thinking dangerous, because it falls into the "they're just 2 sides of the same coin" mindset. Not to mention, it is also false. The DoD budget for 2019 is below the budget for 2008, and much lower as a percentage of total expenditures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_... Yes, there are things the parties agree on, but that minimizes the huge, material differences betwe…

Not saying they are the same, just that when centrists come together they get a lot of bad things done. Also not surprised spending is down after the US left Iraq, would be surprised if it wasn’t overall up though.

My point is, fighting “zealotry” is just a nice way of saying let’s make it easier for corporate centrism.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#192

Post by overthemoon »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #167
marricks wrote: post #42

I always hate the framing as “polarized”. There’s tons of things Democrats and Republicans agree on. Military spending goes up every year. Save for Dodd-Frank, deregulation has been common across presidencies for 30 years along with corporate tax cuts... The establishment gets things done, they really do, it’s just not things that help everyday people. I’m not sure how this would help that.

I find this kind of thinking dangerous, because it falls into the "they're just 2 sides of the same coin" mindset. Not to mention, it is also false. The DoD budget for 2019 is below the budget for 2008, and much lower as a percentage of total expenditures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_... Yes, there are things the parties agree on, but that minimizes the huge, material differences betwe…

There are absolutely meaningful differences between the parties, but the mainstream, and who we end up having to choose between, trend to the center, which is where the similarities are. I think a well-informed citizen must keep in mind the ways both parties rally to particular issues and can be hostile to common interests while differing, sometimes in huge and significant ways, on other things. You're right that the "they're the same thing" is blithe and shallow, but that doesn't mean there aren't similarities.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#194

Post by gjm11 »

marricks wrote: post #191
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this kind of thinking dangerous, because it falls into the "they're just 2 sides of the same coin" mindset. Not to mention, it is also false. The DoD budget for 2019 is below the budget for 2008, and much lower as a percentage of total expenditures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_... Yes, there are things the parties agree on, but that minimizes the huge, material differences betwe…

Not saying they are the same, just that when centrists come together they get a lot of bad things done. Also not surprised spending is down after the US left Iraq, would be surprised if it wasn’t overall up though. My point is, fighting “zealotry” is just a nice way of saying let’s make it easier for corporate centrism.

There were substantial decreases in 2012 and 2013; I think the military budget has increased in every other recent year (though maybe sometimes by less than inflation?). 2019 is indeed down on 2008. (But not 2007, or any earlier year: there were big increases in 2006, 2007, 2008.)

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#195

Post by ng12 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #167
marricks wrote: post #42

I always hate the framing as “polarized”. There’s tons of things Democrats and Republicans agree on. Military spending goes up every year. Save for Dodd-Frank, deregulation has been common across presidencies for 30 years along with corporate tax cuts... The establishment gets things done, they really do, it’s just not things that help everyday people. I’m not sure how this would help that.

I find this kind of thinking dangerous, because it falls into the "they're just 2 sides of the same coin" mindset. Not to mention, it is also false. The DoD budget for 2019 is below the budget for 2008, and much lower as a percentage of total expenditures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_... Yes, there are things the parties agree on, but that minimizes the huge, material differences betwe…

The two parties are functionally identical for the handful of issues I really, really care about. Those issues you've mentioned are not among them -- furthermore they are not as black-and-white as you imply. As a relatively high income earner the only significant tax increase I've ever seen was under Trump.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#196

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

ng12 wrote: post #195
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this kind of thinking dangerous, because it falls into the "they're just 2 sides of the same coin" mindset. Not to mention, it is also false. The DoD budget for 2019 is below the budget for 2008, and much lower as a percentage of total expenditures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_... Yes, there are things the parties agree on, but that minimizes the huge, material differences betwe…

The two parties are functionally identical for the handful of issues I really, really care about. Those issues you've mentioned are not among them -- furthermore they are not as black-and-white as you imply. As a relatively high income earner the only significant tax increase I've ever seen was under Trump.

Which issues do you care about? Because I hear this vague-y statement ("the two parties are functionally identical") without specifics, and I can't for the life of me figure why people think this.

Also, to your point "As a relatively high income earner the only significant tax increase I've ever seen was under Trump.", and don't see how this could possibly be true. For example, Obamacare added significant taxes for Medicare payroll and the surtax on investment income for high earners.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#198

Post by Para2016 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #196
ng12 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The two parties are functionally identical for the handful of issues I really, really care about. Those issues you've mentioned are not among them -- furthermore they are not as black-and-white as you imply. As a relatively high income earner the only significant tax increase I've ever seen was under Trump.

Which issues do you care about? Because I hear this vague-y statement ("the two parties are functionally identical") without specifics, and I can't for the life of me figure why people think this. Also, to your point "As a relatively high income earner the only significant tax increase I've ever seen was under Trump.", and don't see how this could possibly be true. For example, Obamacare added significant taxes for M…

They're irrelevant differences to me. I care about local and state issues. For instance local infrastructure, local school districts, local road maintenance, local taxes, etc.

Federal politics is a distraction. A useless distraction that you're obsessed with. That's the kind of thinking that's "dangerous".

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#199

Post by Animats »

Not so much zealotry, as N-way decisions. There's no perfect way to make N-way democratic choices. Yet sometimes you need to make an N-way choice.

Brexit needs something like a ranked-choice vote. As in, rank these options - a) no deal Brexit b) Theresa May / EU plan c) no Brexit, revoke Article 50 d) Northern Ireland independence, border in Irish sea. None of those can get an absolute majority in Parliament. They've tried and are deadlocked. A ranked-choice referendum would provide a way out.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#200

Post by memory_grep »

logfromblammo wrote: post #82
mc32 wrote: post #2

Looks like this would favor highly coordinated groups to have outsized influence over poorly coordinated groups. So people who vote in isolation have less influence than people who organize and vote as a bloc. I think it also means that places where one party predominates would require the minority party to be highly coordinated in order to have any chance with one single silver “bullet” whereas the dominant party ca…

The voting method breaks down entirely when you consider strategic voting by groups, and multiple-repetitions game strategies. 100 players would form a voting cartel, and each member would spread their votes out among all the members' favorite issues. Reneging on the cartel's rules means that the entire cartel retaliates on the next vote. So each party has exactly 100 issues in their platform, and no individual voter…

You're assuming votes are public, which is not usually the case. If there's no way to check someone else's vote, there's no way to enforce a voting block.
Post reply on HN