[nigel_k]

 kenberg, on 2012-November-06, 07:56, said:

Mr. President, you've got a tough job ahead of you. It is not clear to me why on Earth you want this job. But you got it. I actually don't know how to solve this entitlement problem, but you are supposed to have some ideas. May I make one more observation. People of my age understand about the consequences of spending money we don't have.

I no longer have confidence that the problem is solvable at all. My country is further down this track than the US. Our debt isn't proportionally bigger but the entitlement mentality is more entrenched. During my adult life (the last 25 years) we have gone from a centre-left government committed to fiscal responsibility to a centre-right government that has no intention of ever balancing the budget. We must eventually reach the point where Greece is now and go past it.

There is a long term personal cost to spending money you don't have. But there is no such cost to spending other people's money, especially when those people cannot vote and may not even have been born. To refuse this money requires a strong sense of personal responsibility and a moral worldview that just won't permit you to take more out of the country than you put in. This has to be reinforced by a critical mass of others with the same views. Once that critical mass is lost, I doubt very much there is any way of getting it back.

The best we can do know is understand how we got this way so other countries such as China can have a chance to stop the disease before too many are infected.

[Vampyr]

 kenberg, on 2012-November-06, 13:07, said:

As we went off to vote I mentioned we must now choose between the Muslim Socialist and the Vulture Capitalist.

Did you have a Muslim running for Congress?

[TimG]

 luke warm, on 2012-November-06, 12:48, said:

taking just one example, the defense of marriage act is just as wrong as any other federal law that limits the power of the states to decide for themselves, as determined by the people who reside in those states... if MA wants to legalize gay marriage, it should be legal in MA - imo neither LA nor MS nor the fed gov't should have the power to interfere in that...

If the Federal Government offers an income tax filing status of "married filing jointly" which provides some benefit to married people, doesn't the Federal Government have to take a position on same sex marriage? Or, are these benefits supposed to be enjoyed by those in Massachusetts, but not those in Texas?

[kenberg]

This is a reply to PassedOut (there were several messages inserted in the short time it took me to reply!): Maryland has some of that, I just checked. There is a sample ballot. The referenda are explained in writing, as they are in the sample ballot that was mailed to us, and there is a spoken version. The arguments for and against do not appear, or at least I did not find them.

[lalldonn]

 PassedOut, on 2012-November-06, 13:16, said:

When preparing to vote yesterday, I was pleased to see that we had an online means to bring up the sample ballot for any precinct in Michigan. All I had to do was to type in my name, although I suppose that those with more common names had to enter a bit more.

When the sample ballot appeared, you could click on icons by each name to view more about the candidate and his or her positions on issues. Along with the ballot was the address of and map to our polling location.

But most interesting to me was a series 4-5 minute videos, one for each proposal and constitutional amendment on the ballot. The presenter in each case was the same relaxed, articulate, non-partisan lady (I'm guessing that she is a Wayne State political science professor). She explained in plain, understandable language exactly what the proposal would accomplish (and what it would not). Then she summarized the arguments of both the proponents and opponents of the proposal or amendment.

Some things about the online world can be distracting and irritating, but this impressed me. I'm wondering: Is this type of site new, or is it common and I've just now stumbled upon it?

We have something like that which arrives in the mail with our sample ballots ahead of the election. It states each proposal, the argument for, the argument against, and a rebuttal of each argument. It's actually pretty entertaining to read, watching the sample ballot have a debate with itself.

In Nevada there were only two such proposals up for a vote. One was to increase the ability of the state legislature to convene "special legislative sessions" if they feel the need, and the other was for a slight tax increase to fund schools. Nothing all that controversial IMO no matter which side you fall on.

[nigel_k]

 barmar, on 2012-November-06, 13:42, said:

Really lucky in my town. Population is 42,000, and we have 21 precincts, so there are never any long lines -- I think the most I've ever seen in almost 30 years is 2 people ahead of me. "Talk of the Nation" just read an email from someone saying they waited 2.5 hours, with the line growing from 350 when they got on line at 9am to 500 when they finally voted -- that would be more than half the eligible voters in one of our precincts (I'm estimating at least 1/3 of the population is minors, who can't vote).

This is something I don't understand about the US. According to this link, in New Zealand's 2005 election we had 6094 polling stations for a population of about 4.1 million so a ratio of 673:1, three times better than your 'very lucky' town. It also says: '71% of voters voted in less than 5 minutes and 92% in less than 10 minutes. 98% of voters are satisfied with the waiting time.'

If people complain about disenfranchisement from voters having to prove who they are, how much worse is it when people choose not to vote because they aren't willing to wait in line for 2 hours?

[luke warm]

 lalldonn, on 2012-November-06, 12:58, said:

That's actually more than fair, but I'm in no mood to risk a lot to win a little even with odds that I feel are in my favor. No hard feelings.

not at all

 ArtK78, on 2012-November-06, 12:52, said:

Whereas I view the Republican Party as the evil of two lessers.

