scott craven
Well-Known Member
Canada #23 with 23.1 % ?
maybe if you're under the poverty line!
maybe if you're under the poverty line!
Electoral Reform Referendum
- Thread starter fish brain
- Start date
bigbruce
Crew Member
It's an average tax rate.
tincan
Well-Known Member
... and it's also interesting that many these same countries on the PR list are also highly ranked on worldwide lists such as:
GDP per capita
Median household income
Human Development Index
AAA Bond Ratings
etc.
All else equal, nobody wants to pay taxes, especially high taxes. But not all else is equal and most successful countries work to make sure the taxes they collect are put to the best use for the citizens as a whole. In Canada (and US) I really wish we would start spending a lot less time arguing over a couple % tax increase/decrease and a lot more time arguing over how to make sure we use taxpayers dollars in the best way possible for the majority of the people. In many of the PR countries listed above, they have quite high tax rates that support incredible social programs that the vast majority of the population benefit from. The numbers don't lie on this. Economic, Human Dev (happiness), and Democracy Rankings are consistently higher in countries with PR systems. PR fosters more collaborative government/legislation that helps eliminate the drastic (and costly) swings that false majorities (under FPTP) thrive under.
time to move to PR and join the rest of the civilized world
GDP per capita
Median household income
Human Development Index
AAA Bond Ratings
etc.
All else equal, nobody wants to pay taxes, especially high taxes. But not all else is equal and most successful countries work to make sure the taxes they collect are put to the best use for the citizens as a whole. In Canada (and US) I really wish we would start spending a lot less time arguing over a couple % tax increase/decrease and a lot more time arguing over how to make sure we use taxpayers dollars in the best way possible for the majority of the people. In many of the PR countries listed above, they have quite high tax rates that support incredible social programs that the vast majority of the population benefit from. The numbers don't lie on this. Economic, Human Dev (happiness), and Democracy Rankings are consistently higher in countries with PR systems. PR fosters more collaborative government/legislation that helps eliminate the drastic (and costly) swings that false majorities (under FPTP) thrive under.
time to move to PR and join the rest of the civilized world
fish brain
Crew Member
... and it's also interesting that many these same countries on the PR list are also highly ranked on worldwide lists such as:
GDP per capita
Median household income
Human Development Index
AAA Bond Ratings
etc.
All else equal, nobody wants to pay taxes, especially high taxes. But not all else is equal and most successful countries work to make sure the taxes they collect are put to the best use for the citizens as a whole. In Canada (and US) I really wish we would start spending a lot less time arguing over a couple % tax increase/decrease and a lot more time arguing over how to make sure we use taxpayers dollars in the best way possible for the majority of the people. In many of the PR countries listed above, they have quite high tax rates that support incredible social programs that the vast majority of the population benefit from. The numbers don't lie on this. Economic, Human Dev (happiness), and Democracy Rankings are consistently higher in countries with PR systems. PR fosters more collaborative government/legislation that helps eliminate the drastic (and costly) swings that false majorities (under FPTP) thrive under.
time to move to PR and join the rest of the civilized world
Who doesn't want Education, Health Care. Roads, Care for the Elderly, FISH. None of these things are free, yet no one wants to pay for them; but we all expect them to be there.
Last edited:
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Which of our three choices of Proportional Representation are they all using( well we know at least two aren’t even in the running)? To be accurate you need to throw out all the variations of PR that we’re not being offered. Unless it’s on our ballot it’s pretty much irrelevant because it isn’t a choice we are being asked to make.... and it's also interesting that many these same countries on the PR list are also highly ranked on worldwide lists such as:
GDP per capita
Median household income
Human Development Index
AAA Bond Ratings
etc.
All else equal, nobody wants to pay taxes, especially high taxes. But not all else is equal and most successful countries work to make sure the taxes they collect are put to the best use for the citizens as a whole. In Canada (and US) I really wish we would start spending a lot less time arguing over a couple % tax increase/decrease and a lot more time arguing over how to make sure we use taxpayers dollars in the best way possible for the majority of the people. In many of the PR countries listed above, they have quite high tax rates that support incredible social programs that the vast majority of the population benefit from. The numbers don't lie on this. Economic, Human Dev (happiness), and Democracy Rankings are consistently higher in countries with PR systems. PR fosters more collaborative government/legislation that helps eliminate the drastic (and costly) swings that false majorities (under FPTP) thrive under.
time to move to PR and join the rest of the civilized world
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
I would rather have a real 3rd real contender myself than this reform because it doesn't matter if we do this. The Liberals and NDP fundamentally are flawed and the departments within the government need a major overhaul from the top down. Politicians come and go but the old guard of these departments do not. That is where a lot of your trouble comes from.
