I admire Penn on some things, but he just made an overgeneralization on the grounds of a common way of describing ownership. You can justify any opinion if you overgeneralize the application of a freely chosen rule of behavior.
Hi Penn fans. Penn Says videos have been discontinued, so you won't be seeing any new content on here. You can check out our Profile on our Channel Page for more info. We'll still be checking in, so hope to keep chatting with you all! Thanks!
I'm sure wall street and the oil companies would love to just buy up our votes. There are enough people out there that would sell their freedom for the right price and thats exactly what it would be. What a dumb idea.
High comedy. As if there were such thing as ethical corporations, or that it is only the less ethical among them that attempt influence elections and government policy (and not inidentally, frequently succeed).
'As if there were such thing as ethical corporations'
Then what makes a company unethical?
To me, it's a company that doesn't earn its profit fairly, such as providing exactly what the customer wants and at a price the customer is willing to pay.
A company is unethical if they cheat the customer.
I'll hazard a guess that YOUR definition of what makes a company "unethical" is that if it merely makes a profit.
As for how companies can influence elections and the government, it's because the government butts into their affairs with misguided intent.
The problem with a government trying to intervene is that the government outside of a law enforcement role is that it cannot do it without allowing those that will be affected to have their say about it; it's called representation.
But, this dialogue is what lets companies influence government because the intervention provides a way in.
Even as a libertarian, I've never thought of a vote as a possession, least of all one that can be sold. It's an interesting concept, to be sure, but I do not completely agree. If votes are being sold, then of course some group will buy as many as possible, and then the votes of the general population will mean less than they mean now.
Just goes to show how whacked the libertarian philosophy is if taken to the extreme. Slavery would be perfectly legal under pure libertarianism, since you could sell your freedom (if you can't sell it it's not yours right?) for bag of heroin, or a life saving surgery for a family member. Just sign the dotted line...
Libertarianism is about your freedom to do anything so long as you're willing to respect the rights and freedoms of others and are willing to assume the responsibilities and consequences of your actions as well as let others assume the same.
Without that accountability, there is nothing to balance and restrain that freedom, deteriorating it to anarchy.
Extreme Libertarianism is not true Libertarianism.
And, frankly, ANY philosophy taken to an extreme would be whacked out.
I mean, one only needs to look at die-hard followers of any kind of religion who are willing to malevolently kill to defend what is benevolent ideology in most religions.
And this is largely the problem of people who practice religion. Many people, especially the devout, tend to totally forget the whole point in the first place (usually being good to others).
I liken it to fanboys fighting over which video game system is better, forgetting that it's just about having fun.
I would agree that Libertarian taken to the extreme would be "whacked" -as would ANY view (With the exception of "moderation")- you're account of Libertarianism is totally "whacked". Under a libertarian ideal, Slavery, per se, is impossible! If you "sold" your freedom for a price- that happens to many people every day. It's called "work" or "trade". If you ELECTED to give it up then it wouldn't really be slavery, would it? Working too hard isn't slavery, it's working against your will.
Uh, Penn... what happened to "one man, one vote?" Voting is a right, but that doesn't mean is a commodity. Abortion is a right, but that doesn't mean you can sell the pickled fetus on eBay...
Like you have never joined a political group or cause for a blowjob?
People are always selling theyre souls and beliefs for sex, or to belong,even for financial gain. This is part of the reason they make votes private, so no one realy knows how you voted.
if i sold my vote then i cant hold the person who bought it accountable for what ever they do with it and i think that might be a bad thing for all of us
"You have the right to remain silent, if you GIVE UP that right anything you say can and will be used against you." So giving it up is not giving it up?
It's actually, "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." I've never said, "...if you GIVE UP that right..." although some states may indeed say it a little different. I've never heard of it said that way though.
he's right. you cant give up those rights. you can just choose not to exercise them. it's not a concept that can be grasped easily i agree. but, if you think about it, it makes sense. the only way to truly give up those rights would be to become a citizen of another country. example: right to bear arms, if you choose not to own a gun then you still have the right. your just choosing not to exercise it. but if your a felon, then you don't have the right at all. it comes down to having a choice.
Someone convicted of a felony cannot possess a firearm, or even ammunition. This would, indeed, be considered having that right taken from you. It wouldn't simply be considered "choosing not to exercise that right."
Votes are a special kind of thing that you don't in fact own. It is only yours to give because it's based around a system where "they" ask "us" who we want to put in power. You cannot give it away, as it is only yours if "they" want it. ... hrm. A curse not to be able to articulate. Maybe I'll just stop speaking my mind,
I believe everything Penn said absolutely %100! but if one person does it then that means everyone can do it, then what will stop the extremely rich offering money for votes and buying their way into office, yea you need campaign money, and only the rich will make it to office, but what will stop Bill Gates from saying "Ill give $200 to anyone who will vote for me"
I do agree that you if you can sell it then you dont own it, and I do think that we should be able to sell our vote, but what if?
What about the privacy of voting? You know, strictly speaking no one could prove that you voted one way or another even if you sold it. Doesn't that make the whole point about selling it moot, since it is in fact worthless?
Yes, and there are those that would say, "Fuck it! I'll take the money and vote/not vote however I want!" But then there are those that will think, "Wow, that's kick ass! I'm votin' for the dude that hands out money for votes!" Let us not forget about our ignorant people in society. Not that our votes really matter anyway.
imagine the utter chaos if congressmen and senators were to fall under this same law --- I might be wrong but I think with enough money any vote can be bought in Washington
Your vote is part of your social contract with the rest of the nation. You own the right to give it, but not to sell it. In exchange, you "get" to be led by said individuals because it's a safer way of doing things. In absolutes, yes you are right, Penn. But citizenship is a status, not part of your body.
Wow Penn is a true libertarian....unfortunately.....
I think someone as intelligent as Penn would be disengenous to claim they don't see they immediate problem that would errupt if it were legal to sell your vote. Think about the large amount of poor people and small amount of politicians in the pockets of big corporations with a LOT of easy power they could and would reap. That would be the end of democracy.
Meh yes i am, but anyone whos democrat or repbulican doesnt understand that theyre voting into a two party monopoly where there both two different sides of the same coin that will cause the same problems and fix none
Okay then what do you have to choose from? independent, Which is okay, but does Ralph Nader really deserve a vote? Then theres the green party and all the other useless ones.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Libertarians are hypocritical. They hide behind government for protection of their property and value of their money yet they assert the premises of anarchism.
If the people were so poor that they had nothing to sell but their vote then our government would no longer be influenced by the people at all.
I have respect for Penn and Teller but they really need to read the Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes. Then they can lose this brainwashed libertarian nonsense.
Well, no, because there'd be nothing saying you HAD to sell your vote if you didn't want to. If you want to keep your vote, you can, if you want to sell it, you can.
And yeah, isn't it pretty much just the rich that can become president anyway?
We are all bribed for our vote anyway. Candidates say "If you elect me, I will give you..." Heck, even Obama said he'd be giving out free money in the form of tax rebates and bail outs. Seems like someone is buying votes to me. What's the difference?
What I hate is when they scam you by putting the minimum bet first, and another account by the same person putting in a ridiculously high bet, and right before the bidding ends, the high voter withdraws his vote, and it's sold at a huge loss.
If my grandfathers choose to form a community out of their free will in which men of all ages and races came together and made the laws they wished to live under as free men then it is not my place to question that community which has been formed by them. If they requested that bribery be a crime then so be it.
The only way out for me is to claim that I secede from the United States and that I form my own nation. This is the only right I should have.
Wrong. It is indeed very much real and moral. Society is the product of a 10 000 year old developement process in which different forms of government and non-government have been tried.
Society is the result of humanities need for each other. We are collective beings that help and work together. We are beings that travel and spread on distant places. To make all of this work one needs common rules and laws and common set of morals.
A corporation is a society, a collective entity resembling a totalitarian dictatorship.
The only difference between the corporation and the monarch is your right to leave it if you wish. Thus it is my belife that people should be allowed to leave and form societies.
But beyond that there are societies in societies and societies overlap each other in this global order. So the process of leaving a society is teadious. But claiming that society is not needed is ignorant.
And to finnish of, as any society, the national society has obligations and benifits to make it work. Just because not everything has turned into some beurocratic pile of shit in which everything you do is subject to litteral contracts doesn't mean that you as a citizen or member of a society/community, if anything a member of this planet and this species doesn't have obligations to others as everything you are and will be is the product of previous responsibilities!
So can I say no to your government, or will you have me shot? That's what it all comes down to. You can stand behind how cool your ancestors were, but I have a right to be an existentialist and say no. The job of government is to rid that out. On an individual level, would you do it? Most people wouldn't, which is why I oppose any collectivism, it enables such violence to gain societal consent.
Look. Let's say you''ve payed back everything that the previous government has given you through taxes. (LIke education and healthcare) while showing evidence of not utilizing it in the time you are paying it of and instead using private alternatives. Now when you are so to speak done with your "invisible social contract" you should be able to form your own community and leave the community you are in (United States) if you wish so.
But the issue at hand is obviously that you'd have to convince others to do the same or move out in the wilderness and create your own nation. For lets say live in a village with parks and roads and churches and what not build by that community through the collective will of the people and their money. You cannot simply state "I will not pay taxes but I will use your roads and your parks nor adhere to your rules"
It's then up to you to leave and form your own community.
If you form your own community, will you live alone and isolated from others or will you try to attract others? Will you need a school? Will you need common rules? Will you need public spaces, free for anyone to walk on? Probably...And thus your anarchist community will again turn into a state, a new one, but still a state.
Also, I didn't consent to everything they take/"give", thus, I have no common law responsibility.
And I don't want my own country. I just want what I own to be mine and what you own to be yours. If that's what you call, "anarchy", so be it. If violating each others rights is what you call "government", I oppose it.
If you have a community of good friends in a small village that build a public road, park and school so to skip the teadious process of paying entree fees and being subject to private rules simply to walk a street, pick flowers or learn things then this is owned by everyone and financed by everyone as agreed by the community.
If you 100 years later are born in a family and suddenly at age 18 decide you don't want to pay for it then what?
Who owns the property? If you're a part owner, you could sell your part. If not, you're only there because they let you be there, and you should have gotten something in writing.
Are these people supposed to hire guards to watch you if you walk on their road, on their park or if you enroll your kid into their school? Isn't it just more logical then to leave the community or agree to the communitys commonly financed institutions. What would you do in that situation?
Schools don't need guards to ensure renegade children aren't invading to steal an education now, why would a volunatry society be any different? People don't sneak into hospitals for free treatment.
You're seeing what is financed by government now as what must be financed by gov't to exist. Research anarcho-capitalism, google for a free ebook or audiobook of "The Market For Liberty" to explain how such a society works.
Fool. Ofcourse they did. It is illegal. It is illegal because the United States is a democracy and a society in itself. In it in theory people are to live in harmony with each other.
Anyone objecting so harshly against the rules put forth by the community of all should leave the United States and it should be his right to secede from the United States with his or her property and form his own nation for those likeminded to him or her.
Two terrorist come to this country have a child and raises that child in their hate filled fashion. The child grows up, runs for president and wins by vote buying.
You know, 99% of the time I would agree with you. But in this case I can't. If selling votes became legal than the whole democratic process, the great equalizer of one man, one vote goes out the window. What would stop companies or special intrest groups from buying the votes from whole communities in bulk. Set up a store front offering $100 a vote in poor areas. In this case in order to protect democracy the buying and selling of votes must remain illegal.
Yeah...you do bring up a very good point. I still agree that it's not really yours unless you can sell it, but there would most certainly be some bad outcomes. Good point.
100 a vote huh? what is the population of the US? 300 million? so lets say you need at least 150 million votes to win the election. 100 * 150 million = 150 billion dollars. so it would cost your 150 billion dollars every 4 years to stay in power. [sarcasm] thats a very economical way of doing things... [/sarcasm.]
all this assuming that everyone would sell their vote at the meager price of a $100.
selling votes is not a threat to democracy at all.
Your math is off. The 2008 election was won 52.9% to 45.7% of the popular vote but 365 to 173 of the electoral college. To have changed the election you would have needed to buy off 3 million votes in California and 200,000 in Florida to change those states from blue to red. But in its essence, our vote is the great equalizer, one man one vote, and to buy votes like stock options puts the power in the hands of those who can afford it.
If it becomes legal to sell your votes, our system really wont work anymore. Bill gates for example would be able to buy enough votes for himself to make him president.
The Libertarian Party is the only Party that expressly allows vote buying. (The right of self-ownership, the right of property ownership) Will they survive Barr, Russell Verney, Sean Haugh, and the other infiltrators of the LP? We'll see. Not much reason to have faith in the American people now though. ...(with a few exceptions, I guess).
The government buys millions of votes from government unions and grant wards every election year, and NON election year. Do we disbar people who pay income taxes and hold government jobs from sittinng as jurors on tax cases or voting? No. Because the government wants power, and if the people are going to stupidly and servilely hand it over (to their own demise, and the demise of their children) --the government will take it. Google "Marcella Brooks" and "Whitey Harrell" and "FIJA" & learn.
its the fucking christians who try to fucking tell us we dont OWN ourselves, and i think its bullshit just because THEY feel we dont own ourselves (god does) that we ALL must follow there bullshit reasoning.. im sick of this country being ran by fucking religious fanatics! fuck them and fuck there fake god too
So politicians shouldn't be able to use money for their causes, right? After all, them using this vast amount of money for everything between microphones, balloons, and cake is used to sway the public opinion. They're indirectly buying your vote. Also dongs.
Wow dude, I didn't think I was going to agree with the idea of selling your vote, but you convinced me, in one line: "If you can't sell it, you DON'T own it." Cool!
