Why I won't vote, and why I will give more to charity
Sep 27, 2008, 11:43a - Democracy
I'm not going to vote in this upcoming election. I am not registered to vote, and I don't plan on registering. This may come as hearsay, and who am I to avoid the controversial, so on with the explanation.
I don't like either of the candidates. They both feel like fake people to me, almost people without minds of their ... more »
Read comments (1) - Comment
omar
- Sep 27, 2008, 10:26p
nikhil,
you sound like ron paul, in some ways. i remember reading an interview with ron paul where he said something like "if your neighbor is polluting your area, then you go and talk to your neighbor and work it out, and use the courts to deal with it."
naive.
especially in this globalized world, where pollution/green house gases need to be dealt with globally.
there's one area where you need federal commitments.
now, onto healthcare. this country needs a federal mandate that everyone should be insured. it's ridiculous right now that healthcare, for most people, is tied to their employer.. and buying individual healthcare for oneself is just too expense. i suppose local communities could band together to provide healthcare for their residents (something SF is trying to do) but i really think that you only get reasonable
on obama's finance plan: you should read about where he plans to get the money for his spending initiatives. he isn't proposing spending more without taking in more, though tax receipts will almost certainly be lower this year so of course there will be issues.
on the bailout: it's too simple to see this as a blank cheque for wall street. unfortunately, if people/companies can't get credit, then the economy is going to stall. right now, banks aren't doing much lending. money markets aren't buying up short term issues from companies. these are issues that go beyond the wall street cronies, who are nevertheless partly to blame (as are people on main street for taking up these ridiculous mortgages, the people who sold them, the politicians who got rid of regulations, the regulators who didn't regulate, etc..). of course, i don't think we have an example of a modern financial crisis like this where the government didn't really step in, so it's hard to know what would happen if they didn't do anything, but i don't think we want to engage in that experiment. right now it's about getting the terms right -- for instance, if taxpayers are bailing out these companies, they better get some sort of equity stake.
as to your bigger point: i can understand your frustration with the candidates. i feel the same way. they both seem like poor options in my mind.. and they certainly are playing the political game -- there's no change in washington.
it's a frustrating time.
btw i'll be in cambridge starting 10/6 or so.
Stop Bugging Me
Jan 20, 2007, 11:20a - Democracy
Taking a brief break from the philosophical and moving on to the practical, here's a list of websites you can use to get people to stop bugging you:
- Reduce physical junk mail with the Direct Marketing Association's Mail Preference Service. Takes effect within 3 months and last 5 years.
- Reduce credit card offers with the credit agencies' opt-out tool. Takes ...
more »
No comments - Write 1st Comment
My Votes for the Nov 2006 Election
Nov 6, 2006, 12:42p - Democracy
Here's how I'm planning to vote in tomorrow's election, replete with rationale. If you think I'm voting the wrong way, let me know! I've only spent a couple hours reviewing everything, and some of this stuff is pretty tricky.
I'm supportive of the secret ballot, but I also think that people should discuss these issues more; that's my intent of ... more »
Read comments (3) - Comment
omar
- Nov 7, 2006, 11:00p
* 83 (Sex offender monitoring): NO
i completely agree on this one, and yet it is going to pass (that's how it looks at this moment). this simply can't stand -- this has to go to the supreme court of california, if not further. this is a ridiculous infringement on these people's rights. interestingly, i think this prop is passing because of its name. i think the spin on this one makes it sound like voting no on this prop is a vote *for* sex offenders... which is a strange way of portraying it.
sigh.
i wish i could vote.
Charles Reich
- Nov 14, 2006, 5:30a
I refuse to vote for anyone who is pro war or pro death penalty, and I disagree that the worst action is inaction. But I was elated by the election!
Mehul Thakker
- Feb 21, 2007, 3:38p
Hey Nikhil!
I ran across your blog, and was happy to see that you voted for me for State Treasurer. Thanks!
I read your rationale, which I agree with (naturally), but also wanted to tell you that the reason many candidates (Dems and Reps)did not submit a Voter Guide Statement, is that if you opt-out of the campaign spending limits, then you are prohibited from submitted a Voter Guide Statement. Thus, big money, corporate candidates will almost always opt-out of the spending limits (so they can spend to the moon), but as a result, will not be allowed to present a statement in the Voter Guide.
