Topic: Total budget for each government department should be Median Voted by the people (Read 781 times)

It is good project really. But I feel like control over finances and money are the most important asset of government.
And if you give people the power over money they gonna vote for popular ideas instead the most important ones.

Maybe the government can set a maximum and minimum percentage for each departments individually and the votes will decide where the departments belong in the max min range.

thats a good concept. Lets consider that a government has 50 departments and 90% of the people want their tax money spent on a single particular department? 

This is a great concept. If I would become the prime minister I will adopt this scheme. The problem in developing nations is that not sufficient funds are allotted to Research and Development department. Thats why Scientists are moving to America.

I've always wished that annual tax forms included a section where you could indicate where you want your tax money to go, and then those collected results could be published each year. Whether it's done as a priority list or allows people to actually pick percentages, it would be a great way to measure public perception and desires, even if it's just a survey and non-binding. It would reach a lot more people than random Gallop polls, and people would probably feel a tiny little bit better about paying their taxes because they at least have a chance to say where they want the money to go.

Need to have a balance between the two.

Governing using board of director isn't that much better seeing all banks will implode without taxpayer bailout.

Have you ever worked in a corporation before?  Imagine if the budgets were left to voting instead of being decided by a board. 

You bring up a good point that I have thought about a lot. I think one way to do it would be 50/50 split between government officials and popular vote and here are my reasons.

We (I'm in the US) have a republic. The idea behind a republic is that we elect officials to look at the "big picture" and make decisions that are good for the most people. On paper this seems like a good idea, and it works to an extent. The problem is, we are dealing with people (if politicians can be considered people ;-) and people are screwed up.

But the same "people are screwed up" problem holds true for a popular (or median) vote on everything. We've seen this recently with states changing their constitutions to limit marriage. This was done by popular vote but is obviously unconstitutional (US constitution) based on the separation of church and state, even our very conservative Supreme Court thinks so, having overturned these laws when they were brought before them.

Average voting would not work. Neither would the most votes for a certain budget.

Median Voting on important numbers is not subject to politics because there is no motivation for each person to vote more or less than the number they actually want, since it only matters if you voted less or more than the median but not by how much.

Many people worry about "mob rule" giving the people too much power, but this is a high level thing to list our priorities in terms of where the money goes, proven a balanced democracy by the math properties of median, not a source of argument about the details of what those departments do.

If you do not want to think about it, you could simply vote the way the government recommends, or better, how somebody you trust recommends, but its important to have the option there when government departments expand like we can't do anything to stop them without providing services the people consider valuable.

Theres a few ways to handle when the total budgets exceed the available money:
(1) Whats normally done is to not accept any of the budgets until people change their votes so the total of departmentBudgets is within the limit, resulting in temporary "government shutdowns", and to avoid that the negotiation usually happens quickly.
(2) The amount of taxes could be defined as the total of these departmentBudgets, so people would be motivated to vote less.
(3) The vote could be on what percent of the available money each departmentBudget gets.

Would you vote Yes on starting to do all government department budget totals this way?

This can be decided without asking government permission, since the people have secure tools to count things on a large scale.

I would, for example, vote 0 on the NSA's budget until they make public their goals and methods and justify their existence. If a majority agreed with 0, thats what they would get, but probably it would just be reduced. Because of things like this, its important to hold these median votes continuously so such negotiations can proceed quickly.