Hi, Bell Fen! - Luminous Hyaena

tidalwave-shiningsky asked:

you think we should stop weighting the votes by caste? or at least weight all castes equally?

to-find-the-sun:

consumptive-sphinx:

thebloggerisin:

tidalwave-shiningsky:

yearbyyearrecedesbeforeus:

sacrificecode:

yearbyyearrecedesbeforeus:

um yes blues already get to RUN THE GOVERNMENT why do we need to overrepresent them MORE

if we’re going to give an extra vote to anyone we should give it to greens and yellows who have taken an economics class

you, an intellectual: [caste] should have [thing] taken away!

the rest of us plebs: interesting, why do you think tha-

you, finishing up your third phd: and I should be given it instead!

My actual opinion is one person one vote.

But I do think the fact that only blues, greens and yellows even have the option to take an econ class means a lot of people wind up supporting economically illiterate policies. Although probably the best option for that would be to figure out how to teach the basic concepts to everyone. 

There are six hundred million of us (at least here in Anitam). With one-person-one-vote you have no incentive to put any effort into making an informed decision, because your vote doesn’t matter, and in fact no incentive to vote at all. If we were really determined to be all equality I’d favor randomly picking a couple thousand people and letting them each have one vote. Then it might be worth their time to become less economically illiterate.

My problem with “one person one vote” is that it basically means politicians can win by winning over the purples and nobody else matters. So weight the votes so each caste has an equal say. That’s the only fair way to do things.

the issue with this is that because there are so many purples, any given purple issue will affect way more people than any given yellow or green issue. so it makes sense to give purples more weight than any other caste, because they’re such a huge percentage of the population - otherwise a purple vote would count for practically nothing.

i’m not sure if there’s a way to set the percentages so that purples couldn’t carry an election all on their own, since that doesn’t seem fair either. but that’s why i’m not the one writing the laws.

the issue with this is that because there are so many purples, any given purple issue will affect way more people than any given yellow or green issue. so it makes sense to give purples more weight than any other caste, because they’re such a huge percentage of the population - otherwise a purple vote would count for practically nothing.

i’m not sure if there’s a way to set the percentages so that purples couldn’t carry an election all on their own, since that doesn’t seem fair either. but that’s why i’m not the one writing the laws.

Purples don’t vote as a bloc, you guys. There are way too many to coordinate like that. You could maybe talk about the farmer vote or the retailer vote, but maybe if purple votes counted for more than they do people would stop assuming they were indivisible.