EC vs. NPV - Page 3 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 262Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #31 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-24-2016, 10:54 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 10,926
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
I think I understand what you are saying. If the population of the country is centered in the east and in and around large cities, how will that vote in Wyoming have as much weight as those in areas with more dense populations? Won't candidates only spend their money in areas which could help them win the election? They wouldn't need to stop in many Midwestern states. By the time they get a chance to vote, wouldn't the election already have been won?
The current system is exactly the opposite, yet you support it.



john117 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-24-2016, 11:08 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 10,926
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
hmm...you don't seem to refute my assertion, only belittle it.
Your assertion is that we lost lots and lots of civil freedoms with DHS. I countered that our civil freedoms have been in the tank for as long as I can remember in the USA, circa 1980. All that happened post DHS was it became a bit more, ehem, efficient to, ehem, keep an eye on us.

I recall flying from Amsterdam to Chicago back in the mid 2000's. We had prescreening there. Two college kids ahead of me made the mortal sin of quaffing a beer while in line. The TSA dude had a fit.

My turn came and of course out comes the Samsonite and the guy looks at my two cell phones. I did not know better and took mine (at&t) plus a work phone. Another fit.

Playing to people's fear is great business. Whether done by Reagan in the 80's or by nameless bureaucrats today is a moot point.

The moment I fly into Schiphol I pull out the EU passport and borders disappear. That ain't happening here...
john117 is online now  
post #33 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-24-2016, 11:40 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,655
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by tech-novelist View Post
They lost, so they want to change the rules.
This is such a bull**** comment. It's an inherently unfair practice, and just because you "won" you continue to want it. Holy ****, if this happened in reverse, I am sure the conservatives would all be like, yeah, sure, this is great when votes aren't considered equal in our elections...

Quote:
It's as simple as that, and if you don't believe me, look at the insane attempts to overturn the electoral college results by threatening or bribing electors.
Wait wut? I bribed an elector? Lol. I have said this so many times. People who think like you are ruining this country. This us versus them attitude and continuing to back a flawed system just because it benefits you. Wouldn't it be great if only republicans were allowed to run?

Quote:
BTW, I'm totally fine with the states allocating electors proportionally, which several people have mentioned. That is completely Constitutional and doesn't rip off the small states, while giving representation to the minority party in big states.
How are small states ripped off when they ALREADY have equal representation in the senate? The constitution didn't foresee circumstances like this. Whatever, not like any sort of logic would change your opinion.
Herschel is online now  
 
post #34 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-24-2016, 11:43 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,655
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
By disenfranchising voters in states with low populations.
The people who are disenfranchised are the people who live in states with large populations. I live in NJ and my vote doesn't count, cause Jersey always votes blue. Running up the scoreboard means nothing. I didn't even vote this year, partially because of that.

On the converse, people in small states have EXTRA incentive to go vote. They are worth more than people in large states. People in urban areas should start flooding the market in small states. Well, maybe having a president you don't want isn't worth living there...
Herschel is online now  
post #35 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 12:31 AM
Member
 
TaDor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 987
Re: EC vs. NPV

The EC doesn't match the state's population. For example, compared to the state of Wyoming, California should have something like 250 EC points.

EC is an advantage to slave states.

Either way, the EC didn't follow the law, as they voted in someone who isn't qualified and is a Russian puppet. He *WILL* all be the guy who worked with Putin and his intenet hackers and trolls.

Supporting those who want to divorce or reconcile. Not every relationship is the same.
TaDor is online now  
post #36 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 07:22 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,838
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
The current system is exactly the opposite, yet you support it.

Oh Yeah!


"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #37 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 07:35 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,838
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herschel View Post
The people who are disenfranchised are the people who live in states with large populations. I live in NJ and my vote doesn't count, cause Jersey always votes blue. Running up the scoreboard means nothing. I didn't even vote this year, partially because of that.

On the converse, people in small states have EXTRA incentive to go vote. They are worth more than people in large states. People in urban areas should start flooding the market in small states. Well, maybe having a president you don't want isn't worth living there...
Extra incentive? Worth more? How are they worth more and not equally valued?

