Wow, Just thought of a deep question, please read....?

Question

So, back in the day, only property holders, or people who could read, who were educated, basically people who had the money could vote....

now, everyone can vote, including the mentally ill, the extreme poverty, criminals and just all the idiots we have in this country.

now, if people can´t make the right decisions in thier life, and end up in poverty, or breaking the law, and in general just leading unethical, poor crappy lives......

are these the kind of people that should be making the decisions about the leadership of this country?

think about it....

Is it right or fair that the people that make poor decisions in thier lives should get to make the decision on who gets to lead this country??


*i´m just playing the devils advocate, and at this point don´t necessarily believe what i am saying....

After answering scroll down and find Junto America´s response...

very interesting...

Answer 1

Actually it sounds like a pretty shallow question to me. Yes they should have the right to vote.

Answer 2

I really am not worrying about as Junto says the empire dying because of this change from the original founding father's vote setup. Since the majority of people do not vote it has not cost us. Plus I think the process of having two parties and the representative government setup we have helps insure we don't run into problems that would occur under socialism or some type of dictatorship. If we had a parliamentary system of government where 50 parties had a voice then the extremes would have a chance of being in the ruling government and this would allow issues to be more controlled by the uneducated on the needs of our country.

Answer 3

You ask an interesting question. I'm glad that we have the voting rights that we now have, because for one thing, just because someone is poor or doesn't own property doesn't mean that he/she doesn't work hard or doesn't lead an ethical life. Sometimes people are just unlucky. Not only that, but not everyone has the same abilities or opportunities. Plus, there are also a lot of poor non-property owners who pay taxes, so since their taxes fund the government and its programs, shouldn't they have a say in how the state is run? Also, since you mention the mentally ill, how are we supposed to determine how mentally fit someone is to vote? After all, not everyone can afford a shrink. Not only that, but it often takes several sessions before a shrink is able to get to the root of it all. Also, some people with criminal tendencies, especially psychopaths, are adept at hiding their real selves, even to mental health professionals, so we would have some of those slip through the net. Last, but certainly not least, we should also remember the fact that there have been wealthy property owners with major mental health issues. Think of Howard Hughes and John E. DuPont.

Answer 4

I understand what you mean. Personally, I think the ideal political system is one in which the leaders are decided not by votes but by psychological tests for intelligence and morality. That way we wouldn't have people getting in on simply on good looks, empty promises or patriotic speeches. However, I think getting from where we are to a true meritocracy would be a rather difficult thing to do immediately, so for the time being I would probably go with something like your idea: To test each voting citizen for intelligence and morality, and give their votes more or less weight accordingly. So a kind, just professor of philosophy and Mensa member might get their vote counted for 10, or 30, or 100 times as much as a high school dropout who's been doing drugs for the past decade or so. Of course, I don't mean for this to get corrupted, and I'm not suggesting that people buy votes or anything. I'm talking entirely about intelligence and morality, because they are what really make a person valuable to the rest of the world.

Answer 5

I have actually joked around about raising the voting age in this country to 25, but beginning to think it wouldn't be a half bad idea. Because let's face it, what does some 18-24 year old opinionated college student know about earning a living, paying taxes, and who's best at running the country? I would MUCH rather vote knowing that people who are older, more mature, and who have a better chance of being established tax payers are voting.

Answer 6

This is the first question today that has made me have to think...should someone with a bad personal track record be able to help make decisions for others through voting? on the surface I would say no...and then I wonder who would decide who could and couldn't vote...better yet...shouldn't elected officials be required to be held to a higher standard before the can be elected? and again who would be the moral and ethics police...how can this be corrupted? I am stunned that I really have no insightful and comprehensive answer for you...this crosses more than just political boundaries...good job.

Answer 7

Of course, you are right. But in a perfect world, it really wouldn't matter until a particular political party comes along and decides that it can take control by becoming the party of the freaks and weirdos. Wahlah! The Democrats are now the party of the the Communists, the criminals, the mentally disturbed, the sexual perverts, and every minority you can identify. They have cobbled together a majority out of various minorities of freaks and perverts. The really crazy part is they don't even seem to mind!

Answer 8

Trouble with this is that rich people pass their wealth down to their children who my not be as clever and able as them. Dont want to go back to a situation where only people with money can have an education. People who have mental breakdowns usually recover from them, criminals are often intelligent and poor doesn't mean unintelligent.
BY only allowing certain types or classes to vote you could engineer it that the party of your choice got in, this would not be a democracy representing all the people.
As its all the people who are to be governed, they should all get a say (vote) in who governs them.

Answer 9

I think what several other answerers are missing is that you don't want to be affected by the poor decisions made by the uneducated and foolish people . I don't either . I often ponder the same thing , but can't see a reasonable and fair solution . So I guess we'll have to live with it until somebody comes up with something better .
Yes Democracy isn't perfect and you've just recognized one of its flaws .

Answer 10

Ah, but the goal of a democratic vote is not make the best decision, but to make the decision that most represents the will of the people. A founding principle of western democracy is that the power of government (that is, the power to govern) is derived from the consent of the people. A vote does not determine the best solution, it just determines what solution the people will give the government permission to enact.

Answer 11

Only the educated and wealthy people are in office.
By the Golden Rule. He that has the gold rules.
And what shape is the country in.
It going back to when the Indians protected the land.
Because the land now needs protecting for our life to continue for generations.