Replace Voting With Spending

"To repeat my argument, a funding system can be abused not only by rich people, but people who are willing to blackmail or ransom for a higher ranking. Money isn't a way to determine if something's better (or one that I've actively heard), as sometimes bad products can get profit. So why is it alright that we have a system that can get abused?" If we use money, rather than votes, to rank politicians, then the ranking is going to be wrong because... 1. Rich people are going to abuse the system 2. Rich people are going to be blackmailed 3. Rich people are going to be ransomed 4. Money isn't a way to rank things Again, so why don't we entirely replace spending with voting? If you truly believe that spending will wrongly rank politicians, why don't you also believe that spending will wrongly rank video games, food and computers? Let's say that you want video games to be more highly ranked. Why don't you just ransom or blackmail Bill Gates into spending all his money on video games? Maybe nobody wants video games to be more highly ranked? What about all the people who make video games? Clearly they would be really hurt if nobody bought any video games. So surely they would be really helped if rich people spent a lot more money on video games. Yet, I've never heard of any rich person being ransomed or blackmailed into spending more money on video games. I've certainly heard of people being ransomed/blackmailed, but it's so the criminal can get more money. Which is the same thing as the criminal improving his own ranking by cheating. If I steal all of Bill Gates' money, then my own ranking would greatly increase, which would allow me to greatly improve the ranking of the things that I care about. For example I'd buy a gazillion epiphytes. This would greatly improve the ranking of the people that produce epiphytes. This would encourage more people to produce epiphytes. Of course people want to cheat. But if you think the cheating and abuse prevents spending from correctly ranking epiphytes, video games, food and clothes, then why haven't you argued that spending should be entirely replaced by voting? Think about this website. Here's a fact... 1. Debates aren't equally important Here's another fact... 2. People's attention is limited Do we want to equally divide people's limited attention among unequally important debates? Of course not. We want the relative importance of a debate to determine how much attention it receives. So how do we determine the importance of a debate? By voting? Is voting really the best way to determine the importance of a debate? If so, then how can this only be true for debates and politicians? It can't be. Voting either is, or isn't, the best way to determine the importance of things. So please make up your mind. Sit down and decide whether voting truly is the best way to determine the importance of things. Figure out whether society would truly improve if the importance of epiphytes, video games, food and computers was determined by voting. Personally, I've sat down and figured out that society would immensely improve if voting was entirely replaced by spending. Voting is an incredibly stupid way to determine the importance of anything. Voting to determine the importance of video games would be just as moronic as voting to determine the importance of politicians. The importance of video games can't be correctly determined simply by counting the number of people that would vote for them. Just because a lot of people "Like" video games tells us absolutely nothing about how important video games truly are to society. The only way we can figure out the true social importance of video games is by giving people the opportunity to decide the amount of other things that they are willing to sacrifice for video games. Are you willing to sacrifice a new pair of shoes in order to buy a video game? If so, this tells me that the video game is more important to you than a new pair of shoes. Are you willing to sacrifice 5 hamburgers for a video game? If so, this tells me that the video game is more important to you than 5 hamburgers. By spending your money on a video game, you're saying that it's more important to you than anything else that you could have spent that money on... video game > X If you spend a lot of your money on video games then of course this means that video games are important to you. But if, on the other hand, you simply voted for video games, then this would not at all reveal how important they are to you. It would simply reveal that you like video games. If you want to live in a truly better world, please take the time and use your brain, and other people's time/brains, to figure out whether spending is truly the best way to determine the importance of things.