The difference in formula I find interesting. I think either having everyone vote however uninformed or just have a tiny group of stake holders are equally extr

The difference in formula I find interesting. I think either having everyone vote however uninformed or just have a tiny group of stake holders are equally extreme solutions. I can dream right? Imagine this: Rather than a basic income or a salary in fiat issue some kind of shares to the employees/citizens. You need 100 to get a full vote (50 for half etc) and you get dividend for each share. If the value of the share declines (as we keep issuing new ones) the amount issued and the amount needed for a full vote are gradually increased and the dividend decreases. Then, rather than a single vote for someone you also get a single vote against someone so that popularity alone doesn't win elections. Have a very simple certificate that one must obtain in order to vote that teaches the absolute bare minimum about each candidate. Finally, lets no do single elections but allow people to change their vote whenever they like with a higher amount of votes required for getting in than for getting out.