Hello! My name is Sarah and I am a recent photography graduate of Rochester Institute of Technology in New York. I just moved to Cleveland, Ohio! I'm excited to learn about my new city and have lots of new adventures. I like to post my own work, work that inspires me, and the occasional laugh.
So, I have a really good friend that I don’t see often, but today I knew we were meant to be good friends. I knew this because we went to Panera to get food and I ordered right away. My friend took a few minutes, and ordered while I was getting a drink. We both get our food and it turns out we ordered the exact same thing.
Client: I threw out that black pen, it was out of ink.
Me: What black pen?
Client: The one that was lying on your tablet.
Me: You threw out my $150 Wacom pen?
Client: I tried writing with it and it didn’t work. It must’ve been out of ink.
Oh god… the horror.
I have an idea involving the current government, and how it seems to have stalled out due to corruption in politics. We’ve come a long way, technologically speaking, from when our government was created. I’m curious why we’ve not updated the system to work with what is possible now due to technology.
It is now possible, thanks to the internet, to gather signatures for petitions, to play a single game of pokemon with hundreds of thousands of other people, to share opinions about political issues among millions of people. Why is voting on bills not done this way?
If we relegate congress to writing bills and letting the people vote on it, would that be worthwhile? I haven’t been thinking about it for long, but I think this might be a way to significantly lower the effect of corporate dollars in our government, as well as get representation for minority groups that are otherwise under-represented.
Basically, all we need to do is allow for citizens to vote on the same bills congress would vote on. This should be feasible given that the internet exists. Anyone have thoughts on this? (aside from the practicality of actually implementing it)
congress writes bills, people vote on them via the internet instead of congress.
Interesting. So what your kind of going for is implementing a more direct democracy rather than the representative democracy that we have now. Past arguments for a representative democracy were that it was too cumbersome to get everyone to vote on everything AND that the common man does not always understand what is best, therefore they should vote for representatives that are more intelligent and more aware of what is best for the people.
Now, obviously times have changed. With the invention of the internet it is possible to get a large number of people to vote on certain subjects. (like American Idol) I do feel like some would argue that the common man doesn’t know what’s best, however I don’t necessarily believe that. So along with arguments that the internet can be “rigged” and “hacked by young whipper snappers” to give one side an advantage, I have a feeling that arguments about whether the people know what’s best for themselves would be a point of contention.