You may not like the Greens and I don't agree with a lot of their policies, but that the newest bill for professional reliance will benefit a lot of our stream/rivers with protection for salmon enhancement. This initiative was brought from green party, but they are very weak party.
You may not like the Greens and I don't agree with a lot of their policies, but that the newest bill for professional reliance will benefit a lot of our stream/rivers with protection for salmon enhancement. This initiative was brought from green party, but they are very weak party.
Last edited:
tincan
Well-Known Member
PR systems do vary worldwide. There is not a single universal standard for Proportional Representation. There are also a variety of FPTP or winner-take-all systems throughout the world, FYI.
MMP is a common system around the globe that has been used for a long time.
While the "rural-urban proportional" system is technically not used elsewhere at the moment, it is just a combination of 2 PR systems that are quite common, STV and MMP.
DMP is a new 'made in BC' system described below:
https://elections.bc.ca/referendum/voting-systems/dual-member-proportional-dmp/
https://www.fairvote.ca/dual-member-proportional/
Ultimately, the difference between the various PR options is tiny compared to the difference between PR and FPTP. If you don't like one or more of the PR options you don't have to vote for it. You don't have to answer the 2nd question on the referendum at all if you don't want and your answer to question 1 will still count. I saw a twitter post that simplified it like this:
----
Q: Which do you prefer?
1) ice cream
2) a kick in the balls
Q: Do you prefer ice cream in:
1) waffle cone
2) regular cone
3) cup
Voters against #PR4BC: "what's the cone size? Is the cup biodegradable? Too many unknowns, I'll just take a kick in the balls"
----
MMP is a common system around the globe that has been used for a long time.
While the "rural-urban proportional" system is technically not used elsewhere at the moment, it is just a combination of 2 PR systems that are quite common, STV and MMP.
DMP is a new 'made in BC' system described below:
https://elections.bc.ca/referendum/voting-systems/dual-member-proportional-dmp/
https://www.fairvote.ca/dual-member-proportional/
Ultimately, the difference between the various PR options is tiny compared to the difference between PR and FPTP. If you don't like one or more of the PR options you don't have to vote for it. You don't have to answer the 2nd question on the referendum at all if you don't want and your answer to question 1 will still count. I saw a twitter post that simplified it like this:
----
Q: Which do you prefer?
1) ice cream
2) a kick in the balls
Q: Do you prefer ice cream in:
1) waffle cone
2) regular cone
3) cup
Voters against #PR4BC: "what's the cone size? Is the cup biodegradable? Too many unknowns, I'll just take a kick in the balls"
----
scott craven
Well-Known Member
ziggy
Well-Known Member
It’s all in the detail, if your choice is a kick in the balls or ice cream, your first question should be giving or receiving! Perhaps many of us don’t like ice cream but also don’t like some people
I’m not a fan of some politician deciding after the fact whether I’m giving or receiving. Guess some are more trusting and will always chose ice cream?
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Their is usual a pretty big price difference between a waffle cone and a regular cone.....Maybe some don't care about the price and maybe some do....
Maybe some don't care how areas will be laied out and how many MLA's come from Vancouver but maybe some do care about these details....
How will the MLA's be chosen that are not voted in? Will it be a party vote? Or will they just be chosen by the party leaders? What if they choose only say people on their party from vancouver? is that fair representation?
Were talking about fair representation after all are we not?
So say the green party wins 20% of the vote but don't win any of the areas. So then its left up to the party and the list to choose the MLA's. What if they choose all the green MLA's from Vancouver yet most of the 20% vote came from the island? or do they do it fairly and just put in the Green MLA's that got the most votes?
Last edited:
jasonj
Member
So it sounds like some people will still prefer to get kicked in the balls. Why?
- because getting kicked in the balls is what we’ve always done
- because getting kicked in the balls is so simple, anyone can do it!
- because getting kicked in the balls is a feeling we understand even though it really f***ing hurts
- because the details on the ice cream alternative are just too vague even though ice cream sounds good in theory
So what is "getting kicked in the balls" or rather FPTP?
- we routinely get governments with a “majority” when they had less than 50% voter support (2013, 2005, 1996, 1991, …..)
- we got a government with a “majority" when they had less votes than the opposition (1996) which could happen again
- we get Zero regional representation from voters of non-winning candidates (No BC Liberal MLAs on Vancouver Island, No NDP MLAs from Okanagan, No Green MLAs on mainland despite significant voter support)
- we get massive policy shifts (and costs) with small changes in voter support (ie: photo radar -> no photo radar, subsidized ferries -> no subsidized ferries, tolled bridges -> no tolled bridges, MSP paid by individuals -> MSP paid by employers, simple land taxes -> new vacancy tax+foreign buyers tax+school tax, ….)
ziggy
Well-Known Member
I think the ice cream will go quite nicely with the pie in the sky lol. Then again it’s cold and could reduce swelling to that body part you PR guys seem obsessed with lol. Decisions are good but informed ones better, it’s hard to make an informed one when the details are yet to be decided. Kind of like religion and science, one is based on faith one on fact.
jasonj
Member
I don't think anyone in this thread is asking that we make any decision based on faith. Most of the posts are providing facts and additional information to help us make an informed decision. This should be welcome from all sides.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
I just got mine in the mail, I'm still undecided. I was a solid No vote before this thread, Now I am undecided. I think their has been some great points raise by both sides. A lot of Promises in this thread that PR wont be business as usual.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
I’ve heard a few people say they have just received or not yet received their package and that’s probably a factor.The deadline for mailing them out was Nov. 2, if you still don’t have yours in a couple of days you may want to call the contact number.
Foxsea
Well-Known Member
The big business lobbyists who want to stop the British Columbia’s referendum on electoral reform have been dealt another humiliating blow, this time coming from BC’s top court.
As British Columbians begin deciding whether BC should stick with its outdated first-past-the-post voting system or switch to a more democratic proportional representation system, the Independent Contractors and Builders Association of BC have been pulling out every legal trick in the book to have the referendum postponed.
The ICBA, a lobby group representing BC’s big construction companies, made claims that electoral reform will cause “irreparable harm” to the group’s interests. All claims raised were struck down by the Court.
The ICBA has close connections to the BC Liberals. Chris Gardener, the ICBA’s president, is a former top advisor to Christy Clark. The group donated more than $87,000 to the BC Liberals in 2017 and currently dedicates much of its messaging to anti-union and anti-election reform talking points.
As British Columbians begin deciding whether BC should stick with its outdated first-past-the-post voting system or switch to a more democratic proportional representation system, the Independent Contractors and Builders Association of BC have been pulling out every legal trick in the book to have the referendum postponed.
The ICBA, a lobby group representing BC’s big construction companies, made claims that electoral reform will cause “irreparable harm” to the group’s interests. All claims raised were struck down by the Court.
The ICBA has close connections to the BC Liberals. Chris Gardener, the ICBA’s president, is a former top advisor to Christy Clark. The group donated more than $87,000 to the BC Liberals in 2017 and currently dedicates much of its messaging to anti-union and anti-election reform talking points.
fish brain
Crew Member
Voters against #PR4BC: "what's the cone size? Is the cup biodegradable? Too many unknowns, I'll just take a kick in the balls"
----[/QUOTE]
I guess at the end of the debate, you can ask yourself if you believe that our democracy is based on majority rule. That's what we teach our children. The decisions of the government are made with the best intentions of the majority of people. We don't get this with FPTP. Do you think that with PR and the coalition governments it will likely bring will best reflect the majority, because no one party can pass legislation without co operation from at least one other party. A party that people voted for and therefore must answer to their voters.
----[/QUOTE]
I guess at the end of the debate, you can ask yourself if you believe that our democracy is based on majority rule. That's what we teach our children. The decisions of the government are made with the best intentions of the majority of people. We don't get this with FPTP. Do you think that with PR and the coalition governments it will likely bring will best reflect the majority, because no one party can pass legislation without co operation from at least one other party. A party that people voted for and therefore must answer to their voters.
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
If anyone wants an actual food-based analogy for SMDP vs PR that gives a realistic comparison between the two, here goes.
SMDP (first past the post)
You work at a company with a hundred employees and every day, you order pizza for lunch. You get to select the ten people who will have a meeting and make the call to the pizza shop, and there are basically two groups of ten people, one group which always promises to order Pepperoni, and one which always promises to order Vegetarian. They always promise the pizza they order will be amazing, and it's always four hours late, costs five times what they promised, and is pretty terrible. There are some other people who promise to order something different than Pepperoni or Vegetarian, but they almost never get picked by enough people to completely change the menu.
PR
You work at a company with a hundred employees and every day, you order pizza for lunch. You get to select the ten people who will have a meeting and make the call to the pizza shop, and instead of there being two groups of ten who all get in at once, one or the other, you get random individuals, each of whom promises a completely different thing. Instead of a whole regime getting in and ordering either Pepperoni or Vegetarian, you have this process of negotiation. Pepperoni and Vegetarian camps are still pretty popular, but now there is also a Hawaiian guy, a Shrimp and Garlic guy, a Pesto Chicken guy, and they get to contribute too. So you end up with three Pepperoni guys, three Vegetarian guys, and a bunch of random stuff. They can't make the call until six people agree, so the two big camps try to recruit the other people to their side by offering changes. So now, instead of either Pepperoni or Vegetarian, you get Pepperoni, but also every slice has to have a clove of garlic to get the Shrimp and Garlic guy, and three pieces of pineapple to get the Hawaiian guy, and a spoonful of pesto to get the Pesto Chicken guy. Every person promises the pizza will be the best ever, and it's always four hours late, costs five times what they promised, and is pretty terrible.
The critical points are as follows:
You don't get to choose anything but pizza
The people who make the pizza are always the same and can't be fired or even disciplined
The pizza is always radically over budget and way behind schedule
The quality of the pizza is always poor
If you want to choose PR that's fine. It doesn't work especially well but SMDP doesn't work particularly well either so not a huge deal. The main thing is this: changing the selection process won't fundamentally improve the situation, you just get a different set of problems.
SMDP (first past the post)
You work at a company with a hundred employees and every day, you order pizza for lunch. You get to select the ten people who will have a meeting and make the call to the pizza shop, and there are basically two groups of ten people, one group which always promises to order Pepperoni, and one which always promises to order Vegetarian. They always promise the pizza they order will be amazing, and it's always four hours late, costs five times what they promised, and is pretty terrible. There are some other people who promise to order something different than Pepperoni or Vegetarian, but they almost never get picked by enough people to completely change the menu.
PR
You work at a company with a hundred employees and every day, you order pizza for lunch. You get to select the ten people who will have a meeting and make the call to the pizza shop, and instead of there being two groups of ten who all get in at once, one or the other, you get random individuals, each of whom promises a completely different thing. Instead of a whole regime getting in and ordering either Pepperoni or Vegetarian, you have this process of negotiation. Pepperoni and Vegetarian camps are still pretty popular, but now there is also a Hawaiian guy, a Shrimp and Garlic guy, a Pesto Chicken guy, and they get to contribute too. So you end up with three Pepperoni guys, three Vegetarian guys, and a bunch of random stuff. They can't make the call until six people agree, so the two big camps try to recruit the other people to their side by offering changes. So now, instead of either Pepperoni or Vegetarian, you get Pepperoni, but also every slice has to have a clove of garlic to get the Shrimp and Garlic guy, and three pieces of pineapple to get the Hawaiian guy, and a spoonful of pesto to get the Pesto Chicken guy. Every person promises the pizza will be the best ever, and it's always four hours late, costs five times what they promised, and is pretty terrible.
The critical points are as follows:
You don't get to choose anything but pizza
The people who make the pizza are always the same and can't be fired or even disciplined
The pizza is always radically over budget and way behind schedule
The quality of the pizza is always poor
If you want to choose PR that's fine. It doesn't work especially well but SMDP doesn't work particularly well either so not a huge deal. The main thing is this: changing the selection process won't fundamentally improve the situation, you just get a different set of problems.
Last edited:
ziggy
Well-Known Member
I guess at the end of the debate, you can ask yourself if you believe that our democracy is based on majority rule. That's what we teach our children. The decisions of the government are made with the best intentions of the majority of people. We don't get this with FPTP. Do you think that with PR and the coalition governments it will likely bring will best reflect the majority, because no one party can pass legislation without co operation from at least one other party. A party that people voted for and therefore must answer to their voters.[/QUOTE]
Good point regarding a majority rule should there be a requirement for over 50% of all B.C. voters to vote for PR or just 50% of the ballots returned? I ask this because I keep hearing from PR supporters that less than 50% is unacceptable. What if only 20% of the ballots are returned? Is 10% plus 1 good enough? What is the minimum % of B.C. voters returns acceptable to gain a valid result?
