Government Policy and Budget Discussion Thread (no politics)

[Cincydawg]

Voting is the opiate of the masses.

Cincydawg.

[utee94]

Heh... interesting.

[847badgerfan]

Voting is the opiate of the masses.

Cincydawg.

I dunno. Seems like lately (a lot) voting is more about the lesser of two evils. That's the suckass part, and it leads to lower turnouts too, especially at the state and local levels.

[utee94]

I dunno. Seems like lately (a lot) voting is more about the lesser of two evils. That's the suckass part, and it leads to lower turnouts too, especially at the state and local levels.

I love voting at the local level in my suburb of Austin.  Our city has about 77,000 (compared to 964,000 in Austin proper) and I actually know or have at least met in real life, many of our city council, school board, etc.

I don't know our mayor personally, but several friends do, and he's a really great dude.

Trips to city hall are a breeze, I went in and talked personally to the chief of building codes when I was going to move a backyard fence and put in a shed, and he was so welcoming and accommodating.  I'm definitely never going to live within the city limits of a large city again, that is such a total beating.

[Cincydawg]

I refer to my individual vote.  It means nothing.  I prefer not to waste my time.  It confers an illusion of having some influence which does not exist in any national election.

Some school bond issue back years ago passed by 7 votes, it is possible MY vote might matter locally, though that situation is very rare.

Nationally?  It's nonsense.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I refer to my individual vote.  It means nothing.  I prefer not to waste my time.  It confers an illusion of having some influence which does not exist in any national election.

Some school bond issue back years ago passed by 7 votes, it is possible MY vote might matter locally, though that situation is very rare.

Nationally?  It's nonsense.

Not to mention that for POTUS, the electoral college ensures that only voters in a few states have a meaningful effect on the outcome. 

Here in California, voting for POTUS is literally pointless. The state will vote reliably Democrat, ensuring all 55 electoral college votes to that candidate. If there is some Republican that is SO much better than the Democrat that even California is in play? Well then that Republican will win the election in such a landslide that even if my vote was the one tipping those 55 electoral college votes, the Republican would have won so many other states that my tipping of 55 electoral college votes wouldn't change the outcome of the election either.

It's why I vote third-party. Even if the Libertarians nominate a whackadoodle [as they've done a few times], I know that my vote won't be counted either way in the popular vote as a "mandate" for the winning candidate. It's purely a protest vote, a "vote of no confidence" in the two major parties. And since my candidate has zero shot at winning, it's not like it matters if he/she is a whackadoodle. 

[Cincydawg]

The odds that a single vote would be decisive in any national election are small enough I'm willing to ignore them.  You can blame me if it happens.

[utee94]

The odds that a single vote would be decisive in any national election are small enough I'm willing to ignore them.  You can blame me if it happens.

Oh yeah?  If everyone thought like you did, and only one person voted in the entire country, what then, smart guy??

[Cincydawg]

Catch 22, the Yosarian Rule.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Oh yeah?  If everyone thought like you did, and only one person voted in the entire country, what then, smart guy??

That's why I do vote.

Because if I was literally the only one, I cannot imagine all the fun of knowing that all of you had to live under a Libertarian POTUS for four years because of me. It would be high comedy.

[MrNubbz]

I hate voting anymore - not the process.Because the local church that holds the voting has non profit,home made bakery set up.I hate that the state keeps throwing me into the Jury Pool.I tried to explain to a bailiff that by using the License Bureau they could widen the pool exponentially.I don't want to hear about drivers with records because in the tech Age that's solved by the click of a button.SMDH 

[Riffraft]

I love voting at the local level in my suburb of Austin.  Our city has about 77,000 (compared to 964,000 in Austin proper) and I actually know or have at least met in real life, many of our city council, school board, etc.

I don't know our mayor personally, but several friends do, and he's a really great dude.

Trips to city hall are a breeze, I went in and talked personally to the chief of building codes when I was going to move a backyard fence and put in a shed, and he was so welcoming and accommodating.  I'm definitely never going to live within the city limits of a large city again, that is such a total beating.

The fact that you had to talk to the Chief of Building codes to move your backyard fence and put in a shed on your property drives my libertarian psyche crazy. 

[Riffraft]

Not to mention that for POTUS, the electoral college ensures that only voters in a few states have a meaningful effect on the outcome.

Here in California, voting for POTUS is literally pointless. The state will vote reliably Democrat, ensuring all 55 electoral college votes to that candidate. If there is some Republican that is SO much better than the Democrat that even California is in play? Well then that Republican will win the election in such a landslide that even if my vote was the one tipping those 55 electoral college votes, the Republican would have won so many other states that my tipping of 55 electoral college votes wouldn't change the outcome of the election either.

It's why I vote third-party. Even if the Libertarians nominate a whackadoodle [as they've done a few times], I know that my vote won't be counted either way in the popular vote as a "mandate" for the winning candidate. It's purely a protest vote, a "vote of no confidence" in the two major parties. And since my candidate has zero shot at winning, it's not like it matters if he/she is a whackadoodle.

I totally appreciate the electoral college and what it does. I would only like to see one change to it (Which is constitutional and Nebraska use to do it (maybe still does)).

I would have the electors elected by congressional districts. So say a state has 25 electoral votes.  23 for congressional representation and 2 for senatorial.   So if I won the popular vote of the state I would get the 2 senatorial electors and I would get the electors for each district in which I received the majority vote. So I could get 19 of the electors, but my opponent won 6 districts so he would get 6. I think this would put states such as California and New York that are solid blue because of their major urban areas in play, but would also put many solid red states with large blue districts into play. 

[utee94]

The fact that you had to talk to the Chief of Building codes to move your backyard fence and put in a shed on your property drives my libertarian psyche crazy.

I didn't HAVE to, I could have called or emailed or pored through the city codes.  Instead I walked through the front door of City Hall, asked the receptionist where the building code office was, walked down the hall, and sat in his office and talked to him.  Without an appointment and without waiting at all.

If you're lamenting that we have any building codes  AT ALL in society, well, I guess that's one way to view it.  But this was certainly far easier than when I put in additions/decks/sheds at my old house within the city limits of Austin proper.