a responsible citizens vote should not equal to a vote of a junkie. how about we take each vote and multiply it by the voters credit score and then count
They already are, though that can be improved by decreasing the role of heritable wealth and the disadvantages of poverty through better taxation and social support policies.
Voting is the wrong place to incentivize it, even if you could without first having improved the degree to which it is incentivized in the rest of society.
> The fact that most people voting don't read politicians programs should show how autistic our system is.
Using autistic as an insult here is inappropriate on multiple levels; also, I'd argue that it's perhaps jist rational, since politicians actions are only rarely usefully related to their written programs, and there are much more accessible ways of getting information that is much better at predicting their behavior in office.
since politicians actions are only rarely usefully related to their written programs This is just too excessive, hyperbolic. If you want to quantify it, there you go: https://trumptracker.github.io/ much more accessible ways of getting information that is much better at predicting their behavior in office. Enlighten me then, where is such a thing?
I believe a safer solution is to overhaul education. This way we get both the equality of democracy and the better decision making of an educated populace.
There's also ethical questions around whether solving the problem is even something any human is entitled to do.
All the proposed solutions are an invitation to or an implementation of tyranny. Such a categorical claim (universal Quantifier!) from someone that probably has zero background in voting theory and not enough in epistemology e.g cognitive biases and logical fallacies.
You make such a powerful claim but honestly, in all sincerity: All the proposed solutions How many alternatives are you aware? 1? Dictature ? Two maybe ?
You don't know what you don't know and me neither but at least I know that I don't know what I don't know. The best solution to me is the one I co-designed with my brother, it is not public and will only be when I'll have a mature software implementation. But public solutions that are still an improvement would be for exemple an epistocracy semi-direct. I can explain it to you if you're open to the possibility of changing your mind about "representative" democracy being the least worst governing system.
There's also ethical questions around whether solving the problem is even something any human is entitled to do. No.
> There's also ethical questions around whether solving the problem is even something any human is entitled to do. No.
I'm more interested in hearing you explain this.
Snarkyness aside, credit scores are un-auditable algorithms runs by private corporations. They do a bad job at measuring fiscal responsibility, and do not measure any other kind of responsibility.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/11/this-is-the-real-reason-most...
It is common to blame the poor for having trouble as if all their problems have to do with poor character. We start with the example that it's possible for A poor person to build themselves from nothing to wealth and success and somehow arrive at the thesis that everyone who is struggling is only doing so because they are lazy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/18/poor-...
In reality people have a varied degree of talents and make varied choices in life. Those who start out stupid and lazy at the top of the ramp end up well off with good jobs at Daddy's friends business and those who start off with nothing often end up struggling despite working hard.
Your idea would systemically privilege morons over their betters who had an illness in their family. Furthermore it would privilege the already privilege by taking votes away from the poor and gifting them to the rich. Like a perverse Robin Hood stealing crumbs from the poor to give to the rich's dogs.
Our government already primarily serves the interests of the rich and white but cannot presently afford to sufficiently alienate the poor or black lest they turn up at the polls in sufficient numbers to tip the political table.
Your suggestion intended on its face to to disenfranchise a tiny number of bums seems designed to disenfranchise minorities and the poor. I will be charitable and suppose this isn't the purpose.
Instead of carrying the political day with 49% of the vote or even 40% which is possible with our current electoral college such a suggestion would allow 20% or 30% of the population to rule by decree with little concern for the desires of their poorer kin many of which are far to close to the social and financial edge already.
When the rich rearrange the nation to even better serve their needs and service their wealth millions will see their lives destroyed.
This is my long way of saying that this is a bad idea.