Barack Obama Works For Me
February 27, 2008 on 11:35 pm | In Insider View, Musings by Josh Jones |
The other day I finally re-opened my favorite web browser and I noticed that some prankster had changed my home page to JoshJonesIsYourNewBicycle.com!
I was of course outraged, and since nobody spoke up, I had no choice but to have the entire admin staff TERMINATED!
Just a few days later, as the issues mounted, I re-started my browser again and, I assume due to the perspective lent by time, realized it was nothing more than a jest in good fun!
In fact, I was touched. And so, I immediately re-hired everybody (but at only 60% of their previous salaries so they knew not to pull that crap again)… only to find out that what I thought was such a kind and creative tribute to their illustrious leader was nothing more than a crude knock-off of BarackObamaIsYourNewBicycle.com!
Once again ENRAGED, I had no choice but to fire EVERYBODY. This time I got the entire support team, marketing, HR.. not even our gourmet chefs, fighter jet pilots, or doggie masseuses were safe. I even may have killed a few of the weaker employees.
I’ve finally got some solitude, and it got me to thinking about this whole Barack Obama thing.
To tell you the truth, I can’t get behind Obama. Let me tell you why.
Why?
You see that picture at the top? That’s Senator Obama’s actual name plaque from the actual Senate. Back in 2005 my dad had to testify before some senators about something or other, and I went along for fun. And before you ask, yes, that is how I roll.
One of the four Senators in the room was Mr. Obama, who was already semi-famous after his speech at the DNC in 2004. And, to be truthful, he actually seemed the most intelligent and educated on the issues of the four… but I still can’t get behind him.
Why Not?
Well, after the hearing was over, I took that picture with his name plate, and was THIS (yes, THIS) close to stealing it! Wouldn’t that have been 100% SWEET to put on my desk? But at the last moment, I wussed out.
I knew that thing was already worth a couple of bucks on eBay, or at least would make a cool momento to pass down to my grandchildren or bury on a deserted island… but man, if he becomes PRESIDENT? The first BLACK PRESIDENT?
It would just kill me.
So, that is why I hope he doesn’t win.
But the truth is, as I alluded to in the last newsletter, I can’t understand anybody voting for any politician they don’t personally know.
It is so hard to judge the true character of anybody, even people you’ve been friends or colleagues with for years… HOW could anybody feel comfortable voting for any politician whose entire career is based on projecting an “electable” persona? And that is any politician.
That is why I truly do like propositions. Unlike people, a proposition can’t back-pedal, change its mind, break campaign promises, cheat on its wife, pander to special interests or give in to the freaking UN. A proposition is simply a self-contained law, and before you cast your vote on it, you can do all the real research on it you want!
After a new proposition has been approved, nobody’s allowed to say “I know the law says 5,500 new slots, but now we need an extra 10,000 to stay the course.” (Not without putting it up to another direct public vote at least.)
Not to mention, even if your vote on a proposition ends up “losing”, at least you know that greater than 50% of your fellow voters “won.” Whereas a politician might often do things that are in nobody’s interest but their own.
Proposition Paradise!
So, what if every government decision were, like California’s propositions, put up to a direct public vote? Back in 1789, this would have been technically impossible, and a representitive democracy was the only feasible solution.
But the same is not the case in 2008. We’ve got the Internets now!
What if we kept everything the same about the current government, except that instead of the congressmen doing the final voting on laws, it was always put to the public directly in the form of propositions? Sort of a Government 2.0.
Or, as wikipedia puts it, a direct democracy!
Reading that article, the arguments against direct democracy are pretty weak. Let me debunk them now:
* Scale: The Internet make it easy.
* Practicality and efficiency: Again, thanks Internet! Plus, there should still be just one election per year. Everything would be voted on at once, making it more efficient and less of a burden on the voting populace. The fact that laws can’t be changed more than once a year is just gravy!
* Demagoguery: Please… if we can’t trust our public to vote intelligently, perhaps we’d all be better off in the Irans?
* Complexity: Haven’t you read The Wisdom of Crowds? The masses in aggregate are not fools and they do understand the issues when they affect them.
* Voter apathy: Again, people are apathetic only when the issues do not affect them; and if they feel the issues do not affect them, why does it matter whether they vote? If they did, they’d just vote randomly and cancel each other out anyways.
* Self-interest: I believe a thing it’s been proved time and again that the best way to make rational decisions is by acting in your own self-interest. I mean, that’s why we’re voting, right? To see if a proposed law would be in the majority’s best self-interest. Nobody should ever, ever, ever vote for something that would hurt them just because they think it will help society “as a whole”! Don’t worry, if it’s going to help more people that it hurts, it will win regardless of your measly vote.
* Suboptimality: Well gee, it’s also “sub-optimal” to have a competitive marketplace. It’s “sub-optimal” to have random mutations. It’s “sub-optimal” to buy an index mutual fund. There will be a lot of fumbling in the dark to be sure, but like natural selection, the “optimal” laws will bubble to the top eventually, and the “sub-optimal” ones will be voted the way of the dodo. And with a direct democracy, that will only happen faster.
* Manipulation by timing and framing: Again, all the voting would just be done on the first Tuesday in November each year!
Our founding fathers were also against the idea mostly due to the “Tyranny of the majority”… but as long as we still have the bill of rights and the Judicial branch everybody’s personal freedoms would stay intact.
Especially Interesting
Another bonus of a true direct democracy would be the end of special interests. Special interests exist whenever there is something that benefits a few people a lot while hurting everybody else a tiny bit. Those who stand to gain fight nooth and tail to keep the advantage, whereas there’s no single individual who feels enough pain to bother standing up to them. It’s thanks to this that industry subsidies, trade barriers, and real estate agents exist.
If every law was put to a vote of every citizen, say goodbye to subsidies, tariffs, and monopolies! I know I don’t give a damn if corn farmers have to compete harder as long as it means cheaper food for me. Now, I’m not going to go writing my congressman about it, but if it ever came up on a ballot that’d be a big fat NO vote.
And you’d vote against the law that’d show up every year requiring the state provide each DreamHost CEO a new SUPERCAR every month (so they could get to the data center quicker in the case of a power outage). Unfortunately, I think it’d be tough for me to get greater than 50% of you behind such a measure, no matter how much I plaster this blog with posts extolling the many virtues of such a proposed legislation.
Could It Work?
Yes. And how do I know? Because it has. And I’m not just talking about the DreamHost suggestions system either.
Switzerland has had the most direct democracy on the planet for over 160 years, and it’s the most competitive economy in the world, has a 3.1% unemployment rate, and hasn’t been in a war since 1815! Things are different when the people deciding whether to fight are the same people who would be fighting.
To Barack
So, Mr. Obama, if you really want to “bring real change to Washington,” why not (if/once elected) put every decision you ever come across up on whitehouse.gov, along with what you see the pros and cons to be. Send login info out to every single US citizen (you can include them in those mailed social security updates), and allow We, The People to at least be your guide. You know, radical transparency and all that.
Think of the clout you’d have with congress if every one of your decisions, proposals, and policies was backed by a direct “mandate from the people”! Not to mention, it seems like you should never have less than a 50% popular approval rating!
People say you don’t have much experience. So why not ask for advice? It’s worked out decent for us.
Remember Barack, you are not running for King of America. You are simply interviewing for a job. And that job is to provide guidance and support to us taxpayers, your direct supervisor.
Of course in the end, who knows if all this would make for a better presidency.
But at least it wouldn’t be any worse.
39 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Categories:
Archives:
- May 2008 (2)
- April 2008 (2)
- March 2008 (3)
- February 2008 (5)
- January 2008 (7)
- December 2007 (3)
- November 2007 (3)
- October 2007 (5)
- September 2007 (3)
- August 2007 (4)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (7)
- May 2007 (3)
- April 2007 (3)
- March 2007 (8)
- February 2007 (4)
- January 2007 (6)
- December 2006 (5)
- November 2006 (2)
- October 2006 (4)
- September 2006 (4)
- August 2006 (5)
- July 2006 (3)
- June 2006 (3)
- May 2006 (5)
- April 2006 (6)
- March 2006 (7)
- February 2006 (6)
- January 2006 (8)
- December 2005 (7)
- November 2005 (5)
- October 2005 (8)
- September 2005 (19)
- August 2005 (11)
- July 2005 (4)
Other Sites
- DreamHost Status - An off-network page for all DreamHost Announcements! (Not as silly as this blog.)
- DreamHost! - The host behind the blog.
- Forum - Discuss DreamHost and web hosting!
- Web Control Panel - Manage your account.
- Wiki - On DreamHost and web hosting.
Powered by WordPress. Pool theme by Borja Fernandez, modified by DreamHost.
Entries and comments feeds.
^Top^
How about to prove it might work you run your business like that for a month. Every decision you make next month has to be voted on by your staff and customers.
Comment by None — February 28, 2008 #
First question: Have you heard of the National Initiative for Democracy? (http://www.nationalinitiative.us/)
Second question: do you know who created this initiative?
Third question: have you heard of Mike Gravel?
Final question: Will you talk about Mike Gravel in your next post?
Comment by Maxim Noah Khailo — February 28, 2008 #
I second @1 sugestion.
do you have the balls to do it?
Comment by BUGabundo — February 28, 2008 #
@1 (None)
My first Dreamhost proposition: free accounts for everyone.
Let’s see how the business runs after a prop like that!
Comment by Tim — February 28, 2008 #
I’m glad you dug up that picture; now I can show it to people when I tell the story of you nearly stealing the nameplate.
But why didn’t you mention stealing the pens? Worried our future president would extract revenge once elected?
Comment by Nate — February 28, 2008 #
while i agree with the bulk of your arguement, if america had been run as a direct democracy, barack obama would likely never have been able to run for president in the first place. issues like human rights do not generally go over well in group settings.
“Special interests exist whenever there is something that benefits a few people a lot while hurting everybody else a tiny bit.”
of all those permitted to vote in the 1860s, very few would have benefited from abolishing slavery. likewise in the 1910s when a woman’s right to vote was put on the legislative table. and this carries on to this day with the civil rights and gay rights movements. civil liberties are never popular, however right and just they may be.
it’s our job to research our politicians and elect those who we feel are the most honest. to be outraged and demand for their expulsion from the system when they act inappropriately and to not vote for them again if they decide to run after violating our trust.
getting involved in the political system may be a bit harder without a direct democracy, but tyranny of the majority far outweighs that hardship.
Comment by AB — February 28, 2008 #
Gorgeous rant and some great points.
Just to play devil’s advocate: there’s an old saying that democracy works up until the moment when the people realize they can vote themselves more money.
How would direct democracy deal with propositions such as:
“Every citizen with a net worth of greater than $1 million shall have his or her wealth reduced to $1 million, the excess to be confiscated and redistributed to the remainder of the populace”.
This would be in the immediate (though not long-term) best interests of the majority. It’s an extreme example, granted, but in general how does direct democracy defend against this sort of thing?
Comment by Avdi — February 28, 2008 #
@1 The customers are not the sovereign as citizens are in a state. Therefore, only staff should be able to vote. This however is a system that is run already in some employee-owned companies. I’d be interested in the results @ dreamhost!
@7 Why would you need defence against it? Economic theory knows wealth caps, and so does science fiction (see Kim Stanley Robinson’s Pacific Edge). This might not be a problem in the long run, but the transition of course is.
On a little less theoretical terms, as pointed out by Josh, human rights and the legal system would protect one(’s property). Unlike comment 6 suggests, majority vote might be against human rights on a single case but in principle it is in everyone’s best interest to have them. You are always part of some minority, so protection against the majority is needed.
Comment by Anon — February 28, 2008 #
To all of those who say “human rights do not generally go over well in group settings”, I say that is why we have the constitution. Our representative government is tyranny of the MINORITY and to protect us from them we have the constitution. The Judicial branch under the National Initiative would still serve the purpose it always had. Prevent laws that are unconstitutional. Just as congress is generally not allowed to make unconstitutional laws, the people will not be able to do so. Nothing in representative government favors civil rights. However the disadvantage of Representative government is in reality, lobbyists and special interests have a small powerful minority to target, vs in direct democracy, the masses of people. Which do you think is easier to corrupt?
Comment by Maxim Noah Khailo — February 28, 2008 #
You make some good points about direct democracy. Of course, that would require a total change in our government and the dissolution of our constitution (since that is where our format of government is defined).
This could be a good thing, especially since the Federal government would be disbanded in the process, and so would it’s debt. It would give the former citizens of the United States of America a clean slate financially.
We would want to disband our massive, worldwide standing army as well. Redistribute the assets to the states according to their size, population, and projected growth.
The myriad of federal laws would also cease to exist (yay!). State laws would still hold sway, however.
