The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Save the senate > Comments

Save the senate : Comments

By David Leyonhjelm, published 20/8/2018

While it can sometimes be difficult to discern the principles motivating some of my fellow crossbenchers, especially when they change their position, they are never voting contrary to their own views.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
The senate is needed because the lower house is undemocratic, where ordinary people are not represented and where there is in practice only one party masquerading as two.

Have either proportional or direct representation, then the senate can be done away with.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 20 August 2018 10:42:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tax reform as it'ss being presented has every chance to fail, because it rewards big banks and patently crooked financial houses for clearly, corrupt behaviour.

The Senate is buggered, when someone who received just 19 votes is the alleged representative, then stands and gives a final solution, mine kamf speech, and other go for out and out misogyny just for the publicity it gets them an in the public eye!?

Before he gave his final solution speech, who had heard of the former one nation member? Now every boy and his dog knows whatsisname?

We need a system that better reflects the elector first choice rather than that via dirty deals done in the dead of night as preference swaps that self evidently confounds the blue blaze out of it!

For mine, that means preferencing has to be optional. And we the voter should decide who is first on the ticket not the boys in the room at the back!

Finally, we do need real tax reform to restore equity and fairness along with massive economic upside! And that reform would be an unavoidable 15% flat tax everybody above a generous threshold pays. And given the actual tax actually paid as actual revenue, was 13% in 2017!

And where one in four paid none? Numbered among those were those with the biggest profits, therefore, revenue should increase.

Further, and taking the 13% max as the example, and including tax-related compliance costs averaging 7%, means altogether a 20% impost on the bottom line currently.

However, a 15% unavoidable flat tax with no deductions available, would still be 5% less as the total sum of tax liability and related compliance costs, the latter being made completely redundant by the inherent simplicity! It's just too easy!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 20 August 2018 12:23:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Explanation: The 13% tax reference should be read as the maximum tax paid in actual money/revenue and after all deductions available, was as stated, 13% tops, 2017! (4 Corners)
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 20 August 2018 12:48:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>>Have either proportional or direct representation, then the senate can be done away with. - Yuyutsu

Either proportional or direct representation assumes multi-member electorates.

Proportional representation means candidates are elected in proportion to the number of votes cast for them. That system does not guarantee the election of the most competent candidates, merely, perhaps, those with the biggest electoral machine and most money to spend on the campaign. Worse if preferential voting allows one very popular candidate to drag other candidates through.

On the other hand, practical politicians know they must ignore the wishes of many voters because they are, for example, ill-informed, illogical, contradictory, some times malicious and some times potentially criminal.

Direct representation, according to Wikipedia, "is a proposed form of representative democracy where each representative's vote is weighted in proportion to the number of citizens who have chosen that candidate to represent them."

That system means that every electorate must have multiple candidates elected to represent not only "reasonable persons", but the spread of interests of voters who hold ignorant, ill-informed, racist, prejudiced opinions or with single issue fixations.

Also, if the vote is split often enough, candidates with only a few votes could be elected: think Fraser Anning, elected to the Senate with 19 primary votes.

The costs of government (salaries and superannuation for politicians and staff, parliamentary and electorate office accommodation and operating expenses, travel and accommodation, leave entitlements, etc., would have to rise.

Yujutsu assumes every vote (and every voter's opinion) is equally valid and thus that every candidate is equally valid, so it doesn't matter who is elected so long as it's proportional.

Not so. An opinion that is not supported by facts, information, logic, rational argument, experience and knowledge is not valid. Opinions informed by propaganda, malice or racism, for example, are not valid.

Proportional voting has delivered legislative blocking by the cross bench in recent years, sometimes good, sometimes not.

Not sure how either proportional or direct government is an improvement. But go ahead, Yuyutsu, tell us.
Posted by calwest, Monday, 20 August 2018 2:44:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Calwest said- "An opinion that is not supported by facts, information, logic, rational argument, experience and knowledge is not valid. Opinions informed by propaganda, malice or racism, for example, are not valid."

Answer- My understanding is democracy is a form of government where the "electorate determines what is valid". The other form of government where validity is determined by the few is called "dictatorship" or "oligarchy" malign or beneign. Good luck with your dictatorship Calwest- through the chair.
Posted by Canem Malum, Monday, 20 August 2018 4:55:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am now firmly convinced that the only way for we neglected and scorned voters to make the senate work is to vote only for independents. Certainly, never vote for a senator who is a member of a party that could end up in government.
Posted by ttbn, Monday, 20 August 2018 5:26:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Calwest,

To summarise, you believe that ordinary people are stupid and should not have a say over the laws that the political class makes regarding what they must and must not do in their life.

This being the case, why have this expensive pretence of democracy to begin with?

Proportional representation, though more democratic, is still not perfect, but the drawbacks you attributed to it are exactly what we have in the current Australian electoral system: "That system does not guarantee the election of the most competent candidates, merely, perhaps, those with the biggest electoral machine and most money to spend on the campaign. Worse if preferential voting allows one very popular candidate to drag other candidates through." (your quote)

By "direct representation" I meant that citizens can vote on the issues rather than for candidates, but in practice they will only vote for the issues most dear to them, leaving the routine and unfamiliar issues to representatives of their choice, which one can change if they like at any time and per issue: http://voteflux.org
Posted by Yuyutsu, Tuesday, 21 August 2018 2:22:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu, I'm sorry but Calwest is on the money, when he states that, well, in my words, people are stupid, un-informed, ill-informed, gullible, naive, arrogant, greedy, selfish, bigoted, racist, jees, I could go on, but the inconvenient truth that NO-ONE wants to hear is that the people are all of the aforementioned.
There are exceptions and there are standouts, but generally speaking, I agree.
Yuyutsu if you want confirmation of what I or Calwest speak of, you need look no further than this forum.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 4 September 2018 3:25:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Altrav,

Suffice that I don't know any person who is not selfish - should it mean that no one should be allowed an equal vote?

Perhaps if we could have a wise, informed, humble, unselfish and all-loving king, but alas I know of only one such king in history, King Janaka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janaka): what are our chances of finding another one? What shall we do in the meantime?

Of the list you provided: "stupid, un-informed, ill-informed, gullible, naive, arrogant, greedy, selfish, bigoted, racist",
politicians indeed tend to be less un-informed and less naive than the average, but also above-average in arrogance, greediness and selfishness, while their other "qualities" are around average.

The question stands: should an individual, despite having a combination of the above traits to some degree or another, be allowed a say over the laws that dictate what they must and must-not do in their life?

Well some philosophies (including fascism and communism) answer this in the negative. If you adhere to one of those, then at least you should be decent and honest about it rather than pretend to have a democracy. I for one, am not as naive as to believe this fable as if we have one in Australia.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Tuesday, 4 September 2018 4:39:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy