@melloquacious

http://australianpolitics.com/voting/preferential

voters are required to place the number “1” against the candidate of their choice, known as their first preference.
voters are then required to place the numbers “2”, “3”, etc., against the other candidates listed on the ballot paper in order of preference.
the counting of first preference votes, also known as the primary vote, takes place first. If no candidate secures an absolute majority – 50% plus 1 – of primary votes, then the candidate with the least number of votes is “eliminated” from the count.
the ballot papers of the eliminated candidate are examined and re-allocated amongst the remaining candidates according to the number “2”, or second preference votes.
if no candidate has yet secured an absolute majority of the vote, then the next candidate with the least number of primary votes is eliminated. This preference allocation continues until there is a candidate with an absolute majority. Where a second preference is expressed for a candidate who has already been eliminated, the voter’s third or subsequent preferences are used.

@Scorchar Thank you. I have heard a few Americans talk about this system as the solution to our problem with the polarized, two-party system, but - from what you're saying - it sounds like partisan politics are alive and well in spite of it.

@melloquacious What I have always hated about politics in Australia is that the person running the country gets his job because he's the leader of the most popular party. Although he/she was reelected in his own electorate, that is only a tiny part of Australia & most of us do not get a say in it.

@Graylight Either she failed to communicate that, or the working class just didn't believe it. Whatever the case, plenty of journalists wrote about how the democratic party has lost touch with the working poor, and they are right.

@Graylight Bernie Sander's platform was basically that: the Democrats are out of touch with the working class, and he wanted to bring them back. He lost, so what does that say about Democrats?

That said, I don't think Republicans are the party of working class people, either. I'm just saying I can see why someone might think that, looking at who is doing the voting.

@melloquacious Oh no, she actually said it. It was part of one sentence. Her detractors simply chose to listen only to the first part.

On the point that the Democrats have lost touch with the working class,you are absolutely correct. At least, I think so. It was assumed that white middle-class voters everywhere would vote Democratic down the line, but they still feel unheard and left out. Having just driven a tour through the middle of this country, I can see why. They need a stronger voice, both to talk with and to listen to. Right now, the focus is on the train wreck that is the Republican Party, but I fear the Democrats are sitting idly on the sidelines with popcorn rather than getting down to serious work.

@Graylight That’s the thing. Trump has no objections to the way Bezos is doing business on principle, and he’s a hypocrite (nothing new) to even pretend that he has. If anything, this is sheer corporate envy and vindictiveness on his part.

@Graylight This is my problem with going after Amazon for anti-trust. Why Amazon? Why not Walmart?

OH YEA. YOU HATE BEZOS.

@CopperCicada Exactly.

Yeah, it was just surprising to see a leftist get fired up about how much they hate Trump after mentioning that he is talking about engaging in an anti-trust action.

@CopperCicada Makes a lot of sense.

@CopperCicada You’re right. I shouldn’t attack the person. I see the errors of my ways. But it’s so very tempting to criticize Trump for cheating on Melania.

@QuixoticSoul Yeah, seriously. It's not a cool company in any sense.

@QuixoticSoul

Multiple issues here.


Size alone, is not reason why I should be concerned about a company. It's whether or not they have competition in the marketplace. Even the best intentioned companies run the risk, if they have total control over the market, of sprouting bad people, based on the principle of absolute power, absolutely corrupts.

No person or company, is immune from this principle. This is why I favor government regulation, before problems develop. This is also a weird one, because the champion of less regulation, and free market economics, is making an exception, for the one company, that's run by the person who owns the paper that criticizes him.


Serious question: why do you think Amazon causes a drop in competitiveness? And let's look at Amazon's different businesses, or perhaps the primary businesses.

1. Online direct merchandizing: Amazon does have a very large chunk of the online direct merchandizing space (about 45% of the US market), but its competition has 65% of the market, for a total of about $215B for the competition.

So, it's not lack of competition. Take WalMart for instance, if I recall correctly, they are the biggest retailer in the US (online represents only 4% of total retail in the US). They decreed that anyone who wants to do business with WalMart, is not allowed to host their online platform on AWS.

2. AWS: AWS has a large chunk of the market, but it's not without competition. You have Microsoft Azure, SalesForce Cloud, IBM Cloud, Google Cloud, and these are just the big names. More than 1/3 of the market is small players as well.

There's a reason why AWS is preferred by some. Even former Microsoft execs, who launched their own post Microsoft ventures, switch to AWS, once on their own. It's not just about hosting servers, it's about the 50 or so products/services, AWS offers.

Perhaps this is not the right thread for it, but there's a lot more to AWS than hosting servers. The competition is trying to catch up, with Azure in the lead. Microsoft, this week, announced that they're de-emphasizing Windows, with the head of that division leaving, and the group split into two primary areas: AI and Cloud Services. That's going to fuel Azure's growth.


What you're pointing to, is not unique to Amazon. It's what ails the entire tech industry in the US. It's called golden handcuffs. The model is simple. You join a company, get stock options, work 80 hours+ per week, cash out, and hang out at Starbucks.

To be fair to Starbucks, they did a 180 a couple of years ago. They still have the stock options, and large signup bonus, but they changed their review/promotion model to something that's working a lot better for people now. Across the pond, at Microsoft, the new model they've adopted is still as shitty as the previous model.


See earlier comment


The thing about Trump, is that he did not mention any of this in his tweets. He's been very consistent in either being ignorant, or lying. I would say the latter, because the tax issue has been explained to him in detail, yet he keeps repeating it.

In most of his previous tweets, he did not separate Amazon/Bezos/Washington Post. That much is clear. In his last tweet, he again mentioned the debunked tax myth, and the other debunked issue: use of the USPS services. That makes his intent clear. He's using the power of the office, to fight his "perceived" political rivals. I say perceived, because Bezos, has not been active politically, in support of a specific party. He does own the Washington Post, but he allows the paper to operate independently, as it should.

It's symptomatic of his narcissism and thin skin, because as a President, Amazon is a success story. He's been crowing about "his" stock market rally. In fact, Amazon alone, is responsible for whopping 12% of the market performance, since his inauguration. In addition, Amazon, is responsible for roughly 5% of employment gains, since his inauguration.

Now, as an individual, I have nothing but complaints about Amazon's presence in my area. I wrote about in SW, a while back, when Amazon started looking for a second headquarters. What I wrote was essentially a warning to cities budding for the Amazon HQ2, and what they should demand, before Amazon sets foot in. Essentially, what Seattle should have done, before Amazon added about an hour to everyone's daily commute.

So, it's not about going the partisan way, in criticizing Trump, it's about the bigger picture, something all of us should do, regardless of politics.

@melloquacious I don’t like Trump for a lot of reasons and this annoys me because I do a lot of business with Amazon and his machinations promise to make that more difficult.

@bijouxbroussard I hear you. I dislike politicians in general and don't care for Trump's protectionist policies. I'm not a fan of Amazon, either, but my cynical side is telling me this is just a manuever to continue expanding the power of the government.

@melloquacious Yes, I’m sure it’s a factor, too.