Over the past twelve months, this topic has picked up a lot of steam and is regularly discussed via social media and the news networks. So it's worth going back to the 1760s to discuss why it became so important.
The US population, in this period of 1776, was the size of San Diego county, California of today. Roughly 2-to-2.2 million residents. Around 75-percent were white, and a quarter were slaves.
Two of the US states were considered 'dominating' in terms of population (votes).....Virginia with around 600,000 and Pennsylvania with 400,000. From the remaining 11 states (in the beginning), South Carolina (200,000), North Carolina (350,000), New York (300,000), Maryland (280,000), Massachusetts (340,000), and Connecticut (200,000) were considered 'semi-dominating'. The rest were all less than 200,000. In particular, Delaware stood barely at 50,000.
The effect of the roughly 500,000 slaves that existed in 1776? They had to be counted as part of the Census, but debate led to a number being invented out of thin air (the three-fifth's rule). This rule hindered Virginia, South Carolina and North Carolina in terms of their population domination. Add to the 'gimmick' that they couldn't vote, but they could represent taxation and Census numbers.
So from the very beginning, there was fair in the smaller states (Delaware, Georgia, and Rhode Island for example) that their vote didn't matter much against the big states of South Carolina, Virginia and Pennsylvania. They also saw population gains likely over the next three or four decades. Smaller states and the ones further north....weren't going to be the 'gainers'.
The Electoral College was a creation to ensure some method of fairness to lesser populated states. It didn't matter if you had 100-percent of the votes from Virginia and North Carolina going to George Washington for President. Once you got to 51-percent, you got the max number of votes (based on your population distribution 'number'), and that was the 'win'.
If you dumped the situation today? I would offer these observations:
1. There's no real need to run a state by state primary....spread out over five months. You might as well run a one-month primary with six to fifteen states each week having a primary. Two weeks after that, run your convention, and then a hundred days after that....have the national election. Using this scheme, since we'd be dumping the Electoral College, you might as well flip the date of the inauguration and the election day as well. Set the election day to early August, and the inauguration 30 days later.
2. The no Electoral College landscape? You would basically cross off fifteen states with marginal population or limited urbanization (Alaska, Idaho, Wyoming, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Montana, etc). I would advertise to some degree, but I wouldn't show up and campaign in any of these.
3. I would concentrate all my funding and show-up time....mostly in NY City, central California, the entire state of Florida, Dallas/Austin/Houston, Chicago, Atlanta, Portland, Philly/Pittsburgh, Boston, Seattle, Tucson/Phoenix, Denver, the entire state of North Carolina, Charleston, and probably Nashville. Cities like Reno or Mobile, or Dayton? They wouldn't matter.
4. You would notice after two of these non-Electoral College elections, that people in rural areas or no-show regions....would begin to lose interest and not show up to vote (not just for President, but for Governor, Congressmen, Senators, or even local city council folks).
5. In the space of twenty years, you'd come to realize that only around one-quarter of the population are actively involved in voting. Some Senators would be arriving in DC, who received only fifty-percent of the normal 'win-vote' that occurred during the Electoral College-era.
All of this chatter, if you haven't figured this out....requires a change to the Constitution. Your two methods? Two-thirds of both the House and Senate would propose and pass the change. Or you'd have two-thirds of the states to propose the change. The likelihood of either happening? ZERO. That's the comical side of this. As much as intellectuals, journalists and Democrats talk about this scenario, they can't reach either method to change the Constitution. It's just 'chatter'.
Should we modify the system? I would propose three alternate changes:
1. Cut loose the state by state voting, and distribute the Electoral College vote to each district. There are 435 districts across the nation. This forces the candidates to look upon each district as mattering.
2. There are 3,142 counties in the US. Let each have one single Electoral Vote, and force the candidates to view the bigger picture of individual counties. This would mean that 3,142 Electoral Votes would be necessary.
3. Rewrite the voting age to 21. No one has shown any data to say that 18 is a level of maturity. In fact, we've written enough of the booze laws....to suggest that they aren't mature enough to drink.
