Slashdot Mirror
Selling Open Source on the Campaign Trail
Waldo Jaquith writes: "I'm a long-time advocate and user of open source and free software and, as of this morning, I am a candidate for the Charlottesville, VA (USA) City Council. Naturally, I see lots of areas in Charlottesville's IT infrastructure (as well as potential areas of expansion) where Linux and various free software projects would be ideal. But can I make that a talking point while campaigning? How do I make that concept accessible and interesting to 40,000 citizens?"
No one (the general public)'s interested in it. If someone asks you about your views on Open Source, then answer it truthfully, sure, but don't make it a campaign point to stand on. That's just foolish.
Tell 'em its cheap.
Say the words "hard earn tax dollars"
and be prepared to be called a dirty red commie.
You can't take the sky from me...
They're not going to be interested in what the software can do for them. They will be interested in fact that a significant amount of money will be freed in the budget. Don't go promising tax refunds or anything, but I think the financial benefit will be the most tangible to non-technical folk.
What do voters care about? Taxes. It's that simple. So, you want to get elected, voters want lower taxes. How do you react to this situation? Find a way to lower, or at least not increase, taxes. Open source solutions are free. Maintenance of such systems, contrary to what M$ heads would have you believe, is about the same cost, maybe even less (because once it's running, it JUST WORKS.) Now, let's follow along to make a logical conclusion:
You want to be on the council.
The voters don't want to pay as much tax.
You want to use something that's free for IT purposes.
Tell the voters that using free software would reduce costs!
The voters will automatically imply that your action of reducing costs will lead to lowered taxes and BAM!! you're elected.
Good luck!
~ now you know
If you invoke the possibility that Microsoft and the BSA might steal their hard-earned tax dollars, that will probably get their attention...
"It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
be careful! don't promise a rose garden, thats all!
Okay, for real:
- tell people how much money you save
- you'll have to proove that OS software really won't have a negative impact on services and IT progress of your city
Basically, everything has to be on the upside versus propriatary software. If you can tie it in to huge $$$ saving by the city, thats a language every voter can talk.
"Old man yells at systemd"
The only way I can see to make open source a valid point in an election is the issue of cost. If you can show that the city/state/district will save money and either reduce taxes or put more money towards, say, the schools, people might care. Otherwise, bringing it up will probably cause people to either ignore you, or decide you're a nerd and vote against you.
Basically, the thing to remember is that most people who've even heard of linux have had it pitched by rabid fans, who make themselves more enemies than converts. If you're trying to convince these folks that linux/open source is worthwhile, you're going to have a hard time.
And good luck in your run!
As a citizen, do you think I want to know what brand asphalt you're going to use to fill the potholes? No, I just want to get it done. Details like that are for you and your staff to work out.
Be reasonable and willing to compromise. Other people will sometimes need to have their way, even if it is wrong. Remember, while often times most palatable, open source is not always the best solution (no flames please!).
Try not to be an open source zealot....most people won't understand, and, if and when something goes to hell, your "free" software will be blamed. CYA!!!
I suspect that talking about "open source" won't
mean a lot to your constituency. However, you can
say that you have ideas about how to streamline
governmental IT budgets without cutting services.
A more subtle point is that open source improves
openness. Using open file formats and protocols
protects the government and the public from vendor
lock-in. It also improves the chance that government archives will still be accessible in
the middling and distant future. I don't know
how you can make these points sound-bite-friendly,
but it's worth thinking about.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
The trick that you would need to do is to make sure you wrap a lot of the OS rheteroric in a way that doesn't sound communist or anti-capitalist.
As soon as your opponent would say: " wants to give away all software, and that will cost jobs, especially in this industry where people are being laid off now" then you are sunk with the 40,000 people who don't know the industry.
Another thing you will realize, is that, on the whole, people don't care about the same things that get discussed on here. They just don't. Perhaps they should, but that doesn't make it happen. So again, I wish you luck.
I don't think you can make the general voting populace care about open source as a campaign issue. It will just distract from your other (I hope) sound campaign stances.
OTOH, campaigns aren't won by getting all the votes, just by getting enough. Elections can be decided by a slim margin. Will 400 more votes make the difference for you? Maybe.
You can talk about open source to the right people; LUGs, CS students at local schools, IT/tech workers, etc. Target your open source msg to these folks and bring in non-voters or sway fence-sitters in these groups.
Once you win, push open source solutions to save money. Tax payers love saving money on gov't budgets. You can then use this goodwill/political capital to get things done and/or continue to serve in gov't.
Sig?
Sigue Sigue Sputnik!!!
a) A large percentage of consistent voters are the elderly who would be totally lost when you started talking about this. "Open Source? I'll show you some open sores."
b) Most people who would be knowledgable (primarily young men) would be too busy playing {Enter Latest Game Here} to remember to vote.
c) If you already have systems up and running and existing licenses then the savings would be more long term than short term. This is always bad since people have a short - what the hell was I saying?
Sell them on the cost.
After all, if the city government doesn't have to pay up fees, buy (most) software, worry about viri, and the other day to day details of IT software cost, then the money spent on that can go else where, say providing a few people to do support and development for the custom apps that the city will want.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
Some general directions to try:
Those are just off the top of my head. I agree with other posters that not too many people are concerned with open source directly, but as a symbol of democracy, free market capitalism, and innovation, it might help you make some points.
Fundamentally, you need to be pushing a solution to a problem people care about. Or you need to provide a better way of doing things, that is worth the hassle of accepting. Change for change's sake is scary to voters. And if you're trying to push Linux just because it's l33t and r00lz, then quit now; you're just wasting people's time.
If you can demonstrate that using Linux will...
- Reduce computer costs and free up more money for education...
- Make it easier for kids to get computers, to play and learn with (and so develop future job skills)...
- Have a proven track record of being more secure against attackers...
- Will enable computers and related services to more available, more quickly to e.g. rural areas than otherwise...
...then you've got something you can sell to non computer-geek voters.
You need to simply identify how using OSS well improve your would-be constituents' lives.
