doesn't matter what you're studying 🤣

exactly

@Catboi
Naw. I went there for business school, and look at me.

Is that were you learned to buy CODs on 0 APR credit cards?

Wow this chat has been quiet today

TIL: white male americans weren't all allowed to vote as late as 1856
and male canadians got the ability to vote regardless of wealth the same year women did, 1920
and yet they cry about how late women were able to vote

entitled bitches

Also who the fuck cares that was 100 years ago. These bitches weren't alive then

And they shouldn't be voting now.

Yeah, voting was mostly restricted to white property owners back then

Which I'm kinda liking the property owner thing now. Even though I'd lose my vote

How about voting is fake and gay and just no?

>hey, I have a great idea! Let's let the whims of """people""" who watch reality TV determine policy for our country

<:blondeDisgust:622971427410149386>

🤮

😡

I've always been under the assumption that you should have to take some sort of tests about at least what the different candidates stand for before you are able to vote or something

Like that whole delegate woman that didnt know Pete was gay... like wtf

i don't think that that would work well enough, not if the answer key gets leaked

Also, who puts together the test?

That's also a good question

the gov, who else

Yup

even if its not the gov doing it directly, it would be some gov-adjacent company doing this

just as corrupt

Yup

Imagine you have some clown who unironically watches *Three Arrows* put the test together

>hey guys, we need this convoluted Rube Goldberg device of bureaucracy to make our system even remotely workable, but it's really a great system that we shouldn't just scrap all together

...

...

...

Wat

More bureaucrats is more limberdy guyz

I don't know why we only do it for politics.

We should let 90 IQ retards decide everything about our lives.

@Dan V don't forget more good jerbs!

I think instead of property owners being the only ones who can vote, there should be two legislatures. One to authorize expendatures and budgets, and one to decide issues of values and morals and such (so what to ban, how to punish people, etc.)

So you vote separately in each, and they have their own separate debates and votes and everything.

And only people who are net tax contributors get to vote in the budget/expendatures one.

Oh and the 'money legislature' would determine the taxes, too. If people wanted more power over it, they could dramatically increase taxes on themselves and lower it on people they don't want to have power over it, and vice versa.

But since it can't decide anything related to values, it won't actually stop weakly taxed people from having a say. It'll just stop them from deciding where other people's money goes.

The values legislature would be the more 'real' one, since no matter how hard the other one authorizes a budget, they both have to agree before a new program can be started.

Wat