5 ms·
Homo Economicus does not vote. That is, on an individual level, voting is not a rational activity. Look at it this way - let's say it takes you 15 minutes to d
by ryandvm 7y ago
Homo Economicus does not vote. That is, on an individual level, voting is not a rational activity.
Look at it this way - let's say it takes you 15 minutes to drive to your polling place, 30 minutes to vote, and Lord knows how many hours to figure out which candidates you should even vote for. And what is the value of a single vote? Specifically, what is the chance that a single vote will change an election? Almost zero.
Ergo, at the individual level, the effort of participating in the electoral process does not appear to be a rational choice.
- ggggtez 7y agoI think this is rather a simplification. It assumed the only value people obtain from voting is the actually election of the candidate. But humans get other value from voting. Social benefits, for example, by showing that you care about something. It has been shown that when you tell someone that you'll send a list of who didn't vote to their neighbors... Then it increases turn out.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- platz 7y agoAnd yet, it is only the folks that irrationally do vote that make the individual contributions that ultimately add up to something larger. I think this is a failure of the philosophy of individualism and the atomization of the individual from society, instead of an understanding where people take part and do things in society that primarily benefit society instead of themselves
- trappist 7y agoVoting is the easy part. If I'm to vote conscientiously, obviously I want to be informed on the issues, the candidates, the likelihood of the candidates to even pursue the fulfillment of their campaign promises and so on. This takes time and careful consideration. Under conditions of near certainty that my vote won't change anything, it's almost ridiculous for me to vote.