Friday, May 15, 2009

The Unmotivated Electorate/Voters/Basic Economics

While I was reading through the Comments again beneath the Previous Post, Reaching the Uneducated and Uninformed Electorate, I was reminded of something that I started to write as part of one of my Comments, but never Submitted and realized that I do indeed have something already written that I could make into a Post. Before I Post that, though, I thought I might just repeat a few of the nuggets that I did write in the Comment Section of my Previous Post.

"Sometimes one's 'Civic Duty' is more to Study the Issues, than it is just to Drive to the Polls and/or Make an Appearance."

Shouldn't there be "more of a Push to Get People to Study...than just a Push to 'Get Out and Vote'"

There was some suggestion of "a Political Library, in which a person can get Literature and Videos relating to any Issue or anything Political that has ever been Broadcasted on TV and/or a training center helping people who are not that good with Computers find the information that they are looking for on the Internet?" and I guess such resources do in fact exist, yet what I could add to this idea now is that perhaps there should be "more of a Push to Get People to Study...than just a Push to ''Get Out and Vote."

In other words, perhaps we need more Advertisements relating to these Resource Centers, instead of these Silly, Not Informative, Political Blurbs that are trying instead to get us to vote this way or that. Perhaps the Push should not be, "Get Out and Vote.", but "Get Out and Study!", for it is your "Civic Duty" to Study, just as much as it is your "Civic Duty" to Vote.

Ok. Here's what I wrote earlier and have not Posted until now...

I have a tendency to apply the basic principles of Economics to things other than Money and it is not as if this wasn't also done in my Economics Class. For example, waiting in line for a Sale only brings the Price Down in relation to Money. The Inconvenience of the Crowds and the Lines, however, is a "Cost" that is now added in place of the Financial Cost that has been removed.

If the Cost is Too High, the product doesn't sell, yet the other side of that is that if the Cost is Too Low, the Demand goes up so high as to create a Cost of a different kind.

Another Non-Money related Economic Principle is that just as if the Price is Too High, Fewer people buy the product, so also if a Job is Harder than the Potential Monetary Benefit, than there will be Fewer People doing the Job, thus the Effort involved has an affect on the Numbers of People doing the Job, which in turn has an affect on the "Availability of the Product"

Inconvenience and Effort, therefore, become part of the Economic System. The problem comes when we start Judging rather than trying to do something that might actually fix the problem. That is by making both Voting and Studying Easier.

Just consider, for example, what if someone decided to Judge those who are "Unmotivated" or Not Willing to buy his product and was more concerned about the supposed Guilt than in the need to Lower his Price. Would he sell more product with this attitude? I'm thinking no.

So also, if we continue to be more concerned about the Guilt of those who are "Unmotivated" or "Too Lazy to Learn", than with trying to make learning easier, will this result in increased numbers of Educated and Informed Voters? I'm thinking no.

Also, just as the Amount of Effort involved has an Affect on the Numbers of People doing a Job and also the "Availability of a Product", so also the Amount of Effort involved will have and Affect on the Availability of and the Numbers of Educated and Informed Voters.

This is Basic Economics and yet unfortunately, the tendency of people is to Prefer Judging to working on ways to improve on situations.

Aside from the Basic Economics relating to Price and Demand and Effort and Availability, another factor to be considered in relation to motivating the Worker, Consumer, or in this case, the Voter is Advertisement. In relation to this, I think I will just repeat what I said earlier in that...

"Shouldn't there be 'more Push to Get People to Study...than just a Push to 'Get Out and Vote'?"

And also...

"Perhaps we need more Advertisements relating to these Resource Centers, instead of these Silly, Not Informative, Political Blurbs that are trying instead to get us to vote this way or that."

In relation to this, I think that we have our focus all wrong.

21 comments:

The Griper said...

and who is going to pay for these ads?

there are already plenty of sources that one can use to inform themselves, both, online and offline if one really wants to research something and become informed. and you can't force people to inform themselves, especially those who believe they do not need any.

Lista said...

Hi Griper,
That's a really common response when I have talked about this subject to people in the past.

I guess I could say the Government, yet the Government is so big right now, that it doesn't really seem like the right time to be making such a suggestion.

The only other option would be for the Political Parties to pay for them. In this case, the Resource Centers, Web Pages, etc. would probably be Biased and if a person wanted to hear both sides, he/she may need to visit Resources relating to both sides.

All I'm saying is that adds relating to places to find Information would be more helpful and Informative than the adds that are currently being run now that relate to Specific Issues, Candidates and Propositions, but contain very minimal information about what they are supporting.

Lista said...

As to "Forcing" people to inform themselves, this is a misunderstanding about the Basic Economic Principles that I have addressed in this Post. You can't "Force" anyone to buy a product either, yet when you lower the price, more people do it of their Own Free Will. "Force" has nothing to do with it.

BB-Idaho said...

For years the League Of Women Voters has been doing what you suggest: generally on the local, regional level. They bring in candidates for debate and discussion and issue non-partisan
evaluations, pro/con analysis and the like. Our local group finally closed down because 'politics is just too divisive anymore'.

Lista said...

The problem with so many of these Political Events is that they are far too often poorly publicized and quite often are scheduled during times in which people have to work, so that a lot of the working public doesn't get to attend.

BB-Idaho said...

Yes, that may be a problem. Of course the black/white people will not attened..they already know all the answers :) IMO, the centrists,
the gray area folks do not prioritize their politics like we
see in the blogosphere..isn't the overriding thing in their lives.
In addition, many of these folks are lukewarm on issues that burn
in the hearts of the black/white or possess mixed views, eg for this against that..which place them outside a particular political party platform or viewpoint. Thus, we have the growing numbers that declare they are independents (as well as those
purists who don't think their own
party goes far enough. IMO, the opinion that these center folks
are 'uneducated' is actually a teleological construct we have mentioned prior: the one that runs
'I have convictions, I have come to conclusions. Since I have done that, I am right'..anyone who disagrees is wrong, is uneducated.
That, IMO is a fundamental error in logic..and as you have hinted,
is a roadblock in any meaningful
dialog..and I would add, just another reason people are leaving their parties. And it is nothing new..US history is a tale of black/white/gray, major parties, minor parties, splinter groups,
bickering, etc....

Name: Soapboxgod said...

The league of women voters is NOT a non-partisan outfit in the least. Having worked on a campaign this past election wherein our candidate attended such an event, I speak firsthand.

What's more, any supposed non-partisan political outfit that opposes voter ID while at the same time being supportive of same day voter registration by merely having someone vouch for you, is not what I would deem a credibly "non-partisan" outfit either.

Lista said...

Hi you guys,
One of the problems with this whole Blogging thing is that Real, Well Thought Out Communication takes time and I am so often Rushed when on the Computer.

I still want to say something more to Griper, but wanted to reread the above Post first and think through how I want to say it.

As to the rest, I know I'll have longer answers for both BB and Soap, but I'll try and say something quick for now.

BB,
After talking to you, Beth and Z-man on Z's Blog, (I leave Links to the Posts later when I have more time.), I'm beginning to realize that there are probably several Categories of Moderates. One of the Categories is the Moderates that fit the Stereo Types that were mentioned there, but there are also other Moderates, myself included, that don't fit the mold.

I have more to say, but that's all for now.

Soapbox,
My response to you has to do with the Question that Griper asked above;

"And who is going to pay for these ads?"

or actually a related question;

"Who is going to pay for these Information Centers?"

If the Answer is the Government, than a good portion of my audience is going to complain, including you, because this is another addition to an already very large Government.

The only other alternative is Private Groups, thus, the resulting Bias. The only way that this Bias could be avoided is if the Centers were financed by the Government. Otherwise, we are stuck with what Private Biased Groups can provide.

I agree with you wholeheartedly about the Voter ID issue. In fact, this is another of my very big pet peeves.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

Don't kid yourself Lista if you think that bias would be avoided if the Government were funding your information centers. The government is subserviant to itself and to its very expansive existence. One need only look at the K-12 (dare I say monopoly) public apparatus in this country to get an idea as to point of which I speak.

Personally I happen to think that what you are advocating is wholly unnecessary as it seems little more than a library (which as a repository is about as objective as you will likely find).

As it is said, "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink."

You can build an information center and stockpile it with a flurry of what?? I presume information that is already readily available at present. People need to have the fortitude to seek out this information. Lack thereof is the problem not the idea that we don't have information centers (which actually we do).

If educating the electorate is your primary goal, then it behooves each individual party as a whole to guide their members towards books, think tanks, research, etc. which is in tune with said party's ideology, principles, beliefs, etc.

Of course once the electorate begins to think and to educate themselves, it is then to their benefit that they display similar fortitude in advancing those very things rather than merely advancing men to power.

BB-Idaho said...

