No need to vote?

[randomlinh]

I try to stay out of here... but was curious on an opinion. I was reading some comments when someone made the following comment:

"Technology is the solution to society's problems, not government. There's no need to vote, just innovate. Trust me, they can't keep up. They can only regulate."

It kind of struck me given who it was coming from, but I'm curious as what you all have to say on that statement.

 

[Stunt]

Government has shown itself to be very ineffective in a) regulating new technology b) enforcing older regulations. People are still speeding, drinking and driving, copying software and media, doing drugs, ticket scalping, getting ill or injured from products...
It's an interesting statement as I do agree that anything government does to prevent people from doing what they want to do, with enough motivation; people will do what they want, no matter what regulation exists. Improvements in technology, manufacturing methods have done far more to raise people's standard of living (cheaper goods/services) than any government handout could ever could.

 

[randomlinh]

while I agree that technology has done an amazing job at increasing our standards of living (as well as drive consumerism...), it would seem to me you would WANT people to vote for a government that spurs that kind of innovation. I realize it is a simplistic argument, but at the same token, to blatantly say there's no need to vote? I think there is a vast responsibility of the individuals to push for that if they want it. And it's hard given how the vast majority of people just don't give a shit. But I would think telling people not to vote is not the right way about it.

 

[cwjerome]

When confronted with problems or issues, the natural tendency of government is to limit, regulate, tax, or otherwise be restrictive... and this usually creates a host of new problems and doesn't actually solve the original one very well either.

Saying there is no need to vote though is incredibly naive. Government is about power and just because the private sector may come up with all sorts of innovative problem solving, it doesn't mean the government will still not try and maintain control and/or be oppressive.

Kinda like what randomlinh said... it would be best to organize (and vote for a) government to facilitate dynamic problem solving, which to me would mean within a proper context of free markets and individual rights.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
while I agree that technology has done an amazing job at increasing our standards of living (as well as drive consumerism...), it would seem to me you would WANT people to vote for a government that spurs that kind of innovation. I realize it is a simplistic argument, but at the same token, to blatantly say there's no need to vote? I think there is a vast responsibility of the individuals to push for that if they want it. And it's hard given how the vast majority of people just don't give a shit. But I would think telling people not to vote is not the right way about it.

Why is it bad to not vote? Instead of spending your time getting caught up in politics, which is a bullshit circus of corruption, lies, and wasteful bureaucracy you could be out saving, investing and or building a business.

My roommate is a prime example of someone who wastes their time thinking about politics and the news when they should be building their business. He spends 1 or 2 hours a day watching CNN and other news stations and thinking about people and places that he will never meet and never visit. Complete waste of time.

Another way to put it is this. Why in the world would you waste any part of your time thinking about issues and deciding who or what to vote for when voting only gives you an astronomically small statistically insignificant chance of determining an election? You could be out having fun, or building your wealth. How much time should be allocated to thinking about who to vote for when your chance of determining an election outcome in say a presidential race is far far less than 1 in a billion? Hmm, seems like a no-brainer to me. Forget about politics, it will always always always tend right back towards the status quo anyways. The U.S. government has essentially not changed in any significant way since WWII, and when it did, it was for the worse. It's the same government last year, the same government 30, 40 and 50 years ago, and it will the the same government next year and the year after.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Kinda like what randomlinh said... it would be best to organize (and vote for a) government to facilitate dynamic problem solving, which to me would mean within a proper context of free markets and individual rights.

Governments don't innovate. They tax, spend and regulate.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Kinda like what randomlinh said... it would be best to organize (and vote for a) government to facilitate dynamic problem solving, which to me would mean within a proper context of free markets and individual rights.

Governments don't innovate. They tax, spend and regulate.

Devil's advocate:
What if government taxes economically inefficient sectors/habits and invests/spends in sectors/habits that encourage education, research and development, and other potentially beneficial activities leading to technological advances and innovation.
For example online gambling is not a productive use of time or resource, neither is smoking; both are burdens on society relative to other ways to invest/use money.

Personally, I don't think it is the government's place to determine what is right and wrong; that is for the people to decide. To suggest government doesn't stimulate any innovation is a difficult statement to chew on.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why is it bad to not vote? Instead of spending your time getting caught up in politics, which is a bullshit circus of corruption, lies, and wasteful bureaucracy you could be out saving, investing and or building a business.

I guess it's the idealistic side of me weighing in on it... possibly overly idealistic. I've personally hated politics because of all the bullshit and mudslinging that is always associated with it. But it's hard not to think about it given the last 8yrs of fun we've had.

what if the status quo gets worse? would you just get up and leave instead?

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Stunt
Devil's advocate:
What if government taxes economically inefficient sectors/habits and invests/spends in sectors/habits that encourage education, research and development, and other potentially beneficial activities leading to technological advances and innovation.
For example online gambling is not a productive use of time or resource, neither is smoking; both are burdens on society relative to other ways to invest/use money.

Personally, I don't think it is the government's place to determine what is right and wrong; that is for the people to decide. To suggest government doesn't stimulate any innovation is a difficult statement to chew on.

You can stop right at 'what if government taxes.' Once the government has the 'power' to tax, the game is over and you lose. It will start with gambling & smoking, then move on to cars, houses, incomes, property and sales. The government considers any wealth above the poverty line to be wasted on 'filthy' unnecessary consumption. Here in California every dollar you make over a whopping $44,000 a year is taxed at 9.3%, and that is just state taxes.

Think about it, the government has all day every day to think of new ways to tax people. How often do you have to think about fighting taxes? Do you think you could quit your day job and spend 7 or 8 hours a day fighting them? Of course not. You lost the minute the government got a crack at your paycheck. And now it has first crack at it. The government has now trumped the church and your significant other in terms of your money & finances.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why is it bad to not vote? Instead of spending your time getting caught up in politics, which is a bullshit circus of corruption, lies, and wasteful bureaucracy you could be out saving, investing and or building a business.

I guess it's the idealistic side of me weighing in on it... possibly overly idealistic. I've personally hated politics because of all the bullshit and mudslinging that is always associated with it. But it's hard not to think about it given the last 8yrs of fun we've had.

what if the status quo gets worse? would you just get up and leave instead?

I have plans to leave the U.S. in the future, yes. But not until I have built a significant amount of wealth.

I'll let you in a secret: if you are wealthy politics don't really matter that much. The reason why is that you have financial freedom, and that almost always trumps political freedom. It gives you the means to move wherever you want and protect yourself from recessions/depressions. If things got really bad In the U.S. for instance you could simply move to any number of the other 200 countries out there. And many other countries would be willing to let you in because of your wealth.

Also, another secret: if you accumulate wealth over a long period of time, you will continuously decrease the the total percentage of your wealth that is taken away in taxes. The people who really fund the government are the ones who may have high incomes, but spend it on high consumption products instead of saving and investing over a long period of time. This is all revealed in the book The Millionaire Next Door. The statistics/facts in that book are actually quite shocking.

The people who get hit really hard on taxes are the ones who make six figures, but don't save and invest any of it. They end up paying a huge percentage of their total wealth in taxes, since their only source of wealth is their income.

Bottom line: financial independence and wealth trumps anything going on in the political circus.

 

[TallBill]

There isn't a single candidate who stands out more then another for the current election. I'll only register if I have to vote against Hilary because she is a socialist.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

I agree that they can't keep up. I would have a difficult time coming up with a group of less tech-savvy people than the members of our political establishment.

 

[Moonbeam]

I really get tired of all you assholes bashing the government. I am the government. I voted those dick-heads in. Lay the hell off of the people I deserve.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Bottom line: financial independence and wealth trumps anything going on in the political circus.

Yeah, I understand that as well. But even if financially well off, I don't see myself has having that kind of freedom to just get up and go (ok, if it were REALLY REALLY bad...). But I see where you're coming from.

I guess I just don't really want to see this country fall apart, and don't see "not voting" as being very helpful. Or rather, I should say not voting and not providing an alternate means of change.

I was also more curious as to how many people were on the same fence as that around here (the not voting one).

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Bottom line: financial independence and wealth trumps anything going on in the political circus.

Yeah, I understand that as well. But even if financially well off, I don't see myself has having that kind of freedom to just get up and go (ok, if it were REALLY REALLY bad...). But I see where you're coming from.

Why is that? If you have enough money you can get out of the country within days.

I guess I just don't really want to see this country fall apart, and don't see "not voting" as being very helpful. Or rather, I should say not voting and not providing an alternate means of change.

Political systems haven't changed for thousands of years. Going from monarchy to democracy was probably the biggest change for western civilization, but really, people are back to serfdom minus the agriculture. All empires come to an end because the state will eventually destroy the economy. It can't help itself, and it doesn't really care. It will just continue to buy votes by promising huge entitlements that it will never be able to fund. Right now I see hyperinflation on the horizon.

I was also more curious as to how many people were on the same fence as that around here (the not voting one).

I don't know about around here, but in general less than half the population votes.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why is that? If you have enough money you can get out of the country within days.

Yeah, but I tend to have silly attachments to friends and family.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why is that? If you have enough money you can get out of the country within days.

Yeah, but I tend to have silly attachments to friends and family.

If you have enough money you can bring your family with you too.