For millenia, politicians have promised stuff (from others) in exchange for votes. Fair enough. But formalising the transaction is illegal? McGovern promised every American $1000. Barack promised 95% of America $500. How is selling your vote in an informed way any worse?
eBay? That's stupid. Of course you're gonna get caught. Try selling prostitution or drugs on eBay. This is the sort of transaction that should take place under the cover of secrecy, between two individuals.
Candidates buy votes when they pump money into advertising and promising to be the one to increase income and lower taxes. Honestly, does anyone consider their vote to carry so much weight that they would never sell it? If someone were to come up to you and offer $10,000 to vote against your original choice(and you couldn't cheat) would you turn them down?
The real problem with selling votes is it will lead to the richest candidate, whether the best or not, being president.
I would normally agree with Penn here because I'm an advocate of absolute rights. However since I am an advocate of absolute rights I can't willingly agree with Penn. Selling your vote violates the rights of others to be representative of the people and not just the highest bidders. It is not the choice of the individual but rather the choice of the people collectively of whom we choose to maintain our rights or individual freedoms.
still he is buying my vote! If it is sold by me, so what? it affects no one else- it is no different from someone selling goods like "low income-tax".
Are you seriously arguing semantics on whether or not a bought vote is a vote that goes to the bidders candidate? THAT'S HIS POINT. A vote bought from someone isn't just a card or an object it is a vote for the buyers candidate. My god...
omg... It's people like you that make our country the degraded piece of garbage it is today, but at least money is more of a straight forward approach than political agenda and money can't lie like peoples intentions can deceive the populous.
money is straight forward? Look at the money you carry in your wallet. FYI, I never voted for your govt. Its your own doing. Keep hoping to vote the right person in... will never happen. I value life much more than voting a monopoly of force into power.
What's that supposed to mean, "look at the money in my wallet"? Money is money plain and simple. It governs your life as well as mine whether we like it or not. I know its intentions unlike people. It's good you value life, that we share and most people don't. FYI: the president doesn't do a damn thing his veto powers and figure head status are the only things he has..and i didn't vote for either or the two candidates from the major political BS parties. I voted write in.
Seems unlikely that Penn will read this, but have you considered switching your web browser to Firefox with Adblock? Takes care of most ads, if you add the NoScript add-on to that you really don't see any ads at all, pop-up or otherwise. (add sites like banks that you trust and that genuinely need crazy scripting to the whitelist)
There are other options too if you don't like Firefox, Opera for instance... Might appeal to your libertarian side as Firefox is much "freer" than something like IE.
Just to clarify something: the government protecting your rights (to freedom, life, and property) against someone violating those rights is justified and moral. (unless you make a rational choice that life is pointless or too painful)
Voting is separate from this - it is like testifying in court or being a juror: it is the government's job to make sure the rules of society (against perjury or voting twice) are respected. You can't buy a vote for the same reason you can't buy a friendly witness.
I see now. At first I didn't see the refernce to suicide.I re-read it and I do now. Thank you for clarifying for me....And...No,I won't bring up godd..(unless he wants to buy my vote ).....
I'm not sure what voting is, but freedom or your life are rights, and you should not be able to sell it (or rather the buyer should not be able to buy it): it's not the government's job to punish you for doing so, but it's their job to make sure the buyer doesn't get away with murder or enslaving someone.
I guess it's also their job to make sure no one votes twice, but that's unclear to me.
P.S. assisted suicide is not murder-a doctor helps someone take their own life, so that's different.
Suppose i buy a mule and tie him to a stake in the middle of my field just so i can watch him starve to death.The pet nazis come and confiscate my starving mule (STEAL my property).If you are a lawyer who would you defend?.Would you defend my ownerhip rights(no matter how loathesome they may be)or would you defend animal rights over private property? I would actually NEVER harm an animal..but who would you defend?
I like where you're going. Bad example using a living thing though people have empathy towards them so it nullifys the argument with people to a point. However I have a better example: If I owned a toaster and that toaster could kill me and others and it said in the constitution "the RIGHT to own a toaster shall not be infringed" and my neighbor came into my house and smashed up my toaster.Who would you defend,the man who busted up my legally owned toaster or me and my rights?
and then there was this dude who sold his soul on ebay which later they dissallowed him from doing as well. Hey if consenting adults are willing to hand over their money, who is the govt to tell them what they can and cannot do with their own money?I thought this was a free market system or whatever entrepenuership and all that.
I don't think its ok to sell votes. Just imagine some rich muslimarab oilsheik buying up millions of votes then enforcing sharialaw to us where people who have sex outside marriage and homosexuals are getting stoned to death. One man one vote - that's equality what the western civilisation is supposed to be founded upon.
But your example is incredible. An oil sheik w/ all those draconian laws in mind would never get elected, even if he could buy votes. People would charge him exorbitant amounts, and he couldn't afford it, no matter his great wealth.
And even if he were to be elected, a single official could never get those laws passed.
Penn, I would like to give you my "two cents" for your bathrobe. I do have ideas I would be glad to share with you and I will bounce them over when I feel they are worthy of your consideration. So anyways, my offer to buy your bathrobe is $0,000,000,000,000.02 with the understanding that this bathrobe represents ideas that have a priceless value.
How do you get people to not sell their votes? Easy. YOU MAKE IT ILLEGAL. That's what they did; proving that a person's vote was never theirs in the first place! If I can't sell my vote, it's not mine. If a person can't sell their sex, it was never theirs to sell, so it was never theirs to give away. It was never theirs, because they are not free to do as they wish. They are not free. You are not free. Honestly. I really can't see why people have such trouble wrapping their brains around this.
A citizen has the right to vote. A citizen or resident has the right to live. These rights can be taken away: respectively if one is made a felon or if one were sentenced to death.
But one cannot surrender these rights to another. No citizen or resident can sell his life to another (and be subject to enslavement or death). Nor can a citizen prostitute his right to vote by selling a vote.
Do you think the law unreasonable in either case? I don't.
If these 'rights' can be taken away, they cease being rights don't they? They become "privileges" allowed at the whim of the prevailing government's discretion. That means you're not human. You're cattle; making this entire argument moot. Might makes right, and we might as well give up fighting for inalienable rights and bow to our masters of the moment.
Forgive me if I don't subscribe to your point of view.
I'm saying there are inalienable rights, and there are privileges. We give up freedoms every day in return for illusions of security. We SELL our time, dignity, and yes even our votes, sometimes for far less than what would be a fair market place, if we actually had a fair market for such things.
Our society is built on lies we tell ourselves so we can sleep at night w/o fear of getting our throats slit. If one of us is in shackles, we all are.
So you believe citizens and/or residents have inalienable rights?
Is the right to live one of these? How about the right to vote (for citizens)?
You can sell your time and dignity. There is a market for them, but you don't have to enter it. Selling them is your choice.
