ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 5th February 2019, 06:49 PM   #321
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,781
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I shouldn't have to pay the government *anything*, for the right to not vote if I don't want to.
And I shouldn't have to pay taxes for police, prisons, and poisonous people. Mandatory voting admittedly involves coercion, but the arguments in favor easily justify it (as with most public goods).
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 06:58 PM   #322
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,424
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Rights must come with the element of choice. You're saying that those with no right can't vote, and those with a right must. There is no choice involved.
I think these are two separate things.

1. In such a democracy, unless excluded for one of a number of reasons (in prison etc), you have a right to Vote.

B. As a Citizen you ave certain responsibilities.

So you can have both, or just the first one. B. is not the same thing as point 1, it is not to do with "rights" at all. Point B. does not remove any of your rights.

Compulsory voting is a generalised view that democratic election of governing representatives is the responsibility of citizens, rather than a right afforded citizens constitutionally to nominate representatives.[10] Equating in kind to similar civil responsibilities such as taxation, jury duty, compulsory education or military service, voting in these democracies is regarded as one of the "duties to community" mentioned in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[11] This view asserts that, by introducing an obligation to vote, all citizens governed by a democracy partake in the responsibility for the government appointed by democratic election. In practice, this appears to produce governments with more stability, legitimacy and a genuine mandate to govern, which in turn benefits all individuals even if an individual voter's preferred candidate or party is not elected to power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting

But I can take it or leave it. I don't have a big issue with it either way as I would always Vote, but if the country I live in have decided it is required, I have no problem with that at all.
__________________
Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here

Last edited by BadBoy; 5th February 2019 at 07:02 PM.
BadBoy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 07:03 PM   #323
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Argh, you almost said something reasonable but then you had to write that last part.

It's not nit-picky: it's the exact opposite of what a right IS. That doesn't mean that mandatory voting is necessarily a bad thing, but that you can't admit that it IS an actual infringement seems to suggest that you think it would be a bad thing if it did.
No, I don't see it as an infringement at all.

An infringement on my voting freedom would be someone stopping me voting. Like preventing me in any way from enrolling when I'm eligible voter and I want to vote. Or removing my name from the electoral roll for spurious reasons without me knowing. Or hiding the only polling booth in the back room of the county jail in another city in the bottom drawer of the filing cabinet labelled "Beware of the leopard". That would get us very hot under the collar too.



Quote:
No argument there. I never argue package deals: each argument can be debated or evaluated separately without necessarily impacting other arguments or the larger topic. So I'm quite OK with mandatory voting removing the right to vote and replacing it with an obligation if such a thing can be demonstrated to have a net benefit.
I've been outlining how it works here in Oz and our mindset on this. I do understand there is a history of argument over what we would consider too fine a detail in US constitutional affairs. We think sometimes you lose sight of the whole forest for the trees and even the twigs.

The thing is, the USA has a documented history of issues with voter turnout and disenfranchisement that exacerbates problems and biases created by the unscrupulous in certain areas. This has created pockets of disaffected voters with ongoing civil gripes and has arguably turned important elections. For both sides of politics, to be sure. The voluntary nature of your voting systems, which I agree is the ultimate in voting freedom, is a contributing factor to this situation. It seems to be because it is not possible to distinguish between voluntarily not voting (i.e. your freedom to not vote) and being prevented from voting (i.e. disenfranchisement).

By way of example only, we can show that mandatory or obligatory voting does at least partially addresses this - you cannot be prevented from voting because you are obliged to vote. So the disenfranchisement above is effectively negated. And the first part is accomplished as described a few times already.

This is not a perfect answer by any means. We do not have a perfect system either. We also have a different mindset when it comes to "impingement on freedoms". So I've never advocated that you adopt our exact methods. I only ask that you get past the initial and total baulking about "freedom" and look at the possibilities of solving some known problems.

ETA: Call it a "civic duty" for eligible citizens if the word "mandatory" is obnoxious. I know...wall, barrier, slats, peaches...
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015

Last edited by Norman Alexander; 5th February 2019 at 07:07 PM.
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 07:13 PM   #324
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,424
Sometimes I wonder if all Americans would be happier if they could all live on their own little mounds with a house on top, and within that mound no one else can tell them what they can and cannot do. If you try to climb a mound that's not your's, you are allowed to be killed dead. Each mound is protected by, ideally a guided missile system. Any mound that is not doing too well, hard cheese. In the valley is a church. Once a week everyone has to descend their mounds and go to church. Generally mounds are grouped according to race just so you don't have to be worried about descending your mound to attend church and bumping into someone who is different to you (like wearing colorful clothing).
__________________
Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here

Last edited by BadBoy; 5th February 2019 at 07:16 PM.
BadBoy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 07:32 PM   #325
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
No, I don't see it as an infringement at all.

