NationStates Jolt Archive

I recently heard of this idea (which no doubt came from the extreme fringe of the US Libertarian Party) and I found it interesting but ultimately disastrous.

People should not be allowed to sell their vote. It is bad enough that corporations pump huge amounts of money into their political campaigns of choice, without them having also the ability to buy up votes and vote for these politicians en mass. This proposal would rapidly lead to even more corporate dominance of our society.

Votes for cash? Not again I hope...

Everything I read about the US Libertarian Party strengthens my view of them as lunatics ripe for mockery.

I recently heard of this idea (which no doubt came from the extreme fringe of the US Libertarian Party) and I found it interesting but ultimately disastrous.

People should not be allowed to sell their vote. It is bad enough that corporations pump huge amounts of money into their political campaigns of choice, without them having also the ability to buy up votes and vote for these politicians en mass. This proposal would rapidly lead to even more corporate dominance of our society.

Hey! Land of the free, remember! It is your vote, to do what pleases you with!

People should not be allowed to sell their vote. It is bad enough that corporations pump huge amounts of money into their political campaigns of choice, without them having also the ability to buy up votes and vote for these politicians en mass. This proposal would rapidly lead to even more corporate dominance of our society.

Agreed.

When Bush and the Republicans suddenly realized we have been paying too much in taxes and sent everyone in the country a check for $300 that was pretty close to outright buying votes.

Hey! Land of the free, remember! It is your vote, to do what pleases you with!
Ideology is nice but (and this is the Libertarians' biggest problem) you have to look at how policies will affect reality. The price of selling votes for cash is too high.

Ideology is nice but (and this is the Libertarians' biggest problem) you have to look at how policies will affect reality. The price of selling votes for cash is too high.
My thoughts exactly.

When Bush and the Republicans suddenly realized we have been paying too much in taxes and sent everyone in the country a check for $300 that was pretty close to outright buying votes.


how about Clinton/Gore legalizing and registering about 1 million legal and ILLEGAL immigrants to help win their 1996 election? Was that buying a few votes?

Before this descends into yet another crashingly boring Reps vs Dems argument, can we just agree that they're all rubbish and return to the topic at hand?

I recently heard of this idea (which no doubt came from the extreme fringe of the US Libertarian Party) and I found it interesting but ultimately disastrous.

People should not be allowed to sell their vote. It is bad enough that corporations pump huge amounts of money into their political campaigns of choice, without them having also the ability to buy up votes and vote for these politicians en mass. This proposal would rapidly lead to even more corporate dominance of our society.

Well the way I see it is that if the actual voting is done by a secret ballot then the most they can do is pay individuals to vote a certain way and hope that you do.

I'd have been fine with taking money from M.B.N.A., Sinclair Broadcasting, the N.R.A., and Focus on the Family in order to vote for Bush, and then going into the booth and voting for Kerry. The worst that can happen is that they don't bother sticking with the program next cycle, because they got no return on their investment, and I keep voting as I damn well please. The best that can happen is that they figure that they have to start paying more and from more sources, so I make more money and still vote as I damn well please. Yay capitalism :D

When Bush and the Republicans suddenly realized we have been paying too much in taxes and sent everyone in the country a check for $300 that was pretty close to outright buying votes.
yeah thats why i didnt vote for him. i got the first check for $600 but not the second check for $300. so in a fit of "what has he done for me lately?" i went democrat.

There's nobody worth voting for in the British elections. Politicians are liars and cheats, who have no interest in improving the country, only in gaining themselves more power and recognition. The only people who might not be like that won't ever win anyway. So if someone else wants to use my vote to help one of the equally-corrupt politicians get into power, fine. I'll need the money to pay for the ever-ludicrous tax rates we will pay under any one of the Big Three.

Why not? I can sell my BODILY FLUIDS for cash, are you saying my VOTE is somehow too priceless? Fuck you if you think so! I value my bodily fluids a lot more than the ability to fill in a bubble! You would too! Which would you rather do:

1) Lose a vote
2) Bleed to death

I rest my case.

And since so many people already WASTE their votes by not voting...

And since people ALREADY 'buy votes' (the entire election campaign system is vote-buying. Or lets say, advertisements for vote sales)... and always will... this just enables the common apathetic man who wouldn't do anything with his vote make a little money...

Theres really nothing wrong with it so far as I can see.

But as usual, the anti-corporate types are screaming about this since they disagree that the common man should have opportunities to make money, and would prefer vote buying to remain the exclusive domain of super-rich behind the scenes movers and shakers. "Champions of the worker" indeed.

If the elections are proper, there is no way to insure that you are getting your moneys worth if you're buying votes. For instance, I could take someones money, tell him/her that I'll vote for someone, but then I'd vote for another party. The "buyer" would never know.

Tax cuts are not cash?

We have been buying and selling votes ever since democracy was invented. To do so openly at least has the virtue of honesty and eliminates the self deceit.

Not everyone would sell their vote, but a lot of people already do. They vote according to their pocketbooks, not according to principles. Why should those that want to sell their vote not be able to do so on an open and free market?

To say that selling votes is wrong is a little like condemning prostitution whilst condoning the dinner, present, sex routine. Hypocritical.

Why not? I can sell my BODILY FLUIDS for cash, are you saying my VOTE is somehow too priceless? Fuck you if you think so! I value my bodily fluids a lot more than the ability to fill in a bubble! You would too! Which would you rather do:

1) Lose a vote
2) Bleed to death

I rest my case.

And since so many people already WASTE their votes by not voting...

And since people ALREADY 'buy votes' (the entire election campaign system is vote-buying. Or lets say, advertisements for vote sales)... and always will... this just enables the common apathetic man who wouldn't do anything with his vote make a little money...

Theres really nothing wrong with it so far as I can see.

But as usual, the anti-corporate types are screaming about this since they disagree that the common man should have opportunities to make money, and would prefer vote buying to remain the exclusive domain of super-rich behind the scenes movers and shakers. "Champions of the worker" indeed.

Should the "common man" be reduced to making money by selling his vote? Vote buying shouldn't exist at all. I am aware that it does, but if you legalize all of it, that would just make the situation worse.

If the elections are proper, there is no way to insure that you are getting your moneys worth if you're buying votes. For instance, I could take someones money, tell him/her that I'll vote for someone, but then I'd vote for another party. The "buyer" would never know.

Well... I dont see buying votes as, substitution voting. If you want to vote for someone you should vote for someone yourself. But if you don't want to vote... and right now apparently a lot of Americans don't... then it doesnt matter WHAT is done with your vote (if it mattered to you, you'd have voted!). So if I get money for a vote that I was going to waste anyway, I benefit regardless of who votes for whom with it.

Of course, some standardization and a streamlined public market would help all this.

Good God, I'm actually arguing for my in-character nations' form of government. Maybe I've been playing this game too long....

Should the "common man" be reduced to making money by selling his vote? Vote buying shouldn't exist at all. I am aware that it does, but if you legalize all of it, that would just make the situation worse.

What's "reduced" about it? I don't see earning money where previously there was only wasted political power as being a reduction. Should we outlaw blood sales? They're called "donations" but you are usually given something for it. And 'reduced' therefore, yes?

If the elections are proper, there is no way to insure that you are getting your moneys worth if you're buying votes. For instance, I could take someones money, tell him/her that I'll vote for someone, but then I'd vote for another party. The "buyer" would never know.

If vote buying is permited, surely proxy systems would disallow such fraud.

By selling your vote, you give someone else an extra vote (that they have gained through purely financial means). Not good.

Tax cuts are not cash?

We have been buying and selling votes ever since democracy was invented. To do so openly at least has the virtue of honesty and eliminates the self deceit.

Not everyone would sell their vote, but a lot of people already do. They vote according to their pocketbooks, not according to principles. Why should those that want to sell their vote not be able to do so on an open and free market?

To say that selling votes is wrong is a little like condemning prostitution whilst condoning the dinner, present, sex routine. Hypocritical.

There is no clear line between tax cuts and vote buying, just as there is no clear line between dinner, presant, sex, and prostitution. In a perfect world, none of these would exist, but they do; legalizing everything is not going to help anything.

There is no clear line between tax cuts and vote buying, just as there is no clear line between dinner, presant, sex, and prostitution. In a perfect world, none of these would exist, but they do; legalizing everything is not going to help anything.

In a perfect world, people would not exist, appears to be the message here. People inherently try to do what benefits them (at least the sane ones do). Creating laws that prevent people from doing this where it harms no-one else is just counter productive. These laws are unenforcable and irrelevant. Vote buying occurs. It will always occur, so why not do it openly? This would actually reduce the amount of corruption in politics. A beneficial outcome for all.

What's "reduced" about it? I don't see earning money where previously there was only wasted political power as being a reduction. Should we outlaw blood sales? They're called "donations" but you are usually given something for it. And 'reduced' therefore, yes?

How do you know if a citizen is wasting his pollitical power? He could be informed, want to vote, and just sell his vote because he needs the money. And about blood donations: firstly, they save lives, unlike votes, and secondly, one of my friends donated blood and was not paid for it. What is this "something" you are talking about.

How do you know if a citizen is wasting his pollitical power? He could be informed, want to vote, and just sell his vote because he needs the money. And about blood donations: firstly, they save lives, unlike votes, and secondly, one of my friends donated blood and was not paid for it. What is this "something" you are talking about.

So you are saying its impossible to legally sell bodily fluids and that no one does that? If not then I dont know about your friend and it doesnt matter. Probably there are different rules involved in different states, too.

Anyway, a citizen can choose to vote, using his political power, or not vote, wasting it. All this would do is give them the third option and convert their political power into some financial power. What's wrong with that? People can make their own decisions.

In a perfect world, people would not exist, appears to be the message here. People inherently try to do what benefits them (at least the sane ones do). Creating laws that prevent people from doing this where it harms no-one else is just counter productive. These laws are unenforcable and irrelevant. Vote buying occurs. It will always occur, so why not do it openly? This would actually reduce the amount of corruption in politics. A beneficial outcome for all.

Ok, you call large corperations being the only things with pollitical power hbeing beneficial to all? That already happens more than I'd like it to, but legalizing vote-buying would just create a nation entirely run by the rich.

So you are saying its impossible to legally sell bodily fluids and that no one does that? If not then I dont know about your friend and it doesnt matter. Probably there are different rules involved in different states, too.

Anyway, a citizen can choose to vote, using his political power, or not vote, wasting it. All this would do is give them the third option and convert their political power into some financial power. What's wrong with that? People can make their own decisions.

But as you said, people generally want to do what benefits them, and therefore many of them would choose the third option, which would make the rich-poor gap even more pollitical.

Ok, you call large corperations being the only things with pollitical power hbeing beneficial to all? That already happens more than I'd like it to, but legalizing vote-buying would just create a nation entirely run by the rich.

Where've you been for the past few millennia?

Besides, nobody would be forcing you to sell your vote. The people who would sell it are likely to be the sorts of people who are:

A) Already suffering at the hands of the rich anyway
B) Not going to bother voting anyway
C) Getting rich themselves from selling their votes

Before this descends into yet another crashingly boring Reps vs Dems argument, can we just agree that they're all rubbish and return to the topic at hand?
My thoughts exactly.

I'd have been fine with taking money from M.B.N.A., Sinclair Broadcasting, the N.R.A., and Focus on the Family in order to vote for Bush, and then going into the booth and voting for Kerry.
They would never accept that. They would have to find a way of finding out how you vote, and soon enough the concept of "secret ballot" is gone.

If somehow they managed to legalfy abortion (IT IS WRONG VERY VERY WRONG) then the liberals should somehow find a way to legalfy that

What would it matter anyway. Our votes dont count, only people in office. Unless you talk about for a meager position

Well... I dont see buying votes as, substitution voting. If you want to vote for someone you should vote for someone yourself. But if you don't want to vote... and right now apparently a lot of Americans don't... then it doesnt matter WHAT is done with your vote (if it mattered to you, you'd have voted!). So if I get money for a vote that I was going to waste anyway, I benefit regardless of who votes for whom with it.

Of course, some standardization and a streamlined public market would help all this.

Good God, I'm actually arguing for my in-character nations' form of government. Maybe I've been playing this game too long....

I don't understand that viewpoint. A blank vote (or noting voting) is a statement, so it's not a waste. For example: Iceland usually has higher than 90% voter turnout. The last time we had presidential elections, many people were unhappy with all the candidates and turned in blank ballots. The turnout was between 60 and 70% (blank and not showing up are filed together). This is the lowest ever and is considered a statement. Not only against the president, but against all the candidates.
Hence, not voting or leaving the ballot blank is actually "voting".

The sad thing about this issue is that people are so focused on doing what benefits themselves, that they don't realize that doing what benefits everyone benefits themselves... Nor that by buying your vote, they are buying the power to control the government and invent ways to legally allow them to take more of your money, meaning they get back their investment from you with interest, and you're even worse off than before while they're even richer. There's a reason someone would want to buy your vote, it's a shame you're too stupid to realize it and sell it to him anyways.

Ok, you call large corperations being the only things with pollitical power hbeing beneficial to all? That already happens more than I'd like it to, but legalizing vote-buying would just create a nation entirely run by the rich.

You are missing the point completely, and it would appear deliberately. Votes are being bought now. Large corporations receive support from political parties and as such they contribute to the funds of theose parties. This is vote buying in the legislative body. Electoral votes are bought by promises of tax cuts, of improved benefits, of better services, all funded by running a defecit that will destroy the country in the end (at least this is the case in the USA).

Legalizing the process of vote buying would actualy benefit all because the government policies could become ones that actually do some good for the country as a whole rather than for whichever sector of the population the party needed the votes from. Funds from the corporations would be passed directly to the voter, instead of to the politician as happens now.

You are also presuming a developped economy. Here in Brazil vote buying occurs. It is illegal, and is paid for by corruption. There are few corporations involved. What happens is that the mayor or representative has some power in assigning civil contracts. To obtain the contract, a company bribes the politician. The politician then uses this money to buy votes from the poor in his area. If vote buying were legal, these funds would have to be accounted for. Reducing the corruption.

If somehow they managed to legalfy abortion (IT IS WRONG VERY VERY WRONG) then the liberals should somehow find a way to legalfy that

What would it matter anyway. Our votes dont count, only people in office. Unless you talk about for a meager position
Had to go on a mini rant about abortion why?
Has nothing to do with the topic silly :p

But irregardless he/she does have a point with the electorial collage (rather then people in office)
They do not HAVE to follow what the public says

When it comes to bodily fluids and voting? I'd say the fluids are a bit less in value. But before you get on my case, hear the logic:

Bodily fluids, once donated, only take six or so hours before they're replenished. A vote can't ever be taken back, or, if you look at it as a chance to vote, every four years. So yes, in this case selling blood and selling your vote are in two completely different categories.

I don't understand that viewpoint. A blank vote (or noting voting) is a statement, so it's not a waste. For example: Iceland usually has higher than 90% voter turnout. The last time we had presidential elections, many people were unhappy with all the candidates and turned in blank ballots. The turnout was between 60 and 70% (blank and not showing up are filed together). This is the lowest ever and is considered a statement. Not only against the president, but against all the candidates.
Hence, not voting or leaving the ballot blank is actually "voting".

It's a waste as far as political power is concerned. Me running naked down the street with an American flag tattooed on my butt may also be a political statement, but it's not quite the same as voting for a representative in an election. Everything, for that matter, can be seen as a "statement."

When it comes to bodily fluids and voting? I'd say the fluids are a bit less in value. But before you get on my case, hear the logic:

Bodily fluids, once donated, only take six or so hours before they're replenished. A vote can't ever be taken back, or, if you look at it as a chance to vote, every four years. So yes, in this case selling blood and selling your vote are in two completely different categories.

No one ever said they were in the same category. I however disagree with your logic. There is more to value than how frequently the thing in question comes around. Like, what I and a buyer of that thing agree to! Bodily fluids - replenishable or not - are life itself. Voting is practically nothing. From my selfish perspective, my bodily fluids are so valuable that I will instinctively do all I can to protect them from being wasted. On the other hand, votes are apparently so worthless that people in America - about half or so, in some circles - think nothing of letting them go to total waste and sitting home watching TV on election day.

The sad thing about this issue is that people are so focused on doing what benefits themselves, that they don't realize that doing what benefits everyone benefits themselves... Nor that by buying your vote, they are buying the power to control the government and invent ways to legally allow them to take more of your money, meaning they get back their investment from you with interest, and you're even worse off than before while they're even richer. There's a reason someone would want to buy your vote, it's a shame you're too stupid to realize it and sell it to him anyways.

Yes there's a reason, yes some people are stupid (not me, but surely you wouldn't be making an ad hominem here), but just because it's stupid for some people to buy Pepsi does not mean we force them by law to buy Coke.

But as you said, people generally want to do what benefits them, and therefore many of them would choose the third option, which would make the rich-poor gap even more pollitical.

Sure. And those with greater personal responsibility and strategic thinking will see that voting itself, benefits them - possibly much more than simply selling your vote.

And the rich-poor gap is as political as it's gonna get. We're on the verge of having dynasties set in. This may actually help reverse that - if people choose to.

If somehow they managed to legalfy abortion (IT IS WRONG VERY VERY WRONG) then the liberals should somehow find a way to legalfy that

What would it matter anyway. Our votes dont count, only people in office. Unless you talk about for a meager position

Someone should find a way to "legalfy" me beating you over the head. Idiot.

In response to the topic: No. Baddd idea. Even if Iam being unnecessarily pessismistic about the consequences, the possible cons of this outweigh the pros by far- it'd all end in tears, I tell you!

As for it being a "free country", even if it's conceded that you have the right to sell your vote, noone else has the right to cast any more votes then anyone else.

In response to the topic: No. Baddd idea. Even if Iam being unnecessarily pessismistic about the consequences, the possible cons of this outweigh the pros by far- it'd all end in tears, I tell you!
How about some examples of the possible cons. At the moment this thread has reasoned argument from the pros and gut reaction from the cons. The only thing close to an argument is that it would give more power to corporations, which is a nice try, but plainly false.

As for it being a "free country", even if it's conceded that you have the right to sell your vote, noone else has the right to cast any more votes then anyone else.
No-one has the right to receive more votes than anyone else. The right to cast more already exists when anyone absent votes by proxy. No constitutional difficulties are involved here.

Politicians buy votes so we as citizens should be allowed to sell ours. Of course my vote carries a pretty high price.

There isn't a human alive who could afford to buy my vote.

There isn't a human alive who could afford to buy my vote.


A billion dollars could make more happen for you politically than 1 vote.