Posted by Kazper at 7:48pm Dec 23 '08Perhaps this is how a proportional representation system works or could work: Let's say there's only three parties, that represent three different ideologies... different overall ways. During a vote people vote for whatever party they believe in. The percentage of all votes for a particular party is the percentage of the 100 representatives of that party that will form the government...
I think these representatives would only be decision makers, meaning the... administration of decisions would be carried out by administrators. These administrators' particular political leanings are irrelevant, they pretty much do as they're told. They simply must be qualified to fill the administrative position that they fill. If a certain task has no precedent, regardless if they agree that the task should be done, they must put their skills to work to figure out a way to acheive it.
There must be a certain percent of concensus among the party reps. for a final decision. If one party got 75% of votes then they would have 75 reps. in the... "House Of Representatives". This likely means that they would always get their way but if a majority of people wanted them and still agree with their decisions, then...
For a party to exist it would only need to have at least 100 reps. so that in the unlikely event they get 100% of the votes they'd have the necessary numbers to represent.
The percentage numbers would be rounded up or down. .5 and below would be rounded down and .6 and up would be rounded up so that a party with 68.5% of votes would have 68 reps. in the "HOR".
If through the rounding we're a rep. short because, for example, party one got 35.4%, party two got 40.7% and party three got 23.5% which would translate to party one having 35 reps., party two having 41 reps. and party three having 23 reps., making for a total of 99 reps. the one missing could be added from the party with the highest 10th of a percent. If two or all parties have the same highest then the missing would come from the party with the highest whole percent. In the above example party two would supply the extra rep. since it has the highest 10th of a percent.
If more reps. are desired the number could be 200, 300 or [number] in which case the "HOR" would be made out of 200, 300 or [number] reps.
The decision makers are voted for, not the administration. Administrators earn their position through meeting qualifications.
We need reps. because not everything can go through a vote by millions. It's unpractical to get concensus from millions on an almost daily basis.
It may be irregular but it may bring pleasure and the value of pleasure may be greater than the value of regularity.
If you're not happy with a regular morpheme or word create an irregular one that does make you happy.
The priministership/presidency/[whatever] could also be an administrator position. One functioning as P/P/[W] would be qualified for public speaking, diplomacy and anything that's determined necessary for the position.
The reps. could seek the input of administrators before they decide on something but they wouldn't require their (the administrators') consent.
In a different type of society, perhaps one that is not multicultural, instead of parties just individuals could run for rep. positions. All information about them would be revealed and their goals and visions. ...I think this would mean though that parties would still arise because a large amount of people may like one particular wannabe rep. but they couldn't just vote for her/him/it because they need to fill the "HOR". If that one individual represented a party with hers/his/its desired goals then the large amount of people could all vote for one and fill a large amount of the rep. positions...
Government institutions and the administrators that run them and the reps. can be given various levels of autonomy but never so much that they have greater authority than the people. If every citizen knows this, especially Defenders, then no coup should be possible. An absolute law would be that the people, no matter how much consent, would not be able to give their complete authority away. For example it would probably be a good idea to let an intelligence agency do their job without constant seeking of approval but every single employee is under the ultimate authority of the people... Civilians though can't have access to everything they do and a civilian oversight institute could be infiltrated by intelligence agencies... It'd have to be worked out. There's probably solutions available from governments in existence now.
Businessess that could survive a recession and survive in a smaller economy would still benefit from the existence of the filler job because otherwise poor people would be earning money and could be spending some of that money on those said businessess so those businessess could be richer than they would otherwise be.
I think those parties that qualify to be parties (they have the numbers and they're citizens and they probably can't be criminals and probably all relevant information must be released for public consumption) would present their message in video form that would be posted on a dedicated site for all running parties.
No parties could get donations from anyone for anything. There would be no touring, only videos. If there's debates there would be a certain number of them and they would be paid for by the people.
Voting could be mandatory.
The television and internet and radio broadcasts of the debates could be mandatory to... receive and this could be ensured by not broadcasting any other programs during those times (there's only a few so it's not a huge inconvenience and many may only not want to participate because they're distracted). (I've only voted once by the way.)
I heard that voting machines in America don't give receipts and I think that's a bad idea so machines should give receipts and if we're dealing with paper ballots what might be a cool idea could be a ballot with a carbon copy that would record the vote as well as all the other information such as the location of the voting.
I think absent votes should be allowed in case one doesn't like any of the parties.
Periodically a quick vote could be done to see if the people want another election vote. It would be nice if the quick vote was really quick and simple and secure so that they could be done often, perhaps evey month, so that the "HOR' would really be kept on their toes. They would really be kept in check. If the people are happy a particular "HOR" could theorhetically remain in power for decades.
Hmph. The Canadian Senate is similar to the "HOR" except that the members are not elected. I think it's a good idea. My senate too could consist of appointed administrators and their role (since they should be, at least sometimes, more experienced than members of the "HOR" who could be... right off the farm, so to speak) would be to review proposed legislation. I'm not sure they'd have power to reject it though... Perhaps if they desire to reject it they could let those reasons be known, of course to the "HOR", but also to the people...
Perhaps for every administrator there'll be one from an oversight institution to watch...
Ha! The Federal Reserve Banks are the giant bank that I was seeing for the new system. I don't think entirely the same but basically.
The "FRB" in the new system would be the only real bank because they create the new money and the other money lenders (that don't lend new money) that could exist would go to them to get set up. These "secondary banks" could exist because they'd probably be higher risk lenders since the "FRB" would be much stricter since it wouldn't want to give money away.
If supply can't increase for demand then demand becomes greater than supply and so the prices can rise. If people outside the economic system were to enter it and earn money from filler job work their added demand may not increase supply and so they could cause the prices to go up. They could still cause the prices to go up if they earned money in some other way but the filler job makes it easier since it's guaranteed and can handle as many as there are... If greater demand doesn't spur development of increased supply, which I think it would in alot of cases since it's an opportunity for business expansion and so greater profits, then inflation is just something we'd have to deal with sometimes. I think if the price goes too high for anyone to buy anything or only a few to buy things the prices will fall and businessess would be wise to drop the prices down to preinflation prices so as to all be at that equillibrium and have all those customers back.
I think inflation happens when not just one or a few businessess raise prices but when most of them do. And I think they do so because those businessess that they deal with have raised theirs. By increasing their prices they can maintain... their equilibrium... their profit margin.
Once the prices have gone so high that the living wage is no longer a living wage, the living wage has to be increased.
Businessess that do not increase their prices in order to maintain their profit margin during inflations but instead decrease their profit margin or downsize or innovate in order to compensate could benefit from inflations. Possibly, enough of them could stop and maybe reverse inflations...
A business decreasing its desired profit margin to perhaps just enough to live on to keep their prices the same or perhaps even slightly below preinflation prices may increase its consumers so much that they actually get more profit then they alloted for... And businessess losing customers to this other may have no choice but to lower prices as well in order to try and get them back and this may have a ripple effect...
Females who like big penises may have a... metaphoric epithet like this: boa constrictor. The penis is represented by boa and the female is represented by constrictor. Something like that. :/ ::shrugs::
Seek not power over others. Seek only power over yourself and to kep others from getting power over you.
Yes. Take it literally but conditionally/unabsolutely. Principles are general guidelines that in particular situations may not apply or fully apply. Though some may regard some principles as unconditional/absolute.
~Shawn Savoie~
~Ottawa, Ontario, Canada~
I think these representatives would only be decision makers, meaning the... administration of decisions would be carried out by administrators. These administrators' particular political leanings are irrelevant, they pretty much do as they're told. They simply must be qualified to fill the administrative position that they fill. If a certain task has no precedent, regardless if they agree that the task should be done, they must put their skills to work to figure out a way to acheive it.
There must be a certain percent of concensus among the party reps. for a final decision. If one party got 75% of votes then they would have 75 reps. in the... "House Of Representatives". This likely means that they would always get their way but if a majority of people wanted them and still agree with their decisions, then...
For a party to exist it would only need to have at least 100 reps. so that in the unlikely event they get 100% of the votes they'd have the necessary numbers to represent.
The percentage numbers would be rounded up or down. .5 and below would be rounded down and .6 and up would be rounded up so that a party with 68.5% of votes would have 68 reps. in the "HOR".
If through the rounding we're a rep. short because, for example, party one got 35.4%, party two got 40.7% and party three got 23.5% which would translate to party one having 35 reps., party two having 41 reps. and party three having 23 reps., making for a total of 99 reps. the one missing could be added from the party with the highest 10th of a percent. If two or all parties have the same highest then the missing would come from the party with the highest whole percent. In the above example party two would supply the extra rep. since it has the highest 10th of a percent.
If more reps. are desired the number could be 200, 300 or [number] in which case the "HOR" would be made out of 200, 300 or [number] reps.
The decision makers are voted for, not the administration. Administrators earn their position through meeting qualifications.
We need reps. because not everything can go through a vote by millions. It's unpractical to get concensus from millions on an almost daily basis.
It may be irregular but it may bring pleasure and the value of pleasure may be greater than the value of regularity.
If you're not happy with a regular morpheme or word create an irregular one that does make you happy.
The priministership/presidency/[whatever] could also be an administrator position. One functioning as P/P/[W] would be qualified for public speaking, diplomacy and anything that's determined necessary for the position.
The reps. could seek the input of administrators before they decide on something but they wouldn't require their (the administrators') consent.
In a different type of society, perhaps one that is not multicultural, instead of parties just individuals could run for rep. positions. All information about them would be revealed and their goals and visions. ...I think this would mean though that parties would still arise because a large amount of people may like one particular wannabe rep. but they couldn't just vote for her/him/it because they need to fill the "HOR". If that one individual represented a party with hers/his/its desired goals then the large amount of people could all vote for one and fill a large amount of the rep. positions...
Government institutions and the administrators that run them and the reps. can be given various levels of autonomy but never so much that they have greater authority than the people. If every citizen knows this, especially Defenders, then no coup should be possible. An absolute law would be that the people, no matter how much consent, would not be able to give their complete authority away. For example it would probably be a good idea to let an intelligence agency do their job without constant seeking of approval but every single employee is under the ultimate authority of the people... Civilians though can't have access to everything they do and a civilian oversight institute could be infiltrated by intelligence agencies... It'd have to be worked out. There's probably solutions available from governments in existence now.
Businessess that could survive a recession and survive in a smaller economy would still benefit from the existence of the filler job because otherwise poor people would be earning money and could be spending some of that money on those said businessess so those businessess could be richer than they would otherwise be.
I think those parties that qualify to be parties (they have the numbers and they're citizens and they probably can't be criminals and probably all relevant information must be released for public consumption) would present their message in video form that would be posted on a dedicated site for all running parties.
No parties could get donations from anyone for anything. There would be no touring, only videos. If there's debates there would be a certain number of them and they would be paid for by the people.
Voting could be mandatory.
The television and internet and radio broadcasts of the debates could be mandatory to... receive and this could be ensured by not broadcasting any other programs during those times (there's only a few so it's not a huge inconvenience and many may only not want to participate because they're distracted). (I've only voted once by the way.)
I heard that voting machines in America don't give receipts and I think that's a bad idea so machines should give receipts and if we're dealing with paper ballots what might be a cool idea could be a ballot with a carbon copy that would record the vote as well as all the other information such as the location of the voting.
I think absent votes should be allowed in case one doesn't like any of the parties.
Periodically a quick vote could be done to see if the people want another election vote. It would be nice if the quick vote was really quick and simple and secure so that they could be done often, perhaps evey month, so that the "HOR' would really be kept on their toes. They would really be kept in check. If the people are happy a particular "HOR" could theorhetically remain in power for decades.
Hmph. The Canadian Senate is similar to the "HOR" except that the members are not elected. I think it's a good idea. My senate too could consist of appointed administrators and their role (since they should be, at least sometimes, more experienced than members of the "HOR" who could be... right off the farm, so to speak) would be to review proposed legislation. I'm not sure they'd have power to reject it though... Perhaps if they desire to reject it they could let those reasons be known, of course to the "HOR", but also to the people...
Perhaps for every administrator there'll be one from an oversight institution to watch...
Ha! The Federal Reserve Banks are the giant bank that I was seeing for the new system. I don't think entirely the same but basically.
The "FRB" in the new system would be the only real bank because they create the new money and the other money lenders (that don't lend new money) that could exist would go to them to get set up. These "secondary banks" could exist because they'd probably be higher risk lenders since the "FRB" would be much stricter since it wouldn't want to give money away.
If supply can't increase for demand then demand becomes greater than supply and so the prices can rise. If people outside the economic system were to enter it and earn money from filler job work their added demand may not increase supply and so they could cause the prices to go up. They could still cause the prices to go up if they earned money in some other way but the filler job makes it easier since it's guaranteed and can handle as many as there are... If greater demand doesn't spur development of increased supply, which I think it would in alot of cases since it's an opportunity for business expansion and so greater profits, then inflation is just something we'd have to deal with sometimes. I think if the price goes too high for anyone to buy anything or only a few to buy things the prices will fall and businessess would be wise to drop the prices down to preinflation prices so as to all be at that equillibrium and have all those customers back.
I think inflation happens when not just one or a few businessess raise prices but when most of them do. And I think they do so because those businessess that they deal with have raised theirs. By increasing their prices they can maintain... their equilibrium... their profit margin.
Once the prices have gone so high that the living wage is no longer a living wage, the living wage has to be increased.
Businessess that do not increase their prices in order to maintain their profit margin during inflations but instead decrease their profit margin or downsize or innovate in order to compensate could benefit from inflations. Possibly, enough of them could stop and maybe reverse inflations...
A business decreasing its desired profit margin to perhaps just enough to live on to keep their prices the same or perhaps even slightly below preinflation prices may increase its consumers so much that they actually get more profit then they alloted for... And businessess losing customers to this other may have no choice but to lower prices as well in order to try and get them back and this may have a ripple effect...
Females who like big penises may have a... metaphoric epithet like this: boa constrictor. The penis is represented by boa and the female is represented by constrictor. Something like that. :/ ::shrugs::
Seek not power over others. Seek only power over yourself and to kep others from getting power over you.
Yes. Take it literally but conditionally/unabsolutely. Principles are general guidelines that in particular situations may not apply or fully apply. Though some may regard some principles as unconditional/absolute.
~Shawn Savoie~
~Ottawa, Ontario, Canada~