The fact that we have a situation where parties can legitimately tell voters that they'll risk wasting their vote if they vote for what they really want, is shameful.
Front page of the Press today has Michael Wright arguing that it is time to ditch the threshhold entirely. I like that idea but doubt it will get much traction amongst the elected ...
The data clearly shows Japan’s debt to GDP as the highest among OECD countries.
Now you are changing the basis of your argument. Your initial assertion was
Case in point: Japan, which has seen more public spending relative to GDP than any other nation ...
Spending and debt are not the same.
Well after time, we know that is nonsense. Case in point: Japan, which has seen more public spending relative to GDP than any other nation in history while h’hold incomes and h’hold savings continue to shrink.
It would be good if you could give a source for your assertion about spending relative to GDP, because it did not take me long to find, in the OECD data, some countries which appear to spend more than Japan.
As long as warriors remain under civilian control ...
Is not the question 'Are they still really under civilian control?' one that needs to be asked, and answered, in response to the book?
It seems there is a distinct possibility that the warriors have not been telling the whole truth, and if they can do that without sanction then they cannot be under control.
Now that the Public Address WoY is 'post-truth', it seems pertinent to post here a link to an article published nearly 37 years ago - 'A Cult of Ignorance' - Isaac Asimov (pdf).
Granted that it is somewhat caustic and maybe 'elitist', but it is possible that someone in 1980 noted a trend which might, in part, have led to our 'post-truth' and 'fake-news' environment today.
Based on what Snopes offers , the true ratio of counties wins looks to be Trump : Clinton= 80:20
So what do counties wins indicate?
I suppose it could be (intentionally?) misleading as it takes no account of the fact that counties have widely differing population counts. Perhaps it could become the start of a 'fake news' story.
Other than that, I doubt that it tells anyone anything useful.
seized on a ’factual error” that allowed you to dismiss his entire point
Aren't these 'factual errors' as you call them, the basis of fake news?
Aren't we discussing fake news in this thread?
What is the truth, again?
Perhaps you could inform us of the truth, or point, in the Archdruid report. Preferably something that can be verified, for there is a lot of unverifiable 'fact' being bandied around at present - but then that is the basis of fake news ...
Forbes has a useful rundown
In section on 'The Obamacare Disaster'
triple-digit annual increase in premiums
Generally means greater than 100%. This sounds like over-egging and I call bollocks. I also note that (very carefully?) there are close to zero verifiable statements.