Yes, I’m sure we all use our time so efficiently that voting would cut into time spent on those activities. You’ve presented a false dilemma. In no way do I have to choose between voting and doing any of those things or “most or all other choices of activity in the day”. Additionally, most states allow you to vote by mail, so it can actually be done at your convenience. Heck, you can vote while you’re on the john if you like.
Are you familiar with the concept of opportunity costs?
i voted.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
In other words, do whatever you want to. I’m going to vote for sport.
Why vote when you could burn your ballot? It’s just as useful and way more fun.
larsothan
Why vote when you could burn your ballot? It’s just as useful and way more fun.
How did you know that’s why I did with my write in? I had registered at the register rally at my school, before I learned any Austrian Econ, or libertarianism/minianarchism/anarcho-capitalism (etc). And my parents made sure the ballot was forwarded to me.
Of course; are you familiar with the concept of rational decision making? If so, then you won’t be surprised to learn that I voted, not in place of “making money, making love, … spending time with [my] children”, but in place of whatever thing I had planned to do today that I valued least.
So it is a false dilemma to suggest that I must choose between voting or money making, love making, or spending time with loved ones.
In broader terms, the opportunity cost of an action in a day isn’t the value of “most or all other choices of activity in the day”, but just the least valuable one (assuming it is an action that would otherwise have been done).
And that’s even assuming that I, or anyone else, operates their lives at such efficiency that 15 minutes cannot be taken out of the day to vote.
When I was growing up, there was a saying. Reading is FUNdamental. I asked;
There was no false dilemma, because I never proposed a dilemma at all. I never said you MUST choose any particular activity (reading is FUNdamental), you said that there was not a “whole lot to gain by not voting”, implying that voting was a high value activity. As far as the dilemma, and claiming I posted a logical fallacy, I simply pointed out alternative choices, of which I am sure you will admit there are too many to name.
So my question remains. Why is voting more valuable than your next best choice?
Again, that 15 minutes has an opportunity cost. It’s not about efficiency, it’s about tradeoffs. Whether voting takes 5 minutes or 5 hours, there are alternatives. Why is voting the superior choice in your opinion?
My subjective value scale for today went like this:
-
Stayed home due to not having gas money to go anywhere except work, which leads me to…
-
Reading Mencken quotes about voting and democracy, which led to…
-
Updating my Facebook with Mencken quotes about voting and democracy, which led to…
-
Spending the day on the internet, which led to…
-
Chatting on SoulSeek, which led to…
-
Reading later on, which led to…
-
Eating tacos, currently.
I couldn’t fit voting in that schedule.
So…
- Staying home
- Saving gas (see point 1)
- Reading
- Eating
- Posting this post
- Discussing the merits of not voting (see point 5)
- Voting
Voting is on the bottom.
I worked, ate a good philly cheesesteak and it was fun. Overall good day not voting. What is this true austrian bs?
People just love using the “if you don’t vote, you can’t complain” argument. I overheard a story about a guy at my sister’s job who was complaining about the sales tax he always has to pay. My mom quickly piped up with “you should ask him: did you vote?” because if he didn’t, he can’t complain!
For context: Question 3 on the Massachusetts ballot was to lower the sales tax from 6.25% to 3.00%. I still think he could credibly complain since, you know, his money is still being stolen away via taxation.
A false dilemma may not have been expressly stated, but it was pretty clearly implied that by voting you are choosing to vote instead of making money, love, or spending time with family. Then it was further implied that voting means you have placed voting “above most or all other choices of activity in the day”. To me, these clearly imply a false dilemma between voting and said activities, or between voting and anything else that could possibly be done in a day.
Whether you want to call that a false dilemma or not, I can’t honestly say I care, but it’s certainly not the case that voting implies that you value voting over any of the above named activities, and certainly not “most or all other choices of activity in the day”. It only implies that you value voting over SOME unnamed activity.
To directly answer your question regarding why voting may be more valuable than the next best choice; that all depends on what the next best choice is. I can’t say what one might choose voting over. The things that give voting the little value it has are the marginal chance that your vote could turn the election, and also that by being involved in voting you may be able to engage people about liberty-oriented stances on the issues being voted upon. The latter would not only add more marginal chance for a somewhat more liberty-oriented outcome, but may also lead to another person learning about Austrian economics, or individual freedoms.
And my comment re: efficiency is just that many people spend at LEAST 15 minutes a day wasting time, zoning out, arguing on internet forums, watching TV shows they don’t really care about, and other marginally fruitful activities. If you ask someone what they’re doing during most of these activities they are likely to say they are doing nothing. So, in such cases where the ‘activities’ really yield no value, it would be a question of efficiency.
Understanding what you read may be even more fundamental that reading itself. That there may not be a whole lot to gain by not voting does not imply that voting is a high value activity; only that expressly not voting is NOT a high value activity, or, if you prefer, that voting is not a negative value activity. This was in fact my point all along; avoiding the voting booth does not provide that much intrinsic value (I’m considering opportunity cost an extrinsic value) and voting does not have any negative value.
“If you didn’t vote, you can’t complain.” Ah, yes, because I decided not to choose someone to decide political matters for me, and yet the reality someone making decisions on my behalf still persists, is now an individual problem due to them not voting for someone to make their decisions in the first place.
“If you didn’t vote, you can’t complain.” Ah, yes, because I decided not to choose someone to decide political matters for me, and yet the reality someone making decisions on my behalf still persists, is now an individual problem due to them not voting for someone to make their decisions in the first place.
Usually ignoring the don’t-vote-can’t-complain argument when it comes to voting for candidates is easy, but what about propositions and referendum questions? It seems harder to ignore, even with the statistical insignificance of a given vote.
Usually ignoring the don’t-vote-can’t-complain argument when it comes to voting for candidates is easy, but what about propositions and referendum questions? It seems harder to ignore, even with the statistical insignificance of a given vote.
They can ask me directly if they can have my consent to tax me, live off my income, at a voluntarily expense, and then they can ask how I feel about what they plan on doing with my income.
I suppose you’ve stopped paying taxes then? Income, sales, and property, yes? Do you stop the government waste management employee from collecting your garbage weekly? Reject the government subsidized utilities (electricity and water)? When a cop tries to pull you over for some petty traffic penalty, do you pull over or speed right along as though nothing has happened
So your point is…as long as you pay your taxes and penalties and avail yourself of the over priced services that governments offer. You should vote. Why not go to your local police station and browse through the mug shot book, then you can vote for your favorite burglar or armed robber. I like this guy he looks like he’d let me keep my watch.
You have the right to defend yourself, and if your vote will prevent a maniac from seizing power, you nearly have a duty to vote.
I am an Austrian, so I am confused when you say “intrinsic value”. What is intrinsic value?
Why would you promote rational decision making, and then claim people perform zero value activities? If someone is doing nothing, and we believe they are a rational actor, then doesn’t that mean that doing “nothing” (which is in fact, doing something called nothing) is their highest valued activity at that moment?
Hopefully this came out well enough even with the limiting amount of words I’m allowed.