I lived through Obama. I didn't want him. I lived through Carter. I didn't want him. I lived through Reagan after he made jobs very tough to find in 1987. I lived through NAFTA which took away more jobs. It seems many presidents on both sides of the aisle have caused a reduction in jobs. If there was an increase, it was only in government jobs to help the poor they created get their food stamps and welfare.

Wouldn't it be better to put them to work so they can pay at least some taxes? Meager though they may be, won't those taxes help a little? Won't working folks feel a little more pride in themselves? The way the job market is today, those working poor can sometimes live a better life on the government dole.

I hope and pray Trump and his team can help to change that. I doubt he can, but I think it's worth a chance. No one before him has done much good. We don't have that much to lose. At worst, failing would simply speed up the inevitable. I think either choice is good.

The jobs reports are based mainly in those working poor who have two or more jobs to try to make ends meet. They are including those who work seasonal or semi-seasonal jobs. Those aren't accurate results. They mislead and create some of the hatred we see this election cycle
2ntnuf is offline  
post #38 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 07:37 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,838
Re: EC vs. NPV

By the way, my friends, Merry Hannarhamaquanzmas to you...or have a wonderful holiday...whichever good wishes you feel comfortable accepting.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #39 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 08:14 AM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 755
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by TaDor View Post
The EC doesn't match the state's population. For example, compared to the state of Wyoming, California should have something like 250 EC points.
Goes to what I said in an earlier post. Just let L.A. and N.Y. City, with their now increased electoral votes compared to Wyoming, elect the President. Oh, BTW, Merry Christmas, The Reason For The Season, and all that jazz to you Dawg. And a Happy New Year to, you old humbug.

If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.
VladDracul is online now  
post #40 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 08:15 AM
Moderator
 
farsidejunky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 7,116
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
The original idea was the federal government would be akin to a committee made up of states' representatives. Not the citizens but the government of each state would send a representative to sit on this committee. The states, not the citizens, would select the chairman of this committee. Just like we create a committee at work to organize a project and we designate one member as the chairman to be responsible to ensure the tasks are executed.

The citizens select their state government. The state government do the tasks which individuals could not do by themselves, such as build roads or provide police protection. But some tasks are bigger than an individual state could do, such as defend against foreign attack. So the states band together via this committee.

The citizens, being a bit protective of their freedom, send a few Representatives to this federal committee who are directly responsible to the citizens, thus maintaining a check against the States' selected members on the federal committee.

So the vast bulk of governing the people was intended to be done locally or at the state level. Very little would be done by the federal government. Mostly the federal government would be defending the nation and regularizing interactions across state lines.

And so the EC is the way the states select the chairman of the federal committee. The President is tasked by the States to execute faithfully the tasks of the federal committee.

Really the original structure of the USA was brilliant. The individuals held the power. The states were sovereign over the federal government. The President was not terribly powerful nor very important to the individual citizen.

People want a government big enough to give them everything they want, but have created a monster powerful enough to control everything about their lives and take away everything they value.
In this era of overreaching federal government, where states rights are on the decline, less and less people understand the brilliance of how the Constitution was designed.

Your posts on this thread have been solid, @Thor.


"Our ability to feel joy is directly related to how much pain we are willing to feel." - Mavash.

"The truth is, everyone is going to hurt you. You just got to find the ones worth suffering for." - Bob Marley
farsidejunky is online now  
post #41 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 08:24 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 10,926
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
Extra incentive? Worth more? How are they worth more and not equally valued?

I lived through Obama. I didn't want him. I lived through Carter. I didn't want him. I lived through Reagan after he made jobs very tough to find in 1987. I lived through NAFTA which took away more jobs. It seems many presidents on both sides of the aisle have caused a reduction in jobs. If there was an increase, it was only in government jobs to help the poor they created get their food stamps and welfare.
Wow.

I'm reading a fundamental misunderstanding of what the president can and cannot do.