I still think you made the right call, and even though Bill Lockyear beat me out by a large margin, I've been invited to the Treasurer's office to advise them on my ideas about community banking and State investment in low income areas.
Participation works, no matter what your party or affiliation. Make friends, share ideas, and make change.
Be well!
Mehul Thakker
BuyBlue.org - Tracking Political Contributions and Practices of Corporations
Dec 5, 2005, 12:44a - Democracy
Saw an ad for this on the BART, so I looked it up:
www.buyblue.org
This site tracks the political contributions and corporate pratices of a whole slew of companies.
For example, you can see that Costco gave 99% of its donations to the Democrats, and has 4 positive articles submitted about their worker practices.
While Walmart gives 78% ... more »
No comments - Write 1st Comment
Agreeing to Agree
Jul 5, 2005, 10:35p - Democracy
So many things can go wrong when leading a group; by far the most difficult to deal with is disagreement. Getting a group of people to agree on a course of action must be the most straining yet important thing that any of us can do. Group disagreement permeates all walks of life, from the local Little League team deciding ... more »
Read comments (1) - Comment
Jason
- Jul 12, 2005, 1:28p
I agree with this. It is hard to lead a group when everyone inately thinks individually. I have found in my personal experience that the roadblocks generally do come from one usually powerful individual. The problem with any system to manage this in any operation is the human element. Generally, pride and/or a fear of losing one's power or the desire for moreare what detract from or bring to a complete hault what may otherwise be a fruitful group effort. How does one effectively counter something as primal as pride? It can be done but - man does it make life difficult! People also tend to operate with this (bizarre) "us and them" attitude in most situations, stroking their sense of pride and self worth by pointing the finger or building fences. This is most likely what leads to groups' inabilities to work together or join forces. Anyway, I'm sure you didn't plan to spawn such a long comment with this post but all in all, I like what you've written here. Thanks.
Spending Buckets for Democracy
Jun 1, 2005, 10:43p - Democracy
About a month ago, Dave and I had an idea about how to improve democracy, and I finally got off my lazy butt to write it down. Here goes:
The problem: Even after electing a politician to public office, she may take actions that you disagree with, especially if she's influenced by special interests and other lobbying groups.
One solution: ... more »
Read comments (4) - Comment
Brian
- Jun 2, 2005, 8:29a
I really like this idea. When I was paying my taxes, I was really annoyed to think that the check I was sending wouldn't even cover the tank ammo that military trainees explode as part of an exercise. I would have felt a lot better to view my taxes as a contribution to a cause I believe in. Instead of discretionary, perhaps elected officials could stand behind suggested allocations. This would give people a way to say, I don't know what's best but I trust that Barbara Boxer does so I'll allocate my taxes as she suggests.
Alvaro
- Jun 28, 2005, 9:12a
This is just ludicrous. You're talking about a reconciliation effort so massive, just to undertake it would be an enormous cost in and of itself. Nevermind that, but who would want to pay for personally unnecessary, yet socially necessary projects??? I'm stunned that you're starting to sound like a republican! ;P
David
- Jun 9, 2006, 10:20a
Nikhil,
This is a brilliant idea, and it is feasable.
You would need to phase the effort in over time.
The short term impact of over-looked departments would leave them un-funded and shut down. The BLM for example might not make your list or catch the attention of voters. Folks would not notice until the remaining National Forrests were being mowed down buy entreprenuers, lumber companies and looters.
A first step to making this happen would be to shine a light on what voters (albeit unweighted taxpayers) want vs. what each congress member does. For example, I suspect that most folks in Walnut Creek want peace in the middle east. But more importantly, few of them are aware that Rep. Ellen Tauscher is sponsoring legislation to increase troops in the middle east and reduce the tarriff (taxes) on canned Oysters - unsmoked.
Linking voters desires to Congress Actions... the first step.
nikhil
- Feb 13, 2012, 7:46a
And now it's on a T-shirt:
http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/e0b1b66d-b682-40a0-9b81-58f762a9da4a.html
|