|
|
| Is the two party system good for society? |
| Yes |
|
15% |
[ 2 ] |
| No |
|
84% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:22 pm
* Why does the US have just two major parties? (i.e. Why is it so difficult for other parties to get votes?)
* Is the two-party system good for society, or would we benefit from more competition from outsiders?
* If we want to change the entrenched power structure, then what steps can we take?To start to answer my own questions: 1) I think that stable, two-party hegemony emerges from certain election rules. Having only one vote per contest pressures each voter to choose between the perceived front-runner and the perceived closest challenger. Given historical inertia, the D's and R's grab all of that action. 2) No, I don't think that limited competition is good. Just as in economics, ease of entry pressures participants to improve and replaces them when they don't. Entrenchment allows politicians to serve themselves instead of serving the common good. 3) Until we start using an enlightened election method, simply supporting a third party is like pissing into the wind. Therefore, the logical first step toward opening up American elections to true multilateral competition is to reform electoral laws at the state level, probably via the initiative process. Australia and other countries already demonstrate that instant-runoff (IRV) also leads to two-party entrenchment, so we need to look beyond IRV. Having looked at more than a dozen voting methods, I can reduce the field to two, depending on how much you value simplicity over sophistication. For simplicity, nothing beats Approval Voting (AV). For eliciting voters' true [references and using them to choose the most desirable candidate, nothing beats Instant Round-Robin Voting (IRRV, aka Condorcet).
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:35 am
what needs to happen over the next few years is a true third party system that is effectively promoted so that it gains national attention. I think the problem is alot of people in America may not even know the name of the third party candidates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twizted Humanitarian Crew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:23 pm
We need to destroy the state. That's the only solution, because the problem isn't democrats and republicans, it's capitalism. A third party will become corrupt because in current society the number one thing you need to have as a politician is money, and when you get money you begin to owe favors and be in debt and then you get influenced by outside things. It's not effective, I think that a strong outside party must be formed, all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) should be allied and not fighting, and then we need to start from scratch, with a system where the number one motive in profit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:56 pm
The Leninator! We need to destroy the state. That's the only solution, because the problem isn't democrats and republicans, it's capitalism. A third party will become corrupt because in current society the number one thing you need to have as a politician is money, and when you get money you begin to owe favors and be in debt and then you get influenced by outside things. It's not effective, I think that a strong outside party must be formed, all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) should be allied and not fighting, and then we need to start from scratch, with a system where the number one motive in profit. While you may have some valid points I prefer to live in a country where I have the RIGHT to be as greedy as I want. Our messed up politics are a small price to pay for the FREEDOM to be rich
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twizted Humanitarian Crew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:47 pm
Jungle Soldier The Leninator! We need to destroy the state. That's the only solution, because the problem isn't democrats and republicans, it's capitalism. A third party will become corrupt because in current society the number one thing you need to have as a politician is money, and when you get money you begin to owe favors and be in debt and then you get influenced by outside things. It's not effective, I think that a strong outside party must be formed, all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) should be allied and not fighting, and then we need to start from scratch, with a system where the number one motive in profit. While you may have some valid points I prefer to live in a country where I have the RIGHT to be as greedy as I want. Our messed up politics are a small price to pay for the FREEDOM to be rich At what cost? If being rich makes others poor, others who work, other human beings, then I'd rather be combfotably working class in solidarity with others. Why is it that CEOs that eat 100 dolalr meals, move money all day, and get two or three months of paid vacation every year make so much more money then janitors and construction workers who can't possibly move up in the world and are stuck being poor while working 16 hours a day or more, with no vacation, eating terrible food and dying at a young age. Greed is a bad thing, not a right, but a basic evil of humanity. Greed is theft is murder. Every dollar you have that you don't need could be going to those that will die without it. That's where it should go. No one should starve (and yes, it does happen, I know hard working people who haven't been able to feed their kids for over a week).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:37 pm
The Leninator! Jungle Soldier The Leninator! We need to destroy the state. That's the only solution, because the problem isn't democrats and republicans, it's capitalism. A third party will become corrupt because in current society the number one thing you need to have as a politician is money, and when you get money you begin to owe favors and be in debt and then you get influenced by outside things. It's not effective, I think that a strong outside party must be formed, all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) should be allied and not fighting, and then we need to start from scratch, with a system where the number one motive in profit. While you may have some valid points I prefer to live in a country where I have the RIGHT to be as greedy as I want. Our messed up politics are a small price to pay for the FREEDOM to be rich At what cost? If being rich makes others poor, others who work, other human beings, then I'd rather be combfotably working class in solidarity with others. Why is it that CEOs that eat 100 dolalr meals, move money all day, and get two or three months of paid vacation every year make so much more money then janitors and construction workers who can't possibly move up in the world and are stuck being poor while working 16 hours a day or more, with no vacation, eating terrible food and dying at a young age. Greed is a bad thing, not a right, but a basic evil of humanity. Greed is theft is murder. Every dollar you have that you don't need could be going to those that will die without it. That's where it should go. No one should starve (and yes, it does happen, I know hard working people who haven't been able to feed their kids for over a week). sorry dude I'm no Robin Hood the rich are rich because either THEY earned it, or thier lucky. But don't ever forget that karma is a VERY real phenomena the CEO's will get whats coming to them. I believe this because I believe in a heaven and hell the greedy will be condemned to hell and those who suffered as long as their were righteos in thier actions will ascend to heaven and will be happy and content for eternity. It all boils down to who laughs last
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twizted Humanitarian Crew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:36 am
The great thing about capitalism is that, if you end up in a lower-paying job, it's almost certainly because of choices that you made. If you end up with a dead-end, low-paying job because you dropped out of high school, don't blame capitalism, blame yourself. Similarly, the vast majority of wealthy people in capitalist nations got there through hard work and skill. Bill Gates didn't get rich through exploiting the lower class, he got there by coming up with a great idea and developing it. It took years to pay off for him. And there are many, many examples like him.
What's a better solution? Communism? Ha. Tried and failed miserably over and over again. Socialism? If the conditions are absolutely right, it might work. These conditions do not exist in the US today. Anarchy? Won't work; human instinct is to have a leader. It would only be a matter of time until one emerged.
Capitalism is by far the best we've got.
Edit- On the original topic: A two-party system is little better than a one-party system. The election laws which favour a duopoly need to be changed to something more like what we have here in Canada. We currently have 4 major parties, plus a few minor ones. This definitely helps keep government honest and democratic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:44 pm
Quote: The great thing about capitalism is that, if you end up in a lower-paying job, it's almost certainly because of choices that you made. If you end up with a dead-end, low-paying job because you dropped out of high school, don't blame capitalism, blame yourself. Similarly, the vast majority of wealthy people in capitalist nations got there through hard work and skill. Bill Gates didn't get rich through exploiting the lower class, he got there by coming up with a great idea and developing it. It took years to pay off for him. And there are many, many examples like him. Actually, that isn't true. Many people are rich because of their families stature growing up. For example, in a public school system, the poorer families get fewer tax dollars in their schools (thanks to NCLB) and can't afford major fundraiser to fill in the difference. Without proper equipment and funding, the schools begin to attract newer teachers (who can't get a job anywhere else) and decrease interest in learning. Additionally, in lower income families there is more pressure to get a job, rather than stay in harder classes, as the kids need to support their families. In harder classes, there is also more need for expensive stuff. Do you think a lower income family would want to pay $100 for the required ccalculator for Pre-Cal, or the $100 dollars per Ap test? Of course not. The fact is, the capitalist way is NOT fair to poorer people - that's just propaganda set out by some of the rich. Side note: Read Lies My Teacher Told Me, if you have time. Although it is biased against the textbook corporation, it still is very interesting (with many citations to prove its validity). Yes, it deals with this subject in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:00 pm
The Leninator! all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) If there are supposivly alot of Socialist, and Anarchist parties; Then how come I do not see them on the ballot? thenerdqueen Actually, that isn't true. Many people are rich because of their families stature growing up. That's Horse****! Andrew Carnegie was from a poor immigrant family from Scotland. He worked his way up, and did jobs here and there. Example: In 1851, he became a telegraph messenger boy in the Pittsburgh Office of the Ohio Telegraph Company, at $2.50 per week. Every cent he had made, he invested it. These investments were in railroads, railroad sleeping cars, as well as bridges and oil derricks, and he built his wealth as a bond salesman raising money in Europe for American enterprises. He Created an Empire from Steel. And, He didn't come from a wealthy Family either. If you want more Proof look up Carlos Slim Helú, the man who is richer than Bill Gates. Or, Ingvar Kamprad. thenerdqueen For example, in a public school system, the poorer families get fewer tax dollars in their schools (thanks to NCLB) and can't afford major fundraiser to fill in the difference. Without proper equipment and funding, the schools begin to attract newer teachers (who can't get a job anywhere else) and decrease interest in learning. HEY! THINK FAST! DID YOU KNOW THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS LESS THAN 7-8% CONTROL OVER SCHOOLS? Please blame the State/Local Governments. thenerdqueen In harder classes, there is also more need for expensive stuff. Do you think a lower income family would want to pay $100 for the required ccalculator for Pre-Cal, or the $100 dollars per Ap test? Of course not. The fact is, the capitalist way is NOT fair to poorer people - that's just propaganda set out by some of the rich. LOL! Pre-Calc! Hundred dollar Calculators were usually supplied in my school, along with other schools nearby. On the other hand, There are Several Math Classes that do not require hundred dollar calculators. Plus all you really need is a certain number of Math Credits to graduate high school. Plus there is Financial Aide for college, They can always go to school (a two year school) and, go pretty much for Free. Like I am doing, and then they can go transfer to a four year school. Besides most Career occupations only care about college than in High school. thenerdqueen Side note: Read Lies My Teacher Told Me, if you have time. Although it is biased against the textbook corporation, it still is very interesting (with many citations to prove its validity). Yes, it deals with this subject in it. A book about inaccuracies in text books? Exciting Stuff there!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:06 pm
There will always be 2 parties because the Electoral College Screws over the third parties.
