1370
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
1370 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
58437 readers
4344 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is the natural result of what we vote for every two years.
Is it? I don't remember seeing a guy running for Congress that promised he'd prevent huge corporations from running rough shod over everything.
People like saying stuff like "just vote better", but the fact is the vast majority of people that run for any office are pro-big business because that's their background and the lobbyists give them lots of money to get elected. Where's the anti-big business guy going to get his money to run? And without money, you sure aren't winning.
Through lobbying, corporations have us all by the balls. It doesn't matter what side of the isle you're on; both sides have basically been endorsed by big money.
What we need is ranked voting so someone like that might have a chance on the ballot.
We need to vote on bills directly, having representatives is stupid.
Campaign finance reform is necessary to tackle big business interests out for regulatory capture. Shift some of that subsidy into funding campaigns so the little guy stands a chance against them and their billionaire club.
The result of vote is only as good at the voting system used and the people voting. A more representative voting system leads to more public representation in government, which would likely improve the lives of the voters who will vote next time.
You're much more optimistic than I am.
I'm not sure about that. A party that 'wins' under first-past-the-post/winner-take-all is unlikly to change the voting system such that they would be less likely to get into power next time. I have no idea of the path to changing the voting system. I hope intoducing people to other voting systems helps.