An infringement on my voting freedom would be someone stopping me voting.
Sorry, I can't agree. If you have the right to a job, and I force you to get a job, it's not a right, it's an obligation. I don't see why this is controversial.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 08:36 PM   #326
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,768
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Sorry, I can't agree. If you have the right to a job, and I force you to get a job, it's not a right, it's an obligation. I don't see why this is controversial.
This is the bit I don't get: how is the obligation to vote optional yet the right to vote not? It's like we're saying it's cool to enforce rights, but not cool to enforce the responsibility that comes with it, even though elsewhere in society we see exactly this pairing occur.
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 10:19 PM   #327
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,424
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Sorry, I can't agree. If you have the right to a job, and I force you to get a job, it's not a right, it's an obligation. I don't see why this is controversial.
See above, they are two different things.

You have a right to vote
You have a tight to not vote (turn up and spoil your ballot)

You have an obligation by law (in Aus) to turn up to Vote (or do a postal vote)- this has nothing to do with your rights in my opinion. Just like you have to attend jury service. Do you think your rights are infringed that you are not allowed to just cross the road whenever wherever you want? Or drive on the wrong side, or crash a red light, or take a dump in the high street (without any hay)

People vote for a government, they have a mandate to enact laws, one of the laws in Aus since 1928 is you have to Vote (including voting for no one). We can vote for a party that campaigns on removing that voting law. No one ever does.
__________________
Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here

Last edited by BadBoy; 5th February 2019 at 10:22 PM.
BadBoy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2019, 10:23 PM   #328
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Sorry, I can't agree. If you have the right to a job, and I force you to get a job, it's not a right, it's an obligation. I don't see why this is controversial.
Yes it still is a right. The obligation is a separate matter - you are again conflating voting with attendance at a polling booth.

You and I both have the right to vote (in our respective countries). We may exercise that right by voting as we see fit in our elections and on measures. However I have an obligation to attend a polling booth and get my name ticked off on specific occasions as defined by our law. Failure to do so carries a token penalty. I am under no obligation to vote on those occasions. You do not have any such obligation to attend or vote.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 05:28 AM   #329
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
This is the bit I don't get: how is the obligation to vote optional yet the right to vote not? It's like we're saying it's cool to enforce rights, but not cool to enforce the responsibility that comes with it, even though elsewhere in society we see exactly this pairing occur.
I have to admit that I'm not sure what your point is.

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Yes it still is a right.
We're going to have to agree to disagree. Neither of us seems to be able to make our point to the other.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 05:31 AM   #330
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by BadBoy View Post
See above, they are two different things.

You have a right to vote
You have a tight to not vote (turn up and spoil your ballot)
That IS voting, though. You can't NOT vote at all.

Quote:
You have an obligation by law (in Aus) to turn up to Vote (or do a postal vote)- this has nothing to do with your rights in my opinion. Just like you have to attend jury service.
Attending jury service is not a right. It's an obligation.

Quote:
Do you think your rights are infringed that you are not allowed to just cross the road whenever wherever you want?
I don't have the right to cross the road whenever wherever I want, so no.

Quote:
Or drive on the wrong side, or crash a red light, or take a dump in the high street (without any hay)
Neither of those are rights.

Quote:
People vote for a government, they have a mandate to enact laws, one of the laws in Aus since 1928 is you have to Vote (including voting for no one). We can vote for a party that campaigns on removing that voting law. No one ever does.
Why are you trying to convince me that mandatory voting might be a good idea while responding to my post about mandatory voting no longer being a right? That's weird to me, as if you think the two are linked. They are not. Mandatory voting can be both good and an infringement of rights, or the reverse, or any combination. Just because I say that it infringes on rights doesn't mean I think it's a bad idea. Or even a good one; I might have no opinion on that.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 07:52 AM   #331
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,719
I think you're confusing "right" with "privilege." The latter connotes a voluntary element.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 08:02 AM   #332
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
I think you're confusing "right" with "privilege." The latter connotes a voluntary element.
Both connote a voluntary element. We've had quite a few posters here who have made a duty of their to explain the differences between the two words, and "voluntary" isn't one of them.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 08:13 AM   #333
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,937
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Agreed. We turn up, get our name ticked off, get the ballot paper, ignore whatever is on it, fold it up and stick it in the ballot box, go and see what's on at the fete. No vote, job done, all legal, no cost.
Except for the time and effort lost on that pointless activity, which I should also not have to pay to opt out of.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 08:17 AM   #334
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 17,465
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Agreed. We turn up, get our name ticked off, get the ballot paper, ignore whatever is on it, fold it up and stick it in the ballot box, go and see what's on at the fete. No vote, job done, all legal, no cost.
Your argument can't be "It's essential that we be forced to do this and my argument is how little it matters."