Interesting, Soap. Was your candidate not permitted to speak,
shouted down, not given time to answer questions? The few I have seen seemed to pretty much present the candidates without partisan
comment. If they support same day registration while opposing voter ID..dunno seems one of their goals is to increase the voting rate, which has been fairly tepid last few go rounds.

Lista said...

Well Soap,
You were the one complaining about the Bias of the League of Women Voters, yet the question still remains.

"Who is going to pay for these Information Centers?"

Usually people do not Donate to these Private Groups unless there is something in it for them Politically. So Information Centers that are sponsored by Private Groups are always going to be biased. If Government Funded Centers would have the same problem, than what do you suggest? It's actually a little silly to complain about something unless you can come up with at least some sort of a solution.

BB,
One of the main themes in this Post is that the goal of Increasing the "Voting Rate", or Pushing to "Get Out and Vote!" should not be the focus. This very attitude shows a Focus on Numbers without any concern about how Informed the Voters are.

Why are the Numbers so important anyway? Whether the turn out is high or low does not change the existence of the Right to Vote. If we don't care whether or not they study, or in this case, whether or not they even have IDs, than why should we care whether or not they show up?

It seems to me that the Country would be better served if Smaller Numbers would show up, but the ones who do are well Studied and Informed. Why do we Push so hard to encourage the less responsible of the Voters to Show Up? Why in the world is this so darn Important? The Push, if there is one, should be to get people to Study, not to get them to Show up.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

Wasn't shouted down or not permitted to speak BB. It was an issue regarding their unwillingness to allow a question from an audience member in attendance to inquire how it was that the incumbent which my candidate was challenging had the 11th highest per diem expenses despite living a mere 15 minutes from the Capitol. There were some other issues as well.

As to what I would suggest Lista, I would suggest that education and the dissemination of information be funded with contribution dollars towards political candidates and political parties. I am not wholly concerned with whether or not it is "unbiased". Actually I prefer fact and evidence which, if merely presented, is what it is. There is credibility in presenting the truth, facts, and evidence. My only beef is when people present biased information or misrepresent facts and evidence without having the intestinal fortitude and intellectual honesty to admit as much. For example, my bias is with defending individual freedom and liberty. I'd tell you as much. It is on those premises that I conclude my position(s) on any given issue. If an organization operates on the premise of shoring up fat contracts for their union membership, I would like to think they'd admit as much.

I am objective by my very nature. I can weed through this and that and conclude where I stand based on my premises and beliefs. I expect others to be able to do the same. Whether or not they should choose to do so is a completely separate matter.

Lista said...

Soap,
I guess I just thought that your previous comment that "The League of Women Voters is NOT a non-partisan outfit in the least." was some sort of a complaint. Now that I look at it again, I realize that you were just responding to something that BB was claiming about certain events sponsored by the League of Women Voters. Forgive my misunderstanding.

Lista said...

I’ve started working on another Post that expands and gives more examples of the Principles in the above Post. Meanwhile, I have Reread the above Comments and am going to respond more to some of them. The Number of Typed Pages waiting to be submitted this time is a little over 1 ½ Pages.

I’m going to Skip over Griper’s Initial Comment for now, in which he said "You Can’t Force People to Inform themselves.", as well as all other related Comments below. I responded to Griper’s Comment a little on May 17, 2009, at 3:26 AM, by explaining why "Force" has nothing to do with it. I feel like I have even more to say, but I’m going to skip it for now.

Moving on to BB’s Comment on May 17, 2009, at 9:38 AM, in which he said, "Our Local Group finally Closed Down." Unfortunately, this happens far too often and I’m not aware of any Political Information Canters in our area either. The people who live in bigger cities don’t always realize how many of the resources that they take for granted are lacking in smaller towns. Smaller towns contain a Larger Number of Conservative Folks too, so it would be to the Republican Party’s Advantage to try and help them find Information relating to Voting in whatever way possible.

In BB’s Comment on May 18, 2009, at 5:37 AM, in which he said "The opinion that these Center Folks are 'Uneducated' is actually a teleological construct we have mentioned prior; the one that runs, 'I have Convictions, I have come to Conclusions. Since I have done that, I am Right. Anyone who disagrees is Wrong.', is Uneducated. That, IMO, is a Fundamental Error in Logic." I agree and this quote reminds me of something that my Father used to say quite often. He said "I have Thought Long and Hard about this Issue." and of course, the conclusion is that therefore, he is Right. The reason why this is "a Fundamental Error in Logic" is because even when we "Think Long and Hard on something, we often do so from a Biased Point of View, or to borrow Soap’s terminology, from a Biased set of Premises.