You can try to sell your vote too, and perhaps you'll get away w/ it... but that choice isn't legally available. And it shouldn't be. It would render elections meaningless.
Your reasoning doesn't fit, taking away driving priveledges, mkay.. Taking away someone's vote, who decides this? The government. The government cannot make this decision since it has a conflict of interest. Noone who works in the public domain is free of this conflict, and no group will be impartial enough to actually make this decision.
Taking away people's votes? Welcome to encroaching dictatorship.
how can we have fair elections if people can just buy votes
MrCactopuss 7 months ago
50 bucks!
stickerartone 7 months ago
I admire Penn on some things, but he just made an overgeneralization on the grounds of a common way of describing ownership. You can justify any opinion if you overgeneralize the application of a freely chosen rule of behavior.
AlgeKalipso 1 year ago
disagreed.
scorpionfights 1 year ago 2
Hi Penn fans. Penn Says videos have been discontinued, so you won't be seeing any new content on here. You can check out our Profile on our Channel Page for more info. We'll still be checking in, so hope to keep chatting with you all! Thanks!
pennsays 1 year ago
I don't get these comments. Selling your vote doesn't mean you gave your right to vote up.
TheWhiteRabbit1990 1 year ago
One of the few things I think Penn is dead wrong about. :(
amoneymoney 1 year ago
I'm sure wall street and the oil companies would love to just buy up our votes. There are enough people out there that would sell their freedom for the right price and thats exactly what it would be. What a dumb idea.
drldrl81 2 years ago
@drldrl81
Usually, the less ethical of companies don't even have to buy the votes.
They just buy the candidates.
Watcher3223 2 years ago
@Watcher3223
"...the less ethical companies..."
High comedy. As if there were such thing as ethical corporations, or that it is only the less ethical among them that attempt influence elections and government policy (and not inidentally, frequently succeed).
ChadSmith1452 1 year ago
'As if there were such thing as ethical corporations'
Then what makes a company unethical?
To me, it's a company that doesn't earn its profit fairly, such as providing exactly what the customer wants and at a price the customer is willing to pay.
A company is unethical if they cheat the customer.
I'll hazard a guess that YOUR definition of what makes a company "unethical" is that if it merely makes a profit.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
As for how companies can influence elections and the government, it's because the government butts into their affairs with misguided intent.
The problem with a government trying to intervene is that the government outside of a law enforcement role is that it cannot do it without allowing those that will be affected to have their say about it; it's called representation.
But, this dialogue is what lets companies influence government because the intervention provides a way in.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@ChadSmith1452
So, you either let the government make laws without considering those who will be affected, which makes it authoritarian.
Or you allow the government to intervene and allow representation which can give rise to corporatism.
Or the government stays out and intervenes ONLY towards the pursuit of justice when a company breaks the law.
As for "high comedy," maybe you can try and RESPECT differing opinion rather than ridicule it.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@codediporpal
AvaDiCosta 2 years ago
If I had the money, I'd offer $120 for the bathrobe-unwashed. But...I don't have the money ;_;
S0XF0X 2 years ago
I wish you could sell your votes. I would sell mine for sure.
BenU314159 2 years ago
For 1000 dollars I will tattoo on my huge white ass that "I support cooking babies!"
AmericanPoliceState 2 years ago
"If you can't sell something, you don't own it."
What a great statement! I'll definitely quote that!
XiaoGui17 2 years ago
ill give you 100 buck for the robe im a huge fan
captaincumswap 2 years ago
you cant sell a vote , just the promise to vote a certain way, your in the voting booth by yourself
elmtex 2 years ago
Thats what makes it the perfect scheme! no QA
ArtfulDawdger 2 years ago
YES
cabomane4 2 years ago
Hmmm. Don't people in Congress sell their votes every day? Yet the Feds want to go after a college kid making a point and call it a felony.
designflood 2 years ago
But did someone try to buy his vote?
default28 2 years ago
Even as a libertarian, I've never thought of a vote as a possession, least of all one that can be sold. It's an interesting concept, to be sure, but I do not completely agree. If votes are being sold, then of course some group will buy as many as possible, and then the votes of the general population will mean less than they mean now.
mtlsapu 2 years ago 9
Just goes to show how whacked the libertarian philosophy is if taken to the extreme. Slavery would be perfectly legal under pure libertarianism, since you could sell your freedom (if you can't sell it it's not yours right?) for bag of heroin, or a life saving surgery for a family member. Just sign the dotted line...
codediporpal 2 years ago
@codediporpal
Libertarianism is about your freedom to do anything so long as you're willing to respect the rights and freedoms of others and are willing to assume the responsibilities and consequences of your actions as well as let others assume the same.
Without that accountability, there is nothing to balance and restrain that freedom, deteriorating it to anarchy.
Extreme Libertarianism is not true Libertarianism.
And, frankly, ANY philosophy taken to an extreme would be whacked out.
Watcher3223 2 years ago
@Watcher3223 Hmm, that last point is a good one. I'm trying to think of an exception . . .
pennsays 2 years ago
@pennsays
Exactly.
I mean, one only needs to look at die-hard followers of any kind of religion who are willing to malevolently kill to defend what is benevolent ideology in most religions.
And this is largely the problem of people who practice religion. Many people, especially the devout, tend to totally forget the whole point in the first place (usually being good to others).
I liken it to fanboys fighting over which video game system is better, forgetting that it's just about having fun.
Watcher3223 2 years ago
I would agree that Libertarian taken to the extreme would be "whacked" -as would ANY view (With the exception of "moderation")- you're account of Libertarianism is totally "whacked". Under a libertarian ideal, Slavery, per se, is impossible! If you "sold" your freedom for a price- that happens to many people every day. It's called "work" or "trade". If you ELECTED to give it up then it wouldn't really be slavery, would it? Working too hard isn't slavery, it's working against your will.
AvaDiCosta 2 years ago
@mtlsapu
I have to wonder whether Penn didn't think of this(?!) or finds it perfectly acceptable(?!).
Both possibilities are equally ignominious.
ChadSmith1452 1 year ago
Uh, Penn... what happened to "one man, one vote?" Voting is a right, but that doesn't mean is a commodity. Abortion is a right, but that doesn't mean you can sell the pickled fetus on eBay...
sexyprof63 2 years ago
Why can't you? Technically, it's not even human remains...
axelasdf 2 years ago
Like you have never joined a political group or cause for a blowjob?
People are always selling theyre souls and beliefs for sex, or to belong,even for financial gain. This is part of the reason they make votes private, so no one realy knows how you voted.
beefygoblin 2 years ago
If you're stupid enough to give someone money to do something you have no way of verifying...great!
quantumleap7219 2 years ago
75 for the bathrobe, I'll pay shipping.
mrpittance 2 years ago
if i sold my vote then i cant hold the person who bought it accountable for what ever they do with it and i think that might be a bad thing for all of us
cpuneronet 2 years ago
Penn, this is absurd. You cant sell your rights because you cant give up your rights. They are inalienable - even by you.
