Hacker News Reader

I have occasionally been toying with the idea that the number of votes you have would be dependent on your expected lifetime left. The longer hou have to live with your electee's decisions the more say you should have.

A lot of problems with calculating that expected lifetime though: which variables can you include out of race, income, gender, job, recent purchase of a motorcycle, being diagnosed with cancer, etc?

In practice I think age buckets might be enough.

What are the benefits of this?

De facto term limits is a big benefit in itself, in my opinion. But also, we know that we haven’t solved the problems of aging, and old people as a class suffer from distinct cognitive problems. If it’s reasonable to ban people under 35, or under 21, from the presidency, it’s reasonable to ban people over 65 as well.

Thank you :)

ageist much?