KAWARTHA LAKES WEEKLY posted an article about Fair Vote Canada which promotes proportional representation as superior to our first-past-the-post election system. What does GROK say about it?
This illustrates the problem of using AI for analysis. You don't necessarily get the facts; you get what people are saying on the internet. There is no evidence that PR results in more unstable governments than FPTP. Grok also omits some serious side effects of FPTP, such as increased polarization.
AI (GROK) was used to begin a discussion. No one claims it to be the source of all “truth”. PR and FPTP both have their pros and cons. If you read Digital Direct Democracy, you will find that there are other ways to address the problems with traditional “electoral democracy”. If you are open to considering this topic in a deeper way than just an essay, feel free to contact me.
Sure, there are many ways to address the deficits in our democracy. I would never argue that electoral reform is the only one. I would only argue that it's the most fundamental and possibly most important one.
GROK’s analysis hit on my major concerns with PR. In the EU, where it is common, governments are notoriously ineffective and unproductive. Canada suffers from the same problems even though FPTP is used.
If governments were only 25% of their current size, PR would be my preference too. “Too many cooks spoil the broth” is the cancer that is eroding genuine democracy and this will continue with either PR or FPTP.
You live in Atlantic Canada where the Liberals are dominant politically. Alberta is getting ready for a referendum to decide if it will stay in confederation because Ottawa has handcuffed that province economically. I wonder how interested you would be in PR if you lived in rural Alberta.
I'd be VERY interested in PR if I lived in rural Alberta. Because I'd never get any representation! A lot of people across the country are in that boat.
I don't agree that PR governments are "notoriously ineffective and unproductive," but I guess it depends on what you call unproductive. If you hate it when governments spend on social programs, you'll hate PR.
If I could OPT OUT from the tax liabilities for any social program that I considered unfair, I would have no concerns about PR in Canada. Let every Canadian who thinks they are fair and is willing to accept those liabilities do so voluntarily.
Canada’s public debt levels must be taken into account when new government spending programs are proposed to protect individual citizens from being held liable for national bankruptcy when it comes. .If you didn’t vote for it, you should not be held accountable for its consequences. Fredom of Informed Choice is the basis of a truly moral democracy.
If debt is your concern, it might interest you to know that FPTP countries have over 60% more debt than PR countries on average. Of course: all that FPTP flip-floppin' between two governing parties is wasteful and expensive. We should expect to have higher debt.
I kinda like the idea of "If you didn’t vote for it, you should not be held accountable for its consequences." With our system, it often happens that less than half of voters voted for the government.. Yet the government will often get a majority of seats, and then they can pretty much do whatever they want. We're just stuck with them for four years. At least with PR, you get the government you voted for.
This illustrates the problem of using AI for analysis. You don't necessarily get the facts; you get what people are saying on the internet. There is no evidence that PR results in more unstable governments than FPTP. Grok also omits some serious side effects of FPTP, such as increased polarization.
AI (GROK) was used to begin a discussion. No one claims it to be the source of all “truth”. PR and FPTP both have their pros and cons. If you read Digital Direct Democracy, you will find that there are other ways to address the problems with traditional “electoral democracy”. If you are open to considering this topic in a deeper way than just an essay, feel free to contact me.
Sure, there are many ways to address the deficits in our democracy. I would never argue that electoral reform is the only one. I would only argue that it's the most fundamental and possibly most important one.
GROK’s analysis hit on my major concerns with PR. In the EU, where it is common, governments are notoriously ineffective and unproductive. Canada suffers from the same problems even though FPTP is used.
If governments were only 25% of their current size, PR would be my preference too. “Too many cooks spoil the broth” is the cancer that is eroding genuine democracy and this will continue with either PR or FPTP.
You live in Atlantic Canada where the Liberals are dominant politically. Alberta is getting ready for a referendum to decide if it will stay in confederation because Ottawa has handcuffed that province economically. I wonder how interested you would be in PR if you lived in rural Alberta.
I'd be VERY interested in PR if I lived in rural Alberta. Because I'd never get any representation! A lot of people across the country are in that boat.
I don't agree that PR governments are "notoriously ineffective and unproductive," but I guess it depends on what you call unproductive. If you hate it when governments spend on social programs, you'll hate PR.
If I could OPT OUT from the tax liabilities for any social program that I considered unfair, I would have no concerns about PR in Canada. Let every Canadian who thinks they are fair and is willing to accept those liabilities do so voluntarily.
Canada’s public debt levels must be taken into account when new government spending programs are proposed to protect individual citizens from being held liable for national bankruptcy when it comes. .If you didn’t vote for it, you should not be held accountable for its consequences. Fredom of Informed Choice is the basis of a truly moral democracy.
If debt is your concern, it might interest you to know that FPTP countries have over 60% more debt than PR countries on average. Of course: all that FPTP flip-floppin' between two governing parties is wasteful and expensive. We should expect to have higher debt.
I kinda like the idea of "If you didn’t vote for it, you should not be held accountable for its consequences." With our system, it often happens that less than half of voters voted for the government.. Yet the government will often get a majority of seats, and then they can pretty much do whatever they want. We're just stuck with them for four years. At least with PR, you get the government you voted for.