BONGGLOK 2 years ago 5
spot on
TheOSullivanFactor 2 years ago
So you can't give up your right to bear arms? What about your right to remain silent? Or your right to a lawyer?
IRAISEHELLBITCH 2 years ago
no you cant give up those rights, you can only refuse the goods they provide, not the right to have them if you so wish
BONGGLOK 2 years ago
"You have the right to remain silent, if you GIVE UP that right anything you say can and will be used against you." So giving it up is not giving it up?
That's new.
IRAISEHELLBITCH 2 years ago
It's actually, "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." I've never said, "...if you GIVE UP that right..." although some states may indeed say it a little different. I've never heard of it said that way though.
moarng05 2 years ago
he's right. you cant give up those rights. you can just choose not to exercise them. it's not a concept that can be grasped easily i agree. but, if you think about it, it makes sense. the only way to truly give up those rights would be to become a citizen of another country. example: right to bear arms, if you choose not to own a gun then you still have the right. your just choosing not to exercise it. but if your a felon, then you don't have the right at all. it comes down to having a choice.
epicent 2 years ago
Someone convicted of a felony cannot possess a firearm, or even ammunition. This would, indeed, be considered having that right taken from you. It wouldn't simply be considered "choosing not to exercise that right."
moarng05 2 years ago
that's also a completely different context. that's if your rights are actually taken away by the government. which isn't the case here.
epicent 2 years ago
Votes are a special kind of thing that you don't in fact own. It is only yours to give because it's based around a system where "they" ask "us" who we want to put in power. You cannot give it away, as it is only yours if "they" want it. ... hrm. A curse not to be able to articulate. Maybe I'll just stop speaking my mind,
idiotshowdown 2 years ago
Waste of the "PENILE" system to presecute someone for selling their vote. They just want to make an example out of someone.
badderinperson 2 years ago
ACORN didn't buy votes for a certain canidate. But they sure in the hell were funded to collect votes for a certain person.
hdl13 2 years ago
I believe everything Penn said absolutely %100! but if one person does it then that means everyone can do it, then what will stop the extremely rich offering money for votes and buying their way into office, yea you need campaign money, and only the rich will make it to office, but what will stop Bill Gates from saying "Ill give $200 to anyone who will vote for me"
I do agree that you if you can sell it then you dont own it, and I do think that we should be able to sell our vote, but what if?
randommj 2 years ago
60 bucks for the bathrobe, you pay shipping and handling
RedQueenHypothesis 2 years ago
What about the privacy of voting? You know, strictly speaking no one could prove that you voted one way or another even if you sold it. Doesn't that make the whole point about selling it moot, since it is in fact worthless?
copperblade 2 years ago
Yes, and there are those that would say, "Fuck it! I'll take the money and vote/not vote however I want!" But then there are those that will think, "Wow, that's kick ass! I'm votin' for the dude that hands out money for votes!" Let us not forget about our ignorant people in society. Not that our votes really matter anyway.
moarng05 2 years ago
imagine the utter chaos if congressmen and senators were to fall under this same law --- I might be wrong but I think with enough money any vote can be bought in Washington
mountaindewjoe 2 years ago
Your vote is part of your social contract with the rest of the nation. You own the right to give it, but not to sell it. In exchange, you "get" to be led by said individuals because it's a safer way of doing things. In absolutes, yes you are right, Penn. But citizenship is a status, not part of your body.
TKnightcrawler 2 years ago
Comment removed
ognamas 2 years ago
wow what a good idea. selling your vote! now thats thinking outside the box! their useless anyway...
thequesadilla11 2 years ago
1000 for the robe...it'll be a little long on me but we have similar girth so i should be good...lol.
zmadcook 2 years ago
Penn, give me that bath robe and I'll vote for whoever you want.
coilythespring 2 years ago
$200 for the robe.
hellsreach 2 years ago
Wow Penn is a true libertarian....unfortunately.....
I think someone as intelligent as Penn would be disengenous to claim they don't see they immediate problem that would errupt if it were legal to sell your vote. Think about the large amount of poor people and small amount of politicians in the pockets of big corporations with a LOT of easy power they could and would reap. That would be the end of democracy.
BronzeEleven 2 years ago
If youre not a libertarian, youre an idiot
RanDompwnz 2 years ago
"If youre not a libertarian, youre an idiot"
Not the best sign of someone who is secure with their beliefs right there.
BronzeEleven 2 years ago
Meh yes i am, but anyone whos democrat or repbulican doesnt understand that theyre voting into a two party monopoly where there both two different sides of the same coin that will cause the same problems and fix none
RanDompwnz 2 years ago
Yeah, well libertarian is not the default after you git rid of republican and democrat.
BronzeEleven 2 years ago
Okay then what do you have to choose from? independent, Which is okay, but does Ralph Nader really deserve a vote? Then theres the green party and all the other useless ones.
RanDompwnz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Thats just what we need, more power given to those with money. Fuck you Penn
fooddude6 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Libertarians are hypocritical. They hide behind government for protection of their property and value of their money yet they assert the premises of anarchism.
If the people were so poor that they had nothing to sell but their vote then our government would no longer be influenced by the people at all.
I have respect for Penn and Teller but they really need to read the Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes. Then they can lose this brainwashed libertarian nonsense.
albatros777 2 years ago
$100 for the robe.
AGuyOnDaCouch 2 years ago
Really? $100, for a robe?? Then again, it is Penn's robe. $101!!
gothicpaganpapa 2 years ago
Damnit, I was logged in as my husband. That was really my vote!
faeriemama2007 2 years ago
Wouldn't only the rich be able to become president since they can buy all the votes,
then again statistically it's pretty much the same.
SpikeIncorporated 3 years ago
Well, no, because there'd be nothing saying you HAD to sell your vote if you didn't want to. If you want to keep your vote, you can, if you want to sell it, you can.
And yeah, isn't it pretty much just the rich that can become president anyway?
gothicpaganpapa 2 years ago 2
And this was my comment too. Grr!
faeriemama2007 2 years ago
Penn, stop advocating for an oligopoly! That ain't cool.
42fba 3 years ago
I will vote for whoever you want in the next Great Shelford local election if you send me the robe
cabbagelad 3 years ago 2
We are all bribed for our vote anyway. Candidates say "If you elect me, I will give you..." Heck, even Obama said he'd be giving out free money in the form of tax rebates and bail outs. Seems like someone is buying votes to me. What's the difference?
nthnlsmmrs 3 years ago
alright will go as low as $70, maybe you should sell it on ebay just a thought(hint hint)
XiphiasGladiusMaximu 3 years ago
$40 for the robe lol
Zear0 3 years ago
Oh come on, It's Penn's pink bathrobe! It's worth at least $50!
faeriemama2007 3 years ago
$51
Zear0 3 years ago
LOL that's what I hate about Ebay! Oh that and the people that wait until there's less than a minute left in the auction to outbid you!
$51.50!
faeriemama2007 3 years ago
It's called sniping.
What I hate is when they scam you by putting the minimum bet first, and another account by the same person putting in a ridiculously high bet, and right before the bidding ends, the high voter withdraws his vote, and it's sold at a huge loss.
SpikeIncorporated 3 years ago
51.51. beat that, bitch :D
PiratedComedy 2 years ago
No. Let's say this.
If my grandfathers choose to form a community out of their free will in which men of all ages and races came together and made the laws they wished to live under as free men then it is not my place to question that community which has been formed by them. If they requested that bribery be a crime then so be it.
The only way out for me is to claim that I secede from the United States and that I form my own nation. This is the only right I should have.
omfg4000 3 years ago
"it is not my place to question"?
What kinda bullshiite is that? If it concerns you, question the hell out of it!
An axe need be taken to the head of social contract theory. If it ain't voluntary, it ain't moral.
giggan1 3 years ago
Wrong. It is indeed very much real and moral. Society is the product of a 10 000 year old developement process in which different forms of government and non-government have been tried.
Society is the result of humanities need for each other. We are collective beings that help and work together. We are beings that travel and spread on distant places. To make all of this work one needs common rules and laws and common set of morals.
omfg4000 3 years ago
(Read below 1st)
A corporation is a society, a collective entity resembling a totalitarian dictatorship.
The only difference between the corporation and the monarch is your right to leave it if you wish. Thus it is my belife that people should be allowed to leave and form societies.
But beyond that there are societies in societies and societies overlap each other in this global order. So the process of leaving a society is teadious. But claiming that society is not needed is ignorant.
omfg4000 3 years ago
(read 2 below)
And to finnish of, as any society, the national society has obligations and benifits to make it work. Just because not everything has turned into some beurocratic pile of shit in which everything you do is subject to litteral contracts doesn't mean that you as a citizen or member of a society/community, if anything a member of this planet and this species doesn't have obligations to others as everything you are and will be is the product of previous responsibilities!
omfg4000 3 years ago
So can I say no to your government, or will you have me shot? That's what it all comes down to. You can stand behind how cool your ancestors were, but I have a right to be an existentialist and say no. The job of government is to rid that out. On an individual level, would you do it? Most people wouldn't, which is why I oppose any collectivism, it enables such violence to gain societal consent.
giggan1 3 years ago
Look. Let's say you''ve payed back everything that the previous government has given you through taxes. (LIke education and healthcare) while showing evidence of not utilizing it in the time you are paying it of and instead using private alternatives. Now when you are so to speak done with your "invisible social contract" you should be able to form your own community and leave the community you are in (United States) if you wish so.
omfg4000 3 years ago
But the issue at hand is obviously that you'd have to convince others to do the same or move out in the wilderness and create your own nation. For lets say live in a village with parks and roads and churches and what not build by that community through the collective will of the people and their money. You cannot simply state "I will not pay taxes but I will use your roads and your parks nor adhere to your rules"
It's then up to you to leave and form your own community.
omfg4000 3 years ago
And then the interesting part begins.
If you form your own community, will you live alone and isolated from others or will you try to attract others? Will you need a school? Will you need common rules? Will you need public spaces, free for anyone to walk on? Probably...And thus your anarchist community will again turn into a state, a new one, but still a state.
omfg4000 3 years ago
Re: Payback - Friedman's law.
Also, I didn't consent to everything they take/"give", thus, I have no common law responsibility.
And I don't want my own country. I just want what I own to be mine and what you own to be yours. If that's what you call, "anarchy", so be it. If violating each others rights is what you call "government", I oppose it.
giggan1 3 years ago
You still don't get it.
If you have a community of good friends in a small village that build a public road, park and school so to skip the teadious process of paying entree fees and being subject to private rules simply to walk a street, pick flowers or learn things then this is owned by everyone and financed by everyone as agreed by the community.
If you 100 years later are born in a family and suddenly at age 18 decide you don't want to pay for it then what?
omfg4000 3 years ago
Who owns the property? If you're a part owner, you could sell your part. If not, you're only there because they let you be there, and you should have gotten something in writing.
giggan1 3 years ago
Are these people supposed to hire guards to watch you if you walk on their road, on their park or if you enroll your kid into their school? Isn't it just more logical then to leave the community or agree to the communitys commonly financed institutions. What would you do in that situation?
omfg4000 3 years ago
Huh?
Schools don't need guards to ensure renegade children aren't invading to steal an education now, why would a volunatry society be any different? People don't sneak into hospitals for free treatment.
You're seeing what is financed by government now as what must be financed by gov't to exist. Research anarcho-capitalism, google for a free ebook or audiobook of "The Market For Liberty" to explain how such a society works.
giggan1 3 years ago
50$ for the bathrobe lol
xXToYeDXx 3 years ago
Nice bathrobe.
DonZabu 3 years ago
Some fucking idiot actually CHARGED this kid with something for this?
People have too much time on their hands!
rkzenrage 3 years ago
Fool. Ofcourse they did. It is illegal. It is illegal because the United States is a democracy and a society in itself. In it in theory people are to live in harmony with each other.
Anyone objecting so harshly against the rules put forth by the community of all should leave the United States and it should be his right to secede from the United States with his or her property and form his own nation for those likeminded to him or her.
omfg4000 3 years ago
The US has never been and should never be a democracy (mob rule).
We are a Republic. Which means the rights of the individual are MORE IMPORTANT than the rights of the masses.
There are many laws that ignore this, unconstitutional laws that patriots should go out of their way to disobey!
rkzenrage 3 years ago 2
fuck a free meal at taco bell and you can have my vote. i just don't care and neither should you.
blackplastic420 3 years ago
Its a stretch
Two terrorist come to this country have a child and raises that child in their hate filled fashion. The child grows up, runs for president and wins by vote buying.
Not being paranoid just looking at the angles.
umbrasleeps 3 years ago
Fuck YEAH! As always, I absolutely agree...I have yet to ever hear Mr. Jillette say something I don't agree with.
undisputedgreatest 3 years ago
You know, 99% of the time I would agree with you. But in this case I can't. If selling votes became legal than the whole democratic process, the great equalizer of one man, one vote goes out the window. What would stop companies or special intrest groups from buying the votes from whole communities in bulk. Set up a store front offering $100 a vote in poor areas. In this case in order to protect democracy the buying and selling of votes must remain illegal.
fuerstjd 3 years ago
Yeah...you do bring up a very good point. I still agree that it's not really yours unless you can sell it, but there would most certainly be some bad outcomes. Good point.
undisputedgreatest 3 years ago
100 a vote huh? what is the population of the US? 300 million? so lets say you need at least 150 million votes to win the election. 100 * 150 million = 150 billion dollars. so it would cost your 150 billion dollars every 4 years to stay in power. [sarcasm] thats a very economical way of doing things... [/sarcasm.]
all this assuming that everyone would sell their vote at the meager price of a $100.
selling votes is not a threat to democracy at all.
Vash002 3 years ago
Your math is off. The 2008 election was won 52.9% to 45.7% of the popular vote but 365 to 173 of the electoral college. To have changed the election you would have needed to buy off 3 million votes in California and 200,000 in Florida to change those states from blue to red. But in its essence, our vote is the great equalizer, one man one vote, and to buy votes like stock options puts the power in the hands of those who can afford it.
fuerstjd 3 years ago
an oversimplified arguement imho. but i agree with the gist.
ReadyD 3 years ago
$25 and you get MY autograph.
Oh and my vote for $10, go figure, bathrobe worth more.
gatekeeper501 3 years ago
fbi on the way
ryanmail2004 3 years ago
I'm Canadian! LOL I would claim they look like moose and have a 'hunting accident'.
..again..
gatekeeper501 3 years ago
If it becomes legal to sell your votes, our system really wont work anymore. Bill gates for example would be able to buy enough votes for himself to make him president.
psycomf 3 years ago 4
50. dollars
thebigcomment 3 years ago
I'll give you $10 for you pink bathrobe, Penn. I'll pay for shipping too. Deal?
TheJerm78 3 years ago
The Libertarian Party is the only Party that expressly allows vote buying. (The right of self-ownership, the right of property ownership) Will they survive Barr, Russell Verney, Sean Haugh, and the other infiltrators of the LP? We'll see. Not much reason to have faith in the American people now though. ...(with a few exceptions, I guess).
heywoodjablohme 3 years ago
The government buys millions of votes from government unions and grant wards every election year, and NON election year. Do we disbar people who pay income taxes and hold government jobs from sittinng as jurors on tax cases or voting? No. Because the government wants power, and if the people are going to stupidly and servilely hand it over (to their own demise, and the demise of their children) --the government will take it. Google "Marcella Brooks" and "Whitey Harrell" and "FIJA" & learn.
heywoodjablohme 3 years ago
its the fucking christians who try to fucking tell us we dont OWN ourselves, and i think its bullshit just because THEY feel we dont own ourselves (god does) that we ALL must follow there bullshit reasoning.. im sick of this country being ran by fucking religious fanatics! fuck them and fuck there fake god too
also i LOVE YOU PENN AND TELLER! ROCK ON!
SatansMullet 3 years ago 2
So politicians shouldn't be able to use money for their causes, right? After all, them using this vast amount of money for everything between microphones, balloons, and cake is used to sway the public opinion. They're indirectly buying your vote. Also dongs.
Mudkipia 3 years ago
I'll give you 15 dollars and a half-used memopad
ninjamitis 3 years ago
10 dollars for the pink bathrobe!
utubehayter 3 years ago
Wow dude, I didn't think I was going to agree with the idea of selling your vote, but you convinced me, in one line: "If you can't sell it, you DON'T own it." Cool!
therugdoctoranimesux 3 years ago
For millenia, politicians have promised stuff (from others) in exchange for votes. Fair enough. But formalising the transaction is illegal? McGovern promised every American $1000. Barack promised 95% of America $500. How is selling your vote in an informed way any worse?
lnchrdg 3 years ago
Hey, Penn!!
It Turns out, you actually can give your VOTE away. I did it and caught it on film (see my vid)
previewreview 3 years ago
eBay? That's stupid. Of course you're gonna get caught. Try selling prostitution or drugs on eBay. This is the sort of transaction that should take place under the cover of secrecy, between two individuals.
ManBearPiglet 3 years ago
Candidates buy votes when they pump money into advertising and promising to be the one to increase income and lower taxes. Honestly, does anyone consider their vote to carry so much weight that they would never sell it? If someone were to come up to you and offer $10,000 to vote against your original choice(and you couldn't cheat) would you turn them down?
The real problem with selling votes is it will lead to the richest candidate, whether the best or not, being president.
EbonyBladeProduction 3 years ago
I would normally agree with Penn here because I'm an advocate of absolute rights. However since I am an advocate of absolute rights I can't willingly agree with Penn. Selling your vote violates the rights of others to be representative of the people and not just the highest bidders. It is not the choice of the individual but rather the choice of the people collectively of whom we choose to maintain our rights or individual freedoms.
Verator 3 years ago
"Selling your vote violates the rights of others to be representative of the people and not just the highest bidders."
BS! you are selling your vote and so the highest bidder is your representative. You are not violating anyone's rights as you are not voting for them.
utubehayter 3 years ago
Actually you are wrong. You are essentially voting for who pays you the most, not who you think will be best representative of the people.
Verator 3 years ago
when I vote, I vote for me.. not other people. So the payer will be my representative. Others can choose their representative as they deem fit
utubehayter 3 years ago
WHAT? The guy is paying for your vote paying for you to vote as he sees fit? What the hell are you talking about...
Verator 3 years ago
still he is buying my vote! If it is sold by me, so what? it affects no one else- it is no different from someone selling goods like "low income-tax".
utubehayter 3 years ago
Are you seriously arguing semantics on whether or not a bought vote is a vote that goes to the bidders candidate? THAT'S HIS POINT. A vote bought from someone isn't just a card or an object it is a vote for the buyers candidate. My god...
Verator 3 years ago
so? what is bad with that? Maybe my criteria for evaluating "good" candidates is how much they are going to buy my vote for.. what is the BFD?
utubehayter 3 years ago
omg... It's people like you that make our country the degraded piece of garbage it is today, but at least money is more of a straight forward approach than political agenda and money can't lie like peoples intentions can deceive the populous.
Verator 3 years ago
money is straight forward? Look at the money you carry in your wallet. FYI, I never voted for your govt. Its your own doing. Keep hoping to vote the right person in... will never happen. I value life much more than voting a monopoly of force into power.
utubehayter 3 years ago
What's that supposed to mean, "look at the money in my wallet"? Money is money plain and simple. It governs your life as well as mine whether we like it or not. I know its intentions unlike people. It's good you value life, that we share and most people don't. FYI: the president doesn't do a damn thing his veto powers and figure head status are the only things he has..and i didn't vote for either or the two candidates from the major political BS parties. I voted write in.
Verator 3 years ago
I'll give you 6.50 for it penn
HoratioDUKEz 3 years ago
Seems unlikely that Penn will read this, but have you considered switching your web browser to Firefox with Adblock? Takes care of most ads, if you add the NoScript add-on to that you really don't see any ads at all, pop-up or otherwise. (add sites like banks that you trust and that genuinely need crazy scripting to the whitelist)
There are other options too if you don't like Firefox, Opera for instance... Might appeal to your libertarian side as Firefox is much "freer" than something like IE.
