Welcome to Lemmy.World General!
This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.
πͺ About Lemmy World
π§ Finding Communities
Feel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!
Also keep an eye on:
For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!
π¬ Additional Discussion Focused Communities:
Rules
Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.
0. See: Rules for Users.
Ranked choice is quite terrible actually, barely better than Plurality (also known as FPTP). The center for election science has a whole article on it here. https://electionscience.github.io/vse-sim/
3-2-1 voting and STAR are the best choices, but the CES actually advocates for approval due to logistics and people getting confused by 321 and star.
Instead of banning tipping, the law should maybe require to include all costs. This should not just apply to stuff served, but anything.
No employee, owner, shareholder, investor, contractor, etc. can make more than 50 times the amount of the lowest paid employee, contractor, supplier employee, supplier's supplier employee, etc. (Including all of the foreign slaves).
Tim Cook wants to earn 50M per year? Then all of those Foxconn guys that they need nets to stop from suiciding need to make at least 1M. All of the guys making chips have to make 1M. All of the guys mining coal to produce the electricity have to make 1M.
Income inequality problems would be abated. "Dey took our yobs." would be less of a problem because you would save money by using local labor due to lower shipping costs. Poverty would eventually be eliminated.
Probably communism with extra steps, but maybe it would be less prone to party dictators.
Decommodify housing as well
Ranked choice voting is clearly a better choice than plurality voting, but if you're not familiar with STAR voting, please check it out:
Honestly at this point the only thing you are keeping is the English language.
Dude I'm voting for you
It all starts with the top - proportional representation.
It still amazes me that states have those proposition votea/referenda started by petitions and yet there isn't a movement to get proportional representation on the ballot? Or if there is it seems pretty quiet from outside the US.
Can you please create a community for this? I'd love to be able to discuss each point separately, and suggest others.
i think your biggest problem is how you are getting any of this done with opposite financial incentives in the way without a literal revolution.
dunno how you mandate people vote. the rest looks like an ambitious but overall laudable start.
Australia already does it
So, some of these are great. And some of them are so unrealistic they will NEVER happen in a trillion universes. I don't think it's healthy or productive to conflate great talking points with this crud because it just devalues the argument as a whole.
Why would a two party system implement ranked choice if everyone is stupid enough to keep voting for them? They're not going to shoot themselves in the foot.
That's the issue isn't it
MANDATORY voting... Let's be real, we have people who are unable to read the candidates' personal statements, you really want them voting?
That'll be used to get President Camacho legislating Mandatory plant watering using Gatorade.
That is reeeeaally anti-democratic.
Convert corporations into Worker Consumer Cooperatives to prevent investor wealth accumulation and regulatory capture and align business towards worker and consumer interests rather than short-term profit seeking.
Can you explain what you mean by this?
Collateral for loan is realized gain
Functionally how would that work? Maybe I'm being obtuse here, but it sounds like a Catch-22.
Currently what billionaires do is never sell their assets so that they never have to pay capital gains tax (since they haven't realised the gain), but then take out large loans using those assets as collateral and live off the loans. That allows them to enjoy the benefits of their capital gain without ever paying tax on it.
The line you quoted is saying that if you use some asset as collateral for a loan then for tax purposes that should count as realising any gains in value