3 ms·

Can I say what I hope/wish were on the horizon? 1. Approval voting becoming widely adopted. This would go a long way toward mitigating the hyper polarization i

Can I say what I hope/wish were on the horizon? 1. Approval voting becoming widely adopted. This would go a long way toward mitigating the hyper polarization in politics in America (and likely elsewhere as well). Electing politicians with broader approval means legislation would likely move more quickly. 2. Moving to a Land Value Tax system in America. This would organically help us transition to a culture that builds up instead of sprawling out. This could lead to tremendous reductions in things like municipal infrastructure costs, transportation pollution, reduced mortgage/rent prices, etc.

conductr 4y ago
> legislation would likely move more quickly I tend to think the slow pace is a feature not a bug. Could you imagine if something like Roe v Wade was flip flopping every 4 years on political whims? That said, I do think a modern democracy should have more frequent digital voting abilities perhaps on a policy level. Voting for a person you hope will represent you, it’s a decent concept when you lack technology but as we know it’s heavily flawed as well. I don’t quite understand how we can build something like Bitcoin but can’t solve digital voting in a way that’s not constantly under threat of hacking/some Evil manufacturer etc.
- neon_electro 4y ago
  The United States has a mechanism for slow-moving policy; the Constitution. That doesn't mean we can't have other mechanisms for policy that can be more nimble, local, or "temporary" (for better or worse). Tech policy is the best example of legislation that can't keep up with reality on the ground. (subject to corruption from monied interests, of course)
  - conductr 4y ago
    Does tech legislation need to be kept up more quickly? I really like the default being no regulation and filling in where needed. It’s reactive by nature. I don’t know what broad legislation would have been put in place proactively to help tech be better governed (without specifying honing in on a specific business/industry after the fact). I fear more of if the legislation process is too fast moving it become subject to mob mentality. Instead of #deletefacebook we may have gone straight to a knee jerk reaction of legislation that bans social media which I’m not sure I want to live in that world either.
ClayShentrup 4y ago
LVT wouldn't reduce mortgage or rent prices, but what WOULD reduce them is eliminating property taxes. and that's easier to do if you can offset it with another more efficient tax, like LVT. https://clayshentrup.medium.com/does-a-land-value-tax-have-zero-or-negative-deadweight-loss-36f6d494a577?source=rss-173d4b2d5845------2 https://clayshentrup.medium.com/does-a-land-value-tax-have-z... approval voting is also great.
euroderf 4y ago
In practice, first-past-the-post voting is dysfunctional bordering on evil, especially when combined with gerrymandering wherein politicians select their voters rather than vice-versa. The entire result set of this mess - two parties and their primaries - is deeply screwed up. The practical challenge (imo) is to explain alternatives concisely to voters who might want to modify how their voting system works. But there are now experiments going on here and there.
- hoseja 4y ago
  This also hinges on the ability to predict voting patterns based on residence, which is quite the insanity.
the_omegist 4y ago
For your 1st point I had to google "Approval voting" : it's the Condorcet method, it seems... Why bother improving a method that is inherently flawed? You can chose 50 candidates but they are all stupid and corrupt that makes no difference. Why not make the system more robust and go with liquid democracy [1] ? (yes, I know, many technical/security challenges to overcome, first) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy
- charwalker 4y ago
  Because Condorcet is still better than nearly all implementations of first past the post. But I think the commenter is getting at instant runoff voting methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting There is a comparison between these three systems in the Condorcet wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#Comparison_with_instant_runoff_and_first-past-the-post_(plurality) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#Comparison_wi... None are perfect but IRV is in use and effective. Tactical voting is still an option but at scale either obvious or difficult to organize without being obvious.

conductr 4y ago

> legislation would likely move more quickly I tend to think the slow pace is a feature not a bug. Could you imagine if something like Roe v Wade was flip flopping every 4 years on political whims? That said, I do think a modern democracy should have more frequent digital voting abilities perhaps on a policy level. Voting for a person you hope will represent you, it’s a decent concept when you lack technology but as we know it’s heavily flawed as well. I don’t quite understand how we can build something like Bitcoin but can’t solve digital voting in a way that’s not constantly under threat of hacking/some Evil manufacturer etc.

neon_electro 4y ago
The United States has a mechanism for slow-moving policy; the Constitution. That doesn't mean we can't have other mechanisms for policy that can be more nimble, local, or "temporary" (for better or worse). Tech policy is the best example of legislation that can't keep up with reality on the ground. (subject to corruption from monied interests, of course)
- conductr 4y ago
  Does tech legislation need to be kept up more quickly? I really like the default being no regulation and filling in where needed. It’s reactive by nature. I don’t know what broad legislation would have been put in place proactively to help tech be better governed (without specifying honing in on a specific business/industry after the fact). I fear more of if the legislation process is too fast moving it become subject to mob mentality. Instead of #deletefacebook we may have gone straight to a knee jerk reaction of legislation that bans social media which I’m not sure I want to live in that world either.

ClayShentrup 4y ago

LVT wouldn't reduce mortgage or rent prices, but what WOULD reduce them is eliminating property taxes. and that's easier to do if you can offset it with another more efficient tax, like LVT. https://clayshentrup.medium.com/does-a-land-value-tax-have-zero-or-negative-deadweight-loss-36f6d494a577?source=rss-173d4b2d5845------2 https://clayshentrup.medium.com/does-a-land-value-tax-have-z... approval voting is also great.

euroderf 4y ago

In practice, first-past-the-post voting is dysfunctional bordering on evil, especially when combined with gerrymandering wherein politicians select their voters rather than vice-versa. The entire result set of this mess - two parties and their primaries - is deeply screwed up. The practical challenge (imo) is to explain alternatives concisely to voters who might want to modify how their voting system works. But there are now experiments going on here and there.

hoseja 4y ago
This also hinges on the ability to predict voting patterns based on residence, which is quite the insanity.

the_omegist 4y ago

For your 1st point I had to google "Approval voting" : it's the Condorcet method, it seems... Why bother improving a method that is inherently flawed? You can chose 50 candidates but they are all stupid and corrupt that makes no difference. Why not make the system more robust and go with liquid democracy [1] ? (yes, I know, many technical/security challenges to overcome, first) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy

charwalker 4y ago
Because Condorcet is still better than nearly all implementations of first past the post. But I think the commenter is getting at instant runoff voting methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting There is a comparison between these three systems in the Condorcet wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#Comparison_with_instant_runoff_and_first-past-the-post_(plurality) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#Comparison_wi... None are perfect but IRV is in use and effective. Tactical voting is still an option but at scale either obvious or difficult to organize without being obvious.