this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
19 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32311 readers
943 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HairHeel@programming.dev -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Eh, seems like other towns in Delaware have already been doing it without incident. Doesn’t seem too outrageous to me. They’re giving people who live out of town but own businesses in town a vote in the town’s elections. Why not?

[–] RedWizard@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago

You've seen how Citizen United has led to a deluge of corporate influence on politics right? And you are not sure what the issue could be with allowing Corporations to vote? How about we just skip all these middle steps and just allow the corporations to be elected directly into public office? I'm sure they'll have the average citizens interests at heart.

Because those people are now getting additional votes that affect an area in which they do not live. If I'm a business owner and just need employees with minimal education, what is my incentive to increase taxes to pay for education? At least if I lived there an argument could be made that my family or neighborhood would be affected. Who's voting to increase minimum wage, or engage in conservation and beautification? Not the businesses. Having more money (to start a business or have investment properties) should not equal more votes. It already equals larger sway on elections. Why not just cut to the chase and have an out and out oligarchy?

The article itself mentions that there are almost as many businesses as there are people voting. This will not result in elections being the "will of the people."