Economy

I voted today in our provincial election here in British Columbia. It wasn't just a choice of which candidate to vote for – there was also another choice to make … on a 'new' electoral system called STV or Single Transferable Vote. This would prove to be quite a departure from our current system of "first-past-the-post" or FPTP which is used here and in the United States.

In BC (and in the rest of Canada and the US) our system is based on a candidate winning a 'riding' or electoral district thus gaining a 'seat' in our legislature. It is possible that a political party can win and not have a majority share of the popular vote. Isn't that what democracy is all about, ensuring that the person who has the majority vote becomes the leader?

With the STV, instead of choosing one candidate, you'd rank your candidates in order of preference – they can be from one party or different parties. It's up to you. Elections BC would start by counting all first choices and they'd still need a minimum number of votes to win. One the winner is chosen, or if your first choice isn't the winner, your vote will be transferred to your second choice and so on. This process is done until all candidates are chosen. Sound confusing?

Here's an analogy from the website I link to: "think of your vote like a dollar which you give to your first choice. If your first choice only needs $.90, you still have a dime to go to your second choice. Or, if your district hasn’t elected enough MLAs yet, the last placed candidate is eliminated. If you chose this candidate, your entire $1.00 goes to your next choice"

Our current system is fraught with many problems. You could have a large riding with a large and diverse population but it might still only be worth a disproportionate amount of seats. I know in my riding a certain candidate has been very popular for a long time and rarely loses, but it is not the candidate I would vote for. The current system decreases my incentive to get out and vote if my vote will simply be 'wasted'. Of course, I always vote anyways … but still.

Is it new? Actually, no. It's been around for over 100 years and has been used successfully in Australia and Ireland.

Why wouldn't you want to change electoral systems?

I like the idea of changing and trying something new but not everyone seems to agree. Some might not find it so simple – I have to admit, I had to read the explanation several times. I also wonder how many people would screw up the ballots. Instead of checking your favourite candidate, you number them in order of preference. I could totally see hundreds of spoiled ballots as people insert a check or 'x' instead of a ranking number.

There could also be confusion on who your representative is. With our current system, you know who it is and can lobby them if you want to be heard. Under the STV, with multiple people it's not so clear – you could have 2 to 7 representatives.

As I'm writing this the results don't look too good for STV supporters and it probably won't be adopted.

Still, it's an interesting alternative that might be worth considering at some point.

FOLLOW ME on TWITTER

RELATED POSTS

• Lesson Learned form the Last Pandemic
• Selling Off Our Water
• Should Canada Sell Off Its Assets
• Saturday Linkstuff, Elections Edition

If you like this post, then subscribe for free email updates HERE or click on the bright orange logo on the TOP RIGHT section of my blog. You can also sign up for updates via RSS FEED. What is RSS?

I read this great article in the Globe and Mail on the last flu scare from 1976. Back then, there was a similar situation where a soldier suddenly died from the flu and officials here in Canada were warned that the deadly swine flu was on its way. Millions were spent on inoculations that were ultimately never used and eventually expired.

Similarly, in the US, Gerald Ford, fighting Ronald Reagan for the Republican nomination at the time, quickly got together his experts to produce enough vaccine to 'inoculate every man woman and child in the United States'. In the process he spent $135 million. Well, the pandemic never materialized – one person died and a few hundred got sick - but some people died as a result of the vaccine and lawsuits were filed.

It was considered a fiasco, people lost positions and reputations were harmed as a result of that 'false alarm'

We're facing a similar situation today, however clearly more people are sick and many more have died. The possibility of a pandemic is very real.

What are the lessons to be learned from 1976?

POLITICS ARE A TOUGH BUSINESS

You're damned if you do, damned if you don't, as Marc Lalonde, Federal Health Minister here in Canada at the time, realized after the situation passed. If you don't do enough, you get blamed but if you do too much, you're seen as wasting tax payers dollars. It must be very difficult to make decisions with this kind of pressure.

