| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:03 ihufa wrote: You only have 2 parties and they're owned by the same coorporations, so they don't need to rig the elections to make sure they stay in power what corporations are these? | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On March 02 2012 11:33 sc2superfan101 wrote:i just gave you two reasons why it's not irrational. the first being that for every vote that isn't cast, the value of the singular vote goes up. therefore, as people stop voting, it becomes more and more valuable for them to vote. Yes, but in the United States (which is the context of the argument), the value of an individual vote will not go up to the point that it matters, at least not in the near future. Obviously if you live in a town where only twenty people vote, you should definitely vote in the mayoral election, but that's not what we're talking about here. On March 02 2012 11:33 sc2superfan101 wrote:you're basically assuming some kind of balance where it's valuable to vote before but not after. im saying that it doesnt work like that because that is a circular argument, and that balance is impossible to achieve. if people don't vote because it's irrational, it suddenly becomes rational to vote, but then it's not rational because if they vote the value goes down, but then it's rational because they won't vote because of that... it keeps going and going and going. which is why i put the more important second point in there: You keep assuming that people will stop voting because it's irrational. I've already explained that most people vote despite it's irrationality, and that won't change simply because a few enlightened individuals choose not to. On March 02 2012 11:33 sc2superfan101 wrote:$1,000,000 could not get me to not vote. i would give up my life to protect my right to vote. i would send my children to war to protect their right to vote. almost nothing could be more valuable to me than my vote. so, this point is also incorrect. we are dealing with values that are higher than money. Even assuming that you are honest, your views do not extend to everyone else. It's not that expensive to buy votes, let alone simply paying people to be lazy. We're also not talking about giving up your right to vote permanently or to become a slave; we're talking about how much it would cost for you to skip voting once. Would you vote even though skipping work that day was guaranteed to cost you your job? How much is the net gain to be had if you were to affect the vote? There will always be a few people who value the act of voting once more than life itself. That's great for them, but the point being made is that most people vote even though it costs them something to do so and gives them very little benefit. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
If you don't vote, fine. But don't come here and tell me voting is stupid. It only makes you look like a basement-dweller that is too lazy to take any action to change the world they live in. | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:03 ihufa wrote: You only have 2 parties and they're owned by the same coorporations, so they don't need to rig the elections to make sure they stay in power I don't mean to be insulting, but that really is a stupid thing to say. You don't know that much about our system yet make such ridiculous claims. That's not how it works at all. | ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
| ||
|
NationInArms
United States1553 Posts
On March 02 2012 02:47 mynameisgreat11 wrote: Only considering national elections. President, senator, etc. I live in the USA, and I have never voted, though I've been of age for the last three presidential elections. At first it was because I lived in a state which has always been completely lopsided for one party. I felt like my vote didn't matter, which I realize is a point that many will argue. But, fu, the fact is that my state would elect republicans for national offices no matter what, period. In the past few years, however, my reasons have changed a bit. Now I realize that I just have no faith in the electoral system. As much as I hate sounding like a long-boarding, clove-smoking,, hipster douche, I feel like the fact of the matter is that the wealthy elite of the country really do control everything. Business moguls and celebrities become senators, governors, and president. Our laws, regulations, and taxes are thought up and created by people who are wealthy and powerful. They've proven time and time again that they're willing to use their position to advance their own ends. And of course, lobbyists. Whatever company, group, or individual has the most money can trade that cash in for political influence. Oil companies wine, dine, and bribe for the rights to drill in previously protected environmental areas. Religions collect hundreds of billions annually, tax-free mind you, and then turn around and pump that money right back into congress to support bills that they find morally correct. I know that this is nothing new. Classes have existed since the beginning of civilization. What's infuriating is that Democracy is touted as a government of the people, where decisions and policies are made based on the will of the general public. It's not. That's why I don't vote. Is this a blog? Answering your question with one of my own. Just out of curiosity, to all of you who don't vote, do you just let all of the corruption you believe to be in the US government just slide? Do you guys just put politics in the back of your mind or are you politically active in another way? Because I can't believe it when people who don't vote believe that they can't do anything else politically and just give up. Sure, you might not want to vote, but that doesn't mean you can't be politically active. I mean, if you're so disgusted with the system, then why don't you try to change it? And yes, it is possible. In the words of Lincoln, the government is one of the people, by the people, for the people The government can be changed by the people since it's purpose is to serve the people. So for all of you who complain about the uselessness of voting, I really hope you're trying to correct the system and not just walk away from what you feel undoubtedly is injustice. Because that would be wrong, very wrong. Attributed to Edmund Burke: All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Definitely from Edmund Burke: When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Democracy isn't just about voting, it's about the power of the people. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GcYbD.jpg) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3PNjM.png) | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On March 02 2012 11:56 red_ wrote:So you're saying, my choice to vote actually does influence others' choice to vote by altering the equation and adjusting the chance that their vote is meaningful? I'm glad you could clarify that for me, makes it easier to refute your earlier statements that this is not so. Your choice to vote does not alter their equation by any meaningful amount. If everyone decided not to vote, in the magical world that keeps being proposed by people in this thread, then obviously the equation would change. In the real world, in the United States, that's not going to happen, and there's hundreds of millions of votes, so no, your choice to vote does not meaningfully affect other people. | ||
