Wayne Stollings wrote:
Quote:
No income no vote was stated tongue in cheek. Counting one person's vote more than another is not eliminating votes.
Actually, it does if you weight it enough. If my voted is weighted twice that of yours and we disagree my one vote neutralizes your vote and gives me one additional vote. That essentially liminates your vote.
Fosgate wrote:
Yes, and someone voting in opposition to me essentially does the same thing now.?
You know better than that. The current opposing vote on negates a vote, but a vote WEIGHTED higher than yours would do more than just offset.
Quote:
Quote:
Or perhaps not, since the concern was supposedly how the poor HAS voted to give themselves benefits, not that they may vote those benefits at some time in the future.
No, that's the exact concern.
How can they do that when they are not a majority? Your claims are not backed up by facts.
Quote:
Quote:
But the example was supposed to show how the poor HAD created a problem, which clearly is not the case since there are not a majority of poor there.
Doesn't have to be a majority so much as it having to be
enough relative to the other groups present.
Sorry, but that is pure BS. Unless there is a majority vote there is no passage of anything in the US. Thus, unless another group agrees with that view it does not happen and if that passes your claim is invalid concernign the poor giving themselves anything.
Quote:
Consideration should also be given to how much of each demographic actually votes, not only how much of each comprises an area.
Poor voters generally do not vote as often nor as consistently as those making more money, so this goes against your position too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout#cite_note-18In developed countries, non-voters tend to be concentrated in particular demographic and socioeconomic groups, especially the young and the poor
USA (1988) Turnout
50.1 %
Income (Quinitile)
Lowest 20%: 36.4 %
52
59
67
Highest 20%: 63.1Quote:
It seems to be a cse where the non-poor seem to have thrown the poor under the bus so to speak. The inequality in education and training I found referenced would only come about with the majority non-poor voting to limit the resources spent on education for the poor.
Quote:
If you're equating "poor" with those living at or under the poverty line, maybe. I'm looking at it more from a variable standpoint.
What variable would that be other than "not-rich"? It seems everything in this plan is an undefined variable ...
Quote:
Quote:
How so? More heavily weighting the middle class tempers the issue you describe. It would empower third party candidates like never before.
Except the middle class is getting smaller, and in your example of the Delta has thrown the poor under a bus in many ways.
Quote:
The middle class is getting smaller because of the current system.
OK, how then is the poor vote, which is the lowest turnout of all of the groups causing this change exactly? It seems the cause is more in line with the wealthy earning more and not allowing the rest of the groups to have any share.
Quote:
If that is to change, the power of the rich must be tempered and also shifted away from the poorer classes that support them.
The poorer classes vote in support of the rich? Yet the rich would have their votes weighted more than the poor to dilute this effect?
Quote:
Quote:
Nor do I.
So how would your plan increase the educational spendign for the poor in the Delta, which was your example. The vote of the poorer members is supposed to be diluted in your plan, which would seem to only maintain the lack of resources to improve the society as a whole.
Quote:
A better question would be why it hasn't happened already, given such a champion of the poor and underprivileged has been elected as their representative for I don't know how many terms now.
You would have to provide some specifics there as that makes no sense. How long has there been a problem with educational equality? I know there is still a divide here regardless of how hard some try to correct it. The wealthy want to take money from the public schools to offset some of their costs in private schools even now. One of the local school boards made the national news when a conservative majority came in and immediately gutted the socio-economic diversity plans which had been hailed as on of the best in the nation. Now that majority has been replaced because the schools were screwed up in the process.
Quote:
Hard to blame anyone for throwing the poor under the bus when they've done it to themselves for so long.
Really? They voted to dissolve the public school system because the wealthy could afford private schools? That was mostly racial but the economic lines run very close to the racial lines. I see nothing in the way of data to support this calim at all.
Quote:
Quote:
Less than "not perfect" given the data.
Less than not perfect can still be pretty damn good. How much less?