THE MEDIA

Even at that time, the media's power was clearly felt as Ford wanted to show that he could be a man of decision. Now with the advent of social media 2.0 – Twitter, Facebook, blogs – the power of the media is felt everywhere and its ability to act quickly has increased by many orders of magnitude. I can't imagine what will happen if a full pandemic occurs – will there be huge panic as a result of being able to read about it everywhere 24 hrs a day? I'll definitely be Tweeting about it! ;)

HEALTH AND SAFETY

With all the diseases we're facing like cancer and Alzheimer's, I'm amazed that a simple influenza virus can mutate and become so dangerous. With all the technology and amazing drugs we have on the market today, this is a reminder that your health is one of the most important things you have – people are still dying with all that's available in medicine. What's the use of having lots of money, if you're too sick to enjoy it? Also, take your of yourself – eat healthy and make sure you take your vitamins to ensure that you're getting the proper nutrition.

PERSONAL FINANCE

The current situation with the swine flu is a wake-up call that it is wise to have our financial affairs in order. What would you do if you got sick and were off work for an extended period of time? Do you have an emergency fund? What about your estate – are your affairs in order, should the unthinkable happen? This has certainly inspired me to put more money away or at least be ready if a full pandemic occurs.

Looking back, I think I would have done the same as the officials did at the time. Health and people's lives are worth much more than a little political embarrassment.

Let's just hope that this swine flu doesn't turn into a full pandemic. In the meantime, wash your hands and make sure you can weather any storm.

You just never know what's going to happen.

RELATED POSTS

• How do You Handle Economic Stress
• 5 Things I Learned form the Last Recession
• IOUSA – America's Rising Debt and Foreign Policy
• Should Canada Sell Off It's Assets?

If you like this post, then subscribe for free email updates HERE or click on the bright orange logo on the TOP RIGHT section of my blog. You can also sign up for updates via RSS FEED. What is RSS?

I was on the bus and bumped into a friend of mine who happened to be reading a disturbing article on how British Columbia is selling off many of it's rivers. I've kind of heard about it but for some time, but for some reason, it's not really at the forefront of the issues I should be thinking about, which will be changing, I think. In effect, they want to privatize our rivers – a valuable natural resource – and it turn, rent them back to us and future generations. Oh dear.

Whenever I read about the privatization of valuable resources, I usually get a little concerned. While I do feel that some services can be effectively privatized, at the end of the day, essential services and resources should be left alone. Why? I think with these resources, there is a greater purpose in mind. There are greater issues at play other than making money.

In terms of water and power, they are scarce resources and are crucial to our economy and have important strategic value. Many public entities in the past have taken on huge projects which on paper, didn't make any money, but in fact had important long-term strategic effects and provided important long-term benefits.

Some of these important benefits are:

• Ecological and environmental concerns.
• Servicing communities and groups that would otherwise be ignored.
• Creating a framework or infrastructure for the future economic benefit of all.

You have to wonder if a private corporation would do these things. Please note the highlighted words – long term.

Here are my concerns with regards to water:

• How much are we going to end up paying? It's our water and we should benefit.
• What if the water starts to run out – are we going to have priority? Will our prices start to go through the roof?
• What about the environment? Who's going to be monitoring the effects of any infrastructure projects? There seem to be quite a few of these in the works.
• What about the communities surrounding the rivers and streams? What will happen to them?

Clearly, it's a hot topic and there are people who are passionate on both sides. Here's the flip side to this water issue – apparently, there will be caps placed on these water licenses and streams will be still publicly owned. Ultimately, our ability to regulate our water resources won't be affected in any way. Hmm.

Here's is an analogy of why I'm concerned. I sold my condo back in 2004 for a decent price and then decided to rent 'for awhile'. Well, real estate prices skyrocketed since then – my condo actually doubled in value after I sold – and now rents in this city are going through the roof. Am I better off financially? Well, in the short run, back in 2004, I was better off, but clearly, in the long run, I am worse off now.

Will we be better off by giving away water licenses and buying back our own power? I'm not so sure if it makes sense to me but only time will.

Even though you may not live here in British Columbia, privatization seems to be happening everywhere. Cash-strapped governments are looking to private companies to save them money and hopefully, operate in a more 'efficient' manner.

RELATED POSTS

• Should Canada Sell Off Its Assets?

If you like this post, then subscribe for free email updates HERE or click on the bright orange logo on the TOP RIGHT section of my blog. You can also sign up for updates via RSS FEED. What is RSS?