[poorgradstudent]

[quote=briansd1]We should also eliminate the electoral college. It should be one person = one vote. That would be most democratic. [/quote]
Like Al Gore, I would really like to see the electoral college eliminated. It’s an outdated relic from a time when smaller colonies were afraid of being bullied by Virginia and Pennsylvania. As it stands, low population states like Wyoming and Alaska are grossly overrepresented compared to states like California and Texas. The winner takes all electoral system also gives swing states way too much political sway.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=briansd1]We should also eliminate the electoral college. It should be one person = one vote. That would be most democratic. [/quote]
Like Al Gore, I would really like to see the electoral college eliminated. It’s an outdated relic from a time when smaller colonies were afraid of being bullied by Virginia and Pennsylvania. As it stands, low population states like Wyoming and Alaska are grossly overrepresented compared to states like California and Texas. The winner takes all electoral system also gives swing states way too much political sway.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=briansd1]We should also eliminate the electoral college. It should be one person = one vote. That would be most democratic. [/quote]
Like Al Gore, I would really like to see the electoral college eliminated. It’s an outdated relic from a time when smaller colonies were afraid of being bullied by Virginia and Pennsylvania. As it stands, low population states like Wyoming and Alaska are grossly overrepresented compared to states like California and Texas. The winner takes all electoral system also gives swing states way too much political sway.

[poorgradstudent]

Your typical enlisted grunt in the military is arguably underpaid. Your typical officer could be making as much or more money in the private sector. The US military is far from immune to the laws of supply and demand and labor economics. A decade of war has changed the math for enlisting in the reserves; when I was in high school and college there was a chance reservists would be deployed. Following the Iraq invasion, it’s pretty much guaranteed.

The areas they might be able to cut costs would be hazard pay and civilian contractors. I know of plenty of cases where someone leaves the military and basically gets rehired to do the same job as a contractor for way more money. But military contracts tend to be very political things with a lot of pork involved. Can you imagine a San Diego representative arguing that we need to scale back military spending?

A true fiscal conservative might argue the solution is to end our occupation of Iraq, along with closing outdated bases in Germany and Japan, and potentially other countries. Scale back demand for soldiers and you’ll have the double benefit of not having to pay quite as much and being able to have a higher average overall quality.

[poorgradstudent]

Your typical enlisted grunt in the military is arguably underpaid. Your typical officer could be making as much or more money in the private sector. The US military is far from immune to the laws of supply and demand and labor economics. A decade of war has changed the math for enlisting in the reserves; when I was in high school and college there was a chance reservists would be deployed. Following the Iraq invasion, it’s pretty much guaranteed.

The areas they might be able to cut costs would be hazard pay and civilian contractors. I know of plenty of cases where someone leaves the military and basically gets rehired to do the same job as a contractor for way more money. But military contracts tend to be very political things with a lot of pork involved. Can you imagine a San Diego representative arguing that we need to scale back military spending?

A true fiscal conservative might argue the solution is to end our occupation of Iraq, along with closing outdated bases in Germany and Japan, and potentially other countries. Scale back demand for soldiers and you’ll have the double benefit of not having to pay quite as much and being able to have a higher average overall quality.

[poorgradstudent]

Your typical enlisted grunt in the military is arguably underpaid. Your typical officer could be making as much or more money in the private sector. The US military is far from immune to the laws of supply and demand and labor economics. A decade of war has changed the math for enlisting in the reserves; when I was in high school and college there was a chance reservists would be deployed. Following the Iraq invasion, it’s pretty much guaranteed.

The areas they might be able to cut costs would be hazard pay and civilian contractors. I know of plenty of cases where someone leaves the military and basically gets rehired to do the same job as a contractor for way more money. But military contracts tend to be very political things with a lot of pork involved. Can you imagine a San Diego representative arguing that we need to scale back military spending?

A true fiscal conservative might argue the solution is to end our occupation of Iraq, along with closing outdated bases in Germany and Japan, and potentially other countries. Scale back demand for soldiers and you’ll have the double benefit of not having to pay quite as much and being able to have a higher average overall quality.

[poorgradstudent]

Your typical enlisted grunt in the military is arguably underpaid. Your typical officer could be making as much or more money in the private sector. The US military is far from immune to the laws of supply and demand and labor economics. A decade of war has changed the math for enlisting in the reserves; when I was in high school and college there was a chance reservists would be deployed. Following the Iraq invasion, it’s pretty much guaranteed.

The areas they might be able to cut costs would be hazard pay and civilian contractors. I know of plenty of cases where someone leaves the military and basically gets rehired to do the same job as a contractor for way more money. But military contracts tend to be very political things with a lot of pork involved. Can you imagine a San Diego representative arguing that we need to scale back military spending?

A true fiscal conservative might argue the solution is to end our occupation of Iraq, along with closing outdated bases in Germany and Japan, and potentially other countries. Scale back demand for soldiers and you’ll have the double benefit of not having to pay quite as much and being able to have a higher average overall quality.

[poorgradstudent]

Your typical enlisted grunt in the military is arguably underpaid. Your typical officer could be making as much or more money in the private sector. The US military is far from immune to the laws of supply and demand and labor economics. A decade of war has changed the math for enlisting in the reserves; when I was in high school and college there was a chance reservists would be deployed. Following the Iraq invasion, it’s pretty much guaranteed.

The areas they might be able to cut costs would be hazard pay and civilian contractors. I know of plenty of cases where someone leaves the military and basically gets rehired to do the same job as a contractor for way more money. But military contracts tend to be very political things with a lot of pork involved. Can you imagine a San Diego representative arguing that we need to scale back military spending?

A true fiscal conservative might argue the solution is to end our occupation of Iraq, along with closing outdated bases in Germany and Japan, and potentially other countries. Scale back demand for soldiers and you’ll have the double benefit of not having to pay quite as much and being able to have a higher average overall quality.

[poorgradstudent]

The big story out of the UK elections has been the emergence of the Liberal Democrats, although like a lot of third parties they seem to have polled better leading up to the election than they actually did once the votes were cast.

US elections are sort of one big Prisnor’s Dilema of sorts. Most voters want more choice when it comes to candidates and political parties. But a lot of voters don’t vote FOR a candidate, they essentially vote AGAINST one. I know plenty of people in 2008 who voted either McCain or Obama not out of enthusiasm but fear of the guy they didn’t vote for. Two significant yet underrepresented political views in current US politics are libertarian and Pro-life liberals.

The problem of course is that 3rd party candidates invariably throw elections to the guy the most different from them. NY-23 was a great example of a moderate conservative and an extreme conservative splitting the majority of voters handing the election to the moderate liberal. Bill Clinton couldn’t have won the Presidency in 1992 without H. Ross Perot grabbing a lot of moderate conservatives (and some moderate liberals).

Some states are better than others. Campaign finance and equal time laws can help legitimize 3rd party candidates in states like Minnesota. States like Texas and California are pretty bad in terms of gerrymandering of districts and encouraging political choice.

There’s no easy fix. If everyone dissatisfied with the status quo went out and voted for independant and 3rd party candidates in November, they’d swing elections in the opposite direction of their preferences.

Anyways, the UK is probably going to see gridlock and another expensive election really soon, thanks to their vote of no confidence rules as opposed to having scheduled elections like we do.

[poorgradstudent]

The big story out of the UK elections has been the emergence of the Liberal Democrats, although like a lot of third parties they seem to have polled better leading up to the election than they actually did once the votes were cast.

US elections are sort of one big Prisnor’s Dilema of sorts. Most voters want more choice when it comes to candidates and political parties. But a lot of voters don’t vote FOR a candidate, they essentially vote AGAINST one. I know plenty of people in 2008 who voted either McCain or Obama not out of enthusiasm but fear of the guy they didn’t vote for. Two significant yet underrepresented political views in current US politics are libertarian and Pro-life liberals.

The problem of course is that 3rd party candidates invariably throw elections to the guy the most different from them. NY-23 was a great example of a moderate conservative and an extreme conservative splitting the majority of voters handing the election to the moderate liberal. Bill Clinton couldn’t have won the Presidency in 1992 without H. Ross Perot grabbing a lot of moderate conservatives (and some moderate liberals).

Some states are better than others. Campaign finance and equal time laws can help legitimize 3rd party candidates in states like Minnesota. States like Texas and California are pretty bad in terms of gerrymandering of districts and encouraging political choice.

There’s no easy fix. If everyone dissatisfied with the status quo went out and voted for independant and 3rd party candidates in November, they’d swing elections in the opposite direction of their preferences.

Anyways, the UK is probably going to see gridlock and another expensive election really soon, thanks to their vote of no confidence rules as opposed to having scheduled elections like we do.

[poorgradstudent]

The big story out of the UK elections has been the emergence of the Liberal Democrats, although like a lot of third parties they seem to have polled better leading up to the election than they actually did once the votes were cast.

US elections are sort of one big Prisnor’s Dilema of sorts. Most voters want more choice when it comes to candidates and political parties. But a lot of voters don’t vote FOR a candidate, they essentially vote AGAINST one. I know plenty of people in 2008 who voted either McCain or Obama not out of enthusiasm but fear of the guy they didn’t vote for. Two significant yet underrepresented political views in current US politics are libertarian and Pro-life liberals.

The problem of course is that 3rd party candidates invariably throw elections to the guy the most different from them. NY-23 was a great example of a moderate conservative and an extreme conservative splitting the majority of voters handing the election to the moderate liberal. Bill Clinton couldn’t have won the Presidency in 1992 without H. Ross Perot grabbing a lot of moderate conservatives (and some moderate liberals).

Some states are better than others. Campaign finance and equal time laws can help legitimize 3rd party candidates in states like Minnesota. States like Texas and California are pretty bad in terms of gerrymandering of districts and encouraging political choice.

There’s no easy fix. If everyone dissatisfied with the status quo went out and voted for independant and 3rd party candidates in November, they’d swing elections in the opposite direction of their preferences.

Anyways, the UK is probably going to see gridlock and another expensive election really soon, thanks to their vote of no confidence rules as opposed to having scheduled elections like we do.

[poorgradstudent]

The big story out of the UK elections has been the emergence of the Liberal Democrats, although like a lot of third parties they seem to have polled better leading up to the election than they actually did once the votes were cast.

US elections are sort of one big Prisnor’s Dilema of sorts. Most voters want more choice when it comes to candidates and political parties. But a lot of voters don’t vote FOR a candidate, they essentially vote AGAINST one. I know plenty of people in 2008 who voted either McCain or Obama not out of enthusiasm but fear of the guy they didn’t vote for. Two significant yet underrepresented political views in current US politics are libertarian and Pro-life liberals.

The problem of course is that 3rd party candidates invariably throw elections to the guy the most different from them. NY-23 was a great example of a moderate conservative and an extreme conservative splitting the majority of voters handing the election to the moderate liberal. Bill Clinton couldn’t have won the Presidency in 1992 without H. Ross Perot grabbing a lot of moderate conservatives (and some moderate liberals).

Some states are better than others. Campaign finance and equal time laws can help legitimize 3rd party candidates in states like Minnesota. States like Texas and California are pretty bad in terms of gerrymandering of districts and encouraging political choice.

There’s no easy fix. If everyone dissatisfied with the status quo went out and voted for independant and 3rd party candidates in November, they’d swing elections in the opposite direction of their preferences.

Anyways, the UK is probably going to see gridlock and another expensive election really soon, thanks to their vote of no confidence rules as opposed to having scheduled elections like we do.

[poorgradstudent]

The big story out of the UK elections has been the emergence of the Liberal Democrats, although like a lot of third parties they seem to have polled better leading up to the election than they actually did once the votes were cast.

US elections are sort of one big Prisnor’s Dilema of sorts. Most voters want more choice when it comes to candidates and political parties. But a lot of voters don’t vote FOR a candidate, they essentially vote AGAINST one. I know plenty of people in 2008 who voted either McCain or Obama not out of enthusiasm but fear of the guy they didn’t vote for. Two significant yet underrepresented political views in current US politics are libertarian and Pro-life liberals.

The problem of course is that 3rd party candidates invariably throw elections to the guy the most different from them. NY-23 was a great example of a moderate conservative and an extreme conservative splitting the majority of voters handing the election to the moderate liberal. Bill Clinton couldn’t have won the Presidency in 1992 without H. Ross Perot grabbing a lot of moderate conservatives (and some moderate liberals).

Some states are better than others. Campaign finance and equal time laws can help legitimize 3rd party candidates in states like Minnesota. States like Texas and California are pretty bad in terms of gerrymandering of districts and encouraging political choice.

There’s no easy fix. If everyone dissatisfied with the status quo went out and voted for independant and 3rd party candidates in November, they’d swing elections in the opposite direction of their preferences.

Anyways, the UK is probably going to see gridlock and another expensive election really soon, thanks to their vote of no confidence rules as opposed to having scheduled elections like we do.

[poorgradstudent]

I’ll go with: 2) The teenager didn’t cheat, exactly, but he “shaded the letter of the law” (or custom, in this case)

I imagine no one would have noticed or cared if it was part of the father’s transaction. Or, if the teenager had been on their own, unloaded their own full basket, realized they forgot milk or eggs, ran to get some while the cashier began ringing (although many grocery stores are happy to send someone to grab it for you).

The dad should have just thrown them on his transaction and either covered it or had the teenager give him cash. But I wouldn’t have been bothered by it.

[poorgradstudent]

I’ll go with: 2) The teenager didn’t cheat, exactly, but he “shaded the letter of the law” (or custom, in this case)

I imagine no one would have noticed or cared if it was part of the father’s transaction. Or, if the teenager had been on their own, unloaded their own full basket, realized they forgot milk or eggs, ran to get some while the cashier began ringing (although many grocery stores are happy to send someone to grab it for you).

The dad should have just thrown them on his transaction and either covered it or had the teenager give him cash. But I wouldn’t have been bothered by it.

[Author]

Posts