There are many things i’d like to say, but will let you learn in your own life.

=) Thank You.

~ Joe

Let’s be clear: this is one of the most important times in American history. We have woke up — call it thru 60’s cultural revivalism, or internet-enabled information technology — but we are aware of injustices & dangers that are gigantic in importance — I can say that without exaggeration.

Because this isn’t about whether we should have a slight tax hike or not.

This is about the game being rigged, as Elizabeth Warren says: the superrich have more than half of all of the wealth in America.

This is about our climate changing — certain animal species being driven to complete extinction, sea levels rising, & temperatures changing — our very home being in danger — if not by what is predictable, even, then by the unknown unknowns involved in endangering our environment.

& how are we supposed to fix these things if our fix-it service, the legislative branch, is itself broken?

This is also about Citizens United, then, too: handing over the reins to the superrich, in the sense of campaign financing — reducing the already decimated voice of The People in legislation, & boost the already over satiated superrich’s voice — take from the poor, & give to the rich, in terms of power.

This is reason enough to rise up & vote — right? One thing is apparent: these are exceptional times — do not sit on your derrière during these important times.

Vote.

Speak Up.

Be Heard.

It Is An Important Time.

Let’s all be responsible & use the influence in government we ARE given, to vote for progressive democrats — whose policies align with the problems — & if not progressive democrats, then reasonable republicans, who WILL get the jobs done that need doing in our government.

& Let’s not stop there.

Keep right on speaking up until it’s so loud they can’t hear themselves think – all year-round — then we will see these major responsibilities of ours dealt with – finally – by those in power.

Let’s All Get Out & Vote! Add It To Your Calendar.

Do It Now!

[dropcap]W[/dropcap]ouldn’t both the political will of The People & also the political will of Congress be better measured — that is, more accurately & only more accurately — by a (say) 10-point rating system?

(In fact that is the only difference, provably:

a say 10-point rating system subsumes binary voting & also instant-runoff voting, i believe, because:

• it supports everything they do: rating/voting a ’10’ would be the same as ‘voting for’ (or ‘ranking highest’ in instant-runoff voting (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting)); rating/voting a ‘1’ would be ‘not voting for’ (‘ranking least’ in instant-runoff voting),
• & rating voting also does more: compared to a binary vote, ‘2’ thru ‘9’ would be more nuanced votes, & total rating points p’s ratio to the number of candidates would be the increase in voting accuracy, compared to instant-runoff voting *i believe*.

)

The invention of voting was an epoch-marking invention. But if this provably subsumes its functionality — again, voting for would be the same thing as giving a 10, not voting for would be the same as giving a 1 — as well as instant-runoff (see 2nd point above) — then isn’t it just-better?

* * * *

From my cursory vision for this, you would have to allow rating each candidate — which would be no more a popularity contest than voting is —  comparable to instant-runoff voting, instead of expecting people to choose to vote for one candidate with a vote-power-lowering ‘6’, for example, instead of 10.

So e.g. you could give Roger Dodger a 4, because he’s better than Joe Schmoe, who you give a 1 — but John Doe gets a 10, in your book.

This would add up in the complete election & allow for accurate comparisons. i believe this would possibly be more accurate than ranking/run-off voting — since ranking does not capture strength, only relative strength, i.e. ranking. This has more nuance & you could even (at our serious benefit) use a 50 or 100 point rating system.

* * * *

It would simply be more accurate – by being more proportionate — to the American people’s political will, as well as (in congress) the congressional body’s political will, than binary yes/no voting. (1*thru* 5 would possibly be taught as no to no,-but, 6 *thru* 10 would be taught as yes,-but to yes.)

* * * *

As a final note, this post is a draft, & subject to improvement. 

Thank You For Reading,
Joe Valentyn

[dropcap]R[/dropcap]eddit.com has earned my respect as what the world can be like when it acts as a community.

using our modern invention of the computer, important, up-to-the-minute news bubbles to the top, thru the goodwill-voting of its free, unpaid members:

the world doing the work of a community.

the real ‘slice-of-life’ quality that is somewhat unformalizable, ineffable, is served up fresh everyday – again thru interests-voting, by its members.

because that is what the world acting as a community wants.