First, some Presidents did "create" lots of jobs. By accident. Most of the Reagan era jobs were defense related, or the first wave of transplant manufacturing... All while traditional rust belt and northeast jobs were cut.

Clinton lucked out possibly like no other due to the Internet and y2k.

Bush lucked out due to energy and housing bubble jobs. Some.

Obama lucked out due to healthcare expansion.

Now, what Trump promises isn't likely to happen. We might see a few hundred jobs here or there, but the fact he even believes he can create jobs by cutting taxes and regulations is laughable. Mexico is a third of the wages, maybe half in lower paying jobs. China is half of Mexico.Taxes and regulations are irrelevant if your labor costs are 75% lower there and the supply chain is already established.

I wish he could do it. He could, for example, scrap the h1b visa program. He has said as much. But, when one of his top business leader advisors is none other than the CEO of a company that's the number one outsourcing firm in the country, or when his cabinet is full of billionaires who outsourced their way to corporate wealth, I gotta wonder.

Trump understands business. I do not doubt it. But he deeply understands a very narrow segment of business, real estate, not manufacturing, where the lost jobs were.
john117 is online now  
post #42 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 08:46 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,838
Re: EC vs. NPV

Then the inevitable will come sooner. It's a win in any case.

I've always felt Reagan's actions against the air traffic controllers was a major factor in lost wages and benefits for all blue collar jobs.

I've always believed the value of the dollar was reduced as the deficit ran higher.

I've always believed Carter's increased regulations demanded that costs for businesses be cut to allow for compliance.

I've always believed Ford's slow reaction to a reduction of nationally produced gasoline was part of the issue for long lines at the gas pumps and a rise in prices. Excuse me, along with taxes being attached to each gallon of gasoline, which I still can't figure out what value they have brought. Of course, my little world is not the entire country.

I've always believed Nixon's policies created issues with businesses beginning to move toward production in China and other nations.

Those are just a few examples off the top of my egg head.

I can only say I felt some personal increase in wealth during the expansion of the computer programming age. Why? I don't know. There was more money being circulated in the economy, so there was a greater need for things being produced. I guess that's why.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #43 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 09:15 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 10,926
john117 is online now  
post #44 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 09:53 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,540
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
I think I understand what you are saying. If the population of the country is centered in the east and in and around large cities, how will that vote in Wyoming have as much weight as those in areas with more dense populations? Won't candidates only spend their money in areas which could help them win the election? They wouldn't need to stop in many Midwestern states. By the time they get a chance to vote, wouldn't the election already have been won?
I'd say it goes far beyond the candidates spending money only in those densely populated areas. They would pander to and govern according to the desires of those areas. Why worry about Wyoming when you can get far more votes for the dollar out of a small area on the east coast? We would end up with government which ignored, aka did not represent, the wishes and needs of the vast middle area of the country.

We would get tyranny of the majority eventually. Until then we would have tyranny of the heavily populated coastal metro areas.

This is precisely what the Founders foresaw and precisely what they designed the EC to protect against.
Thor is online now  
post #45 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 10:32 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 10,926
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I'd say it goes far beyond the candidates spending money only in those densely populated areas. They would pander to and govern according to the desires of those areas.
Are you kidding me?

Rural communities, to begin with, receive tons of subsidies, mostly farming. Then you have road building and infrastructure. Rural electrification has cost the rest of us a lot, and now we're seeing the same with Internet and cable TV.

Cost of providing such services in rural areas are much higher due to lower densities. Yet we're subsidizing those.

Then you have the simple economics that urban and suburban counties produce a lot more of the wealth of the country.

In terms of taxes, same thing:

http://www.ibj.com/articles/15690-st...rural-counties

http://www.dailycamera.com/guest-opi...rban-residents

https://www.google.com/amp/civileats...st-demand/amp/

The cynic in me would also point out the state subsidies going to greenfield plants paying $12-15 an hour with no health or other benefits in the middle of nowhere, lowering the bar, and taking established locations and higher wages down.
john117 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome