Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#2News at 11: Pure democracy is unstable and should be avoided.
/read your histories of Athens to see why
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#3"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury." - Someone, probably with a T in their name. [1]
Having one or two layers of bureaucracy can provide a powerful buffer to voters doing things for immediate gains, or based on popular trends. Certainly some of how modern governments are set up is based on the time information took to travel and the distances involved hundreds (or thousands) of years ago, but I don't think that this point was lost on the early founders of democratic systems.
People (especially Americans) often forget that a bureaucracy that slows things down can provide the occasional benefit, right along with all its costs.
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#4News at 11: Pure democracy is unstable and should be avoided. /read your histories of Athens to see why
You're not wrong, but note that there are lots of histories of Athens. The same cannot be said for most contemporary states, which were almost all ruled by a king/dictator or oligarchy.
Athens at least burned brightly.
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#5I'm not a fan of direct democracy but this article isn't factually based. Notice they only give one specific example. That one example is Prop 13 which limited the amount of taxes that could be put on property and required a two-thirds majority to pass any tax increases.
Now let me ask this: If Prop 13 is such a hindrance why is California in the top 5 highest taxing states across the board?
Beyond that most of the initiatives are either social issues (Gay Marriage) or done by Percentage (Prop 98 that requires 40% of general fund spending be spent on Education).
So California's problems are not because of direct democracy. The reason the Economist is writing about this now is because they are (by their own admission) a left-leaning publication and Democrats in California believe the solution to California's problems is a tax hike. But they can't get it done without a couple Republicans because of the 2/3rd rule (imposed by Prop 13, again the only named example in the article). So the problem from their immediate perspective is "Direct Democracy".
But mark my words, some day down the line Republicans will get power in California and they will want to cut money to public schools. When that happens I'd bet all the money in my Bank Account the Democrats are going to be holding Direct Democracy up as their savior.
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#6I'm not a fan of direct democracy but this article isn't factually based. Notice they only give one specific example. That one example is Prop 13 which limited the amount of taxes that could be put on property and required a two-thirds majority to pass any tax increases. Now let me ask this: If Prop 13 is such a hindrance why is California in the top 5 highest taxing states across the board? Beyond that most of the i…
I notice that they do not examine the financial condition of other states that have referendums (e.g. North Dakota). California's problems are more a story of "group voting".
I thought we already had this story...
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#7Unlike California (37 million), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy is more suitable for smaller nations like Switzerland (7 million)
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#8Unlike California (37 million), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy is more suitable for smaller nations like Switzerland (7 million)
One thing I've often thought - but never investigated to test - is that governing at scale requires different policies and approaches than governing at 'small'.
What always brings it to mind is the oft-cited success of the Scandinavian states on welfare, as compared with the USA.
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#9I'm not a fan of direct democracy but this article isn't factually based. Notice they only give one specific example. That one example is Prop 13 which limited the amount of taxes that could be put on property and required a two-thirds majority to pass any tax increases. Now let me ask this: If Prop 13 is such a hindrance why is California in the top 5 highest taxing states across the board? Beyond that most of the i…
1) I believe your "top 5 highest taxing states" is inaccurate. In 2000, at least, California ranked 19th in combined state + local tax burden according to the U.S. Census Bureau, which is decidedly middle of the pack. Pretending like we're the most highly taxed state in the country is deceptive and gives the impression that good governance (well, bad in our case) comes for free.
Note that though the ranking of 19th does factor in our larger economy, it doesn't account for the reality that more highly advanced economies require a better trained and more specialized bureaucracy. So just as we shouldn't be surprised when Sweden has a better compensated civil service than Namibia, all things being equal we should expect for California government to account for a larger portion of the economy than Mississippi's or Oklahoma's, instead of being in the middle of the pack.
2) The Economist is left-leaning? Heh.
3) Most technocrats, be they left or right, absolutely hate the 40% rule as well. As a Democrat, I'd gladly trade a repeal of Prop 98 for a repeal of Prop 13. Hell, I'd repeal Prop 98 just on its own.
Government by ballot box is terrible.
Re: Lessons from California: The perils of extreme democracy
#10Unlike California (37 million), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy is more suitable for smaller nations like Switzerland (7 million)
Imagine a world where California were 4 or 5 separate states. Mendocino to Santa Cruz, including the Bay Area, as one; LA and Ventura as another; San Diego and the Inland Empire as a third; Central Valley, Shasta, etc. as the 4th.
Probably would improve governance, as the Republican Party we deal with in the Bay Area would offer people like Tom Campbell instead of Prop 8 NOMers.