American Breakfast as seen by Europeans

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by shDK
You do make some good point to why certain parts of a population chose not to vote, don't have faith in democracy or simply don't care.

But when large parts of a population are not listened to..it is a weakness in an election, and therefore a problem in a functioning democracy. You cannot argue against that.


In most of these instances save seniors that can't do it, people choose to not have their voice heard, which is their democratic right. These people aren't being excluded by the system; it's not a failed functioning of democracy, these people are CHOOSING to not lend their voice. This is part of the functionality, as we do not mandate participation.

There is a significant difference between a group not being listened to; not being allowed to participate, and one that makes the conscious choice not to lend their voice to the cause. These two should never be conflated.

 

[shDK]

I am not suggesting that people should be forced to vote. Not at all.

The overall opinion where I live is that the right to vote is a right and a duty. Not carrying enough for your country to take part in an election is just sad. And not taking part for what ever reason you might have. Is still sign of democratic weakness.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by skyactiv
You can go to a gun show and find guys selling guns in a "private collection" which requires no background check.


HMMM that's a problem.

Criminals steal them that is why they are called criminals. The TV news doesn't tell you that though.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted by shDK
I am not suggesting that people should be forced to vote. Not at all.

The overall opinion where I live is that the right to vote is a right and a duty. Not carrying enough for your country to take part in an election is just sad. And not taking part for what ever reason you might have. Is still sign of democratic weakness.

In the U.S. if it were my doing i would ban Welfare recipients and government employees from voting. Raise the voting age to 25 and allow only property owners to vote because they usually get stuck with the burden of the taxation. That should stir the pot.

 

[shDK]

Good luck with that.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by shDK
I am not suggesting that people should be forced to vote. Not at all.

The overall opinion where I live is that the right to vote is a right and a duty. Not carrying enough for your country to take part in an election is just sad. And not taking part for what ever reason you might have. Is still sign of democratic weakness.


Do you have 1.2 million natives that you displaced from that land, many of which are now living on reserves? Taking a wild stab in the dark here, but I'm going to say no, and I also don't think many would agree with your assessment of their duty to vote.

Folks living in extensive ghettos in the states also are likely not overly inclined to vote.

I think you are having a hard time with the perspective here because of the monumental difference in both population and land mass, the role of which is significant, but hard to perhaps put to scale in one's head.

Canadian democracy is quite healthy. Those that choose to participate in it ensure that is the case. Our municipal election is coming up shortly, there are lawn signs everywhere. People are passionate, people are keen and quite vocal about who they support and why. Our recent provincial election resulted in the former ruling party decimated to non-party status due to scandal, debt and a green energy agenda similar to what continues to play out in Germany, that has now been kicked to the curb. There was just as much passion then. If all of Ontario looked like my city, which it would if it was the size of Denmark, and we lacked the groups I've specifically mentioned that don't vote, our turnout would likely mirror yours.

As it stands, Ontario has 13.6 million people (10.2 million eligible voters) in an area of almost 1.1 million square kilometres, that's a density of 14.65 per square kilometre. In an area of only 7,000 square kilometres, 6.5 million of those people live. So literally half our population resides in this highly dense area, whilst the other half is distributed in pockets throughout the rest of the province, growing more sparse as you go further north. Ontario has 207 reserves.

 

[shDK]

I read your arguments.. I agree that our countries are fundamentally different. But I just do 't see your argument as valid in any way.. distance is not a valid argument not to vote.

We might just agree to disagree.

 

[OVERKILL]

Speaking nationally, most recent elections:

Denmark - 85.9%
Norway - 78.2%
Germany - 71.5%
USA - 68.3%
Canada - 68.3%
UK - 66.1%
Switzerland 48.4%

Canada had 25.6 million eligible voters in the most recent election. 17.6 million voted. If we for a minute assume none of the reserves voted (just for the sake of argument here) that's 1.2 million people, bringing it up to 18.8 million, that act alone increases participation to 73%.

Also of note here, and it's in-step with my argument, our smallest province, Prince Edward Island, which still has a population density lower than Denmark at 25.25 per square kilometre, but a size of 5,600 square kilometres, had a voter turnout of 77%, which is very similar to Norway. The largest provinces: Ontario, Quebec and Newfoundland, all have lower turnouts.

What are your thoughts on Switzerland BTW, given that their turnout is less than 50%?

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

In the U.S. we do have a lot of people who use the excuse their vote won't be heard. I believe their problem is they are either lazy, or are proud of clinging to victim status. "Things are never going to get better, nothing I can do will change that, poor me." Since I didn't vote for the candidate(s) who won, anything that happens is not my fault.

Diversity works two ways. There is the diversity that disparate groups integrate their unique talents to work together to combine to a sum greater than individual groups could achieve. Then there is the diversity where factions pit social, economic, religious, or racial groups against each other, usually for their own personal gain. Unfortunately, I believe this is what we are seeing too much of in the U.S. today, and is one of the reasons many citizens shirk their civic duties, to include voting.

Opinion only, not stating this as a proven fact.

 

[shDK]

My thoughts are.. that a turnout below 50 % is alarmingly low. No matter what country it is.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by shDK
My thoughts are.. that a turnout below 50 % is alarmingly low. No matter what country it is.


And that I would agree with. It often points to voter exasperation; that the act is futile and won't change anything. Since I'm not intimately aware of the political climate in Switzerland I'll refrain from judgement, but the number definitely surprised me.

 

[shDK]

I am no expert either. But I do know they have a different Set up with great local power and regulation and a weaker state. Maybe that is some of the reason .

 

[bubbatime]

Originally Posted by shDK
My thoughts are.. that a turnout below 50 % is alarmingly low. No matter what country it is.


80% of the population are idiots. Many dont know anything about any issues. They could care less about educating themselves on the issues. I would guesstimate that less than 10% of folks are politically involved, educate themselves on the issues, and know anything about govt.

Why is it a good thing to get 100% turnout, when half of them are so stupid they are drooling on the ballot? I would argue the opposite, that if 10-30% of the population are smart enough, and educated enough, to know the issues, then these 10-30% should be the ones voting and making policy. Do you really want the homeless bum that drinks all day setting policy? Or voting for the guy who will give him access to more beer?

We are entering a phase or point of no return. As Benjamin Franklin once said, "When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic." We are reaching that point now, and in 20-30 years time, the USA will no longer be the USA it was, and will be a lost colony.

 

[shDK]

If that is true.. education is a even bigger problem. I doubt it though

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by shDK
My thoughts are.. that a turnout below 50 % is alarmingly low. No matter what country it is.


Here in Oz, it's compulsory, you get your name marked off or face hundreds of $$$ in fines.

There's a scramble to be the party that's represented at the top left of the ballot paper, as that's where the donkey's cast their vote.

Vote "1 above the line" (easy if you are voting a major party), or 1-30 (once 144) below the line sequentially.

So one party is favoured simply by being the top left of the ballot paper by forcing everyone to stand in line for an hour.

I must admit that more than once I've just scrawled a political message across the paper (making it invalid, which is illegal)...would have been better staying home, but not paying the fine. (Oh, and if you mess up the 1-144, it's tossed as well, which they use to encourage "above the line")

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted by bubbatime


We are entering a phase or point of no return. As Benjamin Franklin once said, "When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic." We are reaching that point now, and in 20-30 years time, the USA will no longer be the USA it was, and will be a lost colony.


That has been the goal of previous regimes, try and get the welfare % to 52 % and the working to 48% and stay in power forever.