You point out yourself the possibility of stopping things in parliament later on (Bund day, whatever)
This is the case for a minority government IF most/all of the opposition agree to stop it. That is by no means the case. And also the SPD declining a coalition with the CDU/CSU does not mean germany will get a minority government. There could be a Jamaika coalition this time for example.
I mostly see smaller coallition partners having to reneg on what they care most about. Here just now the leftmost party that wanted to be in government didn't get enough from the other to, and decided it was bigger chance to get the things done in opposition, which I agree with.
The result is that a minority government is comming up within a couple of weeks
It's their fair option not to go into a government but into the opposition if they don't get enough of what they want. It does not mean they get more of their stuff though. How should that work? If there are more parties that agree with more of their ideas they could maybe get another majority government from this. But then they are not in the opposition again. And since they failed to get partners for their ideas chances are high that alot of their ideas get canceld.
Ofc the can try to gain votes in the opposition to be part of a government after the next election but then again nobody can say how the next election will go and you had to wait a few years for this to happen.
That is true, but I think that means they sometimes should just join
It's more efficent though to have a coalition. You decide on alot of ideas before hand and don't have to negotiate everytime again. Also you can potentially miss out on deals this way resulting in less of your ideas getting through.
That is your opinion and you have every right to have it. And you are also free to support another party than the SPD after they made a coalition with the CSU. But imo it is not a valid argument against the current system. In another system there was the chance that CDU/CSU got enough seats to rule without a coalition which - from what your posts say - would have been even worse in your eyes.
My issue then with SDP is that they have done this
I guess I would think similar of CDU if I was rightist
This is again not an argument against the system. It is an arugment why you don't want to support the SPD anylonger.
Yea I get it. I tbh think most countries aren't democratic.
So what is your idea to get all the countries democratic again if free, secret and equal votes are undemocratic?
But the thing with germans is I've seen people like you defending it, and nobody having been mad at it
Well I have every right to defend a working system if I like it. Infact I prefer the german system to some others I know for example the one from the USA or GB.
If you have better ideas feel free to explain and elaborate them. If I like them more than the current ones I am all for a change.
Sounds good on paper maybe (not for me though). But make it even more extrem, found your own party and get a single vote for it. Now there must be one seat in the parliament for everyone who voted to keep the ratio. So you end up with more than 60 million seats. At this point you can even make a vote for every decision/law to come which is highly impractical and would slow down everything so much that you would get nothing done.
And even with a cutoff you include way more votes than a winner takes it all vote where a party with less than 50% of the votes can have an absolute majority by a high margin (and more than 50% of the votes can be left out).
in any case it doesn't need to be so extreme. there is infact bigger difference between 5 % and 0,01 % than between 100 % and 5 %, so there can be a cutoff way lower
That's why I said 5% is not perfect. It could also be somewhere lower. But a cutoff in general is needed imo.
(Also 100-5=95 which is more than 5-0,01=4,99 so the difference between 100 and 5 is way higher (around 19 times). The ratio from 5 to 0,01 is way higher though (500 compared to 20 from 100 to 5) which increases the rate with which the parliament growth faster the lower you have the cutoff.)
In something like a SPD-CDU coallition I do see this as preferable. You could pull support from different sectors
On the other hand you can also fail to get enough support for even one single idea and end up with nothing. A coalition brings stability here because you already negotiated which ideas you want to get passed - which you can with a majority.
So in the end it comes down to the parties to decide if they can get enough support from different ideas to get their ideas through or if they prefer the reliablity (and ofc additional things like ministerial posts) a coaltion brings.
Again no party is ever forced into a coalition it is always their free choice. It's your good right to stop supporting parties doing coalitions you don't want and start supporting others. But a paryt joining a coalition you don't like does not mean the system at whole is nothing but bad.
and sometimes It's better to do nothing than doing it half-assed
The key word here is SOMETIMES. You are right sometimes it's better to do nothing instead of something half-assed. But then again sometimes it is better to do a little bit instead of nothing.
So it is again up to the parties to decide here what fits their ideas most.