@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

MxM111

@MxM111@kbin.social

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

MxM111, (edited )
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

Multiparty system offers much better option to vote for, but then there is only one coalition. So, the question is only if you are the one deciding what compromise to make, or party you vote for decides for you. There is argument to be made that it is better for democracy that you decide for that.

Each party in 2 party system tries to maximize number of votes and adjusts its position for that as well, which is similar to “power balances shift inside those coalitions” that you mention, but here, they are talking directly to voters, as opposed to each other. Again, I see advantage of two party system here.

I believe that bad perception of two party system is because now, we truly have two camps in our culture - the society is broken in two, cohesiveness is lost. But it is not because of the two party system, it is the opposite: because of this cultural break it propagated, “mirrored” into our politics. But it is exactly how it supposed to work in representative democracy. It would be strange if we had this cultural problem and our politicians would not.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

I don’t get what you mean. There’s a huge variety of possible coalitions.

There many possible coalitions, but there is actually just one with which you end up with, and into which you do not contribute.

You are absolutely not the one making those decisions with two party system with two big tent parties. They’re making those decisions and compromises inside the party...

I am not talking about compromises inside the party. I am talking about compromises that you are forced to make when you select one or another party.

The established party leadership in the US seem to just do similar sort of politics again and again

Are you arguing that US parties are too similar?

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

They are the same sort of compromises. There’s a reason every round people are unsatisfied with the result, even if their party won.

Yes, exactly! But the difference is WHO is making the compromise. You, as a voter, or not. Maybe I like pro-business party but would never, ever vote for party that want to push religion into high school. In US, I will just not vote republican, because I can not make this compromise. But, in other countries, I may vote for pro-business party which then enters into coalition with religious party, and I can not take my vote back. And even in the next election I would not know if pro-business party will end up in coalition with religious party.

Or same for right wing.

I would say that particularly GOP is very different than it were 10 years ago, because of the Trump voters.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

If the pro-business party is making compromises or decisions you don’t like, you can switch your party. If Democrats make those compromises or decisions, where will you go?

They are making compromises (that you have not approved) as result of forming coalition. Democrats do not have to do those compromises - if they are in power - they are in power. The compromises were done at voting booth by you.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

That may be, but they think that it is greater evil to forcefully take money from somebody else (through obligatory taxes) and spend on homeless than letting homeless be homeless.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

There is equality and there is equity. Libertarians are for equality even if it creates non-equity.

Let me give an abstract example so that it is not politically charged. Suppose that there are green-skinned people in our society that for some historical reason value writing poetry above all else. And they are trying to earn their living by writing poetry and sometimes having second part time usually low paid job to support themselves.

Libertarian would say that these green people has absolute right to do so, and face consequences of their choice. This is liberty.
People who advocate equality would say - no, there is systemic green-ism that leads to green people being consistently underpaid, having less percent of them in high level jobs like CEO, and so on. They then propose all sorts of laws that will treat green people differently so that the average salary, average number of CEOs per 100,000 population and other similar metrics associated with “success” are the same for green people. This kind of differential treatment of green people is absolutely against to liberty minded people, that includes libertarians, that think that the laws should be the same to all people, regardless of their skin color, genetics and so on.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

I seriously think that being drug use enabler is not a good thing. If you know that particular homeless person has drugs problem better buy him a sandwich or give warm clothes than give money.

MxM111, (edited )
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

The hanger is covered by insurance in some countries.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

You are in the brain, but I am not sure it is accurate to say you are the brain. Linux is not computer, but something in the computer.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

No, you are a software layer, and actually only a small part of it, that runs on hardware of brain. The "you", the consciousness, the ego, is very illusive part of that software. You are not even the one who thinks the thoughts, because the thoughts just appear somewhere mysteriously in conciseness, in "you".

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

Reply from GPT4:
Certainly, to give you a comprehensive response, I need a bit more context. Are you looking for a conceptual design, a story completion, a technical specification, or something else related to a "construction robot"? Please provide additional details so I can tailor the response to your needs.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

That’s because in American cars we do have space both for driver and their food at the same time!

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

That’s only because in the West there was no way for the game to reach customers at the time. The game was popular in the “Soviet Block” just fine, because distribution model was different.

Today, it would spread through internet like fire.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

Fuck, you scared me!

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

Length, volume and mass specifically (and derivatives, like PSI). Temperature is ok.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

I use both equally well. Since both of them are base 10, no difference whatsoever. You just know the feeling of 70F or 21C.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

You, as a person, can boycott whomever you like, and be loud or silent about it. The law is applied only to companies.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

That depends where you live, what your cultural upbringing is. If you are from Russia, sure. There, it is a myth, and democracy is something to scare people by.

MxM111,
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

In the second panel I thought the lizard has explosive diarrhea.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #