here we go! Wisconsin recount is happening

Page 14 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
glenn1

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
jackstar7 said:
Then we should start with mandatory voting. So all legal voters participate.

Probably make it a paid holiday, too.
Click to expand...

Paid holiday can be easily accommodated, just shift "Columbus Day" back a few weeks to coincide with election day. And while encouraging voting is great I'd need to see a good reason to make voting compulsory under some sanction if you don't.
 
jackstar7

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
imported_tajmahal said:
Because Authoritarians like to make everything mandatory, it's what they do.
Click to expand...
How did you decide I was an authoritarian, was it solely based on the notion that I'd like to see mandataory voting?

Just want to understand how you reached your conclusion.
 
Fanatical Meat

Fanatical Meat

Lifer
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,407
136
glenn1 said:
Paid holiday can be easily accommodated, just shift "Columbus Day" back a few weeks to coincide with election day. And while encouraging voting is great I'd need to see a good reason to make voting compulsory under some sanction if you don't.
Click to expand...

I'd be alright with some minor tax break for voting. Something like $10 off your taxes. I don't know how to track it effectively and affordably or if its a good idea for the National Government to know if you've voted.
 
jackstar7

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
glenn1 said:
Paid holiday can be easily accommodated, just shift "Columbus Day" back a few weeks to coincide with election day. And while encouraging voting is great I'd need to see a good reason to make voting compulsory under some sanction if you don't.
Click to expand...
Isn't the good reason that we're a democratic republic? How does the representation function if not actually voted for by all citizens?
 
glenn1

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
jackstar7 said:
Isn't the good reason that we're a democratic republic? How does the representation function if not actually voted for by all citizens?
Click to expand...

For the same reason we have the First Amendment but citizens aren't legally forced to speak. Having the rights to do something like voting is a very different concept of a democratic republic than one where that "right" turns into a forced obligation under penalty of law for noncompliance.
 
Blue_Max

Blue_Max

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2011
4,223
153
106
It was pointed out in another discussion elsewhere, that it's amusing how recounts are only being done in the states where Hillary lost... and not in the states where Hillary WON by an even slimmer margin.

...says a lot.
 
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
fskimospy said:
Wait... you're now trying to say that free trade, the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions, is a liberal position?

That is a truly incredible statement. I mean talk about epic levels of self-delusion.



Pick one to your liking!

https://forums.anandtech.com/search/118923/?q=free+trade&t=post&o=date&c[user][0]=191266
Click to expand...
Well, I was specifically referencing your open border position, but let's see. Which party's Presidents negotiated NAFTA and TPP? Which party nominated and elected a candidate who promised to kill the TPP agreement? Which party nominated a candidate who supported TPP before she was actively running for President and had to pretend to oppose it?

As far as your supposed support for "the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions", by your own admissions in this thread no such bill yet has ever garnered your support. Therefore I conclude that you support "the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions" as long as the bill is written on a unicorn's ass.
 
jackstar7

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
glenn1 said:
For the same reason we have the First Amendment but citizens aren't legally forced to speak. Having the rights to do something like voting is a very different concept of a democratic republic than one where that "right" turns into a forced obligation under penalty of law for noncompliance.
Click to expand...
Well that seems a false equivalence there.

And we have instances where people are forced to speak under consequence of penalty for noncompliance... but I suppose that's irrelevant.
 
Brainonska511

Brainonska511

Lifer
Dec 10, 2005
29,614
15,175
136
werepossum said:
Which party's Presidents negotiated NAFTA
Click to expand...
The Republican party? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement#Negotiation_and_U.S._ratification
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990 among the three nations, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992.[7] The signed agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.
Click to expand...
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,246
55,794
136
werepossum said:
Well, I was specifically referencing your open border position, but let's see. Which party's Presidents negotiated NAFTA and TPP? Which party nominated and elected a candidate who promised to kill the TPP agreement? Which party nominated a candidate who supported TPP before she was actively running for President and had to pretend to oppose it?
Click to expand...

Uhmm, the Republican Party's president negotiated NAFTA. Whoopsie!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement#Negotiation_and_U.S._ratification

Thanks for proving my point though. :)

Also, the reason Clinton changed her position on TPP was due to pressure from... you guessed it... liberals.

As far as your supposed support for "the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions", by your own admissions in this thread no such bill yet has ever garnered your support. Therefore I conclude that you support "the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions" as long as the bill is written on a unicorn's ass.
Click to expand...

NAFTA garnered my support, so your statement is a lie.

Apologize at your convenience?
 
Fanatical Meat

Fanatical Meat

Lifer
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,407
136
jackstar7 said:
Well that seems a false equivalence there.

And we have instances where people are forced to speak under consequence of penalty for noncompliance... but I suppose that's irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I think his point is we have a right to not speak or vote and more importantly what would the penalty be for not voting, who would track voting compliance? Are those the sign of a healthy democracy?
 
imported_tajmahal

imported_tajmahal

Lifer
Jul 9, 2009
10,759
2,086
136
jackstar7 said:
How did you decide I was an authoritarian, was it solely based on the notion that I'd like to see mandataory voting?

Just want to understand how you reached your conclusion.
Click to expand...
Most of the liberals, socialists and communists i know are authoritarians. From your posting history and that recent post i took it for granted.
 
jackstar7

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
imported_tajmahal said:
Most of the liberals, socialists and communists i know are authoritarians. From your posting history and that recent post i took it for granted.
Click to expand...
So what from my posting history also demonstrated my authoritarian nature as you infer it?

I'd like to know.
 
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
fskimospy said:
Uhmm, the Republican Party's president negotiated NAFTA. Whoopsie!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement#Negotiation_and_U.S._ratification

Thanks for proving my point though. :)

Also, the reason Clinton changed her position on TPP was due to pressure from... you guessed it... liberals.



NAFTA garnered my support, so your statement is a lie.

Apologize at your convenience?
Click to expand...
lol Got me on which party's Presidents negotiated them, or at least began negotiating them. Pretty sure that Obama did the actual negotiating of the TPP agreement though, even if it was somehow "born" under Bush II, and Clinton signed and promoted NAFTA. And in any case, "the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions" only applies to NAFTA and TPP for imported goods - something the Republican voters just voted to oppose. But I'll cheerfully concede that you have found such a bill - as long as it protects foreign workers.
 
Brainonska511

Brainonska511

Lifer
Dec 10, 2005
29,614
15,175
136
werepossum said:
"the cutting of government taxes, regulations and restrictions on private business transactions" only applies to NAFTA and TPP for imported goods
Click to expand...
That is false. These trade agreements have cut or would have cut foreign governments' tariffs on products that we export to them as well.
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
buckshot24 said:
Jhhnn might have something to say about that. The poster formally known as (the offensively named) eskimospy is a little more subtle. We're all hacks to a certain degree though.
Click to expand...

That's a cheap shot- putting me on ignore & calling me out.

I find your 3 month absence leading up to the election quite fascinating. I take it you were being paid to use your skills elsewhere. So many forums. So much social media. So little time. Troll where it pays the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom