hey, for bullshit reasons my threads were deleted in 2 different reasons, citing plagiarism so I will write it with my own words in this 3rd forum: Once upon a time in the home of the Free a student of voting age decided to sell his vote on Ebay. He started out for $10 but the bid raised quickly. Now he is charged with I don't know what, I can't mention the word because that would be plagiarism. I don't think it is fair, that idiot moderators don't understand what plagiarism is, but hey, this is a scientic experience.... So should we be able to sell our votes?? P.S.: Was I unique enough?
If you have a complaint about moderation, please post it in the Site Feedback forum, or PM an administrator.
This thread is about selling our votes, so don't be offtopic.... I just had to put in my own words so it should be OBVIOUS for moderators that I am not plagiarising anyone... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Would I ever complain about moderation? It is the best I know! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! So let's get back on topic: Did the kid commit a crime or was he just a good capitalist, trying to make a few bucks??
Can't have a mix of both? It is a crime to buy off someone's vote, and the kid was trying to make a few bucks. Should it be a crime? I think so, our democratic republic is already ugly as it is. No need to introduce the possibility of some millionaire buying off votes en masse legally.
actually you can only have either democrasy or capitalisium in this case, they are mutually exclusive. Tony Benn explaines WHY its so important here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3HyK5rB9jY
Well, I can argue both ways. Politicans make a calculation usually how much money needs to be risen for certain offices for a successfull run. Also if you look at US presidential elections, money clearly talks. Most of the time the person outspending the competition wins. The pay is not direct to the voters but spent on advertisement and other campaign costs. For example Obama outspent Hillary 5 to 1 and his result was only slightly better, so one can wonder what would have happened if they had had the same amount of money???
The difference is money spent on a campaign is supposed to influence someone immaterially, ignoring the obvious problem of things like social security or health care promises. In theory, the voters' are to be swayed by ideas and arguments. In practice that's obviously not the case. McCain is an example of the opposite of your post's example, the man was broke and had to go in debt, and he still managed to snag the nomination.
But he was broke because he spent so much and he did outspend the rest. Now there was a millionaire who ran for an office in CA and he came in #3 after spending 40 millions of his own money...
Yes, it's crime - and both the seller and buyer go to jail if convicted. I quoted the exact law (and penalities) for that offense in another thread. Forgive me, but I'm not going to go back and dig it up again.
OK, so it is agains the law but should it be? After all if I can sell what is mine, and my vote is mine, I should be able to sell my vote.
Sorry, but that's just plain silly. Your life is yours, too, but it's illegal to sell it to someone who wants to go human hunting with a gun. (Hmmm... perhaps we should make exceptions on the last one for anyone stupid enough to want to do it.) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Aren't all politicians buying your votes one way or another? They advertise everywhere paying up wards to millions of dollars for you to vote for them. You really don't have any idea what they do when they get into office unless they are in trouble with the law. They persuade you to vote for them with money that you pay them in the form of donations. You shouldn't sell your votes because they are already paid for.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Its illegal in the US to sell your vote I think: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2004-08-27-ebay-stops-vote-sale_x.htm
I started it. Anyway, I disagree. The system doesn't work right now and society is just fine. Society also exists in dictatorships where there is no real voting, so your argument is invalid...
But that would go against another law, killing people. What's wrong with selling a vote, if it were not against the law? Cosmic is also right, they are buying it anyway with other methods, so why not direct selling??? We already established that, we are discussing if it is a good law or not...
Because in a democracy everyone is supposed to have an equal vote. Obviously that's not exactly how it works here, but once you introduce the option of directly buying votes, some members of society suddenly have more than one vote via proxy.
Since it takes an extraordinary amount of money to get elected to higher offices, I don't really see the difference if it is your money (being rich) or your funders...So the difference between members of the society already exists....
It's the principle of it. The extraordinary amount of money is used to convince people of ideas, not to directly buy their vote. Otherwise the person who always raises the most money would always be elected.