All of this wasted chatter? Yes, that's the amusing thing to this discussion. We aren't about to dump the Electoral College. Face it.
Sunday, 24 March 2019
Thursday, 21 March 2019
Pondering Upon Higher Education
It's a story which rarely ever gets dragged out, but in the late 1990s....the US Army had this odd event come up where they realized that numerous individuals had gotten hired as GS workers, to jobs which demanded bachelor degrees.
So various individuals had figured out the short-cut....fake degrees. The Army had to go and review each requirement, the person filling it, and then eyeball the university in question. Various individuals were brought in, and basically told they were unqualified, and 'let go'.
I bring this up because this new event going on, with various kids who had someone take their SAT tests, got the easy-going professors, and lounged/drank their way through college....are legit graduates but really unqualified for any type of work that is attached to the degree itself.
At some point, some HR group in a fortune 500 company will start to devise a test that you have to take....if you are a new guy coming out of college, and you have to answer 50 questions out of a hundred in your degree area. Suddenly, you will have thousands of positions vacant because the graduates are unable to comprehend or pass the stupid test (even to get a 50 out of a 100).
In some ways, this whole thing has opened up a Pandora's Box, and you have to ask the question....if you paid $100,000 for a stupid four-year trip to some Disneyland-like university, and didn't really learn anything.....why pay back to the debt to the government for the stupid loan?
So various individuals had figured out the short-cut....fake degrees. The Army had to go and review each requirement, the person filling it, and then eyeball the university in question. Various individuals were brought in, and basically told they were unqualified, and 'let go'.
I bring this up because this new event going on, with various kids who had someone take their SAT tests, got the easy-going professors, and lounged/drank their way through college....are legit graduates but really unqualified for any type of work that is attached to the degree itself.
At some point, some HR group in a fortune 500 company will start to devise a test that you have to take....if you are a new guy coming out of college, and you have to answer 50 questions out of a hundred in your degree area. Suddenly, you will have thousands of positions vacant because the graduates are unable to comprehend or pass the stupid test (even to get a 50 out of a 100).
In some ways, this whole thing has opened up a Pandora's Box, and you have to ask the question....if you paid $100,000 for a stupid four-year trip to some Disneyland-like university, and didn't really learn anything.....why pay back to the debt to the government for the stupid loan?
Wednesday, 20 March 2019
What is Wokeness?
Prior to 2010, I don't think I'd ever heard of the word. Somewhere around 2014, it started to show in columns or commentary of people....usually charged up on political objectives or 'revolution'.
So the basic meaning of this....you were going down some path in your life, with various perceptions, wisdom, and beliefs guiding you, then one day....you 'woke up'. The path is no longer valid, or walkable. You challenge yourself continually about what you see on TV, hear from politicians or journalists, and are in a continual state of either denial or disbelief.
Some folks will use the expression that you were deprogrammed, and now have a clear understanding of things. Other folks will say that you've been RE-programmed, and now have a misunderstood thinking process of things. Complicated? Yes.
So, could you have a woken-wokeness? That's where you suddenly realize that this whole perception you gained over the past year or two....is basically bogus, and you were fed a big long piece of BS? Well....yeah.
So the basic meaning of this....you were going down some path in your life, with various perceptions, wisdom, and beliefs guiding you, then one day....you 'woke up'. The path is no longer valid, or walkable. You challenge yourself continually about what you see on TV, hear from politicians or journalists, and are in a continual state of either denial or disbelief.
Some folks will use the expression that you were deprogrammed, and now have a clear understanding of things. Other folks will say that you've been RE-programmed, and now have a misunderstood thinking process of things. Complicated? Yes.
So, could you have a woken-wokeness? That's where you suddenly realize that this whole perception you gained over the past year or two....is basically bogus, and you were fed a big long piece of BS? Well....yeah.
Tuesday, 19 March 2019
Russia: Social Media and Fake News
Yesterday, Russia's Putin signed a law into effect concerning fake news. You might want to browse through the wording and effect:
1. The Attorney General of Russia (and his deputies) can on their own (without a judge) decide what is fake news and what is not fake news.
