Term used for a situation in which paired-choice voting by majority rule fails to produce a consistent ranking of society's preferences for public goods is the paradox of voting.
The paradox of voting, also known as Downs' paradox, states that the costs of voting usually outweigh the expected benefits for a rational, self-interested voter. Because the likelihood of exercising the pivotal vote is negligible in comparison to any reasonable estimate of the private individual benefits of the various possible outcomes, the expected benefits of voting outweigh the costs.
Responses to the paradox of voting have included the belief that voters vote to express their preference for a candidate rather than to influence the outcome of the election, that voters exercise some altruism, or that the paradox ignores the collateral benefits associated with voting that are not related to the resulting electoral outcome.
Learn more about paradox of voting here:
brainly.com/question/17136492
#SPJ4
The answer is being heuristic. Being able to cook without the use of strict measurements, but relying on one's past experiences and cooking wisdom in order to determine the correct proportions of ingredients is an example of being heuristic. Heuristic refers to being able to teach one's self base on someone's individual discovery or learning.
Answer:
TRUE
Explanation:
Social and sentimental relationships must be guided by respect for individuality and trust between the couple. If either monitors the other's footsteps through technological tracking, it means that this relationship is not going through a healthy process, as there is a clear goal of controlling someone. This is characterized as abusive relationship. Abusive relationships are toxic and tend to create a climate of instability and abuse in the relationship.
It is Province of Quebec, Canada
