Currently browsing from alexandrite.app an alternative lemmy frontend.
The examples were never proven to be justified by the government or anyone else. In both cases the government essentially said freeze these people’s money and the banks did. No due process. No presumption of innocence.
That is the danger of a cashless society.
I never suggested keeping your life savings in cash. You brought that up. I ignored that bit as your financial decisions are your own. And they are just not relevant to the original point of a cashless society being bad.
Just because you haven’t heard of it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. It is a big world and everyone only sees their small piece of it.
The Canadian government did recently it with the trucker protests. The US did it with operation Choke Point starting in 2013. It targeted 20+ categories of merchants including porn stars, cable box descramblers, and money transfer networks.
The government routinely misuses the ‘justice’ system to wrongfully imprison people. Is it so hard to believe they will do the same thing with money? The government is not a neutral arbitrator of who is innocent. No one is innocent. But the government allows some people to be treated as more innocent than others.
Cashless forces everyone to cede control of their money to the government through the banks. Do you want the government to be able to get a list of everyone who purchases abortion pills? Can you see how such an ability can be easily abused by government? Assuming the government will always be friendly to you is a false assumption.
Not allowing the government/banks the ability to freeze or seize your money because you did something they don’t approve of.
Not giving the government/big companies a log of how you spend your money.
It’s pretty hard to beat Oracle Cloud’s free tier Hosting.
I don’t agree with you and you are actively hurting the adoption of a proportional system
Kinda low to attack me and not the argument. That is otherwise known as an ad hominem.
It’s pretty clear your treating this as a pissing match and I have no interest in that.
Fair use is a defense you have to make in court. And court is expensive.
Why not say you would support IRV or better, especially multi member districts and proportional results?
I do and I did. See my last paragraph. Sure, I used different words than you did but I was trying to imply the same thing.
Why put so much effort in trying to push against the facts about IRV?
I did no such thing. Don’t strawman me by putting works in my mouth.
Frankly if IRV gets put in place and people are not aware of its strange chaotic behavior it will get repealed, which isn’t my conjecture its reality.
That is your conjecture, unless you give an example of that happening. I will grant you that it is conceivable that such a circumstance happen, but that doesn’t make it not a conjecture.
I guess my point is that it isn’t really helpful for us to argue about different voting systems when we largely agree that we need to move away from a FPTP system. It just serves to promote division. Unless we are actually doing the groundwork of pushing for different voting systems, arguing about the details of the different systems is just not needed.
RCV does have a name recognition and a perceived ‘hotness’ that other voting systems haven’t really matched. And in politics, name recognition matters. I think it is counter productive to attack it to push another voting system. Instead, imo it makes more sense to push the alternative voting system by comparing it to FPTP, our current voting system.
I don’t doubt that RCV has flaws. But we know that FPTP has flaws. So the question then becomes, Is RCV or FPTP the better voting system? If RCV is a better voting system than it should be pushed for and supported because of that fact.
Perfect is the enemy of good. It is relevant in life and in politics.
For example, If someone is so obsessed with making sure your comment is completely accurate and factual that they end up deleting and never posting the comment, then that comment will not help anyone. Or for another example, I shouldn’t wear a mask because it won’t fully protect me or others from coronavirus. Doing something even is if it is an imperfect improvement is better than doing nothing.
I believe an RCV system is better than FPTP and therefore support it. I also would support STAR for the same reason.
Hmm, It’s worked for me recently. I guess ymmv depending on your IP.
It also works with nsfw content they put behind an appwall.
YoU HaVe tO UsE tHe ApP To ViEw ThIs CoNteNt.
STFU with that BS.
Change the url to old. instead of www. and you can bypass it.
Sir, this is a Lemmy.
Here’s a creative way to do it.
Thanks for giving me your take on it. My take on the Forward party in general is that it is somewhat of a single issue party focused on improving our democratic system through issues such as Ranked Choice Voting and open primaries. I do agree that a they could conceivably function as a advocacy group, and I also can see how organizing as a party can have advantages as the entire point of parties is to influence public policy like voting. They are essentially acting as an advocacy group for candidates who support their proposed reforms right now. If a state representative or senator promises to support their policies, they will help to funnel support to them by endorsing and promoting them.
State representatives are the people who have the power to change the voting system like they propose. But they do not have really have any reason to in our current system. If they replace our current First Past The Post voting system they would be opening the door for allowing more parties to have a chance to represent their constituents.
Sure, there are some conservatives that have joined, but I think you are exaggerating that the party is only run by them. Yang is on the board and he is no conservative even if he is willing to ally with them. I can understand and sympathize why you don’t like the association with conservatives. I don’t either really. I’m sure that part of the reason the UBI and elimination of the electoral college is absent from the platform is to get those conservatives willing to work with the party.
Conservatives control the vast majority of the state legislatures that make the rules for voting. Apparently Repubs hold 28 and Dems hold 19 currently. Both of those parties are pretty conservative by and large. One is regressive and conservative. The point is if you want to change the voting system you have to have a voice on the legislatures that make the voting rules. That is what they are attempting to build. It’s not something that’s gonna happen overnight.
You are welcome to believe they are a scam. I believe all parties are scams to some degree. Even so, I don’t see how instituting Ranked Choice Voting is really a conservative position. It is changing the existing system which is by definition not conservative.
Yeah, I’m not gonna watch an hour long video. If you put it in your own words why you are opposed to them, I will certainly listen. I don’t come to lemmy to watch videos telling me who or what I should support. I come for discussion. So if you want to convince me, explain your view.
Anyone who wants to run on ranked choice or proportional representation will get my vote
There’s a newish party for that. See the forward party.
It is an extremely prevalent delusion to think that we can only choose from the 2 parties nominees for president or any other office. But it is a very convenient delusion for party insiders and elites of DC that neither party is interested in dismantling.
That is not to say we shouldn’t be strategic in our votes. That means voting for the best(This is highly subjective and will usually come down to the lesser evil) candidate there is for a given race. Because it is also a delusion to think that everyone will suddenly realize they don’t have to vote for either party and elect a different candidate. Especially when other candidates aren’t really much better than the party candidates.
I agree strategic voting is a good thing. I never said or implied it isn’t. But it seems like your trying to straw-man me here.
Please explain how not voting for someone = handing someone else a vote.
To put it in another context, if I say I don’t want to go to applebee’s, does that mean I’m supporting going to olive garden? Here’s another one. If a republican withholds voting for trump in the general, does that mean they are handing a vote to biden even if they don’t vote for president at all?
I would say you ideally have enough for about a month expenses in cash. Then maybe have 2 more months expense in two different bank accounts(1 in each account). That way any one bank blocking an account for a flagged transaction is just a minor inconvenience. Same thing with credit cards, have 2 different ones so 1 getting blocked is just a minor inconvenience. Anything beyond that I would probably put in a tax advantaged investing account like a roth ira invested in mutual funds.
I wouldn’t be opposed to holding some portion of long term investments in a well established blockchain like bitcoin or monero but I would hardly call it a necessity for most people. They are effectively out of the reach of governments if they are setup and used correctly. But I wouldn’t expect most people to have the know how and motivation to set them up and use them that way. Government can’t tell bitcoin to freeze your account. They can tell that to your bank.