2. After this group makes their decision, the Russia media control agency (Roskomnadzor) would be given the responsibility of blocking the news, or the site.
3. If you did publish a fake news item? The fine is 100,000 Rubles, roughly $1,525, if you were just a regular citizen. If you were a public figure....double that fine. And if you were a company (HuffPost or Twitter for example), then it's 500,000 Rubles.
4. A news site that comes to exist without being registered with Roskomnadzor? They'd just be immediately blocked, without any warning.
5. Then we get to the juicy part of the law.....insulting anyone, government offices themselves, the flag, or even the Constitution itself. Fines and two weeks in jail would be the extent of your trouble.
The odds of Twitter or Facebook being a major factor in Russian elections? I would suggest that both will likely be shutdown for various periods of time in Russia.
1. The Attorney General of Russia (and his deputies) can on their own (without a judge) decide what is fake news and what is not fake news.
2. After this group makes their decision, the Russia media control agency (Roskomnadzor) would be given the responsibility of blocking the news, or the site.
3. If you did publish a fake news item? The fine is 100,000 Rubles, roughly $1,525, if you were just a regular citizen. If you were a public figure....double that fine. And if you were a company (HuffPost or Twitter for example), then it's 500,000 Rubles.
4. A news site that comes to exist without being registered with Roskomnadzor? They'd just be immediately blocked, without any warning.
5. Then we get to the juicy part of the law.....insulting anyone, government offices themselves, the flag, or even the Constitution itself. Fines and two weeks in jail would be the extent of your trouble.
The odds of Twitter or Facebook being a major factor in Russian elections? I would suggest that both will likely be shutdown for various periods of time in Russia.
How To Fix Twitter, Facebook and the Rest
People are convinced that social media is harming the general public.....so my suggestion is this, for each tweet or Facebook comment....charge the guy $3.99, and responses to that guy's original tweet/comment....$1.99.
After a month or two, everyone would start to calm down....lessen their tweets, and calm would be restored.
Yes, Facebook and Twitter would likely go out of business in a year or two....but that's simply the path of this whole mess.
After a month or two, everyone would start to calm down....lessen their tweets, and calm would be restored.
Yes, Facebook and Twitter would likely go out of business in a year or two....but that's simply the path of this whole mess.
Monday, 18 March 2019
The Fakeness of College
Someone made a public statement today.....over the topic of 'faking your way through college'. It was a curious topic to ponder upon.
Prior to the 1980s, I think faking had some potential but most classes had enough demands and adult leadership....so that the system worked the way that it was designed.
Part of this faking-talk goes to the 1980s/1990s 'agenda' where high schools more or less....dumbed down the structure. The system began to escalate the potential for a 'C' average student to start getting B's instead. Kids began to show up at colleges and they simply didn't have the skill to handle courses, so along the end of the first semester, or second semester.....they quit. This statistic started to become part of a university's record....the dropout rate.
The University of Charleston for example.....only 18-percent of freshmen will be there at the end of the 4th year....graduating.
Southeastern University in Florida for example.....has only 39-percent of the freshmen finishing a degree in four years.
I worked with a guy in Arlington, VA who had a son who'd been accepted at a prominent Virginia college. There was one issue.....they (the school) demanded that the kid take a math and English placement test. The kid did a dismal score. So they said....go ahead and enter college, but two of the five classes for the first semester would have to be high school remedial math and English courses. Yes, the father was basically paying around $1,500 for two courses.....which should not have been necessary. The school even demanded that the kid retake the placement test at the end of that, and if he hadn't advanced to the level expected.....he'd retake them yet again. This guy went down and had a conversation with the college 'chiefs', and they made it simple.....they were sick and tired of kids arriving who were not prepared for college.
No one is counting up on the kids who drop out, nor is it some type of national emergency. Colleges playing along and dragging the 'slackers' onto the 2nd, 3rd and 4th year? Well....if you had 20-percent drop out at the end of the first year....you need to have a mechanism carry the remaining folks on. So you build up a slacker-approach, and at the conclusion of four years....out a hundred kids graduating....there's probably a quarter of them who really aren't capable of performing at the level required.
