Quadratic Voting
Public.icon
In Japanese, it is said to be "I hate guys who mimic Wittgenstein's "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence" without reading Philosophical Investigations."
Radical Democracy ― About Quadratic Voting to Achieve Revolutionary Democracy | ALIS
Translation of an article written by glenweyl, the founder of RadicalxChange.
The original link could not be found.
QV is proposed as a way to update democracy.
The main current issues are as follows:
1. Under the majority rule, minorities are easily persecuted by the majority.
2. The current voting system does not weigh each vote, leading to various problems such as Beauty Contest.
Related: Problems with democracy
I understand 1, but I don't really understand the concept of "Beauty Contest" in 2 Previous companies, interviews and appearances related to oneself.icon.
About the voting system called QV
1. A certain amount of credits are distributed to everyone.
2. Use credits to purchase votes and cast your vote.
3. The "credits required to purchase x votes" (similar to price) becomes x^2.
https://gyazo.com/95fe7a1e567e4032cc1074b3618e7fae
image from Radical Markets
From left to right,
1. Number of votes to buy
2. Credits consumed (for that number of votes)
3. Cost compared to buying one vote less
A bit difficult to interpret
table:introduction-QV
Votes Total cost Marginal cost
1 1 1
2 4 3
3 9 5
If you try to buy three votes, it will cost 9.
That's five more credits than if you tried to buy two tables.
Why QV is effective in democracy
In a pure one person, one vote majority vote, Arrow's impossibility theorem occurs, so there is no fair system.
["If there are two or more people participating in a majority vote and there are three or more choices, there is no fair voting system.]
Since this concept has been proven impossible, it is necessary to explore other methods.
Therefore, QV attempts to solve this problem by introducing market principles into politics (voting).
First, let's review the premise Previous companies, interviews and appearances related to oneself.icon
"The market " is a system that reflects preferences in prices.
I want to bring this system into the political arena.
However, it is not desirable to use the same method as the market, which gives decision-making power to the highest bidder.
That's where QV comes in.
It is not a "highest bid" system.
Instead of giving decision-making power to the highest bidder, each individual who makes the decision should share the total cost of the actions resulting from that decision.
For example, "How much cost are you willing to pay to avoid air pollution from power plants?"
The border line is determined by how many people are concerned about pollution.
With the current majority vote, minorities are affected.
In other words, we want to measure "the depth of interest in the issue," that is, the degree of interest in the problem of minorities compared to the low degree of interest in the problem of the majority.
We need to ask the question, "How much cost are you willing to pay to avoid air pollution?"
https://gyazo.com/364104f17c9edbc5d6186531673e24c3
The solid line (Demand for pollution) represents the "economic value of power generation."
While it can supply electricity at a low cost, it also causes pollution.
Since the seller is a business operator, "the lower the cost, the better."
Nills is a user, so the more pollution, the worse.
For themes that are not of interest to the majority, the use of QV by minorities may improve overall welfare more than it is now.