State governors would become much more powerful.
Interstate cooperation doesn’t have to come via heavy-handed Big Brother tactics.
Comment by Adam Skinner — February 28, 2008 #
Tim: I would not vote in favour of your proposition unless you provided a very good plan for funding the free accounts.
Comment by Carl — February 28, 2008 #
Was I the only person hoping Josh was going to announce some type of new service because of customer initiated voting.
Oh well :(
Comment by Jake — February 28, 2008 #
I can’t believe there are people that need to have it pointed out that there’s a difference between a country and a privately held hosting company.
Comment by Mike — February 28, 2008 #
*hear, hear*
This isn’t going to happen anytime soon (the general public is too apathetic to campaign for it and those who have power don’t want to give it up) but I do think it would be a highly successful system.
However, I think Obama is the one who can bring us closer to this: he has talked about using the web for a transparent government and supports many radical web-based initiatives.
How about you start it by having the entire staff and customers vote on every single decision?
Comment by Arthus Erea — February 28, 2008 #
Because it’s a privately owned company?
Presidents don’t own the country. They supposedly work for us.
Big difference.
Comment by Mike — February 29, 2008 #
That very link to the World Economic Forum website shows the US as the most competitive economy with Switzerland #2.
Comment by Taylor Trusty — February 29, 2008 #
Damn, you should’ve taken it, I doubt anyone would have cared it’s a just a piece of wood after all!
/dictator mode
Democracy just leads to the tyranny of the (eventually ignorant) majority, go totalitarian lead Dreamhost!
/end dictator mode
Comment by Jim — February 29, 2008 #
John McCain doesn’t like the cut of your jib, Josh.
http://johnmccainisyourjalopy.com/
Comment by Karl — March 4, 2008 #
America is actually technically a republic, not a democracy. It is a republic because the majority of people can’t be arsed to care about what goes on in our government.
Don’t believe me? Ask the next person you run into if they voted in the primaries.
Comment by Terri — March 4, 2008 #
Technically The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic.
Wikipedia FTW!
Comment by binaryspiral — March 4, 2008 #
What’s Obama being black have to do with it? As long as he can do a better job than the clown in office right now…why not??
Comment by Helen Chambers — March 4, 2008 #
Happy b-day, Josh. I was born 3/3/77, so I guess that makes us almost-twins.
Comment by Alex — March 4, 2008 #
US is both a republic AND a democracy!
A republic just means there are no Kings/Emperors, for example UK is a representative democracy but not a republic since the head of state is the Queen. US is very much a democracy of the representative type.
Direct democracy usually exists in smaller countries, representative democracy is necessary for larger countries.
Comment by linewbie — March 4, 2008 #
The US is a democracy???? Sure could have fooled me. Democracy is basically the rule of the common people. In the US and Canada, you can basically vote for one of two or three parties…You can’t vote on every issue you want, and the parties which have access to television, print media, et cetera are very limited. Then there is the issue of money…I have never seen a poor president, despite the massive amount of poor people who are supposedly eligible voters.
On another note, people do seem to care about helping each other out, and not just about money. Look at wikipedia, opensource programs, volunteer programs, music jam sessions….there are plenty of examples of people helping one another without the need or desire for a monetary incentive.
Comment by mosa — March 5, 2008 #
Actually, I believe that DreamHost is actually employee owned, so it would make sense for staff to vote in things. While customers do not have a direct entitlement to control over the company, in the end we pay for everything and have final “veto” authority. There are plenty of other hosts we can switch to if DreamHost makes a bad decision.
Comment by Anonymous — March 5, 2008 #
Those with money will simply offer to buy a car for everyone who votes against the redistribution of their wealth, of course…
I’m totally with Josh, though. Everything a referendum to be voted on by the people, with just enough administrators to handle the paperwork. Werks fer me.
Comment by dramaguru — March 5, 2008 #
people, listen to what these canidates are saying. Obama will never accomplish gettingrid of lobbyist. it’s unrealistic to even believe. Clinton obviously has the most experience in the whitehouse with out a doubt. And what has Obama actually accomplish in governmet. People need to look beyond his color.It would not be wise to choose our president because it would be change to have a black president and because oprah backs him.
Comment by tom — March 5, 2008 #
AB: Excellent example.
