> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Fred Foldvary wrote:
> > Of course one has a right to complain, but what is meant is that by not
> > casting a ballot, one has voted to let the others decide, so if you
> > later complain, you contradict yourself.
>
> ... You're offering a fixed coin here. Heads I don't vote
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Fred Foldvary wrote:
> Of course one has a right to complain, but what is meant is that by not
> casting a ballot, one has voted to let the others decide, so if you later
> complain, you contradict yourself.
Oh come on. You're offering a fixed coin here. Heads I don't vote a
--- Aschwin de Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It may be more accurate to say that at the moment of casting a ballot the
> rest of the country has sovereignty over me...
No, because at that moment, I express my will as to who shall govern.
Nobody is forcing me to choose whom to vote for.
Every o
In other words, what you're suggesting is that for some, lotteries and
voting are like candy, pornography, birth control, or narcotics, i.e., a
legitimate way (in some cultures) for a person to deliberately subvert his
own genetic programming and obtain pleasure that he doesn't "deserve".
Ok, I ca
> At the moment of casting a ballot, I feel like a sovereign human being.
> That is my only opportunity to be a sovereign rather than a subject of the
> state. That's worth the small time cost of casting the ballot.
It may be more accurate to say that at the moment of casting a ballot the
rest of
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What other
> reasons might people vote besides believing they can influence the
> outcome?
At the moment of casting a ballot, I feel like a sovereign human being.
That is my only opportunity to be a sovereign rather than a subject of the
state. That's worth the sma
> Quoth Weidai:
>
> > "Why have economists latched onto the idea of "expressive voting", when a
> > much simpler explanation is that most apparently irrational voting really is
> > irrational? Of course "expressive voting" preserves the assumption of rationality,
> > but there is still the problem
st [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Hamish
> Barney
> Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 11:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: lotteries and elections
>
> In Australia voting is actually compulsory. Failure to vote in an
> election can result in a fine. Voting then b
In Australia voting is actually compulsory. Failure to vote in an
election can result in a fine. Voting then becomes very rational. I
think in many ways this is a good way of getting around the problem of
voter apathy and the otherwise apparent irrationality of voting.
Hamish
Michael Giesbrecht wro
Quoth Weidai:
"Why have economists latched onto the idea of "expressive voting", when a much simpler explanation is that most apparently irrational voting really is irrational? Of course "expressive voting" preserves the assumption of rationality, but there is still the problem of participatio
I don't really see how coercing people to vote will render voting any more
rational. More importantly, do we really want people who don't care enough
about politics to cast their votes? How will this improve anything? They
will just show up and vote for the fellow with the glitziest
advertisement,
> From: ArmChair List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Wei
> Dai
[snip]
>
> Why have economists latched onto the idea of "expressive voting", when
a
> much simpler explanation is that most apparently irrational voting
really
> is irrational? Of course "expressive voting" preserves the assumpt
Dear Michael,
I laughed out loud at your concluding sentence. Well said! I've had almost
the identical response from one of my undergraduate students, except, being
only 18 or thereabout, she exercised the adolescent eye-roll instead.
David
In a message dated 9/1/04 12:30:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTE
Well I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd never ever heard the term
"expressive voting" before yesterday when someone used it on the list, and I'm not
exactly sure how people define it.
I do know that when I lived in Iowa I encountered a great many voters who
supported candidates like Alan Keyes
Wei Dai wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 08:25:16PM -0500, Jeffrey Rous wrote:
When people ask me why I vote, my standard answer is "because I can." Voting simply
reminds me that we have something special going here in the free world. I do a decent job of
learning about the candidates and issues n
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 07:50:08PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've been discussing with my undergradute students the rationality of voting.
What about the possibility that many people do not deal well with with
small probabilities, and mistakenly think that their votes matter?
Why have eco
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 08:25:16PM -0500, Jeffrey Rous wrote:
> When people ask me why I vote, my standard answer is "because I can." Voting simply
> reminds me that we have something special going here in the free world. I do a
> decent job of learning about the candidates and issues not because
When people ask me why I vote, my standard answer is "because I can." Voting simply
reminds me that we have something special going here in the free world. I do a decent
job of learning about the candidates and issues not because I think my single vote
matters, but because, overall, voting does
In a message dated 8/31/04 8:36:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>A problem with many of these reasons is that they do partly rely on the
>
>illusion that their vote does matter! "Expressive voting" is not a
>
>completely separate issue. Why feel pride in participating in an irrational
>
>system?
> I've been discussing with my undergradute students the rationality of
voting.
> People might get other benefits from voting besides thinking that their
one
> vote can influence the outcome. Some people feel a civic pride in voting.
> Others vote to prevent others from telling them they don't hav
I've been discussing with my undergradute students the rationality of voting.
People might get other benefits from voting besides thinking that their one
vote can influence the outcome. Some people feel a civic pride in voting.
Others vote to prevent others from telling them they don't have a "rig
Dimitriy V. Masterov writes:
> If my memory serves me, when no one has a winning ticket, the pot gets
> rolled over to the next round. When you have several large states that run
> a joint lottery, the sum can get really enormous when this happens, so
> that the expected gain is positive even with
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Dimitriy V. Masterov wrote:
>
> > I don't have an answer for you, but it seems important to point out that
> > not all lotteries have a negative expected payoff. Large, multi-state
> > jackpots are often a "fair" bet, even after taxes.
M. Christopher Auld:
> How does that co
If my memory serves me, when no one has a winning ticket, the pot gets
rolled over to the next round. When you have several large states that run
a joint lottery, the sum can get really enormous when this happens, so
that the expected gain is positive even with a minuscule probability of
winning. E
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Dimitriy V. Masterov wrote:
> I don't have an answer for you, but it seems important to point out that
> not all lotteries have a negative expected payoff. Large, multi-state
> jackpots are often a "fair" bet, even after taxes.
How does that come about?
Cheers,
M. Christop
I don't have an answer for you, but it seems important to point out that
not all lotteries have a negative expected payoff. Large, multi-state
jackpots are often a "fair" bet, even after taxes.
The best economic analyses I've seen are Charles T. Clotfelter and Philip
J. Cook, Selling Hope: State L
Does anyone know if there is a correlation between a person's
willingness to buy lottery tickets, and his willingness to vote in large
elections (where the chances of any vote being pivotal is tiny)?
A simple explanation for both of these phenomena, where people choose
to do things with apparently
27 matches
Mail list logo
