What if your candidate wins the popular vote, but is not made President?

originally posted by: tadaman

tadaman: I doubt anyone with a brain will deny that things arent all peachy when it comes to the sate of democracy in this country, or even the world. We only have an illusion of choice. Is that democracy? Maybe to some, but most would not line that up with a democratic ideal.

There is reason why most countries are not democratic but more toward a socialist bent. Keep the masses happy with the social programs or dole/stipend (no reason to change or revolt against the government) as it is ones meal ticket in places such as France, England etc. Libya confounds me as everyone under dictator Quadafi's regime recieved $20,000 a year (oil profits) and did not have work. The result was no one was available to fix the infrastructure (roads, sewage systems); cars, buildings as no one had to work; there was no incentive to do so . A Kind Socialist Dictator's regime that failed.

Paying people by merely existing is not a solution.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Most people dont realize this. They talk about golden oil pans and the such.

It was failing, but with money like that, it was a missed opportunity for out of work professionals the world over.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: vethumanbeing

tadaman: Most people dont realize this. They talk about golden oil pans and the such.
It was failing, but with money like that, it was a missed opportunity for out of work professionals the world over.

You would think there would be ex-pat French that may want to live in Libya (this was a French colony before WWII). Perhaps the regime was so fragile/unstable (infighting) after the late 70's one did not want to accidently lose their life if misidentified as an oil worker or an oil worker (engineer) import.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
Paying people by merely existing is not a solution.

Why not? Every single person has needs, wants, and desires. Simple existence creates value because you're still a consumer for certain products. That's a commodity that's worth something to the economy.

originally posted by: Aazadan
originally posted by: vethumanbeing

vhb: Paying people by merely existing is not a solution.

Aazadan: Why not? Every single person has needs, wants, and desires. Simple existence creates value because you're still a consumer for certain products. That's a commodity that's worth something to the economy.

So; you are volunteering to pay a wage to everyone existing on this earth in order they can fulfill their needs wants and desires? That is outstanding; where do I sign up?

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: tadaman

tadaman: I doubt anyone with a brain will deny that things arent all peachy when it comes to the sate of democracy in this country, or even the world. We only have an illusion of choice. Is that democracy? Maybe to some, but most would not line that up with a democratic ideal.

There is reason why most countries are not democratic but more toward a socialist bent. Keep the masses happy with the social programs or dole/stipend (no reason to change or revolt against the government) as it is ones meal ticket in places such as France, England etc. Libya confounds me as everyone under dictator Quadafi's regime recieved $20,000 a year (oil profits) and did not have work. The result was no one was available to fix the infrastructue (roads, sewage systems); cars, buildings as no one had to work; there was no incentive to do so . A Kind Socialist Dictator's regime that failed.

I don't see how what you wrote applies to the post you responded to, or to your original post about democracy never being broken and being "rubbery".

The premise was that the state of democracy in democratic countries is messed up, which you denied.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
So; you are volunteering to pay a wage to everyone existing on this earth in order they can fulfill their needs wants and desires? That is outstanding; where do I sign up?

People still have to work, but basic incomes that cover things like food and rent are a very good idea.

a reply to: Aazadan
They wont work if that is just given. Its not even something that is arguable. In every instance that this has been done, productivity goes down and society starts to lag.

Also, I dont think people deserve those things. Too many are selfish and corrupt even on a common level. They arent WORTHY of that.

I am serious. People are lazy, self entitled jerks who need to be humbled by life in order that they dont become little monsters running around making life harder for the other people they treat like crap.

I say let them suffer, it makes the weak show they are assholes and the strong rise to become noble.

a reply to: tadaman

So the poor are assholes and the rich are humanities noblest specimens? The poor don't get to eat? People shouldn't have shelter?

Wow.

a reply to: Aazadan

Stop being so simplistic.

Some rich were poor and some poor were rich.

Class simplicity and the victim mentality need to be corrected in ourselves.

Perhaps hard work will change that error in disposition.

I know it was a reality check for me. I know the worth of my meals and how hard it is to bring a full spoon to my mouth. That also makes me see the worth in bringing a spoonfull to others.

More than those that think its monopoly money and all a game.

You cant demand things. I dont care about people who demand things.

I care for those that will know the worth of things, and in that knowledge see the true worth in helping others.

Its not all a cheap game. Isht is real, some people are not.

a reply to: tadaman

Actually, I know that what you're assuming would happen, wouldn't actually happen because we have ample real world evidence of it. Nations with basic incomes actually have stronger economies. As it turns out, the practice frees people up to perform the labor they want to perform. Psychologically this fits as well. As even you have shown in your posts, people tend to evaluate themselves by looking at others. In this case you're justifying your own work/life choices by seeing others who are worse off than you, because they didn't make those same choices. The same thing happens on a basic income. When people only have the same things as the people on the bottom, they want to do more in order to justify their own existence to themselves.

It doesn't result in a situation where no one works, it in fact does the opposite.

a reply to: tadaman

I would say this is probably the root of the current divisiveness in US politics.

The left has never gotten over the last time this happened.

a reply to: Aazadan

No I am going off historical precedent. Every country with even a working hardcore socialist society has issues of productivity.

I am not getting into a socialist BS argument.

I dont agree, read history and current events.

You are not convincing someone with sores on his asses sores from work to give anyone crap.

Ask the rich you hate. Leave me in my hard earned poverty the hell alone.

Moral arguments to give people who only eat crap and reproduce things they dont appreciate. Yeah.

Some socialist ideals, cool. Free food and housing, higher education and spending money for a quality life....

Eat me.

a reply to: Aazadan

That is the system we have now ... only the basic is called welfare, and the ones who live on it only gripe and complain that they aren't given more instead of having incentive to go out and earn it.

Look this way, everyone has $20. You say it gives everyone incentive to earn more so they can have more. But it seems to me that the people who are used to having stuff provided to them only complain when they see some working and having more.

"You gave me this $20, and it's not fair that some can earn more than I have!"

And look at what happens when some of those on basic can only flip burgers ... then they get upset when some can work as things like teachers, engineers, surgeons, etc., and earn way, way more than the basic burger flipper.

"But we work just as hard for just as long! It's not FAIR!"

And so it goes. I don't really see that it would change anyone's mentality.

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: tadaman

vhb: There is reason why most countries are not democratic but more toward a socialist bent. Keep the masses happy with the social programs or dole/stipend (no reason to change or revolt against the government) as it is ones meal ticket in places such as France, England etc. Libya confounds me as everyone under dictator Quadafi's regime recieved $20,000 a year (oil profits) and did not have work. The result was no one was available to fix the infrastructue (roads, sewage systems); cars, buildings as no one had to work; there was no incentive to do so . A Kind Socialist Dictator's regime that failed.

Dutch: I don't see how what you wrote applies to the post you responded to, or to your original post about democracy never being broken and being "rubbery". The premise was that the state of democracy in democratic countries is messed up, which you denied.

Lets get back to the original position/question of the OP. The reason popular vote can be outsmarted/duped by the Electoral College is because the Founding Fathers (in their unique wisdom) set it up this way; to insure a tyrant or potential dictator will not buy votes/rig or influence the election process or have undue influence (designs) of a sinister nature. Its an 'ideological trap door' (if the spring lever has to be pulled) for any corrupt candidate to fall through. Hopefully has a soft landing (SAFETY FIRST)!

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: tadaman
I would say this is probably the root of the current divisiveness in US politics.
The left has never gotten over the last time this happened.

The polarization began with the Vietnam War. All states should have open voting (one should not have to register as a conservative or liberal). Everyone should be able to vote for the person that best expresses ones own ideas either parties. It is not made clear that if one registers as an Independent one can vote any party. There is some Shylockian thought at work here.

originally posted by: ketsuko
That is the system we have now ... only the basic is called welfare, and the ones who live on it only gripe and complain that they aren't given more instead of having incentive to go out and earn it.

Our current welfare system is not a basic income at all. In fact, our current welfare system basically tells adults too bad, go get a job. The entire system is designed around the support of children that can't otherwise be afforded. Not only does this actually punish those who are trying to be responsible, but it encourages people who are getting assistance to have more children.

A basic income is much different.

And look at what happens when some of those on basic can only flip burgers ... then they get upset when some can work as things like teachers, engineers, surgeons, etc., and earn way, way more than the basic burger flipper.

Actually, if everyone had a basic income, people would have the option to not work rather than be a burger flipper. It would result in higher wages and better working conditions because people would have the option to say no to bottom tier employment without reasonable conditions.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: ketsuko
That is the system we have now ... only the basic is called welfare, and the ones who live on it only gripe and complain that they aren't given more instead of having incentive to go out and earn it.

Actually, if everyone had a basic income, people would have the option to not work rather than be a burger flipper. It would result in higher wages and better working conditions because people would have the option to say no to bottom tier employment without reasonable conditions.

You realize at $15.00 an hour for an entry level employee minimum wage (for a small boutique company) would equate to a Union Journeyman Carpenters wage in 1990; $31,200 a year, take 40% of that in taxes take home would be $19,000 a year? The large franchised companies could afford this hike in minimum wages; but they get around it by only offering a 25 hour work week dodging health insurance. The hike in minimum wage across the board would result in more tax collection. Again; what remains of the lower middle class will still be milked like a Jersey Cow. Small boutique startups would have to rethink their business plans. The government is going to take the money from the working people whatever ingenious way they can contrive.