I disagree with almost everything in your post. But that's life.

fine, so you support the defense of marriage act, you favor more people dependent on the fed gov't and a more european-styled america, along with "almost everything" else in my post... as you say, that's life

 TimG, on 2012-November-06, 13:48, said:

If the Federal Government offers an income tax filing status of "married filing jointly" which provides some benefit to married people, doesn't the Federal Government have to take a position on same sex marriage? Or, are these benefits supposed to be enjoyed by those in Massachusetts, but not those in Texas?

if MA passes same sex marriage and TX does not, then yes...

[kenberg]

 Vampyr, on 2012-November-06, 13:42, said:

Did you have a Muslim running for Congress?

Under the old districting we only had Vulture Capitalists. I have not yet learned the accepted way to summarize Chris Van Hollen. Commnunist Dupe is a bit outdated. I'll let you know.

Or, if you want a more serious response, I don't know. Actually I would be delighted to never know the religious beliefs of anyone running for Congress. Or of anyone else, for that matter.

[barmar]

 kenberg, on 2012-November-06, 14:04, said:

Actually I would be delighted to never know the religious beliefs of anyone running for Congress.

Even if they allow their religious beliefs to bias their decisions?

I'm all for religious tolerance, as long as their belief doesn't affect other people.

[Vampyr]

 kenberg, on 2012-November-06, 14:04, said:

Or, if you want a more serious response, I don't know.

OK; I assumed you did know, since you mentioned a Muslim.

[ArtK78]

There were two voting districts voting in the polling place for my voting district - an elementary school gymnasium. In my district, at 8:30 this morning, the line was about 30 people long. There were two voting machines, and it took about 15-20 minutes to vote. In the other district, the line (if you would call it that) was about 1-2 people long at various times while I was waiting, and that district also had two voting machines.

I don't know why it was the way it was, but it was curious.

In any event, the races in New Jersey are not very interesting. Robert Menendez will certainly be reelected to his Senate seat, and Frank LoBiando will certainly be reelected to his seat in the House from the 2nd Congressional District (Atlantic, Cape May, Cumberland and Salem Counties - the southern most and least populated counties in New Jersey - home to Hurricane Sandy!). President Obama is as sure a bet as there can be to win New Jersey. Other than that, there are some County and local races which are of interest primarily to the people running in them. And there are a couple of statewide questions which, while not unimportant, are not very interesting.

[wyman]

 Vampyr, on 2012-November-06, 14:22, said:

OK; I assumed you did know, since you mentioned a Muslim.

I thought it was pretty clear that he was referring to the two sides' caricatures of the opposition candidates (Obama as a Muslim socialist, Romney as a predatory venture capitalist). Maybe if you're subjected to the adverts, punditry, and "news" day in and day out, it is far clearer.

[barmar]

Ahh, voting machines -- that's the difference. We still use paper ballots where you fill in ovals with your choices (we used to use punch cards, but got rid of them after hanging chads). We actually have 3 precincts voting in my polling place, also an elementary school gym. There are about a dozen carels with 4 writing surfaces each, but most of them were empty when I voted at about 12:30.

[ArtK78]

 barmar, on 2012-November-06, 14:53, said:

Ahh, voting machines -- that's the difference. We still use paper ballots where you fill in ovals with your choices (we used to use punch cards, but got rid of them after hanging chads). We actually have 3 precincts voting in my polling place, also an elementary school gym. There are about a dozen carels with 4 writing surfaces each, but most of them were empty when I voted at about 12:30.

I have been voting since I was 18 (way back in the middle of the 20th century) and I have never voted on a paper ballot.

Are you in Florida? You really need to move into the 20th century (at least) and get rid of paper ballots.

[Trinidad]

 luke warm, on 2012-November-06, 12:48, said:

 kenberg, on 2012-November-06, 07:56, said:

May I make one more observation. People of my age understand about the consequences of spending money we don't have.

i'd like to take a moment or two to talk about this, and i'm trying to do so without being particularly partisan, though i'm sure some will think that's not true... it seems to me that the more people we have who don't subscribe to your view, the farther we get away from america and the closer we come to a more european society...

Now this has not been your first fact free post in this thread. Don't worry, Mitt Romney has said some incredibly ...err... poorly informed things about Europe too.

It is not difficult to find some facts. Then you will see that the USA would loooooovvvveeeeee to be like Europe... because European countries are much less prone to spend money that they don't have than the USA.

I googled a little. I am sure someone can find more recent data, but this is the start of the table with the 2010 deficit by OECD country as a percentage of the GDP, the next column shows the estimate for 2011:

1. Ireland -31.3  -10.3
2. Greece -10.8  -9
3. United States -10.7  -10
4. United Kingdom -10.4  -9.4
5. Iceland -10.1  -5.4
6. Portugal -9.8  -5.9
7. Spain -9.3  -6.2

I skip a few..
11. OECD Total -7.7  -6.6
14. Canada -5.6  -5
17. Australia -4.8  -3.3
19. Italy -4.5  -3.6
.
.
32. Norway 10.6  12.5

Note the OECD Total in place 11. No doubt that the major reason why it is so high is that the USA will be weighing in so heavily.

How about the debt (% of GDP)? I found something here.
1. Japan 104.6
2. Italy 100.8
3. Greece 94.6
4. Belgium 85.4
5. United States 65.2
6. Portugal 62.6
7. Hungary 62.1
last Norway -143.6

I didn't search for that, but I can also safely say that personal debts (in contrast to the debt of countries) are much bigger in the USA than in Europe.

If you then think about what caused the problems for many of these European countries (and look how small the European problems are compared to the USA) then I think the last thing that Americans are allowed to do is point a finger at the financial situation of European countries.

The simple conclusion: If the USA would be a little more like Europe, the world would be financially considerably sounder.

Rik

[wyman]

 ArtK78, on 2012-November-06, 14:22, said:

...New Jersey
...
And there are a couple of statewide questions which, while not unimportant, are not very interesting.

I actually think that the statewide constitutional amendment ballot initiative is rather interesting.

Background: NJ Legislature passed a bill that changed the pension withholding from govt employees' paychecks. A judge or justice (I forget which) sued because NJ has a clause in the NJ constitution that says that the legislature can't change the compensation of sitting members of the judiciary. This argument held up through a few rds of appeals, so Christie is pushing for a constitutional amendment that allows the legislature to change the salaries of sitting members of the judiciary.

My commentary:
1) I believe that it would be fine to increase the withholding from these paychecks.

2) I don't think that this is an issue that warrants a constitutional amendment, since these judges/justices will retire eventually, after which this is a non-issue until the legislature wants to change tack. This incentivizes the legislature to get "it" right the first time.

3) This is a small issue, not warranting an amendment, because the judiciary is a small fraction of NJ gov't employees.

4) Allowing the legislature to alter the compensation of sitting members of the judiciary compromises the checks and balances we have in place.

5) And this I believe is the most interesting point: Ostensibly, the Republican party should be against adding massive complexity to the lawbooks, and especially the constitution. We shouldn't be amending the constitution over small things. Yet, this is somehow important enough to CC that he's willing to push for it. This seems extremely strange to me and is an example of how Republican politics has (d)evolved.

I voted against it for the reasons above, even though I agree in principle with CC on the matter.

Additionally, in New Brunswick, we had a city-wide initiative to change from a mayor-appointed Bd of Ed to an elected BoE. Some political action group sent out a letter from the mayor with a glossy on the current BoE and the members' credentials and an appeal to reject this on the grounds that the initiative is a way for people who failed to be elected in local elections to backdoor their way into the political scene. Again, seems weird for a dem. mayor to argue against holding elections for such positions, but since it's usually a dem mayor...

Again, while I agree that the BoE is fine, and the members are (for the most part) credentialed and qualified, it's insulting to me as a member of the electorate that he seems to think that we are incapable of electing a quality, non-partisan school board. So, on principle, I voted in favor of changing to an elected BoE system. But honestly, we as an electorate should be capable of electing a non-partisan national legislature that would put aside politics and act in the best interest of the voters. But I can't even type that sentence without laughing. So maybe the mayor has a point. Kind of makes me sad.

[wyman]

http://thenextweb.co...altering-votes/

I'm sure this is not malicious at all, but it makes me long for the days of scantron (since we're on the topic of voting machines).

[1eyedjack]

I was reading an article on why the election is always on a Tuesday. To those where it is closer to home it is probably obvious or taught in schools or whatnot.

Anyway, the article is here

http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-20072338

from which I quote:

"Saturday was a workday on the farm, travel on Sunday was out, and Wednesday was a market day. That left Tuesday."

Ummm, duh!! "That left Tuesday"?? Yes. And Monday, Thursday and Friday. And if Saturday was a workday, then so was (I imagine) Tuesday, so that also leaves Saturday.

No doubt there was a reason for Tuesday, but as a piece of journalism I say again, Duh!

[barmar]

 ArtK78, on 2012-November-06, 14:57, said:

I have been voting since I was 18 (way back in the middle of the 20th century) and I have never voted on a paper ballot.

Are you in Florida? You really need to move into the 20th century (at least) and get rid of paper ballots.

I'm in Arlington, MA. Normally we're a very high tech community -- we were one of the first towns in MA to get cable Internet. I'm not sure why we still use paper ballots, but maybe it's just because they still work pretty well. Low-tech isn't always bad.

[Thiros]

Well, it's done. I've made my choice, but you have no idea how badly I wanted to write in Fred Gitelman.