2 ms·

> You have to buy your way into voting as a shareholder. In a democracy, it's just your given right as a citizen. In a democratic country, only the people who

> You have to buy your way into voting as a shareholder. In a democracy, it's just your given right as a citizen. In a democratic country, only the people who have citizenship are allowed to vote. In a shareholders meeting, only the shareholders are allowed to vote. You sometimes cam buy your way into citizenship. As a shareholder, it is your given right to vote in a shareholders meeting.

Fraterkes 1y ago
Even if you think there's no qualitative difference between the 2 (which I think is a deeply immature idea, but whatever), there's an obvious quantitative difference: In practice democratic voting power is much more socioeconomically spread and shared than shareholder voting power.
radlad 1y ago
Shareholders receive power proportionate to their buying power. Citizens get a single vote. > You sometimes cam buy your way into citizenship. As a shareholder, it is your given right to vote in a shareholders meeting. Maybe - depending on your jurisdiction. Just like whether you have citizenship or not.
- aleph_minus_one 1y ago
  > Shareholders receive power proportionate to their buying power. Citizens get a single vote. Historically, there did exist experiments that not each person has the same voting power (for example the Prussian "Dreiklassenwahlrecht" [three-class franchise]): > https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreiklassenwahlrecht https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreiklassenwahlrecht Depending on the amount of taxes you paid, you were assigned to one of three classes. The sizes of each of these classes were chosen so that each class paid 1/3 of the whole tax volume. The votes in each class elected representants for this class. The idea is obvious: those who pay a lot more taxes should have more influence. Thus: each citizen has the same voting power is just the "currently fashionable" implementation of democracy.
  - radlad 1y ago
    Likewise, there are companies with classes of stock, each with different voting rights. But at this point we are simply discussing semantics.

Fraterkes 1y ago

Even if you think there's no qualitative difference between the 2 (which I think is a deeply immature idea, but whatever), there's an obvious quantitative difference: In practice democratic voting power is much more socioeconomically spread and shared than shareholder voting power.

radlad 1y ago

Shareholders receive power proportionate to their buying power. Citizens get a single vote. > You sometimes cam buy your way into citizenship. As a shareholder, it is your given right to vote in a shareholders meeting. Maybe - depending on your jurisdiction. Just like whether you have citizenship or not.

aleph_minus_one 1y ago
> Shareholders receive power proportionate to their buying power. Citizens get a single vote. Historically, there did exist experiments that not each person has the same voting power (for example the Prussian "Dreiklassenwahlrecht" [three-class franchise]): > https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreiklassenwahlrecht https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreiklassenwahlrecht Depending on the amount of taxes you paid, you were assigned to one of three classes. The sizes of each of these classes were chosen so that each class paid 1/3 of the whole tax volume. The votes in each class elected representants for this class. The idea is obvious: those who pay a lot more taxes should have more influence. Thus: each citizen has the same voting power is just the "currently fashionable" implementation of democracy.
- radlad 1y ago
  Likewise, there are companies with classes of stock, each with different voting rights. But at this point we are simply discussing semantics.