In the EU there is already a similar system because, in the parliament, the number of MEPs is not really proportional to the population (Germany has 84,48 million inhabitants and 96 MEPs, so 1 every 880,000 people, while Malta has 553,000 people and 6 MEPs so 1 MEP every 92,000 people).
The difference is MEPs are appointed proportionally within each state (so if a party gets 40% in a state, it will get ca. 40% of the state's MEPs)
Ok yes maybe "easy" isn't exactly the correct term, but the way to appoint electors in each state doesn't need a 2/3 majority in every house + 3/4 of the states as it happens with Constitutional amendaments. So it's definitely an easier approach
Yours is a very good point of view actually. I initially hadn't thought about the tragedy of the commons situation where all the states agree to implement it and later one state decides to go back to winner take all system.
As stated in other comments, it would be actually easy to implement as it doesn't require a change in the constitution.
Anyway, as I told in another comment, I'm not from the US, so my intention wasn't really to say how to implement the proposal. I just had this idea and wrote it down in a blog post.
- California has 38,940,231 inhabitants and 54 electors. That means 1 elector every 721,115 inhabitants
- Oklahoma has 4,053,824 inhabitants and 7 electors, so 1 elector every 579,117 people.
Yeah, spoiler vote brings to 2 parties (like the US). Although the current electoral college doesn't work well, I'm not sure the Americans would prefer to remove it completely and rather use directly popular vote because in the rural areas they don't want to be "governed" by the decisions of big cities.
What do you think about keeping the electoral college and use IRV instead?
I believe you're right, even if all the states agreed to make a similar change, this "equilibrium" state would be unstable. It would require an amendment to the US constitution to make it stable and that would require a huge majority.
Even if they decided to ament the constitution, you would still face another issue: now electoral system is written in the constitution, so it becomes even more difficult to change in the future.
What do you think about the system adopted by Maine and Nebraska instead?
Hello, here is my proposal to improve the Electoral College. The basic idea is to allocate electors proportionally in each state with the Jefferson method (aka d'Hondt method) rather than using a "winner-take-all" system.
What do you think about it?
PS: I'm not from the US, so an American perspective on that would be extremely appreciated :)
Are there any ways to show the source of the information retrieved by the model? For instance, the LLM forms a sentence and it points to a stackoverflow answer with the same or similar content.
If your dense housing leads to higher housing costs that's actually great news; it means that your city is enabling higher-productivity arrangements that boost local incomes
Take Milan as a counterexample. A single room in a shared flat costs around €700/month, a single-room studio €1200/month. Yet, people on average earn €30,000 a year, which means €24000 after taxes, or around €1800 per month. That's not what I would say increased salaries and productivity.
In Italy, there are serious problems with stagnating productivity and national, collective bargaining. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean rents do not skyrocket in big cities
Anectodically speaking, it has always been extremely helpful not only reading texts and solving problems/exercises, but also:
1) repeating topics out loud and, if there were some formulas, writing them down while doing that
2) explaining something to your friend if they didn't understand it
It seems very similar to what we study in "Computer Science and Engineering" in Italy, which is a different degree from "Computer Science". The former is considered engineering, the latter isn't (pretty strange tbh, but that's how it works)
The difference is MEPs are appointed proportionally within each state (so if a party gets 40% in a state, it will get ca. 40% of the state's MEPs)