Avdi: Yup, but that is essentially what happens with today’s progressive taxes. So many people pay essentially no federal income taxes that they have little incentive to keep taxes low and lots of incentive to vote for whomever promises them the most subsidies. I don’t like the idea of flat taxes, but it does make voters less susceptible to campaign promises.
Mike: Thanks for pointing out that presidents supposedly work for us.
Comment by Leo — March 6, 2008 #
Terri: the number of people who vote in primaries says lots about how people feel about Parties, not Democracy. Primaries are Party functions.
Another point along those lines is that in general elections (including local, state and national), majority parties oversee voting methods, distribution of machines, creation of ballots, etc. An example is the trouble voters had in Florida during the disputed presidential count in 2000. It was clever marketing (with the help of the “objective” press) that blamed that on Republicans when it was the Democratically controlled counties that had the most problems, and Democrats that tried to change the rules post election, a big no-no as the Supreme Court pointed out.
What is going to be real fun is that if certain Dems try to change their own rules after voting has occurred to include Michigan or Florida. There will be Dem-on-Dem lawsuits that will show the light to a lot of people.
Get involved in local politics if you want to make a difference. You don’t need to start with presidential elections.
Comment by Leo — March 6, 2008 #
Okay, Dreamhost management: Put your actions where your mouth is. Run your company as a direct democracy with financial transparency. I am waiting for info on how my vote (as a customer) will count. When will Dreamhost management publish financial info detailing how your 10 year advance payment plan is properly managed?
Comment by new customer — March 6, 2008 #
Consider the fact that all of congress,house and senate, those who pass all the laws — plus the president — can’t get into office unless they first get the money they need to campain for election. The money now comes in massive amounts mainly from the wealthiest sectors — industrial, financial, defense, etc. The congress is thus beholden (no matter how they may deny it) to the interests of those who put them there.
The point I make is — if we want to change things — away from the status quo of perpetual war, environmental destruction, inequality, injustice (or you can name your pet peeve about our present disgusting national agenda) we have to first change our system of financing elections. Thus for instance, public financing of elections should be instituted and enforced. That would take away the lopsided power of the elite from the process, to start.
Also uniform federal election rules covering all states would help. (While we’re at it, removing electronic voting machines and instituting uniform paper balloting throughout all the states)
Once we repair the election process, we can then restore the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that have been partially evicerated by the present Cheney/Bush administration. (Then the job of impeaching them both should begin too.)
Can’t you just picture what a breath of fresh air all that would be?
Comment by Annette Jacobson — March 7, 2008 #
Annette:
“Campaign Finance Reform” has so far gotten us 527 groups and baroque financing restrictions that throw the baby (”us” - otherwise known as anyone we agree with from the Red Cross to Plebians for Social Suicide) out with the bath water (”them” otherwise know as anyone we disagree with or Richer-Than-Me and Evil Inc.)
It is a guarantee that no congressperson is going to vote for anything that wouldn’t benefit incumbents, so you might want to come up with a new dream.
As messy as it seems, and as unlikely, no restrictions are probably fairer and more likely to produce results that would benefit voters.
Comment by Leo — March 7, 2008 #
Barack Obama first realy president ?
Comment by Silver — March 11, 2008 #
That statement is completely racist and pointless, especially for a web hosting blog.
“but man, if he becomes PRESIDENT? The first BLACK PRESIDENT?
It would just kill me.
So, that is why I hope he doesn’t win.
But the truth is, as I alluded to in the last newsletter, I can’t understand anybody voting for any politician they don’t personally know.”
Comment by kayol — March 12, 2008 #
Try stepping outside the reality distortion field every once in awhile. I don’t know if that is possible having such an ego.
Comment by Dennis — March 12, 2008 #
As far as dumb posts go, this one takes the cake.
Comment by Rob — March 14, 2008 #
@33
He was saying it would kill him to not have the nameplate he ALMOST stole of the first black president kook… he wasnt saying it would kill him to have a black president… holy hell.
Comment by shannanegin — March 17, 2008 #
Surely you jest- there’s a serious set of reasons I don’t trust the security of e-voting machines, and you expect me to believe the internet is secure enough to vote over? A system that easily managed is just as prone to being mismanaged.
Comment by gildedlink — April 1, 2008 #
Barack Obama, exactly why not? I was reading to see if I agree, but I am not clear on what your main point was.
Comment by Parker — April 15, 2008 #