Except in this case it is a lot less than not perfect. Near the level of epic fail.
Quote:
Quote:
Under numerous circumstances which is still continued to be ignored.
I've acknowledged faults and flaws, that the system isn't perfect. We're simply entertaining an idea. Short of outright agreement with you, how much more consideration should be given?
For weighted voting based on what appears to be assumptions? None.
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not ignoring it. I'm simply lending it the consideration it deserves. I accept that there will be demand for that which can be destructive. Society, at the same time it demands, recognizes that which is ultimately destructive and takes action accordingly.
Except that negates the premise of your statements concerning compensation being equal to demand beign filled which in turn is equal to a benefit to society.
Quote:
No, it accounts for the fact that humans are imperfect beings.
How does it do that? It shows the concept is beyond imperfect, but that does not cause any corrective action.
Quote:
Quote:
The more caveates which must be included the more flawed the plan.
You mean the more I don't provide a satisfactory answer to your questions, the more you
believe the plan is flawed.
No, the more flaws that cannot be satisfactorily supported by facts nor explained the less likely this plan is to work. Now I give it only a ~30% chance of being tried and then a ~85% cahnce that it would fail outright.
Quote:
Quote:
Or perhaps, cleaner, while students cleaning up their own mess just might work out fine.
As long as you did not mind the injuries and lack of real education resulting from this plan. It shows a clear lack of understanding of the larger picture in favor of a knee-jerk reaction.
Quote:
Yes, there is always the risk of injury with physical activity. You think the risk is higher for custodial work as opposed to P.E. or recess?
Custodial work. There are cleaning supplies, electrical equipment, and the like which are not normally a concern.
Quote:
I fail to see how early work experience doesn't qualify as education especially when there is no risk of being terminated.
Except the risk of termination is more along the lines of a permanent termination. What would being taught to clean do for you in the study of science, math, or languages? Not very much. Considering the level of education provided in many of the poorer areas, the loss of any class time would be bad.
That seems to be the basis for the failure of the plan. There is a basic failure to see the obvious.
Quote:
Are knee-jerk reactions necessarily bad?
No, but the probability they are is higher since there is no thought put into them.
Quote:
Is this a knee-jerk reaction or perhaps and idea from someone who's been around the block and knows what works off the top of their head?
Right, and perhaps there will be a magic lamp that gives us the answer too.
Quote:
Quote:
But the doctors are making more, despite being in larger number.
Please give me the evidence to support this claim. The income in 1900 compared to that in 1990 for a GP MD would be a good step in this case.
Quote:
Your data clearly showed that doctors today are making inordinately more than they did in 1900. I thought inflation, maybe, but the numbers looked so much out of the ballpark that I didn't give it further thought. What'd I miss?
The fact I did not give data for doctors for one. Not many doctors earn $17,593.00 or less a year.
Quote:
Quote:
I submit that their services are of higher quality now than it once was and that this contributes significantly to compensation.
And you have evidence of this where?
Quote:
Evidence that we pool more intensive resources into medical training today than we did 100 years ago, which translates into better, more valuable physicians...really?
You have supported a claim with another claim. How much of the relative resources were put into medical training in the two periods?
Quote:
Not every good idea or plan succeeds and part of the cause is bad luck. Not every bad idea or plan fails and part of the cause is good luck.
Quote:
No, part of the cause is chance and chance alone.
Yes it is. If you have the best business plan in the world and sufficient capital for twice more than the average growth curve for a business of this type, but a simple act of bad luck can offset all of the planning and preparation and kill that business.[/quote]
Quote:
An act of bad luck? Huh?
You do not understand an event consisting of bad luck happening?
Quote:
If you have a business that is isolated because a freak storm causes a landslide which cannot be cleared for months after you have exhausted your capital and closed your business, what is the cause other than chance that the business failed.