You're not even arguing for mandatory voting in any meaningful sense of the term, you're arguing to force a populace to just go through the pantomime of voting via the argument "Most of them are just going through the motions."

At least with forcing actual voting there's an actual legit cost-benefit analysis with valid points on each side with your "It's the duty (which I'll keep calling a right for no reason) of a citizen to vote" versus theprestiges "It's a lose of personal freedom and prioritizing."

Here it isn't. It's "Lose of personal freedom and prioritizing" to... nothing. It's like if you're called into jury duty but they don't actually make you sit on a trial or having to send it a blank check when you don't owe any taxes just to "go through the same motions."
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 09:26 AM   #335
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,982
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Here it isn't. It's "Lose of personal freedom and prioritizing" to... nothing.
Not exactly nothing. It artificially raises the voter turnout so advocates can claim that 'democracy' is working. This will be of enormous propaganda value once we become a one party police state, since the high turnout will prove that everyone supports it. Then we can proudly join the ranks of other dictatorships where the ruling party gets 100% of the vote.

North Korean voters face little choice in local elections
Quote:
North Korea has held local elections to decide provincial governors - with the official turnout recorded at a near-perfect 99.97 per cent of the population.

Voters do not mark their ballot papers, but put them into a ballot box to show support for pre-approved candidates. There is only one candidate on the paper for each district.

A near-100% turnout in North Korean elections is common since voting is mandatory for everyone over the age of 17 and abstaining is considered an act of treason.
And the bonus...
Quote:
Observers say the polls are used as an informal census, allowing the authorities to ensure citizens are where they are supposed to be and identify defectors.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 09:42 AM   #336
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,781
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Your argument can't be "It's essential that we be forced to do this and my argument is how little it matters."

You're not even arguing for mandatory voting in any meaningful sense of the term, you're arguing to force a populace to just go through the pantomime of voting via the argument "Most of them are just going through the motions."

At least with forcing actual voting there's an actual legit cost-benefit analysis with valid points on each side with your "It's the duty (which I'll keep calling a right for no reason) of a citizen to vote" versus theprestiges "It's a lose of personal freedom and prioritizing."

Here it isn't. It's "Lose of personal freedom and prioritizing" to... nothing. It's like if you're called into jury duty but they don't actually make you sit on a trial or having to send it a blank check when you don't owe any taxes just to "go through the same motions."
I'm not sure why you're being deliberately obtuse. Rights are, as one theorist famously put it, like trumps. A secret ballot trumps the state poking its nose into any single particular ballot. Last year a person was told to cover his political t-shirt in the polling place. Does that mean freedom of speech is dead? No, you can wear your t-shirt just about anywhere else without state interference. For that one moment, however, voting free of sloganeering in the polling place trumps one person's freedom of expression (which is fully permitted one-hundred yards away). Similarly, you can spend the vast majority of your time -- 99.999999% of it -- free from participating in elections. A compulsory vote is a relatively minor and trivial inconvenience at most. I realize it's difficult to explain basic responsibilities to caterwauling children, but this is getting out of hand. Jesus, mandatory voting is not like North Korea, and none of you are Rosa Parks.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 10:04 AM   #337
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
I'm not sure why you're being deliberately obtuse.
Everybody gets one of those, it seems.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 11:53 AM   #338
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,768
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I have to admit that I'm not sure what your point is.



We're going to have to agree to disagree. Neither of us seems to be able to make our point to the other.
Fair enough. I have no idea on what to say next to lead you to an understanding.
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 12:55 PM   #339
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Except for the time and effort lost on that pointless activity, which I should also not have to pay to opt out of.
Once every two years or so you can't find 10 minutes to go to a local school fete and put some paper in a box? That's too onerous an obligation as a citizen?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 12:57 PM   #340
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
Fair enough. I have no idea on what to say next to lead you to an understanding.
Nor I you, but I was trying to be diplomatic about it, rather than being a dick.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 12:57 PM   #341
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,937
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Once every two years or so you can't find 10 minutes to go to a local school fete and put some paper in a box? That's too onerous an obligation as a citizen?
That should be for me to decide, not you.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:05 PM   #342
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Your argument can't be "It's essential that we be forced to do this and my argument is how little it matters."