|
Craton
United States17274 Posts
On March 02 2012 03:00 mastergriggy wrote: Most people don't vote. From what I hear the percentage gets lower and lower too. I'm guessing it has to do with the fact that most people don't prescribe to either of the two candidates policies, and therefore don't think voting is worth it or don't feel compelled to vote in the first place. That's untrue. More than half of eligible voters do so for every presidential election with only one exception in the last 50 years (49.1%). It is closer to 1/3 of voters for the half of votes that don't include a presidential candidate. Voter turnout in federal elections has climbed for every election since 1996 for both presidential and non-presidential. It is true that the electoral system is bullshit and we have the technology to use popular vote in major federal elections, though. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html | ||
|
phyvo
United States5635 Posts
On March 02 2012 03:16 KwarK wrote: Statistically no one vote ever makes a difference, no major election is decided by a single vote. The argument "but if everyone thought like that then..." is meaningless because there is no connection between your choice to vote and anyone else's, if you go into the ballot room and spoil your ballot then nobody else will do anything different because of it. There is absolutely no value to voting beyond any personal gratification you get out of it. There is a connection. Your statement does not make the "if everyone did this" argument invalid because votes come from ideas that are shared between people and ideas have influence. You're sharing ideas now like any person would, those ideas can affect other people's decision to vote. I'm not saying anyone here is going to start some huge voting/not-voting movement by random posts in an internet thread. Rather these are old ideas that have been battling for a long time and if you're going to publicly take the position of not voting you have realize you might be responsible for other people saying "yeah he's right why am I voting anyway?", and if enough folks in your camp happen to convince enough people there'd be consequences, and you'd be a part of it. That is where the "if everyone thought..." argument comes from. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
In the US? Primarily Hollywood, the music industry, and oil companies. Those three basically dwarf everything else when it comes to campaign contributions and lobbying funds. | ||
|
dANiELcanuck
Canada217 Posts
On March 02 2012 02:57 D10 wrote: I wish I could not vote, here in Brazil if you dont go vote you lose a lot of rights =( One of the reasons we elect so many corrupt politicians, so many people with 0 idea of politics voting They technically aren't "rights" if someone can take them away from you. | ||
|
Game
3191 Posts
On March 02 2012 02:57 D10 wrote: I wish I could not vote, here in Brazil if you dont go vote you lose a lot of rights =( One of the reasons we elect so many corrupt politicians, so many people with 0 idea of politics voting It's really funny that this correlates so much with my thought process on people with authority. I'm a criminal justice major in school, and most of my teachers at the police academy for my county (in South Florida) that is attached to my school are the chiefs, and or 2nd or 3rd in charge in their respective city's police departments. I recall specifically that not one, not two, not three, but four of my six criminal justice professors so far have emphasized their fanship of the Brazilian voting system, and why forcing people into voting until _x_ age is beneficial to express the voice of the people since it is mandatory. When I did my own research on the matter, after being told its benefits, that the people are educated voters to eliminate redundancy, and that the people who don't vote are the idiotic ones and therefore lose their rights, I found it to be far on the contrary. I made this point for two reasons: 1) I agree with OP that people in authorative positions abuse them at any level of government or power in society. 2) People of any social power, whether it be celebrities or Mitt Romney, are blind narcissists who strictly live to revoke others of rights they already have, regardless of motive. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:07 WolfintheSheep wrote: In the US? Primarily Hollywood, the music industry, and oil companies. Those three basically dwarf everything else when it comes to campaign contributions and lobbying funds. as long as we are talking conspiracy theories, you left out the banks, the pharmaceutical companies and the weapon manufacturers who also have extensive lobbying efforts. | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:03 sunprince wrote: Yes, but in the United States (which is the context of the argument), the value of an individual vote will not go up to the point that it matters, at least not in the near future. Obviously if you live in a town where only twenty people vote, you should definitely vote in the mayoral election, but that's not what we're talking about here. You keep assuming that people will stop voting because it's irrational. I've already explained that most people vote despite it's irrationality, and that won't change simply because a few enlightened individuals choose not to. Even assuming that you are honest, your views do not extend to everyone else. It's not that expensive to buy votes, let alone simply paying people to be lazy. We're also not talking about giving up your right to vote permanently or to become a slave; we're talking about how much it would cost for you to skip voting once. Would you vote even though skipping work that day was guaranteed to cost you your job? How much is the net gain to be had if you were to affect the vote? There will always be a few people who value the act of voting once more than life itself. That's great for them, but the point being made is that most people vote even though it costs them something to do so and gives them very little benefit. I don't mean to be rude, but you are wrong. I'm not going to type up some large explanation since you clearly aren't getting where I'm coming from, but you're very, very wrong. You're attempting to mathematicize emotions, logic, and feelings into a formula. If this were possible, we'd have had AI years ago. | ||
|
Craton
