Grave_n_idle wrote:Xerographica wrote:You're saying that quality and popularity are not connected. What am I saying? That taxpayers should be free to directly allocate their taxes. What are you saying? That taxpayers shouldn't be free to allocate their taxes because we're better off allowing representatives to allocate them. Except, how do we choose our representatives? Popularity contest.
Ouch, my most of me.
You said something about me claiming I could "accurately predict how American taxpayers would allocate their taxes" - something I certainly hadn't claimed.
I pointed out that the point I had been making was that popularity is what people choose when they spend their own money in commercial arenas - and that the problem with your 'idea' is that it makes everything commercial.
I even explained this in the post you are now apparently pretending not to understand - and pointed out that they will actually select AGAINST quality, in favour of popularity.
You still didn't address the fact that we choose our representatives by popular vote.
I think that cat videos are pretty popular. Imagine if Youtubers paid a fee that they could spend on videos. What percentage of the total fees would be spent on cat videos? In other words, what would be the demand for cat videos? I think it would be broad but super shallow. Lots of people would be willing to spend only a small amount of money on cat videos.
Which videos would people be willing to spend larger amounts of money on? Wouldn't you like to know? I sure would. The Least Blind Group Will Win.