GrandAdmiralJello posted: Restriction of the franchise to those with a demonstrable and quantifiable ability to properly participate in the process so that mindless votes cannot be roused en masse by special interests.
GrandAdmiralJello posted: No, rich people come in all shades. The world's richest person at this point isn't white, but Hispanic.
wikipedia posted:On April 11, 2007, Forbes reported that telecommunications magnate Carlos Slim Helú had risen to become the world's second richest man.[2] Later, the Wall Street Journal on August 4, 2007 and Fortune Magazine on August 6, 2007 reported that Carlos Slim Helú had topped Bill Gates' position as the wealthiest person in the world.[3][4][5] Due to exchange rates, stock valuations, and the overall impossibility of selling all shares at an equal price, the top three placeholders are statistically indistinguishable.[citation needed] The combined net worth of the list is US$3.5 trillion, a US$900 billion increase from 2006.[6]
Lowbacca_1977 posted:Kimball, this paragraph is from Wikipedia's list of billionaires for 2007, and I think will explain the confusion: wikipedia posted:On April 11, 2007, Forbes reported that telecommunications magnate Carlos Slim Helú had risen to become the world's second richest man.[2] Later, the Wall Street Journal on August 4, 2007 and Fortune Magazine on August 6, 2007 reported that Carlos Slim Helú had topped Bill Gates' position as the wealthiest person in the world.[3][4][5] Due to exchange rates, stock valuations, and the overall impossibility of selling all shares at an equal price, the top three placeholders are statistically indistinguishable.[citation needed] The combined net worth of the list is US$3.5 trillion, a US$900 billion increase from 2006.[6]
Rogue_Ten posted:Nice dodge, GAJ, but the Census Bureau informs us that 88.9% of the "top 5%" of the population is white. Seems like a controlling stake to me.
DARTH_CONFEDERATE posted:I think also the states should decide the presidency. I'd say equal representation for all, one vote per state. Whoever wins the most state wins. With that, maybe we wouldn't have so many states being ignored because the candidates couldn't win by just getting a few of the most popular like California, Texas and New York, but Arkansas and Wyoming would get an equal chance to decide.
Lord_NoONE posted:The elimination of the electoral college would be an interesting development. Although I don't think it would effect any real change since inconsistencies with the electoral college vote and the popular vote occur so rarely.
dizfactor posted:That would be a change I would be willing to go to war to prevent. I would literally kill you with a gun on a field of battle somewhere if that would help prevent that from happening.