The issues isn’t with how long part the redistricting takes place, it’s with how the redistricting is decided in the state legislatures. It’s not something that either party should be doing.
Politics affects the public. I doubt you can make people dispassionate about things that will impact their lives. It’s much easier to remove money from the political system. If you want to go further, you can do what Germany does and remove money from news media.
We’re going to have to agree to disagree, then. I see it as a spoils of war that strengthens the nation by strengthening political participation.
And I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree about money, too. I hope you take the time to listen to the TED talk in the link to @Mick’s post, which makes some very good points.
And still be short of a living wage!
20nt. What’s even the point of collecting 20nt at that point lol
Sorry, can’t seem to get that sentence out of my head, and couldn’t resist posting this. Just a reminder that science don’t vote, we humans do. 
No pleasure, no pain… no emotion, no heart. Our superior in every way.
-Dr. Arthur Carrington
I was expecting at least 100nt, but 20nt? that’s really really really cheap. I guess someone else is paying for the bulk of it, and you pay like maybe service fee lol.
A bit of a stretch to the conclusion, no?
Yeah for me I only realised just a few years ago that human’s mostly make decisions on emotion not logic. It’s kind of what separates a professional sport’s better from the amateur betters. One bets on a team because he likes them or they represent his country etc, then the minority actually bet on who is more statistically likely to win.
Please don’t ask me to back that up with stats ha ha
It’s just sound execution of a “free” healthcare system, making sure all consumers have at least some skin in the game. NT20 isn’t much but it ain’t free. Free resources tend to result in infinite demand.
Even if the admin costs of processing the payment exceed nt20, it’s a wise requirement imo.
You can have what ever idea of fair you want, but if you can’t quantize it, there would never be ways to know what is fair. If you think redistricting should be based on most contested elections, the only way to achieve that would still be falling back on a proven algorithm, rather than people redrawing the districts willy- nilly.
In fact, in the states legislatures they are using algorithms to deliberately gerrymander the districts to make it as unfair as possible.
The minimum you’ll have to pay is 150 NT$ to go to a GP and 300 NT$ when going to the emergency room. Than other costs apply for all they do.
different thread but dont let daves bro see that. See that he is going to the earthquake capital of the world…HUALIAN.
There is a remedy, though - an upper limit on gerrymandering.
“Unfair as possible” probably won’t survive judicial inspection. Someone in one or both of the two Congressional districts created can file suit in Federal court and claim the new boundary is a violation of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). Evidence will be introduced and whether the change is just will be decided by a Federal judge, and as a result the state may be forced to redraw the district’s boundary.
Also, the growing inability of Democrats to tolerate conservative ideas acts against them in the redistricting process. Democrats tend to cluster in cities and urban clumps, while Republicans are usually more evenly distributed (although many Republicans likewise cluster together, and for similar reasons).
When the FiveThirtyEight team sought to make districts as compact as possible — and they note that there are scores of measures of what constitutes compactness — they ended up reducing the number of majority-minority districts. When they sought to draw maps proportionate to the breakdown of the electorate, they had to engage in some partisan gerrymandering to get there.
When they sought to produce the maximum number of competitive districts, geography again became a factor. “In an era when Democrats and Republicans are choosing to live next to like-minded neighbors, drawing lots of competitive districts can be tricky,” Wasserman writes. “In fact, in some cases, it requires conscious, pro-competitive gerrymandering.”
That’s why I myself find “make districts compact while following county borders” a much more fair criteria to the other options. I don’t see exactly what’s fair about building majority-minority districts into the system. I also don’t think you need to force competitiveness of an election.
That is until state legislators starts to physically altering county boundaries…
Think that’s good? My wife has private insurance, you d 150au a month, she had a private room in a private hospital specifically for birth, she had a c section and states there for a week. Her insurance paid her 45k twd after she got out. We spent $0 i
I hope you didn’t tweet or share this outside forumosa.com. I agree with you, but I hope you realize that such rational thinking can get you turned into an enemy of the Democrat party pronto. I can think of at least one Congressional district (in Minnesota’s 5th, currently represented by Rep. Ilhan Omar) where you may not be welcome. 
Redistricting is an inherently political exercise. It must be, by definition. Maybe some day, when our partisan divides soften, it will be possible for states to adopt (and follow) a machine algorithm. In the meantime Democrats could remedy any perceived disadvantages by choosing not to dilute their votes by huddling together in cities. Republicans won’t bite (well, most).
In survival camps!
You are pretty obsessed about putting people into buckets, now it’s democrat and Republican. Do you think it’s cos of their DNA?
Well, this went off topic fast.
I guess the discussion of Taiwan hospitals running out of money will stay in that other thread.