Quote:
Nothing, you're just getting "colorful" with the outcome's description based on what is considered fortunate and what is not. We could call it a spell, a curse, or if there is good luck, a blessing.
You can play with semantics all you like, the cause and effect are still based on random acts which cannot be controlled or predicted .... luck.
Quote:
Quote:
Oh he got his luck alright, just not the form he was hoping for.
So luck does make of break a plan?
Quote:
Nah, luck is just a way of describing how the chips fell.
If that is the extent of your understanding of the impact of luck, I cannot explain it any more simply. Good or bad would describe how the chips fell and the fact they fell would be described as luck.
Quote:
Quote:
I'm sure. I'm not as concerned with that as I am the existing poorer classes multiplying on their own.
Evidence of this claim?
Quote:
:-s What claim?
"I'm not as concerned with that as I am the
existing poorer classes multiplying on their own."
Quote:
Quote:
The fact that they their contributions were no longer valuable enough to be further compensated by that particular employer? Am I to assume this particular person is so unlucky that they cannot find a job within a reasonable amount of time either without falling into poverty?
No, you can accept the facts that in a bad economy you may not get a job regardless of how hard you try due to being unlucky enough to have lost a job if several million jobs have disappeared nationwide. How long can you survive without income?
Quote:
Long enough to find work or, if necessary, adapt to where I no longer need it.
So how exactly do you no longer need a job to stay out of poverty? These "off the cuff" assertions are harder and harder to integrate into the position.
Quote:
Quote:
Other than the area being poor, is there a more valid reason why schools in poor areas are in the state that they're in?
Racial bigotry is often the basic reason. Economic bigotry is another.
Quote:
I agree wholeheartedly.
So how did the poor minorities do that to themselves?
Quote:
Quote:
I mean, it can't possibly be as simple as folks generally not giving a rat's ass, can it?
Yes, if you can afford to send your children to a private school why support a public school for the poor minorities?
Quote:
I know. Doesn't make a hell of alot of sense to me either. On the flip side, fostering a destructive social model, generation after generation, might give a clue that some demographics couldn't care less about education in the first place.
Sort of like ignorance not being corrected and thus creating a perpetual cycle? Wait, that is one of the causes of poverty according to some ecperts.
Quote:
Quote:
Naw, that would be too simple. There must be another explanation. I hear there are statues that bleed too. Those must be miracles.
Just as claiming those who are poor are so because they really want to be based on a pure assumption.
Quote:
Good thing no one's made that claim.
How then do you make the claim the poor have done all of this damage to themselves? Or are you saying it is not an assumption and there will be data following?
Quote:
Quote:
A basic human right decided that it is such by who, exactly? Sounds like something that can be changed.
In our society it can be changed by the agreement of the majority of the state legislators in 2/3 of the states.
Quote:
As can the requirement on who/how many must agree in order to change X.
Only AFTER the number agrees or there is a significant civil war.
Quote:
Quote:
At any rate, this can be averted by empowering the middle class...now.
How is the middle class NOT empowered compared to the poor now? You claim the poor are voting things for themselves when they are NOT a majority, which makes the claim false. Proposing to correct the situation on such a false claim does not make the situation as it was claimed.
Quote:
There needn't be a majority...only a majority of votes.
How is there a minority of votes when the poor are not a majority compared to the middle class and have a lower level of voter turnout? All of the data is against this claim.
Quote:
Quote:
You're concentrating too hard on the weighting and not hard enough on sheer numbers of votes.
Weighting toward the higher incomes while the sheer numbers are mostly falling in income level refutes what I am saying in what fashion?
Quote:
It doesn't. I agree that the poor component is growing, for other reasons, but it will eventually be too late to do anything to reverse the trend. What do you suggest
Election reforms. Taking the corporate donations out of the election process and eliminated the super PACs so the elections are not as much bought by the highest bidder. Fact checking of ads and independent ads correcting inaccurate claims which are not tied to any party or election. Term limits might also be necessary.