Greece 2012

[Iannis]

There is a logic to it though - ensuring the winner has a thumping majority that can take some defections but the loser (and especially the losing side's lead personnel) cannot be locked out of the council/parliament/whatever, as can happen under fptp systems.

I understand the logic behind it but I still think it's chimerical in...well, let's just say a way that doesn't appeal to me.

 Of course proportional representation is the best but this bonus is anyway far better than FPTP. In practice, it is an incentive for broad colitions. In the 2 occasions in which it has been used in Italy the winning coalition neve had less than 46,8% of votes, and even according present polls the winning coalition would have 45%

[Iannis]

I really don't get it. What's wrong with having the cake and eating it, if we actually can ? Majority bonus PR is infinitely more representative than any constituency-based system, and avoids most of its shortcomings.

But in a constituency-based system, every member of parliament can rely on a personal vote. He is supported by more people in his constituency than anyone else. That is a great thing if you ask me. The single MP is more independent in his voting, and, at least theoretically: No one is really save.
Tony Blair could have lost his super-safe constituency in Newcastle (right?, somewhere in Durham I think), if only a few thousand people voted another way around as they did. That is the charme of FPTP: No one is really save.

On the other hand, Schröder, Müntefering, Steinmeier and Steinbrück would have been elected in the Bundestag even if the SPD would have been down to 5,1% in 2009. No voter could have done anything to avoid that.

And majority bonus PR combines the non-proportionality of FPTP and the ultimate power of party bosses of list-PF.

Quite the opposite, assuming that strongholds exist, a party leader can be elected even if his party gets 0,5% if in his constituency he's strong (a boss), but ignored in 99% of the country, with FPTP. But we know that everywhere people vote according to a national sentiment, also in Britain where the losses or gains are quite widespread regardless the qualities of local MPs. Indeed, I don't think thay in 1997 all tory MPs had become so hated from their local voters, the were just voting against tory as a national party. so it's right that if a national party is over 5% its leaders have to be in parliament, because nationally that party exists with some force.
And if you add the preferential vote, it's even better.

[Iannis]

This is going to be a great election. Hopefully the KKE can lead the Revolution after this.

In their deep souls KKE leaders know that they are wrong, that their model would neve work. That's way they refuse any coalition with other parties.
i just fear leftist populims at government, but what can they do without possibility of public expenditure?

[Iannis]

px, who did you vote for/will vote for?

I mentioned before the elections that I'd vote for DISY on May 6.

This time I'll wait and see. If the first place is contested then I might be forced to hold my nose and vote for ND, just to stop those SYRIZA clowns from taking us back to the drachma.

Well, At this point I think it's necessary to vote ND, Syiriza could really be the first party.

[Iannis]

Yeah, that meanie doesn't want to give me his money...guess I should hold a gun to his head. Right, Antonio?

I guess you know that it has never been about actually giving any money, right ?

If SYRIZA wins, it was a lot of money given.

Well, we wouldn't be there if the German governments didn't bullied neoliberalism on all Europe...

Neoliberalism? Funny, They canceled 140 billion debt, owed to european banks, so neoliberal.. they are only asking not to do new debt, actually, the consequence is that Greece will have the development that its industry and productivity allow, nothing special. Too bad that the productivty is at balkanic levels, but this is not german fault of course.

[Iannis]

This is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that there are two options : either we accept the idea of a common currency, with everything it entails (including eurobonds), or we definitely settle on the old-fashioned selfish nationalist logic with everything it entails (ie abandoning Euro). Both these choices are absolutely legitimate (even though I think the second would be an economic suicide). All what I want is some consistency in reasoning.

The idea of the common european currency entails not merely eurobonds, but a european government responsible to a european parliament that has direct taxation authority over the european population. Unless you are willing to share you real president with the German voters, you aren't accepting what a common currency entails.

You are absolutely right, I couldn't agree more. All this is what should come next. But you can't do everything at once. The next step is Eurobonds, then something else, etc. until we have a complete European Federation.

No no, it must be done in the SAME moment, or better, first a unique fiscal authorithy with a control on any expense of any state in cluding Greece, and THEN the eurobond as a consequence. This implies that laws about greek pensions, for instance, are not anymore possible, not with money of fiscal disciplined peopleo of Germany, Austria, Finland, Netherlands, Northern Italy.

[Iannis]

This is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that there are two options : either we accept the idea of a common currency, with everything it entails (including eurobonds), or we definitely settle on the old-fashioned selfish nationalist logic with everything it entails (ie abandoning Euro). Both these choices are absolutely legitimate (even though I think the second would be an economic suicide). All what I want is some consistency in reasoning.

The idea of the common european currency entails not merely eurobonds, but a european government responsible to a european parliament that has direct taxation authority over the european population. Unless you are willing to share you real president with the German voters, you aren't accepting what a common currency entails.

You are absolutely right, I couldn't agree more. All this is what should come next. But you can't do everything at once. The next step is Eurobonds, then something else, etc. until we have a complete European Federation.

No no, it must be done in the SAME moment, or better, first a unique fiscal authorithy with a control on any expense of any state in cluding Greece, and THEN the eurobond as a consequence. This implies that laws about greek pensions, for instance, are not anymore possible, not with money of fiscal disciplined peopleo of Germany, Austria, Finland, Netherlands, Northern Italy.

Ahah yeah sure,the same "fiscal disciplined people of Northern Italy" who have ridicolous tax evasion rates.
Please...

It's one of the lowest rate in europe, the same of Germany or Finland, as hugely demonstrated many and many times

[Iannis]

What is dimiourga xana ?

Nazis

Goddamnit, another nazi party ? *__*

Merkel fanboys who want to ban public demonstrations and sound as if they'd rather like to ban the KKE.

I love this party, I hope they will join DRASI to form a bigger force

[Iannis]

Believe me, I don't like to. But I felt the need to express my feelings, because my despair reaches new heights every time I realize how widespread your "views" are.

The hard reality for your kind of answering usually is the lack of good arguments and the lack of competence on the issues treated