First of all, may I know that why u think I am an idiot? btw, I am. But, you people debate illogically. Anyone who wants to debate with me about Unicameralism may just mention me. I'D GIVE HIM A BEFITTING REPLY! Titanne, Andusre, Cerdenia, Norhaim Anyone!
btw, Titanne, u once said that I am not active, neither in RMB nor in Discord, and now u are not in Discord, may WE know the reason? Asking politely.
Like? What are my grammatical mistakes?
I just rechecked it, everything seems fine. But, the combined number of seats of HoC and Senate results in an even number, is that your point?
Oops, i didn't notice that.
LONG LIVE THAECIA!!!
You may know the reason. Itís house rules for me. I did say you werenít active, now your activity has spiked. And I think my frequent activity here more than makes up for the no discord thing.
On Unicameralism: weíve seen very little inclination that large scale Unicameralism can work. The joint chamber took 10 days to pass business, and Fishergate had to wait a long time for all the different MPs and Senators to submit amendments and to vote. This, of course was combined by the need to scrutinize such an important bill, but add that with MORE MPs and Senators. Unicameralism cannot work as a permanent institution, but having a joint session every once in a while to vote on constitutional amendments and other bills of such importance can. Thatís what the PCT proposes, and itís a good compromise or middle ground between the two main parties.
I canít tell if that was a joke, please let me know?
What if the unicameral parliament has 9 seats only? There'll be no problem then.
How? Can u give me a logic for that?
In a region of 244 nations, thatís 27 people per representative. We should try to make our congresses as representative as possible for everyone, and the best way to do that is to EXPAND both chambers. Another argument I forgot about: with unicameralism it is twice as easy to get a one-party system.
btw, only 50 nations of this region is active. And about the one-party system u say, now we have four parties, PCT, TPP, UNI, TPU. It would be harder to get a clear one-party majority, and now that election-system is changing, its almost impossible.
One of our main arguments for unicameralism is that a single large unicameral parliament would have better voter representation. Say a candidate won 6% of the overall vote, in our current system that wouldn't be enough for them to win a seat, meaning everyone who voted for them wasted their vote. In a larger chamber, of 17 seats for example, 6% would be enough to win a seat. So it gives more opportunities for independent candidates and minor parties who don't have a chance of being elected in the current system, but would have a very good chance of being elected into a larger chamber. The only way to make a larger chamber without creating too many seats to be filled is to use a unicameral system.
Not everyone in the world votes.
DAILY CULTURE POST
Quote of the Day: ďBe who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind donít matter and those who matter donít mindĒ óBernard M. Baruch
Daily Debate: Best Paradox or Total War Grand Strategy Game!
Murder Mystery: Xernon has been brutally murdered in the dead of night! Who did it? Iíll leave you three clues.
He who makes the ruling
Shall make your task less grueling
If you lead a group of people,
itís a party of telegrams for you
The alt of the lord
Will make things become clear.
If you think you know who the murderer is, telegram me! Do NOT post on the RMB the solution. This event will continue through Friday.