You're not even arguing for mandatory voting in any meaningful sense of the term, you're arguing to force a populace to just go through the pantomime of voting via the argument "Most of them are just going through the motions."

At least with forcing actual voting there's an actual legit cost-benefit analysis with valid points on each side with your "It's the duty (which I'll keep calling a right for no reason) of a citizen to vote" versus theprestiges "It's a lose of personal freedom and prioritizing."

Here it isn't. It's "Lose of personal freedom and prioritizing" to... nothing. It's like if you're called into jury duty but they don't actually make you sit on a trial or having to send it a blank check when you don't owe any taxes just to "go through the same motions."
What I was responding to was the insistence that he wants the option of not voting for any of the candidates because presumably he thinks they all suck. His solution is to not even vote because voting is voluntary. Our solution is a blank vote because voting is mandatory. The result is the same. And therefore with mandatory voting he can have his desire to "not vote" fulfilled.

The reality is that most of us do attend and cast a valid vote. At its most cynical, we're there anyway...may as well do this thing.

But as noted a long way above, mandatory voting has other effects: Candidates have to concentrate on policies only, it tends to get a more representative result, and voter suppression becomes very difficult to achieve.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:06 PM   #343
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,781
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That should be for me to decide, not you.
You're behaving like a certain coward. Reasonableness is the enemy of Bobism.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:09 PM   #344
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
What I was responding to was the insistence that he wants the option of not voting for any of the candidates because presumably he thinks they all suck. His solution is to not even vote because voting is voluntary. Our solution is a blank vote because voting is mandatory. The result is the same. And therefore with mandatory voting he can have his desire to "not vote" fulfilled.
He still has to cast a ballot, which is part of the voting process. We're just playing word games, here. He can't just sit it out without getting fined.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:13 PM   #345
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That should be for me to decide, not you.
Nope. Your voting system was decided in your constitution centuries ago, not by how lax you feel about voting today. Your decision to not vote is an option within that system, not you optioning out of it.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:15 PM   #346
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
He still has to cast a ballot, which is part of the voting process. We're just playing word games, here. He can't just sit it out without getting fined.
He can do that. Simply not register to vote. Disappears right off the electoral radar. But that's fairly permanent.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:15 PM   #347
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,937
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
You're behaving like a certain coward. Reasonableness is the enemy of Bobism.
Not at all. I have actual arguments, which I will present when asked. Behold!

For me, it's axiomatic: By default, I always have the right to decide what I will and will not do. Making an exception to this rule places a burden of proof on whoever wishes to make the exception. And for me, the burden of proof for mandatory voting can only be met by an argument showing
- That the state has a compelling interest in forcing everyone to vote
- That the proposed solution actually solves the problem
- And no less intrusive solution exists.

So far, no such argument has been put forward. Just a lot of conflicted waffle about how it's super important but also super inconsequential, and about how it's super meaningful but also the actual meaning is not audited nor enforced.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:22 PM   #348
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
He can do that. Simply not register to vote. Disappears right off the electoral radar. But that's fairly permanent.
That doesn't score points for the idea that it's a right.

The idea of mandatory voting is that a right becomes an obligation. Again, that's not necessarily bad, but it is what it is.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:41 PM   #349
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,781
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Not at all. I have actual arguments, which I will present when asked. Behold!

For me, it's axiomatic:
Which is Bobism...

Quote:
- That the state has a compelling interest in forcing everyone to vote
We saw these arguments.

Quote:
- That the proposed solution actually solves the problem
It's going to be difficult to get someone who does not see the problem to agree that a proposed solution solves a non-problem. This is especially difficult if anyone believes the policy will lead to the election of leaders that are personally less preferred (more Democrats, fewer Republicans). Besides that, "solve" is too high a standard. Do laws against homicide "solve" the murder problem? Compulsory voting leads to a number of improvements, which have been identified and repeated throughout this thread. They appear on this page.

Quote:
- And no less intrusive solution exists.
What's the less intrusive solution?

Quote:
So far, no such argument has been put forward. Just a lot of conflicted waffle about how it's super important but also super inconsequential, and about how it's super meaningful but also the actual meaning is not audited nor enforced.
This is an abuse of language. Is it important everyone pays their taxes? Yeah, sure. What happens if one person cheats and does not pay their taxes? Well, pretty much nothing. Aha, I guess it's not important that everyone pays their taxes! This is the way it goes with public goods. These same arguments could be used against anything. A hard-core libertarian could say the state should not force them to vaccinate their children.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 01:47 PM   #350
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,937
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Nope. Your voting system was decided in your constitution centuries ago, not by how lax you feel about voting today. Your decision to not vote is an option within that system, not you optioning out of it.
The question we're debating is not what the system allows, but what the system should allow. The Australian system does not allow its citizens a certain freedom of choice. I say that it should.

Appealing to what the system does isn't actually an argument about what the system should do.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 02:41 PM   #351
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,768
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The question we're debating is not what the system allows, but what the system should allow. The Australian system does not allow its citizens a certain freedom of choice. I say that it should.

Appealing to what the system does isn't actually an argument about what the system should do.
And I say it shouldn't. So we're back to opinions again and as we know, opinions are like ********* - everybody has one.
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 03:21 PM   #352
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,937
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
And I say it shouldn't. So we're back to opinions again and as we know, opinions are like ********* - everybody has one.
As long as you're not telling me that What Is is What Should Be, there's still a chance we can actually debate our opinions.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 03:57 PM   #353
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That doesn't score points for the idea that it's a right.

The idea of mandatory voting is that a right becomes an obligation. Again, that's not necessarily bad, but it is what it is.
...that a right includes an obligation. The right is not magically transmuted into a road rule of itself. But there are road rules that having the right entails.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 04:03 PM   #354
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 81,370
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
...that a right includes an obligation.
That's a contradiction, to me. I guess we're simply using different definitions of "right".
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 04:04 PM   #355
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The question we're debating is not what the system allows, but what the system should allow. The Australian system does not allow its citizens a certain freedom of choice. I say that it should.

Appealing to what the system does isn't actually an argument about what the system should do.
You are now arguing that we should have your system. No, thanks, but we went past that in the 1920's.

I'm not arguing you should have our system. Do what you like, it's not our country! Mandatory voting does indeed have disadvantages - readily and totally conceded. Because there is no perfect system.

I'm simply showing how it does work in practice, using a stable and similar country to the USA as an example. Because most of the arguments against "mandatory voting" that get propagated seem to be straw-manning based on a lot of cross-eyed ranting about "DON' TUK MUH FREEDUMS!" Does not become you.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 04:05 PM   #356
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's a contradiction, to me. I guess we're simply using different definitions of "right".
Could be. I asked about that above.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 04:24 PM   #357
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,937
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
You are now arguing that we should have your system.
I've been arguing some variation of that all along. You're only just now noticing it.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 06:26 PM   #358
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I've been arguing some variation of that all along. You're only just now noticing it.
Having a president, maybe soon, I hope. Voluntary voting? Nearly 100 years too late.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 06:49 PM   #359
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,391
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Having a president, maybe soon, I hope. Voluntary voting? Nearly 100 years too late.

I will chime back in on that one even though it is moving a little off topic. Having a popularly elected President who is totally (in theory) not connected to the Parliament is something I never wish to see. It is a totally unnecessary extra layer of Government which would add costs to running the Country by having its own bureaucracy and potentially add further conflict that presently does not exist.



If he is not tied to the Parliament, it raises many problems. If she is, it is not a necessary position. Unless the President is just there to open fetes and give trophies out at Horse races. But we already have one of those. I could envisage a state of play where a Clive Palmer or a Pauline Hanson would decide to give it a go.



As you have argued, nobody opposes compulsory "voting" because it works. Apart from a certain date which will remain nameless, so does the current Westminster system we use. If it aint broke don't fix it certainly applies here.


Norm
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain



Last edited by fromdownunder; 6th February 2019 at 06:51 PM.
fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2019, 06:54 PM   #360
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by fromdownunder View Post
I will chime back in on that one even though it is moving a little off topic. Having a popularly elected President who is totally (in theory) not connected to the Parliament is something I never wish to see. It is a totally unnecessary extra layer of Government which would add costs to running the Country by having its own bureaucracy and potentially add further conflict that presently does not exist.



If he is not tied to the Parliament, it raises many problems. If she is, it is not a necessary position. Unless the President is just there to open fetes and give trophies out at Horse races. But we already have one of those. I could envisage a state of play where a Clive Palmer or a Pauline Hanson would decide to give it a go.



As you have argued, nobody opposes compulsory "voting" because it works. Apart from a certain date which will remain nameless, so does the current Westminster system we use. If it aint broke don't fix it certainly applies here.


Norm
Yep, the republic debate goes on!
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.