Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tichy | Hacker News Reader

I'm torn on the issue. In my view a politician is actually a service provider doing the mundane tasks I can't be bothered to do. It would be a huge waste of time if a majority of people had to keep up to date on all political issues.

Most of the current "internet voting" systems provide a way to delegate votes, but often those are delegated indefinitely and lead to power concentrations on a few active people.

View on HN

I'm not dumb and I even have the time, but I'd still give proxy to someone who I thought serious understood the issue at hand (so, say, an economist for economic issues). Unfortunately, we currently get the worst of all worlds, representative democracy where the decision makers are career politicians and rarely experts in anything. A representative technocracy would suit me.

I don't see a way around it (doesn't mean there isn't one), because how would you identify the economics expert? Seems to me it would still boil down to marketing, the "expert" who advertises himself the best would win. Obviously that advertising could not happen in terms of presenting economics knowledge, because few people would understand it. So the advertising would be in things people understand, like looks, presentation skills, charme... So basically just what already happens.

Politicians rarely read any bill or law that they vote for. Instead they have underlings to do this. Even then it's a problem because they have to wade through the legalese of a 500 page document with constant changes.

For half of their tenure Congress is preparing for re-election. Much of the other time left is meeting with lobbyists who pay enough to their campaign to represent one side of the issue.

I'm not saying the current system delivers, just that I think politicians should do work that I then won't have to.

There is an issue in that our society doesn't provide us with the time and space needed to participate properly in governance. This is true even of Congresspersons: they spend as much time providing the service as they do keeping their job [1]--and those two activities aren't the same. We need a culture where companies see it as normal and natural for people to take time out of their daily/weekly/monthly schedule to seriously study and engage with issues.

[1] http://politicalpartytime.org/blog/2013/01/18/bennet-leads-t...

I still think it is impossible because nobody can be an expert in everything, and furthermore, it is something I personally don't want to do. I have other interests than politics.

> I still think it is impossible because nobody can be an expert in everything

Expertise is not a prerequisite to good governance. Let's face it: no one knows everything about anything. You get by with what you do.

> it is something I personally don't want to do. I have other interests than politics.

I'm not proposing to take those things away from you.

I have other interests than eating food, but I still do that every day.

>I'm torn on the issue. In my view a politician is actually a service provider doing the mundane tasks I can't be bothered to do. It would be a huge waste of time if a majority of people had to keep up to date on all political issues.

A lot of the things that we pay for are paid for because we can't or won't provide it ourselves. I buy vegetables because I don't grow them myself. I pay for someone to fix my car, because I can't do it, and don't have the time to learn how, or maybe don't have time to do it even if I could do it.

The difference between the above, and government, is that I can choose my provider. No matter which liar wins an election, I lose.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com