ShoutingMan.com
I don't know how accesable "open-source" stuff is to "the people" but you can't ignore the University of Virginia - located right in Charlottesville! Now, clearly not all the students there are registered voters in charlottesville but I'd guess about 1/3 of them are (maybe more since UVA is 60% in state students) - and for these students I bet open source is not only an idea accesable to them, but an issue otherwise jaded and synical students would be willing to get of thier buts and vote on. Also I am sure a fair number of the professors and staff would be interested in this to - so it is an issue you can definantely bring up when campaigning on the UVA campus! Good luck!
Depends what the potential savings are to your constituents. If you can present open source software in concrete terms as in "Ditching Microsoft will pay for one more school per year in our city" then perhaps people will listen.
Otherwise you'll have exactly one extra vote, from RMS.
Something like this will most likely end up costing more in the end.
This is opposed to corporations that write software that's just barely good enough to sell copies and make money. Once you've paid them, whether it works or not is of no importance anymore.
With open source, quality of software wins over the ignorant boss's/management's priorities every time.
- reduced cost of licencing
- reduced cost of licence compliance
- reduced cost of dealing with security
- reduced waste in government offices (open software tends to have less feature-creep, which means less time doing stuff that shouldn't be done at all (like writing your memos in three columns).
Issues of freedom come second. The problem is they are more abstract, difficult to grasp, and non-local. And you are not running for President so your voters might not care about your opinions about copyright and copyleft.Of course if you were running in Berkeley, things might be different ;-) but you aren't.
-- look, cheese ahoy!
Now that is sensible.
"Blake is an idealist, Jenna. He cannot afford to think." - Kerr Avon, Star One, Blakes 7
Would you vote for a landscaper whose campaign speeches were treatises on the merits of hardwood mulch over pine bark mulch? Or an auto mechanic who promised to improve the performance of the city's vehicle fleet by switching to synthetic motor oil?
I know I wouldn't.
If you're running for city council, stick to the top issues in municipal government: schools, taxes, crime, etc.
At most you might say something like "as information technology becomes increasingly important to the successful managment of any business or government, our city council would benefit by having a member who understands how to apply IT tools to improve the function of city government." But leave it at that.
Make the point of "Why are we spending large amounts of money on licenses and opening outselves to spending even more defending ourselves against charges that we haven't bought enough, when there's software available that does the job and which doesn't require a license per seat?". Point out the state and municipal governments that've gotten audited by companies like Microsoft and had to spend large amounts of the taxpayer's money to prove they really did have all the licenses they needed. Ask whether this is really a prudent way to spend tax money, when there's an alternative available.
Furthermore, you can explain briefly how with the source code available, special changes to the software for specific needs can be done by any programmer and the city won't have to buy $100K of custom software -- $100K will easily get you a couple full-time programmers in Charlottesville for a year.
Just remember, voters don't want things complex, and TV and papers will almost never let you discuss anything in detail, so it's got to be something simple and quick. "If we change to Linux, our base costs will be less and our long term costs will save the city X dollars over Y years." "Remember Virginia Beach and the Microsoft audit! One hundred twenty-nine THOUSAND dollars for software the city already bought!!!" You get the idea, otherwise, give up politics. (:
woof.
How do I make that concept accessible and interesting to 40,000 citizens?
Use puppets. MAke one of them act mean, make the other one act kind, and make sure that the kind one explains the moral at the end.
Barring that, most voters won't pay attention.
Say something like "Although I recognize that the American Dream has always been that somebody can take an idea and roll it into a million dollar business, I also believe that ONE SPECIFIC million dollar business is EVIL(tm) and therefore, suggest that we run this city using free software written in the free time of college students, and by philosophers who tend to wear brown robes." That should get the underlying ideas across. And after all, your opponent will only be talking about, you know, taxes, crime prevention, improving public works, The Safety Of The Children(tm) and other such inconsequentials. Sticking It To Microsoft!(tm) is MUCH more important to them all.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
How do I make that concept accessible and interesting to 40,000 citizens?"
You can't.
Be vague. Find out how much the city spent on open-source server software, figure out how much they can save, then write in your campaign literature: "An IT professional, recently did an analysis of the city's computer infrastructure, and found that it was wasting . As a member of the council, will be able to help eliminate this kind of wasteful spending." For small municipal elections, you can usually win by drowning out the other candidates with enough colorful, interesting ads.
I wouldn't try to replace all the workstation software; it would just be too costly and inefficient in the end.
Don't know - Slashdot effect in effect. ;)
Seriously, I'd be careful, if I were you.
There may be certain legal repercussions. As well, are you campaigning for councillor or the city's IT Manager position?
Talk about taking all expendatures to task with the various Department heads. Then use Open Source Software as an example of how to save money long term - that would buy you more credibility. Stay away if you can from subjects that contain "Corporate Control" and "Legal Issues" - they tend to glaze the eyes of John Q. Public.
Remember, this isn't a Slashdot poll.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
Offer them tax breaks... if less money to spent on municiple spending, specifically on computer systems, that means more money can be spent on other things like the little league, the police... and even lower taxes.
I have to me-too the other posts: you're saving taxpayers' money. Bashing Microsoft may be fun (and many of your constituents may agree with you) but it doesn't mean anything if there isn't real savings and/or improved productivity.
You may also be benefiting the community by opening the source of work done for the city; custom work is done for cities' web tools, etc., and this could be useful to your constituents as well as other municipal webmasters (for example).
I must say, though, that I bet this is not your constituents' highest priority. Here in SF, CA it's the usual suspects: the economy, jobs, homeless, crime, transportation, housing, etc., etc. The OS used in city government is not on the radar of even one percent of voters, I guarantee it. So make sure you have other issues you're running on as well!
sulli
RTFJ.
Tell people you're all for sending spammers to hell. I'd vote for you.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Several people have written articles on how MS and others are moving to a pure leasing arangement. At some point you will be paying monthly and if you stop paying, you will be unable to access your data. Add in DMCA nightmares of reverse engineering prevention, and the future is very bleak. Plus, how can you trust a convicted monopolist?
And have They been to your city yet. Use it to your advantage. Use examples of other successful places. Between a lower budget, better reliability, and no fears of data lockup, it would make a good plank in your platform, but you will need other things to make a stand on. Lastly, be prepared for some mud slinging. Probalby they will paint OSS as commie or some other Non-American thing. Explain it as being Christian (give unto poor) and use other metaphors to make the populace think of Free software writers as good charitable folks. Might want to avoid outright speaking of it as Christian, but as a politician, you should know how to turn a phrase to put an idea in the populace's mind.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
No one cares. Let me say that one more time: No one cares. And again, but louder: NO ONE CARES ABOUT OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE.
If you make it a campaign focus, you will lose, simple as that.
If you care about this issue, then fine, but learn the first rule of politics: you have to get elected. That means figure out what your constituents care about, and propose solutions to THOSE problems.
If you get elected, then you can try and push OSS software if you want and think it's important. But don't fool yourself into thinking that this issue is important to the average person.
And one last: Never fool yourself into thinking that it SHOULD be important to the average person, because it just isn't compared to other problems.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
As a general rule, it drives me nuts when politicians make a big pie-in-the-sky speech and fail to back up their promises with a specific plan, or to make that plan accessible to the general public.
To that end, if you've got real identifiable places where IT could be streamlined with open source products, develop a plan. Make it accessible (both in the physical sense -- it's on a website, and the site has a name I'll remember) and in the mental sense. Even if regular folk could access all 7000 pages of this year's tax bill, no one would understand it -- it's not mentally accessible to us. Finally, bullet-ize the major benefits your consituency will get out of open source, and remember your audience -- focus on direct and immediate benefits of open source (reduce taxes? make more government services available? get out from under Redmond's thumb? -- you should know your consituency, you know what'll resonate with them).
By the time you hit the campaign trail, your message should be "I'm going to reform our local government's IT with open source software. Your benefits from this reform will be x, y, and z. Find out more about my plan at votewaldo.org." Then, make the information you present on the website detailed and specific, but accessible to the average voter.
If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
Come on down the road a bit to Roanoke, we're cheap down here, and it would probably be an easy sell.
Keep your target voter in mind on this one. If you have a large segment of IT professionals in your district then it's okay to get geeky about the whole IT issue. However, if you are looking at a largely-technophobic constituency you might run into the "if it's open-source then it's insecure" mentality, and no matter how many times you explain it you aren't going to sink in with some of them.
A possible strategy would be "The county is currently running a computer system that jeopardizes the security and reliability of the IT infrastructure in our county offices, and I have proven solutions that could dramatically correct these issues and at the same time save taxpayers thousands of dollars a year in unnecessary IT purchases".
Bring to their attention insecurity of data and inefficiency of spending, and then tell them how you are going to fix it.
As for the cost savings, yes, Linux can cost more money than it saves when the transition is not carefully planned and executed. Part of the reason for that is the large number of people who "make Linux harder than it is", as Roblimo, IIRC, pointed out. There is a variety of extremely simple graphical e-mail clients. Konqueror or Mozilla are both web browsers that can be used by almost anyone (whereas Konqueror can be set up easily by anyone with half a clue to look and act like IE). It's exactly the Internet client problems that are mostly solved on the desktop. Don't invent problems that do not exist. Surely you could set up mutt and procmail on a library computer, but then don't be surprised if people point and laugh.
But cost savings are not the main reason to move to Linux. The main reason are the long-term benefits of source code openness, which includes easy expandability, which is a major plus, because many additions by anyone from government agencies to corporations will be returned into the pool of open source software, to the benefit of all -- the more open-source software (GPL) is used, the more powerful this effect becomes (and there's the obvious "given enough eyes .." security/stability advantage, which also increases exponentially). Also, schools and libraries will not have to deal with unmanageable obsolescence cycles which are deliberately created by the Wintel duopoly. OSS will make computers better, more easy-to-use and cheaper. You should support those trying to make that difference, or become one of them.
"How do I make that concept accessible and interesting to 40,000 citizens?"
It's so easy! Dress up in a fuzzy penguin suit and hand out debian cds to everyone you see. Most of them won't know what to do with the cds, but you'll save a few souls I'm sure. For the rest of them... well, hey, you're wearing a cute, fuzzy, penguin suit. And that's something everyone will find both interesting and accessible. I mean, how many politicians walk around in penguin suits? None. You'd be the talk of the town. Hell, the nation. Maybe even the world.
Wow that's an interesting and provocative question. Sadly I don't have the time tight now to give you a proper answer, when I get back home I will expand some thoughts that now I lay down.
;-))
First, obvious to someone who's going to vote, you have how much money the city or the governament scope will save. Then after you PROVE and you do your little MARKETING (hey that's politics) of how you are going to save money, say that this money is going to be used for:
1) Buy schools new computer, hire people to teach computer classes to children (education issues)
2) Build a network among schools, fireman, police, hospital, etc... (health, security, future issues)
3) Found user groups so people can help people (community issues)
Okay, that's enough, my boss is calling me. Anyway, you must find a balance between what people traditionally want from politicians (all the good and the ugly of it) and how using open source will satisfy these needs.
Money is the first thing someone would think, but you also have Microsoft that may OR may not crumble (even if just a little) with the trials.
Say to people: "Hey, let's not buy software from a company that been accused of doing Bad Things to us. Choose an alternative! Vote for me, bla bla bla".
Politicians do this all the time (playing with what MIGHT happen and exagerating the facts or assumptions).
I don't know how your personality is, if you can play this political game or not. Anyway, you will have to.. and once you start (I don't know your past) you will have to make these little concessions.
Draw on papers what people want and what Open Source can give you. Than separate these two piles of paper and in between go filling the table with the arguments that you will use, topics that you will choose. If you can make a lot, and good, connections, maybe it will work. Just remember to judge stuff from the point of view from someone who's going to vote for you.
Last, go to schools, universities, user groups, star trek meetings around your area and get as many as geeks as is possible to, of course, vote for you and give you more ideas. (think globally, act locally
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
However, if you are looking at a largely-technophobic constituency you might run into the "if it's open-source then it's insecure" mentality, and no matter how many times you explain it you aren't going to sink in with some of them.
No, you're going to run into the "what does source mean in this context? and what makes it open? secure? secure from what?" mentality. I swear, from the way people here talk you'd think the entire population of the US read slashdot. The average voter/citizen has almost no interest in comparing an operating system that they don't understand with an operating system they've never heard of. A large percentage of them probably have never heard of the term "operating system". They still don't quite get the idea of e-mail, though they might be able to use it if it's set up for them. Linux isn't even a blip on their radar, and the idea of modifiable "source code" is totally beyond them. It has nothing to do with intelligence or education, it's simply that they just don't get involved in that sort of thing, and a campaign that used it as its main focus would probably fail.
If you looking for votes be sure to look up and make a visit to the local Linux Users Group, Perl Mongers Group, etc.
:) That should be worth a couple of precentage points.
Guaranteed votes if you express some sort of OSS advocacy. Maybe this only accounts for several hundred or thousands votes but they would be cheap votes in terms of amount of time spent.
You might even get some offers to help.
BTW since you are somewhat close to florida you might try to get your name on _top_ of the ballot
One force that may work in your favor is home town pride. See if you can find any developers in your area, and find some way to brag about how you could be using software that was written "Right here in VA, and not in some Redmond office complex."
Get people on the self-reliance kick. Relate it to stories about early pioneers not relying on the support of the major cities, or to direct ancestors of people famous in the town.
Much of the Free Software advocacy kick is based on out-and-out pride. We try to push GNU, Linux and BSD into service not just because they're technically superior in many ways, but because we feel like it's made by Our People rather than some deranged Redmond focus group or snooty Cupertino aesthete. We can identify with the people who made it.
Remember that Red Hat is in North Carolina, too. I don't know how you folks feel about the triangle, but you may be able to work up some small regional pride there if you can't find any local developers.
--
I noticed
It's getting about time to leave everywhere
OTOH, many of them probably have strong opinions on government waste. Spending money on M$ and other proprietary products when free (as in beer or speech) alternatives exist could be spun as a big-vs.-small gov't or gov't waste issue (at least on the city level, where big software corporations won't go after you with huge campaign contributions to your opponent(s)).
Best of luck - we need more geeks in office.
OK,
- B
http://www.bradheintz.com/
- updated
dont say a word about anything technical..
#1 - cost savings... show the HUGE $$$$ saved.
your constituents will love this.. saving huge dollars right now is great for everyone. any naysayers (read that as MSCE's) will scream that ther are no productivity apps.. point out that there are in fact many many FREE productivity apps that work well. and that a county in florida has sucessfully switched and saved bags of money.
#2 - freedom.. Nationalism is runnung rampant right now... (not patriotism, but that's another issue) Open source screams freedom, freedom from being under control of a corperation... freedom from forcing a replacement of all computers every 2 years.
finally wrap it up as that computers in government are there to work for the people and to do the job, not to make money for large companies.
I would read everything you can about the communities that have changed to OSS and run from there.....
research your topic.... but the $$$ saved is what will get the attention of the sheep\b\b\b\b\b regular citizen out there.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Business Software Alliance. The folks who get the US Marshals to conduct raids of companies AND CITY GOVERNMENTS that didn't pay their required license fees. Or at least didn't conduct the 100% compliance audit they were expected to conduct.
On topic: Using "free" (beer or speech) software may reduce costs associated with license fees and audits.
Yes, I know Redhat is not Linux, but it's American, though maybe a little too red for most of your constituents.
While I understand your zest to incorporate OSS into your run for city council it just seems like a bad idea. Not because using the software in IT department isn't good, but because 95% of the voters (the people who actually CAST BALLOTS) don't know what the hell "Open Source" is, and really don't care how evil Microsoft is.
The best way to approach this is to write up a comprehensive plan for your vision of the city. If it includes OSS, that's cool. Emphasize the cost-savings on licenses, and the potential savings on hardware replacement (don't have to replace all servers every 24 months if the software doesn't become exponentially more bloated every year), and then move on.
Political reality is that most citizens care about two things: Crime in their neighborhood, and high taxes. As long as you take care of these two things, you're in good shape.
Who did what now?
Besides the "it's the taxes, stupid" aspect covered by others, be specific about what you see Linux offering. What services do you see replacing, or offering for the first time? What problems (e.g., software audits) are you trying to avoid?
Finally, have you verified that you can actually have any effect? Many cities have charters that explicitly prohibit the city council from interfering with the daily operations of the city departments - that's province of the city manager.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
If you're running for city council, stick to the top issues in municipal government: schools, taxes, crime, etc.
He just has to promise that he'll make better schools, lower taxes, and less crime! His opponent will never think of that!
At least up here in NoVA (Northern Virginia, the DC suburbs), the big issues in local elections are traffic, schools, crime. Taxes are always a factor, especially if it involves shipping $$ to Richmond and not getting as much back in roads, schools, etc...
In your case, there MIGHT be a campaign issue involving the "efficiency" of city government, espcially if there's a program to "wire" the city or get city departments "on line". Without knowing the politics in Charlottesville, I will assume it is not a burning issue. (It took Marion Barry YEARS to make government incompetance an issue in DC - by causing much of it - and it's STILL far from being fixed). Schools? You might have computers in the classroom issues, or the town/gown deal with UVA, but I expect just getting a "passing" grade on the state Standards of Learning exams are a big enough deal.
Sure, you can work open source software into elements of the campaign, but it isn't going to get you elected. Or understood.
[semi relevant factoid: The Al Gore presidential campaign web site ran on linux and used open source software throughout (apache, php, mysql...). Did anyone care? The campaign did - it saved them $$ and worked better than W's big $$ Dell cluster running ASP. Did it help the campaign - yes, for raising money and building "community". Did it make a difference in winning or losing the election? IMHO, not a bit.]
Give me a map and compass, drop me into the Amazon Rainforest, and I will be lost immediately too. But that Crocodile Hunter guy on TV would figure out where he is, and start walking. Might take him a week, but he would find his way out, while I would still be trying to reboot the compass.
Crikey! If you look ovah here, you can see a primo example of the dread Linux Hacker. 'e's a dangerous brute, but ain't 'e bayutiful?!
I can get this close to 'im because I respect 'is terrortree. You're a notty hacker! Yes you are! He's a dangerous wonk, alright, but I'm okay because I'm a trained profeshun'al.
Let's all remember the the Linux Hacker is an endangud species. Paoching and biggah predatas like the fanged Microsoft encroach on 'is terrortree more and more each yeah. If we want to keep these bayutiful creatuhs around, we gotta protect 'em!
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Except, of course, that it was crafed in full knowledge that it made an excellent sound byte and he'd be associated with low taxes. One reason why democracy is stupid. Not that I have a viable solution. Stupid human nature.
Make your campaign slogan "Free as in Beer"
Then make posters like this:
FREE
as in
BEER
Make the "FREE" and "BEER" in a really big size, and the "as in" in a really small size.
Oh, don't forget to put your name on the poster somewhere too. In big letters. Probably as big as the letters you make "FREE BEER".
Seriously though, I would check with the town clerk or historian and see how much they have been spending on software over the past few years. Draw up a budget plan and present it to the people showing the disparate prices between the software, and the re-training/OSS costs.
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
When was the last time that such minutia actually changed your vote one way or the other unless it directly affected you? Probably never.
.5% of the local government costs. All these decisions take time, far too much time for the average voter to concern themselves with. We have public officials and representatives for a reason.
Even if you THINK you do, I doubt you really do. In order to make an informed decision on these matters must spend SOME time learning the background and the difference between the competing alternatives. Even with an issue like Open Source, there is considerable debate in the technical community about whether or not it actually saves money and it's got to be even harder for the average person to make heads or tails of it. It's not as if there's a simple authoritative source you can go to that says Open Source > Closed Source. It may be trivial to discover that the software itself takes money to actually purchase, but finding out the actual support costs, training, quality of the software, and other elements takes a lot of time and intuition. Speaking for myself, I'd actually be opposed to this kind of adoption, especially in a government agency.
Now you're going to do this kind of research for each and every little item? Asphalt? Shovels? Paper? Paper clips? It may sound ridiculous, but I doubt software costs more than
This argument is especially ridiculous when you consider that the kinds of day to day payroll decisions made by managers have a far greater impact and cost far more. For instance, would you rather have an experienced admin run NT or a bunch of clowns running Linux? I know which I'd pick. Yet it's blatantly obvious that we can't effectively engage in this kind of oversight.
People will be concerned about cost (since they pay for that) and privacy (they pay for that, too, if some hacker comes and snatches confidential data the city has about them). You don't have to specifically say the L-word, but you should campaign on issues like "saving taxpayer money" and "preserving city resident privacy by increasing security in the city IT department". If asked how you would do that say "If I am elected, I would form a special task force to review security, procedures, and cost structure in city government, including the IT department". Avoid saying "Microsoft vs. Linux" specifically, as that would make it appear you have an agenda not specifically associated with city political issues. If asked about that say something like "I will certainly make sure all our options are open, and if a change in software will make things more secure and reduce costs, then I'm all for that and will see to it that it gets done".
Be sure to read this, too.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
...it's high time that our governments took advantage of its investment in these quality resources.
:)
That's speech material right there. Has a beautiful ring to it.
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
"Our industries, our jobs, are under increasing pressure. Our livlihoods, our neighbors, our children are at risk. But I tell you, the answer need cost you nothing. Freedom for Charlotte to be prosperous, freedom from fear of "downsizing", freedom from the whims of Corporations a thousand miles away. That is what I have to offer, and it's real. The other choice is to live on moonbeams and fairy dust. Can you pay your bills with wishes? Then let us make Charlotte a city to be proud of!"
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Heck...just say the words "free beer" a lot and you'll win by a landslide.
/.'ers have written lengthy posts to /. about the issues they feel strongest about but have never written their congressperson?
I'd have to agree with the parent tho...stressing techie issues is a bad way to try to get elected. Regardless of whether it is a legitimate problem or not, the tech-saavy population is one of the least motivated electorates around. How many
Relying on the tech saavy vote to get elected probably won't work. However, that said, when re-election time rolls around, the "I saved the city $xxxxxx.xx using open source software" might work really well.
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
Hi!
By way of introduction, let me mention up front that I've been an elected public official, an elected party official, and I've run several political campaigns in municipal, county, and state senate races.
Let me offer some advice.
Don't pitch Open Source
You're attempting two impossible things at one time: you're raising an issue that you simply cannot get across in the limited bandwidth of a campaign; and you're staking your campaign on the city's website and it's present outsourced contractor. Picking on a city vendor is generally a bad campaign strategy, unless the vendor is already on the front page of the newspaper or the current mayor's brother-in-law. Otherwise you are perceived as "rocking the boat" and a nuisance--and you will guarantee yourself absolutely zero cooperation from municipal employees on issues like poster permits, etc. You also instantly create an opponent: the city official responsible for selecting the incumbent (Windows-based) web hosting firm. Who will, undoubtedly, be quoted in the newspaper as saying, "if this guy wants to be the city I.T. director, he should come down to City Hall and fill out a job application. Picking the software for the website isn't City Council's job...."
I'm not kidding. I have seen this happen before.
Back in the late 1980s I recruited a candidate to run for the local school board. This guy was perfect. He had a clue about schools and education, he had kids in the district schools, he was an assistant coach in the local township rec. league, and he had a terrific grasp of financial issues. Except....
The guy was going to TQM (Total Quality Management) training classes, and embracing the TQM religion. And he got religion--he started talking about implementing TQM in the schools, and he wouldn't get off the subject. He talked about it when he was campaigning, he talked about it when he talked to voters at home, he talked about it in his brochures, and he handed out a white paper on TQM at the League of Women Voters meeting. It was, um, a bit over the top. It's been maybe 10-15 years, and I still get grief from local leaders about the guy--where did I dig him up?