It is hard for a third party to take a State in the Electoral College.
It is hard for them to Raise enough money on their own.
The two major parties will try to take up most of the third parties political positions, thus taking away potential voters.
'Nuff Said
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:17 pm
Sith_Master_Steve thenerdqueen Actually, that isn't true. Many people are rich because of their families stature growing up. That's Horse****! Andrew Carnegie was from a poor immigrant family from Scotland. He worked his way up, and did jobs here and there. Example: In 1851, he became a telegraph messenger boy in the Pittsburgh Office of the Ohio Telegraph Company, at $2.50 per week. Every cent he had made, he invested it. These investments were in railroads, railroad sleeping cars, as well as bridges and oil derricks, and he built his wealth as a bond salesman raising money in Europe for American enterprises. He Created an Empire from Steel. And, He didn't come from a wealthy Family either. If you want more Proof look up Carlos Slim Helú, the man who is richer than Bill Gates. Or, Ingvar Kamprad. Andrew Carnagie was lucky - at that point in American history only 3% of the wealthy businessmen were from poor families. Quote: thenerdqueen For example, in a public school system, the poorer families get fewer tax dollars in their schools (thanks to NCLB) and can't afford major fundraiser to fill in the difference. Without proper equipment and funding, the schools begin to attract newer teachers (who can't get a job anywhere else) and decrease interest in learning. HEY! THINK FAST! DID YOU KNOW THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS LESS THAN 7-8% CONTROL OVER SCHOOLS? Please blame the State/Local Governments. I would like your source, please. Mine is a teacher who has been teaching for 20 years. In any case, what does that have to do with anything? Quote: thenerdqueen In harder classes, there is also more need for expensive stuff. Do you think a lower income family would want to pay $100 for the required calculator for Pre-Cal, or the $100 dollars per Ap test? Of course not. The fact is, the capitalist way is NOT fair to poorer people - that's just propaganda set out by some of the rich. LOL! Pre-Calc! Hundred dollar Calculators were usually supplied in my school, along with other schools nearby. On the other hand, There are Several Math Classes that do not require hundred dollar calculators. Plus all you really need is a certain number of Math Credits to graduate high school. Plus there is Financial Aide for college, They can always go to school (a two year school) and, go pretty much for Free. Like I am doing, and then they can go transfer to a four year school. Besides most Career occupations only care about college than in High school. Funnily enough, in either of the low-income high schools I have attended, neither has the means to provide free calculators (because of NCLB, both are PI schools). I chose pre- calculus as my example, because that is the most basic math that the expensive calculators are required for. I believe Calculus, Statistics, and Higher level math all require the calculators too. Colleges accept the smartest looking students - the ones who have had math all 4 years of high school. How can you take four years of math without flunking or needing an expensive calculator? Quote: thenerdqueen Side note: Read Lies My Teacher Told Me, if you have time. Although it is biased against the textbook corporation, it still is very interesting (with many citations to prove its validity). Yes, it deals with this subject in it. A book about inaccuracies in text books? Exciting Stuff there! It is - the whole concept of the book is fascinating - especially since my American history textbook was one of the ones that was chosen for critique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 11:05 am
thenerdqueen Sith_Master_Steve thenerdqueen Actually, that isn't true. Many people are rich because of their families stature growing up. That's Horse****! Andrew Carnegie was from a poor immigrant family from Scotland. He worked his way up, and did jobs here and there. Example: In 1851, he became a telegraph messenger boy in the Pittsburgh Office of the Ohio Telegraph Company, at $2.50 per week. Every cent he had made, he invested it. These investments were in railroads, railroad sleeping cars, as well as bridges and oil derricks, and he built his wealth as a bond salesman raising money in Europe for American enterprises. He Created an Empire from Steel. And, He didn't come from a wealthy Family either. If you want more Proof look up Carlos Slim Helú, the man who is richer than Bill Gates. Or, Ingvar Kamprad. Andrew Carnagie was lucky - at that point in American history only 3% of the wealthy businessmen were from poor families. LOL Please define for me Wealthy? How much money is Wealthy? Everyone one of these came from a non-rich family. Look up John D. Rockefeller, he wasn't from a wealthy family! J.P. Morgan wasn't from a wealthy family! Henry Ford wasn't From a wealthy family! Walt Disney wasn't from a wealthy family! You also failed to look up Carlos Slim Helú, the man who is richer than Bill Gates, and Ingvar Kamprad. You see, I believe the individual is personally responsible for his/her own well-being, making me quite fiscally conservative. Can you say DIY? Yeah, that means I believe that resourceful, hard-working individuals should be able to reap the fruits of their labor without being penalized for "making too much". On the other hand I believe that lazy people should get exactly what they deserve...nothing. If you have the will and the discipline, you can achieve anything. The sky is the limit. I believe that life isn't about handouts, but working for what you have. I worked my a** off to get where I am. There's no such