If you went to a university on some sports scholarship? It's probably a 50-percent chance that you can't handle the level required.
The sad thing here.....not only were you a slacker in college and collected a fake degree, but you spent $100,000 to get there, and there's a debt situation for the next twenty years for your slacker-degree.
Prior to the 1980s, I think faking had some potential but most classes had enough demands and adult leadership....so that the system worked the way that it was designed.
Part of this faking-talk goes to the 1980s/1990s 'agenda' where high schools more or less....dumbed down the structure. The system began to escalate the potential for a 'C' average student to start getting B's instead. Kids began to show up at colleges and they simply didn't have the skill to handle courses, so along the end of the first semester, or second semester.....they quit. This statistic started to become part of a university's record....the dropout rate.
The University of Charleston for example.....only 18-percent of freshmen will be there at the end of the 4th year....graduating.
Southeastern University in Florida for example.....has only 39-percent of the freshmen finishing a degree in four years.
I worked with a guy in Arlington, VA who had a son who'd been accepted at a prominent Virginia college. There was one issue.....they (the school) demanded that the kid take a math and English placement test. The kid did a dismal score. So they said....go ahead and enter college, but two of the five classes for the first semester would have to be high school remedial math and English courses. Yes, the father was basically paying around $1,500 for two courses.....which should not have been necessary. The school even demanded that the kid retake the placement test at the end of that, and if he hadn't advanced to the level expected.....he'd retake them yet again. This guy went down and had a conversation with the college 'chiefs', and they made it simple.....they were sick and tired of kids arriving who were not prepared for college.
No one is counting up on the kids who drop out, nor is it some type of national emergency. Colleges playing along and dragging the 'slackers' onto the 2nd, 3rd and 4th year? Well....if you had 20-percent drop out at the end of the first year....you need to have a mechanism carry the remaining folks on. So you build up a slacker-approach, and at the conclusion of four years....out a hundred kids graduating....there's probably a quarter of them who really aren't capable of performing at the level required.
If you went to a university on some sports scholarship? It's probably a 50-percent chance that you can't handle the level required.
The sad thing here.....not only were you a slacker in college and collected a fake degree, but you spent $100,000 to get there, and there's a debt situation for the next twenty years for your slacker-degree.
Sunday, 17 March 2019
Russian Collusion in 2020?
If you haven't figured it out...just about every news group, social media team, and fake-news agenda will be pushing Russian collusion in 2020.
So why let the gimmick ruin the election?
My suggestion to go and hire up a Russian ZIL 1986 115-model limousine. Then find a couple of comedians for three weeks to tour America.
'Comrad Zippy' will be KGB-like secret agent, who mostly talks about the secret agenda, but it's never clear what the agenda might be.
'Secret Agent Anne' will be a slutty KGB-type gal who mostly just looks at the camera, and does poses.
'Comrad General Vilsely' will be some general with 88 different medals on his chest, and autographed photos of himself being handed out. He will usually be talking about the fake news of CNN.
'Comrad Anton' will be some Russian farmer, who is continually amazed how wonderful America is, and always seen wearing Make America Great Again hats.
Our dynamic four would be touring America and continually getting into trouble....mostly with honest intentions. At the end, a public call from Putin would occur, with the team recalled, and all collusion ended.
So why let the gimmick ruin the election?
My suggestion to go and hire up a Russian ZIL 1986 115-model limousine. Then find a couple of comedians for three weeks to tour America.
'Comrad Zippy' will be KGB-like secret agent, who mostly talks about the secret agenda, but it's never clear what the agenda might be.
'Secret Agent Anne' will be a slutty KGB-type gal who mostly just looks at the camera, and does poses.
'Comrad General Vilsely' will be some general with 88 different medals on his chest, and autographed photos of himself being handed out. He will usually be talking about the fake news of CNN.
'Comrad Anton' will be some Russian farmer, who is continually amazed how wonderful America is, and always seen wearing Make America Great Again hats.
Our dynamic four would be touring America and continually getting into trouble....mostly with honest intentions. At the end, a public call from Putin would occur, with the team recalled, and all collusion ended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)