View Poll Results: Should voting be compulsory?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    8 40.00%
  • No

    12 60.00%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 70
  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,124

    Should voting be compulsory?

    Australia is quite rare in having compulsory voting.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  2. #2
    Account Permanently Banned Axiom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,383

    Vote No

    I believe this is a secondary issue.
    The primary one being :- we should be encouraged enough to vote by having real credible and varied options....not simply a continuation of the tag team ,dog and pony,punch and judy, puppet show.

  3. #3
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    823
    I see it as the lesser of two evils. The greater evil being a government that is not representative because of a low % of voters. But I could be wrong.
    Dyslexics of the world untie

  4. #4
    CC Grandmaster Spiny Norman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,437
    If people are unable to unwilling to educate and motivate themselves to vote, then I don't see why the government should force them to vote.

    I would prefer to see a proper registration system for voters, where people are actually licensed to vote based on having at least a rudimentary level of knowledge about our system of government. e.g. if they're unable to tell the difference between the Senate and the House of Reps, they'd fail their license test.
    “As you perhaps know, I haven't always been a Christian. I didn't go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don't recommend Christianity.” -- C.S.Lewis

  5. #5
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Axiom
    not simply a continuation of the tag team ,dog and pony,punch and judy, puppet show.
    You forgot my favourite: "Tweedledum and Tweedledumber"
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  6. #6
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,539
    Freedom to vote means freedom not to vote, therefore it should not be compulsory. If someone does not intent to vote, it means it's not important to him/her. forcing them to vote might skewer the results.

    On the other hand, I view it as a very minor and insignificant issue.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,672
    Note that it is not compulsory to vote in Australia. It is compulsory to present yourself at a voting booth, or to send a postal ballot paper (which may or may not be an actual vote).

    The problem with non-compulsory voting (especially when the system is also first-past-the-post) is that the government can be determined by a very small minority of the population. In the US, it is even worse, with elections usually taking place on weekdays - when normal people generally have to work!

  8. #8
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    823
    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty
    I would prefer to see a proper registration system for voters, where people are actually licensed to vote based on having at least a rudimentary level of knowledge about our system of government. e.g. if they're unable to tell the difference between the Senate and the House of Reps, they'd fail their license test.
    So you're saying that a person's level of education should determine what rights they have a citizen?
    Dyslexics of the world untie

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty
    If people are unable to unwilling to educate and motivate themselves to vote, then I don't see why the government should force them to vote.

    I would prefer to see a proper registration system for voters, where people are actually licensed to vote based on having at least a rudimentary level of knowledge about our system of government. e.g. if they're unable to tell the difference between the Senate and the House of Reps, they'd fail their license test.
    I agree. Indeed, compulsory voting could encourage demagogery. SeeEconomic Illiteracy by John Stossel:

    people often support price controls, foreign-trade barriers and laws against job "outsourcing," and oppose immigration. Most economists are eager to demonstrate that these policies are bad for society, but most people aren't interested in evidence. They're interested in what confirms their worldview and makes them feel good. So they often vote for protectionists, anti-immigration advocates and other opponents of the free market.
    And G.B. Shaw pointed out, a government policy to rob Peter to pay Paul can be assured of the support of Paul.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  10. #10
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,124
    Quote Originally Posted by pax
    Note that it is not compulsory to vote in Australia. It is compulsory to present yourself at a voting booth, or to send a postal ballot paper (which may or may not be an actual vote).
    Fair point. But it is often colloquially called "compulsory voting", as per your contrast with "non-compulsory voting".

    Quote Originally Posted by pax
    The problem with non-compulsory voting (especially when the system is also first-past-the-post) is that the government can be determined by a very small minority of the population. In the US, it is even worse, with elections usually taking place on weekdays — when normal people generally have to work!
    People who don't vote shuldn't whinge that they haven't got the government they wanted.

    FPP voting is crass, much inferior to our preferential system that eliminates the role of spoilers. So is voting on a work day.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    people often support price controls, foreign-trade barriers and laws against job "outsourcing," and oppose immigration. Most economists are eager to demonstrate that these policies are bad for society, but most people aren't interested in evidence. They're interested in what confirms their worldview and makes them feel good. So they often vote for protectionists, anti-immigration advocates and other opponents of the free market.
    What has this got to do with compulsory voting? I think you will find that stupid people and people who don't agree with you will vote whether it is compulsory or not.

  12. #12
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Freedom to vote means freedom not to vote, therefore it should not be compulsory.
    That is one of the main problems in principle with compulsory voting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    On the other hand, I view it as a very minor and insignificant issue.
    It's not big enough for me to want to leave the country anyway.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  13. #13
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    People who don't vote shuldn't whinge that they haven't got the government they wanted.
    Whether they whinge or not, do you really think that a system where 15% of the population votes for the winner is a good thing?

  14. #14
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    823
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    I agree. Indeed, compulsory voting could encourage demagogery. SeeEconomic Illiteracy by John Stossel:

    people often support price controls, foreign-trade barriers and laws against job "outsourcing," and oppose immigration. Most economists are eager to demonstrate that these policies are bad for society, but most people aren't interested in evidence. They're interested in what confirms their worldview and makes them feel good. So they often vote for protectionists, anti-immigration advocates and other opponents of the free market.
    And G.B. Shaw pointed out, a government policy to rob Peter to pay Paul can be assured of the support of Paul.
    What you seem to be saying is that the only people who should vote are those who agree with your worldview?
    Dyslexics of the world untie

  15. #15
    CC Grandmaster Basil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Subtropical Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    11,245
    Quote Originally Posted by pax
    Whether they whinge or not, do you really think that a system where 15% of the population votes for the winner is a good thing?
    This has more to do with the population, not the system. The system allows for 100% of the population to vote. Nothing wrong with the system!

    Off to re-set the Hydro-Sucker
    There is no cure for leftism. Its infestation of the host mostly diminishes with age except in the most rabid of specimens.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Eurovision song contest 2006...
    By four four two in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 02-06-2006, 01:02 PM
  2. Who is being ripped
    By Davidflude in forum Politics
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 13-03-2006, 10:32 PM
  3. Best posts of 2003
    By paulb in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 289
    Last Post: 29-03-2004, 10:54 AM
  4. Voting for best post
    By paulb in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 19-02-2004, 10:46 PM
  5. HOW to choose the best ACF BB post in 2003?
    By chesslover in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 16-02-2004, 06:54 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •