Posted 12 months ago on June 21, 2012, 12:24 p.m. EST by JadedCitizen
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Let's say every other election cycle, only the poor could cast a vote. What would happen? Would it end poverty?
From both sides of the political spectrum, most everyone agrees the only real way to effect change is with a bottom up, grassroots effort. But really, what could constitute bottom up change better than giving the 'least among us', the bottom percentile of the population, a real chance to change polices.
When the wealthy are questioned about greed, they often point to how charitable and generous they are at giving to programs to aid those less fortunate than themselves. What could be more generous than sitting out an election cycle to give those with small voices a big voice? What could be more charitable than giving up your seat at the table to let those not heard have a voice? Would that not be the ultimate form of charity - of compassion?
As a practical matter, it would not be all that difficult to set up. Philosophically speaking, it opens up a big can of worms.
Would you be willing to set out an election? What would happen? Would it be a disaster because the poor lack the education to vote wisely? Would it make for a better society? Would it create a never ending tug of war between the haves and have nots - is that a bad thing?
Would it end poverty?