What you should do
Understand that you have a very limited amount of bandwidth to talk to the voter. And you have a very limited number of voters to talk to. And 95% of those voters are interested in races that they view as more significant than yours. All of which means that you simply cannot even begin to sell something as complex as Open Source, or as instantly controversial as "replacing the city's Internet consulting firm" (which is how the newspaper will report your campaign platform).
Instead, do these steps:
And hey--if you do get elected, drop me a note. My oldest daughter is going off to college in Lynchburg next fall, and I know she'll be traveling to C'ville for riding lessons. It might be handy to have a contact to call in an emergency.
FYI, this is the real Waldo Jaquith's account. Somebody made an account named Waldo Jaquith and is posting some rather amusing flamebait. You know it's me because my UID rocks and his is astronomical. :)
Anyhow, I'd appreciate if moderators could moderate appropriately. Thanks, folks! Of to class...
-Waldo Jaquith
Keep in mind that your job as a public official would be to serve the public's selfish interest. Using Open Source Software and Free Software just happen to be ways that often (but not always) serve that end.
What you tell them is that you are going to fight government waste of their tax dollars and reduce corporate welfare. And OSS/FS are one of the ways you'll do it.
You explain how they allow you to get software (if it already exists) for little or no expenditure. And for software that doesn't yet exist or needs a lot of mods, it allows you to shop around among contractors to get the best bid (since you have the code, instead of them). And if the desired mods are popular, you may even be able to con some suckers (perhaps even in another country) into doing the work for you, for free, without any taxpayer expenditures at all!
I've heard there have been recent BSA radio ads. It would be amusing if those same ads were immediately followed by ads that say that if you're elected, you'll use software that doesn't require that the local government employ auditors to serve the interest of some private megacorp on the other side of the country.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
If you want to do geeky stuff then get a job doing that for your locality, don't go sit in city council or whatever and try to dictate administrivia. If you want to get involved in broad range of local issues then run for office.
Every place gets it's fair number of single-issue candidates every season. Some are anti-abortion, some are obsessed with more money for the schools, or getting better playing fields for sports, or are gun nuts, whatever. You - apparently your big theme is Open Source and expanded IS.
Guess what: Most folks don't want to see bozos like that in office.
You can't pick and choose what will be local issues. Sure you can sit on or even possibly chair committees (though rookies don't often do that) but at best you'll spend 5% of your time and energy on a pet project; the rest of the time it'll just keeping the wheels of goverment turning.
Water & sewage, roads and schools, contracts and insurance, negotiating with unions and filling out paperwork for other layers of government. These are all your responsibilities and unless you're willing to commit yourself to fulfilling all of these then you're absolutely the wrong person for the position.
Sure it's nice to daydream "If I were King" but you won't be: You'll be an elected official working within an established system. Try to tell the local civil service IS employees what to do and they'll smile, give to 30 minutes of their time then dismiss you as a gadfly, though perhaps as a useful gadfly in the future.
Do yourself and your constituents a favor: Decide if you really want to be an elected official or if you want to play with computers.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Just don't. Trust me on this, the average user just does not care about his computer. He does not care about improving performance, or being able to tweak his programs, or helping other programmers. He just wants "the machine" to work. If you focus on open source, you will get hammered in any and all public forums. Just for the heck of it, here's a quick sample speech by a hypothetical opponent of yours that could be made after you gave an "open-source" schpeel:
"Ladies and gentlemen, like many of you, I have heard Mr. Jaquith's speech on the benefits of switching the town to what he calls 'open-source' software. And like many of you, I am confused. Our city need money for roads, and schools. Our children need more parks and playgrounds, and children's programs to keep our youth off the streets. As we go into this new century, our city faces questions of crime, of poverty - Mr. Jaquith talks about Linucks and Debean or whatever it's called - I, for one, cannot make heads or tails of it.
And that's his perogative, of course - the right to campaign freely is what makes this country what it is, the unshakeable roots of our culture. But not to put too fine a point on it, do the people of Charlottville really care about my worthy opponent's issues? As long as our taxes and payrolls for city workers are processed in a timely manner, as long as other computerized fuctions are carried out properly - why should we change them? Even Mr. Jaquith cannot tell us how they will save any meaningful amount of time - in fact, I tell you it will cost us time, as our town employees are forced to learn the new system. So why does Mr. Jaquith want this?
I can tell you that. He believes that it is wrong, my friends, to pay for software. He believes a product that costs thousands of man-hours to produce must be given away for free, and that those who would not do this are evil. Go to a web site called slashdot.org, or freshmeat.net, or read any "linux advocacy" magazine, and the "open source" position becomes clear.
I know that this is a tight race, and that I may not be elected. That's fine, that's the democratic process, and I can accept that. But my fellow citizens, I ask one thing of you. When the time comes for you to vote, vote based on the issues that actually matter to your lives. Schools, taxes, health care - if you do not agree with me on these things, then please do not vote for me. But please don't vote for Waldo Jaquith for the sake of a complex new system that we don't need. Thank you."
It's a little rough, I admit, but with a little polishing it might be good against you, sir. Find "real" issues, like those mentioned in the speech above, and campaign on those - open source is something you can work for once you're actually in power. I hope this helped.
I'm the stranger...posting to
As much fun as it would be to represent /. on the city council, we're not your constituency. It doesn't matter what we think, and looking at the penetration of linux into government agencies, I'm guessing our messaging skills are about as bad as geek communications reputation would suggest.
:)
Go ask your neighbors! First, talk to a couple of people you trust to be honest with you. Tell them you think this is an important issue that people should care about, and then explain why. Ask them if you've convinced them. Ask them what arguments were convincing and which seemed irrelevant to them. Then go talk to your neighbors.
Try to get a feel for which arguments work with them and which made them think you were a crazy geek. Use the arguments that work!