United States17274 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:07 phyvo wrote: There is a connection. Your statement does not make the "if everyone did this" argument invalid because votes come from ideas that are shared between people and ideas have influence. You're sharing ideas now like any person would, those ideas can affect other people's decision to vote. I'm not saying anyone here is going to start some huge voting/not-voting movement by random posts in an internet thread. Rather these are old ideas that have been battling for a long time and if you're going to publicly take the position of not voting you have realize you might be responsible for other people saying "yeah he's right why am I voting anyway?", and if enough folks in your camp happen to convince enough people there'd be consequences. That is where the "if everyone thought..." argument comes from. Precisely. It's incredibly common for people to share their philosophies with others (e.g. about why they don't vote), regardless of their socioeconomic status. This thread is proof of that, but you can find the same thing from co-workers, real-life friends, family, and so forth. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
You keep assuming that people will stop voting because it's irrational. I've already explained that most people vote despite it's irrationality, and that won't change simply because a few enlightened individuals choose not to. i find it to be extremely ironic that those "enlightened individuals" would, if they lived in a society by themselves, not get anything done at all because they would spend their entire time trying to figure out a completely circular argument. i find it to be extremely ironic that the "logical" world would have a problem of "if i do it, it's not worth it, but if i don't, it is worth it, so i should do it, but then..." while the "irrational" world would just say "whatever" and vote and get something done. tbh, the "enlightened" individuals don't sound all the rational to me. Even assuming that you are honest, your views do not extend to everyone else. have the government declare that they don't have the right to vote and you'll find out just how much people do care. We're also not talking about giving up your right to vote permanently or to become a slave; we're talking about how much it would cost for you to skip voting once. better men than me have died for me to have the right to that one vote. their lives are more important to me than money. and i would argue that not voting, for whatever reason, is a form of slavery. you are relying on others to make your decisions for you if you don't vote. if you vote, you may not get your way, but you at least tried. but the point being made is that most people vote even though it costs them something to do so and gives them very little benefit. it costs them very little and it gives them the benefit of knowing that they took part in running their country. it also gives them "bragging" rights: "don't blame me, i voted for (X)!" | ||
|
Millitron
United States2611 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:03 sunprince wrote: Yes, but in the United States (which is the context of the argument), the value of an individual vote will not go up to the point that it matters, at least not in the near future. Obviously if you live in a town where only twenty people vote, you should definitely vote in the mayoral election, but that's not what we're talking about here. You keep assuming that people will stop voting because it's irrational. I've already explained that most people vote despite it's irrationality, and that won't change simply because a few enlightened individuals choose not to. Even assuming that you are honest, your views do not extend to everyone else. It's not that expensive to buy votes, let alone simply paying people to be lazy. We're also not talking about giving up your right to vote permanently or to become a slave; we're talking about how much it would cost for you to skip voting once. Would you vote even though skipping work that day was guaranteed to cost you your job? How much is the net gain to be had if you were to affect the vote? There will always be a few people who value the act of voting once more than life itself. That's great for them, but the point being made is that most people vote even though it costs them something to do so and gives them very little benefit. Absentee ballots are a great thing. You request one, fill it out at home, and mail it in. You don't need to miss work to do it. Even if you do absolutely have to vote in person, if you can't simply skip your lunch break and vote then, or discuss it with your boss to get enough time to go vote without losing your job, one of two things is true: 1) You're a bad worker who has screwed up so many times that you have no leeway on whether they can keep their job or not, in which case even if you don't vote, you almost certainly will screw up and lose your job some other way. 2) Its a terrible job, and losing it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. | ||
|
ihufa
Denmark79 Posts
| ||
|
sevencck
Canada704 Posts
On March 02 2012 12:10 sc2superfan101 wrote: it costs them very little and it gives them the benefit of knowing that they took part in running their country. it also gives them "bragging" rights: "don't blame me, i voted for (X)!" You guys espouse voting so fiercely, yet it's posts like these that make me wonder if any of you fundamentally understand democracy at all. You don't run your country by voting, nor are you a good citizen because you vote once every four years. Also, voting isn't about assuaging yourself of guilt should the government be poor, and as far as I'm concerned it isn't about bragging. | ||
|
Sega92
United States467 Posts
On March 02 2012 03:00 mtwow789 wrote: If you are dissatisfied by politicians, voice your opinion. If all of the so called “middle class” votes, then politician will have to do something that makes middle class happy. Because if they don’t, they won’t get elected. If people like you don’t vote, why would politicians spend time and money to you? Every vote counts and if you neglect to vote, you are forfeiting your life to hands of others. thats how its supposed to work but in reality they only do what the people who pay for their election campaigns want them to do, in america the congress may as well be just a bunch of dollar bills sitting around in a room, i feel like more would get done that way | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Invitational
Gerald vs YoungYakov
Spirit vs MaNa
SHIN vs Percival
Creator vs Scarlett
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs Solar
Clem vs Classic
Cure vs herO
Reynor vs MaxPax
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Krystianer vs TBD
TriGGeR vs SKillous
Percival vs TBD
ByuN vs Nicoract
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
|
|
|
EPT
