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
<span>For the advantages, there's more jobs. Also better working conditions and better payment.
The disadvantage is that there is a lot more people, not a lot of houses. Also noisier.
hope this helps ^~^</span>
Answer:
What happens to a person when they eat poop? According to the Illinois Poison Center, eating poop is “minimally toxic.” However, poop naturally contains the bacteria commonly found in the intestines. While these bacteria don't harm you when they're in your intestines, they're not meant to be ingested in your mouth
Explanation: