Please know that I don't know of any government system like this in any country and no contry I know s actually planning to use something like this.

Technology hs came to a point where we can catogrise government decisions and choose which ones we would want to view. Like this forum some may not be intrested in conspiracies and some ma,but you do not have to put your opinion across.

So if we were to do this with a government by automating and giving the decisions to the people then we could decentralise government so that it is even more decentralised.

It would use time limits and deadlines for voting on choices. So if you were to try to vote after the deadline then your vote is pointless

__________________
European union, the super power which may one day own my homeland.

Electronic voting of all ideas and bills and taxes and rules would all in all be good - I think.

VERY interesting Idea

Thanks

I've just been thinking if a government used my idea, then someone could make 'slight' alterations to the people votes and probably no one will ever find out.

This could be a true advantage to things like the 'illuminati' - if it exists

__________________
European union, the super power which may one day own my homeland.

I think everyone should have an electronic box in their house, that notifies them of bills being passed and things being voted on (mostly in their community). And they should be able to "yay or nay" the bill or whatever is going on.

This would get more people participating, since Democracy depends on participation.

__________________
Believing that McAfee is going to protect you from hackers and viruses is exactly like believing that republicans can actually protect you from terrorists.

When the rich wage war, it's the poor who die.

We vote for the government who best reflect our views so I don't know why we would need any other voting system. If we did we would open everything up to more cheating.

__________________
Regards from The Leader

LogisticForums http://www.logisticforums.com
Glamour Walk Red Carpet Hire http://www.redcarpethire.net.au
Glamour Ride 300c Wedding Cars http://www.300c.net.au

This is an interesting topic.

I kinda look at this, in terms of "what technology can bring to the table".

So, like, today, one of the big problems is, government has too much work. There's like 300 million people in the US, and there bezillions of ideas floatin' around, and "lots" of 'em end up as bills or something "formal" that elected representatives have to consider -

And I mean, look at it from the point of view of your local Senator or whatever - that poor guy (or girl) is being inundated with opinion, right? PLUS, they still gotta get out there and do their little speeches on the Senate floor, and they still gotta do all their behind-ths-scenes negotiating and stuff, and so, all this -

The result of all this, is a kind of "compression", in the way the government does business, and it's reflected in things like "packaged" bills - like the "omnibus spending bills", for instance, right? Where the bill itself, is this huge aggregation of thousands of seemingly unrelated items (including most famously, some kinda "pork" usually) -

So it seems to be, that one of the benefits than an electronic type of technology can bring to the table, is this kinda idea of "separating the issues" again, right? I mean, the real reason they're "combined" in the first place, is just 'cause there's too many of 'em, and it seems me, that electronic voting could make that whole process "more efficient" that way -

And the benefit to We the People, would be that we get to consider the issues individually again, instead of having to make decisions on the basis of some "lump aggregate" of whatever "compromise" happens to have been worked out that day -

Um... let's see... immigration - perfect example, right? The "compromise" there, was this huge aggregate thing, that involved changes to border control, labor practices, social services, I mean, all kinds of stuff was in that McCain-Kennedy thing, right?

But the People, it seems to me, kinda had the smarts to "individuate" the issue of "border control" out of that whole thing, and it seems to me, that the People kinda indicated to the politicians at that point, that they didn't like the "package", and just wanted to vote on the "individual issue", right?

See what I mean? So, it seems to me, that this idea could be very helpful.

This same question was brought up in a law class I took recently. After about an hour of "discussion", our professor brought up his take for our founding fathers use of a representative republic.

His view was this: We, as the general public, tend to become emotionally attached to the issues going around us. If we all were to cast votes to create or decide leglislation, we would be biased by OUR perpectives. We would not be objective; we would only see how it would effect our lives, not the rest of America.

Our elected officials are "supposed" to look at how both their constituencies and the rest of the country will be effected.

And an elected representative would automatically think of America first instead of how it would affect HIS (or her) life? I'm sure s/he would think of America, but ultimately make the decision on how it best affects his life.

That is the flaw of every American.

__________________
Believing that McAfee is going to protect you from hackers and viruses is exactly like believing that republicans can actually protect you from terrorists.

When the rich wage war, it's the poor who die.