I could get into what I mentioned briefly about Several Categories of Moderates, yet that could be another whole long subject, so I’ll skip that one for now.

As to Soap’s Comment that was submitted May 18, 2009, at 5:53 PM, I too am Very Frustrated by "Misrepresented Fats and Evidence" and Lack of "Intellectual Honesty". I’ve even seen this within the realm of Science as is pointed out in my Post, "Christianity Under Attack on All Fronts, even Science". It’s not surprising, though, that when people have Shady Motives, that they are Reluctant to Admit it.

Even though you are "Objective by Nature", Soap, your Premises and Beliefs are what define your Bias.

BB-Idaho said...

"Misrepresented Facts and Evidence" and Lack of "Intellectual honesty.." ..makes me chuckle.
A few months back a blog had a 25 question test on the constitution and stated that liberals did very poorly on it. So, I took it. Noticed immediately it was from the POV of 'free enterprise', probably written by the Cato Institute/Heritage Foundation.
So, I just answered as one of those folks would....and got them ALL RIGHT! ..or wrong, had I been grading. heh

Lista said...

BB-Idaho,
Yes, it's just as I suspected. A lot of the conflict between Republicans and Democrats has more to do with Interpretation, than with honoring or ignoring the Constitution.

Christians have this same exact problem. It is not uncommon at all for someone to Study the Bible, or perhaps I should say "Think Long and Hard" on it and feel convinced that the way in which they have interpreted that words is the correct one. The result is for them to become very strongly Dogmatic and think that everyone who has Interpreted the Bible differently is wrong.

Sure, there are some things in the Bible that are quite obvious, yet there is a lot more that is not.

The test that you are describing, BB, is a good example of why all such tests should be put together by people from both parties.

Lista said...

Soap,
Part of the whole quest to be "Intellectually Honest" involves being willing to admit that there is a whole bunch of stuff that is uncertain, in that it can be "Interpreted Several Ways", or "Can not be Proved or Disproved". This is why tolerating other points of view is so necessary.

BB-Idaho said...

Well, some of us just don't
tolerate other's opinions. Which is OK, I guess, but
IMO, we should know all sides well enough to understand even opposing views...like you state, intellectually honest....

Lista said...

Well, I've grown to dislike the word "Tolerance" because it has been used too often in order to push the Homosexual Agenda which is really more about seeking Acceptance and the Seal of Approval of their Behavior, than about simply "Tolerating" them, yet when the word is kept in the appropriate Balance, the principle is a good one, for we do need to "Tolerate" each other's varying view points and a totally "Intolerant" Attitude that fits with the actual definition of the word is part of what marks what I call Extreme.

On the other side of the coin, though, lets not go to the other Extreme, by asking people to Accept, Approve of and Embrace that which they do not believe in, for that is taking the idea of "Tolerance" too far and it has caused the word to become "Emotionally Charged".

Gayle said...

This is a very interesting post, Lista, and comment thread. I can't even think of anything that hasn't already been said here, but I am here late and I apologize for that. I'm going through a lot of dental work and I have a lot on my personal platter besides that, so I haven't been making the rounds as often as I used to.

Now it's Memorial Day weekend, and I hope the majority of Americans remember why it is that we celebrate Memorial Day, but my fear is that to many it's just an excuse for a three day weekend. Sort of like Christmas just being about giving gifts and decorating a tree.

I truly wish more people would inform themselves. I understand people get busy with their personal lives, working, raising children and all of that, but who runs this country is extrememly important too. There's no excuse for not being informed since we do have the internet, although one has to be at least informed enough to sort through a lot of bogus information.

I hope you have a wonderful weekend!

Lista said...

Hi Gayle,
Thanks for dropping by. I have more to say on this subject, but have decided that I'm going to make it into my next post instead. Mostly it's about the whole idea that "You can't Force people to inform themselves. and as I have said, "'Force' has nothing to do with it.", this post is about Motivating, not Forcing.

I have trouble "Forcing" or even Motivating myself and I get the feeling from the comments I get, such as the ones on this thread, that many, if not most, Bloggers are Self-Motivators and don't really understand what I'm saying and why I'm saying it.

I know that "There's no Excuse.", yet I was hoping to get people to stop thinking so much about Blame and try instead to think of ways of Being Helpful. I don't know why it's so hard for people to think on that level. It just seems that it is.

I have things to say about the link that BB left as well.