ValeofAldur 3 years ago
Just to clarify something: the government protecting your rights (to freedom, life, and property) against someone violating those rights is justified and moral. (unless you make a rational choice that life is pointless or too painful)
Voting is separate from this - it is like testifying in court or being a juror: it is the government's job to make sure the rules of society (against perjury or voting twice) are respected. You can't buy a vote for the same reason you can't buy a friendly witness.
deinse81 3 years ago
Hi Denise...please define ~too painful~ ?
stjakk 3 years ago
Why? I just mean if somone is in horrible pain (and dying, usually), they can decide that their life no longer has value to them.
I have a feeling you're gonna bring up God next, if I'm right please don't: no madeup stuff today, please.
deinse81 3 years ago
I see now. At first I didn't see the refernce to suicide.I re-read it and I do now. Thank you for clarifying for me....And...No,I won't bring up godd..(unless he wants to buy my vote ).....
stjakk 3 years ago
I'm not sure what voting is, but freedom or your life are rights, and you should not be able to sell it (or rather the buyer should not be able to buy it): it's not the government's job to punish you for doing so, but it's their job to make sure the buyer doesn't get away with murder or enslaving someone.
I guess it's also their job to make sure no one votes twice, but that's unclear to me.
P.S. assisted suicide is not murder-a doctor helps someone take their own life, so that's different.
deinse81 3 years ago
Suppose i buy a mule and tie him to a stake in the middle of my field just so i can watch him starve to death.The pet nazis come and confiscate my starving mule (STEAL my property).If you are a lawyer who would you defend?.Would you defend my ownerhip rights(no matter how loathesome they may be)or would you defend animal rights over private property? I would actually NEVER harm an animal..but who would you defend?
stjakk 3 years ago
I like where you're going. Bad example using a living thing though people have empathy towards them so it nullifys the argument with people to a point. However I have a better example: If I owned a toaster and that toaster could kill me and others and it said in the constitution "the RIGHT to own a toaster shall not be infringed" and my neighbor came into my house and smashed up my toaster.Who would you defend,the man who busted up my legally owned toaster or me and my rights?
Verator 3 years ago
pepole should be able to sell drugs and and your body if you want
badazz5001 3 years ago
If one could legally buy and sell votes, then public offices would literally be for sale.
A man rich enough could buy the title "governor" or "senator."
Suddenly those sound more like titles of nobility, huh?
lnd3005 3 years ago
Where you been? Public office ARE sold to the highest bidders. THEY'RE CALLED LOBBYISTS!
ZachsMind 3 years ago
In the US nobody can legally buy a public office.
If anyone does so, he does so illegally. It doesn't matter if he's a lobbyist or a yoga instructor.
Even if such illicit sales were going on, which I doubt, does that mean we should legalize what's obviously immoral? Of course not.
lnd3005 3 years ago
and then there was this dude who sold his soul on ebay which later they dissallowed him from doing as well. Hey if consenting adults are willing to hand over their money, who is the govt to tell them what they can and cannot do with their own money?I thought this was a free market system or whatever entrepenuership and all that.
OsyenVyeter 3 years ago
50 bucks...please autograph it....haha
joshfif 3 years ago
I agree 100% man.
TreyStanger 3 years ago
I don't think its ok to sell votes. Just imagine some rich muslimarab oilsheik buying up millions of votes then enforcing sharialaw to us where people who have sex outside marriage and homosexuals are getting stoned to death. One man one vote - that's equality what the western civilisation is supposed to be founded upon.
TheParaz 3 years ago
You're right. It's not okay to sell votes.
But your example is incredible. An oil sheik w/ all those draconian laws in mind would never get elected, even if he could buy votes. People would charge him exorbitant amounts, and he couldn't afford it, no matter his great wealth.
And even if he were to be elected, a single official could never get those laws passed.
lnd3005 3 years ago
Penn, I would like to give you my "two cents" for your bathrobe. I do have ideas I would be glad to share with you and I will bounce them over when I feel they are worthy of your consideration. So anyways, my offer to buy your bathrobe is $0,000,000,000,000.02 with the understanding that this bathrobe represents ideas that have a priceless value.
Your friend,
toobeeteddy
toobeeteddy 3 years ago
I like how he put all of that
P.S. ill pay you 20$ for your pink robe
Truthbesaid 3 years ago
Penn is exactly right.
IKilled007 3 years ago
Now, to be constructive, how do you get people to not sell their votes?
2 factors:
- increase the value of a vote by giving people a good choice
- decrease the value of a financial reimbursement by making sure everyone has enough money for a decent life
Zarathustra314 3 years ago
How do you get people to not sell their votes? Easy. YOU MAKE IT ILLEGAL. That's what they did; proving that a person's vote was never theirs in the first place! If I can't sell my vote, it's not mine. If a person can't sell their sex, it was never theirs to sell, so it was never theirs to give away. It was never theirs, because they are not free to do as they wish. They are not free. You are not free. Honestly. I really can't see why people have such trouble wrapping their brains around this.
ZachsMind 3 years ago
Considering only the US...
A citizen has the right to vote. A citizen or resident has the right to live. These rights can be taken away: respectively if one is made a felon or if one were sentenced to death.
But one cannot surrender these rights to another. No citizen or resident can sell his life to another (and be subject to enslavement or death). Nor can a citizen prostitute his right to vote by selling a vote.
Do you think the law unreasonable in either case? I don't.
lnd3005 3 years ago
lnd3005: "These rights can be taken away.."
If these 'rights' can be taken away, they cease being rights don't they? They become "privileges" allowed at the whim of the prevailing government's discretion. That means you're not human. You're cattle; making this entire argument moot. Might makes right, and we might as well give up fighting for inalienable rights and bow to our masters of the moment.
Forgive me if I don't subscribe to your point of view.
ZachsMind 3 years ago
So you think the law is unreasonable in both cases?
Do you think the death penalty should be illegal at the federal level?
Do you think felons should be allowed to vote?
lnd3005 3 years ago
Do you put words in people's mouths?
I'm saying there are inalienable rights, and there are privileges. We give up freedoms every day in return for illusions of security. We SELL our time, dignity, and yes even our votes, sometimes for far less than what would be a fair market place, if we actually had a fair market for such things.
Our society is built on lies we tell ourselves so we can sleep at night w/o fear of getting our throats slit. If one of us is in shackles, we all are.
ZachsMind 3 years ago
I try not to put words in others' mouths.
So you believe citizens and/or residents have inalienable rights?
Is the right to live one of these? How about the right to vote (for citizens)?
You can sell your time and dignity. There is a market for them, but you don't have to enter it. Selling them is your choice.
You can try to sell your vote too, and perhaps you'll get away w/ it... but that choice isn't legally available. And it shouldn't be. It would render elections meaningless.
lnd3005 3 years ago
moronpolice:
Your reasoning doesn't fit, taking away driving priveledges, mkay.. Taking away someone's vote, who decides this? The government. The government cannot make this decision since it has a conflict of interest. Noone who works in the public domain is free of this conflict, and no group will be impartial enough to actually make this decision.
Taking away people's votes? Welcome to encroaching dictatorship.
Zarathustra314 3 years ago