FPTP vs MMP

[Scott Elcomb]

On 10/7/07, phil <phillip-l+pbsqP8NtUm29vl6s1fFg at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Since we're guaranteed to get things just as wasteful as those you
> quote regardless, I'd rather not pay for them *PLUS* 22 extra
> parasites, their entourage, and expenses on top of it.

Good point.

>  When we're in
> a position where current tax levels are capable of supporting program
> delivery and reducing debt, it might be a good time to talk about
> funding an increase in administrative overhead...or not.

As a libertarian I'm not into funding unnecessary administration.
However, being moderately-so (libertarian), I'm not adverse to
throwing a few extra tax dollars towards finding an alternate solution
for increasing the publics' participation in Government.

In order to implement MMP, 60% of the vote in 60% of the ridings is
required.  I would've thought the democratic approach would be more
like 50%+1 votes in 50%+1 ridings, but that's not the case.  I think
the deck is stacked in favor of FPTP, and that makes me... um...
argumentative.

If there were an "out" clause (whereby we could, by referendum, revert
to FPTP in the next election) I would vote MMP without thought.  I
haven't heard or seen anything suggesting there is a way back though,
which leaves me in the frustrating place I find myself every election
- not knowing "how to help" - only doubly-so.

I don't like feeling stupid; if necessary, I'll roll the dice to induce change.

That's just me though.

-- 
  Scott Elcomb
  http://www.psema4.com/
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists