261–270 of 308 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First is the idea that Government spending is bad. It's not saying that all spending is bad. The point is to have some pushback so it's not so wastefully spent. Some efficiency would be welcome by all, I think.
> Some efficiency would be welcome by all, I think. That’s a silly thing to think when observably many are benefiting from that waste and inefficiency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It provides impetus to the government to make it as frictionless as possible. Ahahahaha. Have you tried dealing with American bureaucracy? None of it is frictionless, it’s all horribly inefficient and fragmented, and one party is steadfastly committed to keeping it that way, and the other party only vaguely recognizes how big of a problem it is. Voting needs to be made easier, but making it compulsory would not aut…
I was talking about Australian voting, given the post to which I replied talked about Australian voting. Specifically, I was pointing out that in Australia, compulsory voting is great. I don’t really know about the US’s ghoulish pantomime that is government, but at least here, the understanding that one can be fined for not voting comes with the societal expectation that the roadblocks to doing so will be cleared as…
I’m also somewhat worried in this political climate that such a measure could start another civil war, for one thing, and that at minimum there would need to be federal military intervention to enforce it in southern states, as in the 1960s. The Supreme Court would also need to be packed, because the justices currently holding the majority would never support it (they gutted the Voting Rights Act with no pretense of legal argument eight years ago merely because it was an ideological goal).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Make early voting widely available and mail ballots available to anyone who requests one. Stop thinking of elections as a single day. That’ll be much healthier for democracy.
The secret ballot and full chain of custody of ballots is a pretty important thing in democracy.
I'm not certain how mail-in ballots are counted currently, but it is certainly possible to have the ballots be in a sleeve, and the ballot itself only be exposed to the machine reading it. Put the ballot 'inserters' under camera if needed. It seems like a simple problem to solve.
Another commenter mentioned that a real issue is that the counting of ballots isn't transparent, which is true. When I vote, all I know is that the ballot scanner increments its 'scanned ballot' count. I can't verify that it actually voted for who I voted for, and they're closed source, so I have to rely on someone else's word that they are.
Maybe this is finally a use for blockchain? lol
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Make early voting widely available and mail ballots available to anyone who requests one. Stop thinking of elections as a single day. That’ll be much healthier for democracy.
In Australia we always have elections on Saturday. Works well for most people. Of course, there is a minority of people it doesn't work well for, such as people who have to work on Saturdays, and observant Jews. And for those people we have early voting and postal voting too. I never quite understand why voting is such a controversial topic in the US. In many countries (I'm sure Australia is not alone in this) it is…
By making it mandatory:
1. everyone has to accept that voting has to be accessible.
2. it's pretty hard to contest the results of a vote when you know "everyone had their say".
In the US the variations around accessibility can significantly affect voter turnout.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make it a holiday and move the election to the day after tax day: "Elections should be held on April 16th- the day after we pay our income taxes. That is one of the few things that might discourage politicians from being big spenders." - Thomas Sowell
What a trite and overly simplistic idea. First is the idea that Government spending is bad. Second is the idea that Government spending is controlled directly by taxes. Third is the idea that a majority of people actually pay any income tax at the end of the year. Fourth is the idea that people understand their taxes. Fifth is the idea that it is income taxes are the only taxes. I could go on, but I digress.
> What a trite and overly simplistic idea. First is the idea that Government spending is bad. Second is the idea that Government spending is controlled directly by taxes. Third is the idea that a majority of people actually pay any income tax at the end of the year. Fourth is the idea that people understand their taxes. Fifth is the idea that it is income taxes are the only taxes.
And sixth is the idea that it's even necessary. Pretty much my entire adult life has been major tax cut after major tax cut, one useful starved government program after another (the Strategic National Stockpile anyone?), and a ballooning deficit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is basically what happens in Canada, where our national holiday is official July 1st, but ends up moved to the closest Friday or Monday.
No. It is on a Thursday this year. Like all holidays if it is on a Saturday or Sunday it is observed on the Monday. But it doesn’t move if it is on Tuesday Wednesday or Thursday.
[1]: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/canada-day-2015-13-places-to-ce...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> one party is steadfastly committed to keeping it that way, and the other party only vaguely recognizes how big of a problem it is. Not quite: the other party is committed to keeping it that way, too, but is also content to let the first party be the fall-guy for its efforts. The two parties both play for the same team. They're in a big club you might say, and we're not in it (apologies to Carlin for my poor renditi…
It’s pretty clear this isn’t the case. It was more true 20 years ago, but polarization has been increasing rapidly. How are they playing for the same team if they can’t agree on anything anymore?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Australia we always have elections on Saturday. Works well for most people. Of course, there is a minority of people it doesn't work well for, such as people who have to work on Saturdays, and observant Jews. And for those people we have early voting and postal voting too. I never quite understand why voting is such a controversial topic in the US. In many countries (I'm sure Australia is not alone in this) it is…
As an australian, the reason the process is boring is because voting is mandatory. Well, to within a practical degree; some people can't, some people don't etc By making it mandatory: 1. everyone has to accept that voting has to be accessible. 2. it's pretty hard to contest the results of a vote when you know "everyone had their say". In the US the variations around accessibility can significantly affect voter turnou…
Unlike Australia, New Zealand doesn't have compulsory voting. And yet, I am led to believe that the process of voting is just as boring in New Zealand as it is in Australia. And one could make the same point about a number of other countries – Canada, the UK, Ireland, much of Western Europe.
So the reason that these countries to have far less controversy over the voting process than the US does must be something other than the question of optional-vs-mandatory voting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some states in the USA recently there's been legislation passed that makes it illegal to provide even water to people waiting to vote. For us Australians, I suspect that invites a huge range of questions, including how long are people normally waiting that they need water, and why would a nominally capitalist society legislate against selling libations and comestibles under these very specific conditions.
Yeah because it's like bribing a vote. If it was non partisan water no one would care but instead it's "Oh you're hot and thirsty standing in line? Here, have a cold one courtesy of Biden (or Trump)!" Nothing is stopping voters from drinking their own water and eating their own snacks in line. I applaud laws that limit "gift giving" at the polls. The polls should not be a place where your vote is swayed by a gift.
That sufficient number of people (to warrant passing such legislation) would be swayed on the topic of who to vote for, to disregard their experience and opinions built up over the past several years, in return for a $2 bottle of water to quench a mild thirst, seems inconceivable. I wonder if there's perhaps other reasons at play there.
I guess it may be interesting to look at whether there's any common features at all of all the state legislatures that have passed such laws this year.