Re: "GOVLOT", $100,000,000 Get Out the Vote Lottery

["Harry Veeder" <eo200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In Canada the government sends people out door to door to register voters.
Does the American government help people to register?

Harry Veeder

----------
>From: Adam.Stokes@xxxxxxxxxxx
>To: jjgelles@xxxxxxxx, pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: "GOVLOT", $100,000,000 Get Out the Vote Lottery
>Date: Tue, Sep 26, 2000, 11:36 pm
>

>John.
>No doubt that it is desirable for everyone to have their say in terms of who
>should lead the country into an unknown future (hopefully with a plan).
>However, I doubt that compulsory voting has compelled
>governments/polititians to heed the identifiable social needs here in
>Australia.  Democracy is not a system of one man one vote per se simply
>because powerful persons and groups have a skewed influence on government
>policy through ideology.  Elections are merely a means to gain political
>office. The influece of the majority is only indicative of $$ spent in a
>marginal seat.  Voting is rarely are able to influence ideologies.  This is
>why Australian governments across the political spectrum have pursued an
>economic rationalist agenda for the past two decades.  This said, I will
>admit that in the end ideology is nothing more than the belief in different
>means to reach known and agreed ends. However, I feel that sometimes, even
>the ends are a matter of dispute.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John Gelles [mailto:jjgelles@xxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Tuesday, 26 September 2000 14:38
>To: Post Keynesian Thought
>Cc: Cyberspace Society
>Subject: "GOVLOT", $100,000,000 Get Out the Vote Lottery
>
>
>    "GOVLOT", $100,000,000 Get Out the Vote Lottery
>
>    Admit it or not, like the belief among conservatives that
>    laissez faire automatically optimizes a political economy,
>    Keyneisian thought looks to mechanistic concepts, (such
>    as employer of last resort, soft currency economics, buffer
>    stock employment, citizens income, inflation protected
>    money, individual estate account, taxing fixed not vartialbe
>    costs, etc.) to also optimize political economy without need
>    of geniuses in charge, once their system is installed.
>
>    After 16 years of obsession with my Keynesian mechanism,
>    I've come to a new and different thought. If we want a self-
>    correcting political economy we do not need money reform
>    first. Money reform can follow a more important political
>    reform.
>
>    If the poor can be got to vote, democracy will be far more
>    self-correcting than it now is.
>
>    Toward this end -- Australia uses a fine for not voting.
>
>    America needs a big-win lottery as reward for voting.
>
>    With a free lottery ticket and, say a $100,000,000
>    payout to a single winner, we might get more than 90% of
>    the poor to vote. If they did not, we at least might wean
>    them permanently away from other lotteries.
>
>    The payout could come from ticket sales allowed -- if
>    you voted -- and wanted a second ticket.
>
>    Details can be read on my site.
>
>
>        John Gelles
>         email    1944@xxxxxxxx
>
>             url    http://www.1944.org
>                     http://www.1944.org/whatsnew.htm
>
>                     http://www.1944.org/lottery.htm
>
>