The Ruling Class

[gPink]

It's winter...forum seems slow...so here is a bit of light reading in keeping with the election season. This was published in 2010 but is extremely relevant today. Agree or disagree but try to keep it civil so the sword doesn't fall. 

http://spectator.org/print/39326

[Deziner]

To be honest, I only made it through about 40% of the article. It actually only took about 10% to conclude that "burning this Muther to the ground" is the appropriate course of action. With a few exceptions,  we haven't had a politician thet was worth a damn in my lifetime. Honest and politician are mutually exclusive.

Until voters can no longer be bribed by "entitlements", we are fighting a losing battle. Collapse and restructure are only a hair's breadth away from being the only viable remedy.

[Cuda]

Here is a copy and paste from the COG

The thread was titled "I'm glad I'm on the way out not in" , due to the warming of the earth

This is Gpinks reply , I thought Politics is NOT allowed here?

 What more can you expect from the leftist 'Government is God' crowd. The high priests of the left have convinced their congregation that self-flagellation with the global warming whip is the only way to salvation. And like the Inquisition, the heretics must be purged and cleansed  of their sins. Deniers must be not only silenced but destroyed so there is no longer a voice of opposition.

[gPink]

I'm honored that you saved that one, cuda. It was one of my better rants.  Are you not taking it a bit out of context? What's it got to due with the current discussion? And if the powers that be decide to move this, we'll still be able to carry on the with the fun elsewhere. 

[maxtog]

Until voters can no longer be bribed by "entitlements", we are fighting a losing battle.

+1

As long as there is a huge underclass, people who are not productive can continue to vote for more spending (mostly for themselves) and less taxes (of course for themselves).  There is no hope of ever paying off the debt or even just balancing the budget.  And the giving up of rights for the promise or illusion of "safety" cuts right across every demographic and class.

The lack of instant runoff voting coupled with an archaic electoral college concept make it impossible to break out of a two-party system (both of which want ever larger government with more power and never ending spending and corruption).

[VirginiaJim]

This is Gpinks reply , I thought Politics is NOT allowed here?

Depends how it goes..stays civil, stays here.  Doesn't, then off to the Arena.

[gPink]

 
Like I said....out of context from the original thread. Must have struck a nerve though, 

[VirginiaJim]

I can't believe it!

[gPink]

It's both a gift and a curse but I have learned to adjust.

[maxtog]

It's both a gift and a curse but I have learned to adjust.

It is difficult having super-powers...

[gPink]

With great power comes great responsibility.

[VirginiaJim]

Quite.

[Cholla]

What two party system? There's no difference between D and R.
We could break out of the "two party system" if the voters would stop voting for the party and vote for a candidate.

[gPink]

Now might be the time,Cholla. We have a third party candidate running in each of the two major parties.

[Deziner]

Now IS the time!

[VirginiaJim]

Now might be the time,Cholla. We have a third party candidate running in each of the two major parties.

Who are they?

[gPink]

Who are they?

Trump is a Populist running as a Republican and Bernie is a Socialist running as a Democrat.

[maxtog]

Now IS the time!

Not really.  The way it works now is that very, very few people are willing to vote *FOR* who they really want in one of the other parties or independents because they are too scared their vote will allow someone they DO NOT want to win will win (they are throwing their vote away).  So they are "forced" to vote for someone else.  This is why we are all trapped.  The only way to prevent that is with IRV (instant runoff voting), so each voter can rank candidates.  Then one can vote primarily for who he really want to win, and if they don't have a majority, that vote then goes to next rated candidate, and so on.  With such a system, one's vote is never wasted.

[wally_games]

Not really.  The way it works now is that very, very few people are willing to vote *FOR* who they really want in one of the other parties or independents because they are too scared their vote will allow someone they DO NOT want to win will win (they are throwing their vote away).  So they are "forced" to vote for someone else.  This is why we are all trapped.  The only way to prevent that is with IRV (instant runoff voting), so each voter can rank candidates.  Then one can vote primarily for who he really want to win, and if they don't have a majority, that vote then goes to next rated candidate, and so on.  With such a system, one's vote is never wasted.

Just wondering, where it that method being used today?

[Rhino]

Not really.  The way it works now is that very, very few people are willing to vote *FOR* who they really want in one of the other parties or independents because they are too scared their vote will allow someone they DO NOT want to win will win (they are throwing their vote away).  So they are "forced" to vote for someone else.  This is why we are all trapped.  The only way to prevent that is with IRV (instant runoff voting), so each voter can rank candidates.  Then one can vote primarily for who he really want to win, and if they don't have a majority, that vote then goes to next rated candidate, and so on.  With such a system, one's vote is never wasted.

Interesting. I've thought for a long time that we should have runoff voting. I've never considered the concept of instant runoff. Sounds like a pretty good idea. I have the same question as Wally. Wondering if this is currently being used anywhere.