RIP Aaron Swartz, founder of Reddit, & kudos to Reddit.com & its community; & Long Live The World Living As A Community.

~ Joe

Where do we even begin?

85 people in the world have more than the bottom-netting 3.5 billion;

Now, some people say time & chance DO NOT happen to all men, & that the rich are necessarily & always just “that much” better: how much is “that much”? The average top-85-netter really 41,176,471 times “better”¹ than the average person from the bottom-netting 3.5-billion?

41 million, 176 thousand, 471 times “better” —

“Ha ha” is what I have to say that; you’re kidding me.

But what a cruel joke — because it’s real.

Sit down any of these top-85 netters & talk to them: you will see they, as the saying goes, put their socks on one foot at a time, too; they are not 41 million times better in any respect – *laughs*. how about we measure their sense of fairness?

Too, some say “Well, inequality; there must be some inequality, because some have higher & lower abilities” – income & wealth ‘variation’ is not what we mean; we are not un-understanding of that. I believe we SHOULD each have the fruits of our labor, as the Biblical saying goes, & get what we earn.

But when you produce 100$ profit an hour for your boss, & he pays you 10$, & then your co-worker too earns your boss 100$ an hour, but he pays her only 10$ for that same amount of time — are we really getting the fruits of our labor, then, or are people taking, or are our bosses taking the fruits of OUR labor, as their exorbitant profit? I believe they are taking the fruits of OUR labor, not you are jeopardizing the fruits you steal from us.

So really, I agree we should receive the fruits of our labor – that applies more to the people earning 41,176,471 times less — unless you feel the average worker among the poorest 3.5 billion DOES DO 1/41,176,471 times less work, on average, than the usual top-earning-85 person does. Otherwise: you see the unfairness.

& The truth is we are not evil. Power ossifies, but the those top-85-netting people – what some would call an old boy’s club – have not volunteered to beyond the shadow of a doubt make this fair; So the we will act where they will not.

* * * *

How?

One idea is employeed-owned business models & co-op business models; employee-owned businesses & co-ops are fundamentally different than normal ‘winner-take-all’ type business models.

As I understand them: profits are distributed more fairly / totally fairly, & decisions are no bureaucratic but democratic, more often. Also every worker feels they have a stake in the business, so they, if they are somewhat sensible, responsible, they tend their business more, with more passion, than getting minimum wage with little hope of increasing their income through their efforts.

This way people do make more money – the fruits of their labor – & do a better job, providing better goods & services cheaper.

Why not subsidize, campaign for, & yourself start innovative employee-owned or co-op businesses, & wave what like gold will not de-value: ethical doing.

* * * *

Poverty is a serious issue. According to UNICEF, 22,000 children die everyday due to poverty.

If 22,000 people died a day of another preventable cause, we’d be flailing — much less children: 22,000 children die everyday due to our Greed, & wealth inequality, etc. To defend this is unconscionable. If you were at a party & many children were dying, unless you gave them 100$, then wouldn’t you give 100$ in almost every circumstance — only saving more lives I could think of would trump it — & save many children’s lives? it might be hard but in the end it’s the right thing to do.

we should think of global inequality the same way, & stop being so Greedy.

* * * *

footnote:

are these top 85 earners really, on average, 41,176,471 times “better” than 3.5 billion people¹, even those without large sums of wealth?: 

from freenode #math:
<mobuto> yes, 3.5/85 is the multiple for avg incomes in those 2 cohorts
<mobuto> 3.5 bil i mean

3,500,000,000 ÷ 85 = 41,176,470.5882; i rounded up to 41,176,471 for the multiple of times supposedly “better” they are, according to those who claim the rich are just all-out “better” than the poor. if that is not true, is the idea, if the rich are not just fundamentally better than the poor, & time & chance as we’ve heard in the Bible happeneth to them all, then this is actually a measure of the unfairness, with the genuine difference in abilities (considering we should eat the fruits of our labor) still needing some amount – maybe not totalized by some poorly-designed ‘measure of merit’ — the genuine difference of abilities needing some factorization.

* * * *

as a final note, consider contributing your opinion on inequality in conversation with your friends & family, & via social media. Thank You.

~ Joe