>> The simple, humble Clarke tax method does seem a bituh unfair to >> me. There are various ways to remedy this problem like having it >> be based on the log of your income or making it based on how much >> income you have left as a means of judging how much you have >> contributed. There is a near endless number of ways to tweak this >> in order to amount to something useful.
Do you think that if we vote simply with money, the rich have more power than the poor? Yes, it is true. And exactly that is the situation right now, too. > The big issue is that according to economic theory, nobody would > vote. If someone is in a polling booth, they have already ignored > economic theory and thus there is no way they are going to care > about a tiny probability of paying. I feel here some mixing up economicness and selfishness. Yes, when I go to vote, I have so little probability to save myself from being killed by Nazis that even this big stake maybe doesn't make my voting economic. But I also save many others while hoping that they also save me. In other words, I can be altruistic, so consider for some extent other peoples' interests as my interest. And I can even express my interests (including altrusitic ones) by money units, and bear fully economically rational decisions about paying probabilities and other things. (Altruism is not a very frequent behaviour among humans. But: if a person rationally can expect others to return her altruism, the behaviour becomes much more likely. And I go to vote with the strong belief that others do it too.) Peter Barath ____________________________________________________________________ Tavaszig, most minden féláron! ADSL Internet már 1 745 Ft/hó -tól. Keresse ajánlatunkat a http://www.freestart.hu oldalon! ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