thing as a free ride. I suppose that makes me a bit of a Darwinist, which is a good thing because Charles Darwin was a very enlightened man. thenerdqueen sith_master_steve thenerdqueen For example, in a public school system, the poorer families get fewer tax dollars in their schools (thanks to NCLB) and can't afford major fundraiser to fill in the difference. Without proper equipment and funding, the schools begin to attract newer teachers (who can't get a job anywhere else) and decrease interest in learning. HEY! THINK FAST! DID YOU KNOW THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS LESS THAN 7-8% CONTROL OVER SCHOOLS? Please blame the State/Local Governments. I would like your source, please. Mine is a teacher who has been teaching for 20 years. In any case, what does that have to do with anything? Ok, My Source is my Political Science Teacher who has her Doctorates, in Political Science, and has been teaching since 1981. She also a head honcho at the League of Women Voters, in my college town. Granite, We can not use people as sources, because how the hell do you or I know that these people exist? And, also my source is my Two text books from lat year, they both have a publication date of 2008, but I sold them back. however, the book does have a website, I will provide it. Later on! I try will explain the mighty 7-8% federal control of schools. First of all where do Public Schools get their money? Answer: Tax Payers! mrgreen New York State Has High Taxes, so thus we have better schools. If you do not believe me on this on then you are lost. When Presidents that say 'I wanna be the education president', are full themselves. Because every State has their own education requirement. For an example New York has a Regents exam. You may be thinking to your self 'WTH is a regents exam?' from my brother's student handbook; the Regents, are a set of standardized tests given to high school students through the New York State Education Department, designed and administered under the authority of the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York. Regents exams are prepared by a conference of selected New York teachers of each test's specific discipline. The conferences meet and design the tests three years before the tests' issuance. Each State has it's own education requirements. New York's is different most states. If the Federal Government had a say what to do then everyone would have to take Regents exams. Quote: thenerdqueen sith_master_steve thenerdqueen In harder classes, there is also more need for expensive stuff. Do you think a lower income family would want to pay $100 for the required calculator for Pre-Cal, or the $100 dollars per Ap test? Of course not. The fact is, the capitalist way is NOT fair to poorer people - that's just propaganda set out by some of the rich. LOL! Pre-Calc! Hundred dollar Calculators were usually supplied in my school, along with other schools nearby. On the other hand, There are Several Math Classes that do not require hundred dollar calculators. Plus all you really need is a certain number of Math Credits to graduate high school. Plus there is Financial Aide for college, They can always go to school (a two year school) and, go pretty much for Free. Like I am doing, and then they can go transfer to a four year school. Besides most Career occupations only care about college than in High school. Funnily enough, in either of the low-income high schools I have attended, neither has the means to provide free calculators (because of NCLB, both are PI schools). I chose pre- calculus as my example, because that is the most basic math that the expensive calculators are required for. I believe Calculus, Statistics, and Higher level math all require the calculators too. Colleges accept the smartest looking students - the ones who have had math all 4 years of high school. How can you take four years of math without flunking or needing an expensive calculator? Hey, now, You completely jumped over my argument. Most colleges decide over other things too, such as SAT Scores, ACT Scores, Extra Curricular Activities, Volunteer work, etc. In High School I didn't ******** take Calculus! I took Four years of Math, but no Calculus! I never had a $100 Calculator either. I used ten dollar one, and passed it with a B+, through my High School Career. I Got accepted into Ohio State, is that a good School? I didn't go (Didn't have the money), I go to a two year school in my Hometown, already I am getting s**t Loads of Post Cards from Top Dog Schools LOL! (University of Michigan, Penn State, Syracuse University, University of Pittsburgh, Ohio State, Rutgers, To Name a Few) I am Saving money too. Please re-read my First post I do not feel like Repeating my Self. Quote: thenerdqueen sith_master_steve thenerdqueen Side note: Read Lies My Teacher Told Me, if you have time. Although it is biased against the textbook corporation, it still is very interesting (with many citations to prove its validity). Yes, it deals with this subject in it. A book about inaccuracies in text books? Exciting Stuff there! It is - the whole concept of the book is fascinating - especially since my American history textbook was one of the ones that was chosen for critique. Ok, The book is Discussing Text inaccuracies. I'll tell you the book is about. You see when a group of Professors, or Professor revises a text book from a previous edition, some things become inaccurate. To re-sell the text books to maybe add, new finds. But, to Re-sell it bylaw they have to re-word the book. They usually hire their students to do the re-writing, and thus you inaccuracies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:40 pm
1. I do read my books, but I don;t believe half of what is in them. Most of it is either inaccurate or "politically corrected". I find things out for my self.
2. DIY. You work, you get rewarded. You don't work, you don;t get rewarded. During the year, as the various yard jobs open up, I alternate phases from working my a** of to not working. I get paid accordingly. When I get a steady job, I wil be rewarded for my effort. Just like I always have and always will.
3. Alongside Darwinism, I believe greatly in the teachings of the Fathers. I also have read a few of Gahndi's teachings. In the words of the great Thomas Jefferson, "The Tree of Liberty needs to be refreshed time from time by the blood of Patriots and Tyrants."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:15 am
Jungle Soldier The Leninator! Jungle Soldier The Leninator! We need to destroy the state. That's the only solution, because the problem isn't democrats and republicans, it's capitalism. A third party will become corrupt because in current society the number one thing you need to have as a politician is money, and when you get money you begin to owe favors and be in debt and then you get influenced by outside things. It's not effective, I think that a strong outside party must be formed, all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) should be allied and not fighting, and then we need to start from scratch, with a system where the number one motive in profit. While you may have some valid points I prefer to live in a country where I have the RIGHT to be as greedy as I want. Our messed up politics are a small price to pay for the FREEDOM to be rich At what cost? If being rich makes others poor, others who work, other human beings, then I'd rather be combfotably working class in solidarity with others. Why is it that CEOs that eat 100 dolalr meals, move money all day, and get two or three months of paid vacation every year make so much more money then janitors and construction workers who can't possibly move up in the world and are stuck being poor while working 16 hours a day or more, with no vacation, eating terrible food and dying at a young age. Greed is a bad thing, not a right, but a basic evil of humanity. Greed is theft is murder. Every dollar you have that you don't need could be going to those that will die without it. That's where it should go. No one should starve (and yes, it does happen, I know hard working people who haven't been able to feed their kids for over a week). sorry dude I'm no Robin Hood the rich are rich because either THEY earned it, or thier lucky. But don't ever forget that karma is a VERY real phenomena the CEO's will get whats coming to them. I believe this because I believe in a heaven and hell the greedy will be condemned to hell and those who suffered as long as their were righteos in thier actions will ascend to heaven and will be happy and content for eternity. It all boils down to who laughs last Well, it boils down to religion and a different debate in that case. Let me just say this, it's a quote from Jesus- "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to pass through the gates of heaven."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:21 am
Sith_Master_Steve The Leninator! all the socialist and communist and anarchist parties in the nation (quite a lot) If there are supposivly alot of Socialist, and Anarchist parties; Then how come I do not see them on the ballot? I never said any of them were good. There are lots, the RCP, ISO, SWP, IWW, CPUSA, SPLJ, and more. There are tons of parties, each off which with few members, and most of them refuse to deal with electoral politics and are filled with middle class coffee shop revolutionaries, and they constantly fight each other. Plus, most communists in the country are like me- pissed off because all of the parties suck and we don't deal with them and just try and convert others to communism and have things like reading groups. thenerdqueen Side note: Read Lies My Teacher Told Me, if you have time. Although it is biased against the textbook corporation, it still is very interesting (with many citations to prove its validity). Yes, it deals with this subject in it. A book about inaccuracies in text books? Exciting Stuff there! Don't be a douche dude, read the damn book or don't, don't insult it until you've at least looked at it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