BTW, people might not care. You might not be able to get them to care. And you'll be more likely to be elected if you listen to the things people in your community care about, and offer ideas for how to deal with those things. You can obsess about open source issues when you get there.
You might want to work with someone who has done community organizing in your area, especially consumer-oriented groups.
These opinions are my own. My employer is not aware of them, does not endorse them, and is not responsible for them.
Open Source, Open Government.
Use the open source philosophy as a selling point. Say you want your goverment to work like open source does, where everyone contributes, where everything is out in the open (no secret deals), and where it works perfectly.
It will be a huge paradigm shift for most politicians, but IF you can pull it off, you will be on the road to the presidency and you will have DESERVED it.
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
Can you sell the idea of open source or low-cost IT options in a political race?
Sure.
The question is: do the people want it?
This is a common mistake that new candidates make: Trying to "sell the people" on something that's important to the candidate without asking whether the people care about it in the first place.
Your experience in building IT infrastructure certainly could be something that helps create the image that you're ready for the job, if the job has an obvious computer component to it.
But chances are the people care more about issues that are accessible to them. Issues like crime, education, the economy, or (lately) their personal safety.
What you should do is ask the people what they want and then try to find a way to show them that they can get it by supporting you.
This emphatically does not mean that you should just tell them what they want to hear. Stick with what you know and who you are. But if you're not presenting it in terms of what the people want, (instead of what you happen to think is kewl), then you're wasting your time and theirs.
The reason is simple, there are several compaines that make a lot of money selling the city M$ junk. They will object if they get wind of your open source attitude. They will point out that your open source attitude will cost them jobs which the other tax payers will not like. They will spin you out of the picture and you could find ads for your oponents paid for by M$ who has more money than you do. Thouse voters that do care won't make a difference compared to the large number of voters that don't but are cuaght up by the spin doctors.
My advice, go on other issues. If asked about your software views say your "_open_ about them" and if you win, chase the M$ money through the goverment and take a axe with you.
I absolutely agree that money is what voters are going to care about: talking to them about open-source software is like talking to them in Martian, but if you start talking asking why the local government is using "expensive" Microsoft software instead of "free linux", they will at least notice.
Another reduced cost is reduced cost of hardware: since Linux runs nicely on less powerful hardware, older computers could potentially be put back into service if they're on hand, and existing computers could be kept in service longer because they won't be made obselete immediately by rapidly bloating commercial software. A lot of constituents have purchased computers. A lot of them will have had the experience of buying what they think is an expensive new computer, only to find it's obselete (or at least out of date) in six months to a year. Remind them of this experience and point out that their city goes through the same thing... and explain how Linux can save their tax money by greatly slowing down that new-to-obselete cycle.
As a secondary issue, if the current operating system of choice for the city is from Microsoft, you could start asking why the city government is spending tax money on an illegal monopoly - "giving your tax money to lawbreakers!"
Finally, I'd say don't be unrealistically optimistic: the change to Linux will involve some staff time, possibly bringing on some temporary IT staff to help with the changeover, and possibly retraining existing IT staff or hiring an additional sysadmin or two, and at least minor internal retraining for all staff about applications. Stress that by making a minor outlay to make the change now, the many kinds of long-term savings we've enumerated here can occur in the future.
Fabulous! If you push the reinstall rate back from 1 per node per year to one per node per 3 years (or even less with something like Debian) you save about $120 per node per annum in admin time alone, to say nothing of the value of user's time. If you go whole hog and use diskless, this drops even more, as does the replacement rate and hardware failure rate. Note that I haven't mantioned cost of software yet, and this is only a couple of aspects of ROI.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Sir, you are very very good - far better than I at political debate. Thank you for pointing out the holes in my argument. I should point out that I am not really an anti-closed source zealot - were I forced to define my position, "moderately pro-open-source" would do. Well fought!
I'm the stranger...posting to
"If elected, I promise only to buy chairs from Company X! VOTE ME!"
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
It does not seem that many people have realised the fact that this man is a troll; the story is fake just look at his posting history. Christ...is it really that hard to see? I must say, however, that it is a good and pretty funny one.
Because there's no insight in that argument. I've personally known a crack whore baby factory, and the thought of her makes me sick. Welfare is shit, it's degrading to Americans, and it should be eliminated.
...I see a large middle ground as preferable to a small (15%? I forget) portion of the populace controlling 80% of the wealth.
I just love statistics (sarcasm,) especially when used so gracefully.
Sounds eerily similar to the bullshit campaign Gore used last time around. Let me explain why that stat is pure shit:
Let's say we have 5 people. Each person makes $1 per day at work base salary. One of those people is the manager, who gets $3 more per day because of his hard work and promotion to a higher position. So, that person gets paid $4 while the others just get $1, bringing the total amount paid to all employees $8. That's an atrocity!!! 20% of the workers now control 50% of the money!!! Oh GOD, let's ban capitalism right away and give that whole Communism thing another go-round!!!
OK I'll stop with the sensationalism. The point is that I have no problem with a few people being rich and a few people being poor, because I'm a competitor and I plan on being successful. If I fail, so be it, I'm not going to accept money from the government. If I succeed, I'm going to be extremely pissed off that 60% of my money goes to paying for slack asses to live. In life there are winners and losers, I believe Darwin referred to it as the process of natural selection. We need to stop forcing the winners to bail the losers out. Churches, community groups, families, things like that should be (and would be if people didn't have to pay so many taxes) the benefactors to the needy, not the government and my hard earned paycheck.
~ now you know
Create a plan on how to use the money you
saved by not using Microsoft, or say that
you will give x dollars back to each taxpayer.
Possibly you could create a digital government
initiative which would reduce costs and provide
jobs to local talent pool, though it would not
be easy to show how/when you would save money.
Perhaps easiest is to look at example of a city
which has switched and modify it for your needs.
Also, you could calculate your liability in the
event that you actually had to pay Microsoft for
all of the liscenses and upgrades that they require. Perhaps it would work out to something
significant.. this money could be again, given back to the people, or better yet show some leadership and use it to hire people who can
save you more. Open source isn't just about money, it also means people can modify the code.
