Minority Opinions

Not everyone can be mainstream, after all.

Little Things that Matter

leave a comment »

I’ve been noticing some parallels between a few movements that I support.  Each is a small change with some significant ramifications, creating significant benefit to the vast majority of people.  However, those ramifications are not obvious, the benefits fly in the face of tradition, and the costs are borne primarily by those with the greatest power to enact the change.

I once lived in a state where individual citizens, with enough support, could propose legislative ballots for the statewide elections.  For the federal government, the closest we come is the ability for a super-majority of states to support a constitutional amendment.

Then again, these are exactly the kinds of movements that can be proven at the local level, growing bigger with each generation.  If I ever, through some miracle, become rich and/or outgoing enough to gain the ear of my local officials, will I still be focused on these same issues?

Funding Reform

By capping campaign contributions by individuals, and prohibiting contributions by organizations, elected officials are no longer beholden to a very small portion of the population.

Pros:

  • Gives more voice to a greater proportion of the population
  • Allows other reforms a chance
  • Reduces cost to taxpayers

Cons:

  • Reduces future power of political parties and large organizations
  • Reduces future wealth of political parties and elected officials
  • Requires voters to seek out information on candidates

Election Reform

Pros:

  • Allows independent candidates a chance
  • Allows other political parties a chance
  • Allows voters to express a greater range of opinion
  • Gives more voice to a greater proportion of the population

Cons:

  • Reduces future power of political parties
  • Requires more thought by voters

Cycle Paths

Pros:

  • Free exercise
  • Better air quality
  • Reduces price of oil
  • Reduces carbon emissions
  • Increased safety, particularly for children
  • Child freedom, particularly for teenagers
  • Reduces cost of infrastructure

Cons:

  • Increases time required to drive
  • Requires thoughtful planning
  • Might decrease worth of suburban homes
  • Reduces income of gyms
  • Increases bicycle theft
Advertisements

Written by eswald

22 Oct 2013 at 8:56 pm

Posted in Cycling, Politics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s