The debate "Votes should be weighted by IQ and hardwork" was started by
May 17, 2015, 2:43 pm.
8 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 8 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
There is a tie in this debate, post your arguments, call some reinforcements and break this tie.
PsychDave posted 1 argument, Sosocratese posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
jonatron5, Pamelamccubbins, toughgamerjerry, Bodaciouslady16 and 4 visitors agree.
PsychDave, charliec1007, Damn3d, Sosocratese, I_Voyager, soullesschicken and 2 visitors disagree.
What would constitute hard work vs not hard work? Do doctors work harder than construction workers? Do stay at home mom's not contribute and work hard? Could you measure that workload somehow? This is way too complicated of a system to ever be practical, so I'd say it's impractical and unfairly distributes votes.
The problem is determining who works hard, and IQ is not a representation of how good someone's choices will be, just how intelligent they are in one narrow area of testing. Would you want Sheldon Cooper having a deciding vote on public policy? I am aware that he is a fictional character, but he is a good example of extremely high IQ, hard working, but poor choices. Some brilliant people have embraced truly horrifying ideals (genocide, Nazi medical experimentation, eugenics). The one vote per person makes sure that everyone has an equal say in deciding who should represent them.