That's a community project and you could foster
the development of solutions for government starting at home, and take advantage of work done
elsewhere for other local governments.
Also you could check and see how many people have
ADSL or cable Internet access and see how happy they are. Maybe linux could be part of an initiative to give good access or other services to homeowners courtesy of the city and open source.
Don't.
Or rather, don't make open source a focal point in your campaign because you'll just get 40,000 glazed eyes, and 40,000 people who will think you're a nut who has focused on some small aspect of the campaign rather than the "big issue" ideas such as city management, police, fire, and schools.
Of course if you do put together a position paper on your overall campaign, you may want to toss out open source as a line item, or a minor talking point. But by and large, think of a campaign as a very large job interview in front of 40,000 potential employers who don't give a damn and who can't be bothered to read your resume.
If I were you, in this current election cycle, I would concern myself with police first, schools second, and local concerns third. If open source even comes up, talk about it as a potential tax savings that can potentially be used to help fund police efforts or whatever.
By the way, a realistic estimate of the cost to transition a town to open source should factor in the cost to retrain users and the cost for your town's MIS department to make the transition in terms of lowered productivity and consulting time. And while overall you probably will save a fair amount of money, realistically speaking the fiscal savings over the course of a year may not buy one police squad car. (Not that the savings is insignificant, but in the scope of running a town, it's relatively small chump change.)
Oh, and by the way, slightly off topic: beware political math done by any of your opponents! When I helped my brother win in the city council in Fresno several years back, it was done largely because he went up against an opponent who tried to claim that a $1 million savings in one place could be used to hire a hundred police officers and pay their salaries for one year. (Do the math: factoring in training costs and the cost of supplies, what's left wouldn't pay minimum wage.)
Oh, and beware the last minute advertising blitz! That is, beware of your opponents taking out a whole bunch of last minute advertising which sways the voters away from you. The last election cycle, my brother was defeated because his opponent violated campaign financing rules (a criminal offense in this state) to buy advertising that painted my brother as a crook. (The irony there should be obvious.)
Anyways, good luck!
Thanks, folks. The answers that seem to be the most correctish are the ones that read "what are you, stupid?" The point being that this is a topic of such piddling interest and without bearing on the Real World(tm) that it has nothing to do with a city councilor, least of all with a campaign. It's the IT guy's job, end of story, for the most part. I had suspected this to be the case, but figured that it was something worth asking /. about.
:) Thanks, all.
Now I know.
-Waldo Jaquith
There seems to be a general perception in the middle/upper class that poverty is the fault of the poor for not uplifting themselves. This is a good sign of a complete misunderstanding of the socioeconomic system.
Let's start with minimum wage. You're right: its a minumum. It has nothing to do with the cost of living, but with the cost of surviving. It is set according to the requirements of a statistically average poor household (2.5 kids, high density housing, 1 working parent), and should allow them to maintain basic human standards of living according to the International Declaration of Human Rights.
So why should a bunch of capatalists be interested in such bullshit? Why don't they just get skills and improve their lives?
Because you, working on your expensive computer in your suburban home, require unskilled labour. Because you aren't prepared to fix your own potholes, take your garbage to a landfill or recycling site, sweep the streets, mow the verges, or watch for cracked beer bottles on a production line and smash them so that you can enjoy a cold one at the pub.
And because capatalists put too much emphasis on skill, and undervalue basic services of this nature, the system can't work without intervention at a political level.
The paradox that arises is that you can train unskilled people, but that leaves a vacuum for unskilled labour and an abundance of low-skill labour. The economic of supply and demand kicks in, and you end up with situations that have been seen in Germany and the far east: production line workers (low/moderate skill) earning less than menial labourers (street sweepers, etc), because no-one with skill is prepared to do such an arbitrary job.
An ecnonomic system, like a political system, is a compromise between government and individuals. Some individuals want complete equity in distribution, some want complete anarchy. The compromise is the point at which restrictions are placed: with capatalism the point is close to anarchy.
This compromise is needed because in a pure capatalist society, those with money can dictate to those without. Even a highly skilled individual cannot earn a good salary if companies are not prepared to pay one. Competition and demand only work to a limited extent: if all companies recognise that they can get a resource cheaper, they will force such a response from the market.
Notice how consumers are generally unable to apply pressure to large companies, but the reverse is not true. Microsoft, Sony, and Universal come to mind. When dealing with necessary resources (like a job) as opposed to optional or luxury items, the laws of supply and demand largely go out of the window.
In other words, the job of a capatalist government is (amongst others) to ensure that there is an unlimited ability to grow money, but that must be balanced against the rights of individuals to earn money, and the cost and value of services that need to be provided to society. The prevention of collusion and the use of minimum wage are extremely effective in creating such a balance.
Democracy is not about listening to the rule of the majority. It is about accomodating the majority while protecting them and the rights of all minorities. Capatalism is inherently at odds with democracy, which is why most first world countries tend towards socialism (especially in Europe).
i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
That's just a cliche... When it comes down to it, a voter is just a person when in the voting booth. Don't forget, just because you flipped heads 50 times in a row doesn't mean that the chance of the next flip coming up tails is greater than 50 percent, 'cuase it's not. Aggregates are nice, but they aren't reality.
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
Don't think too hard, because you won't be in any office.
Councilmen don't make decisions about PC stuff, civil service people do. This is not a hot-button issue that anyone outside of the IT community cares about one way or another.
The big money in government is spent on professional services during installation -- not software.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
I agree with all this. The word to use is "Transparency" as in "...and efforts to improve government transparency both now and the the future." If this stirs some emotions, elaborate a little.
Open source definately can help with government transparency since any audit can be more complete, and the data -- the work -- of the governement does not become stale or unretrievable.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Let me tell you how it really works: the minimum wage is set by the legislature according to the pressures of trade unions and populists (the former want labor priced higher to decrease competitive pressure on their members, the latter so that they can talk up "all that they've done" for that fraction of their constituents who remain employable at the higher minimum) versus the employers, particularly small business (who are responsible for a lot of the entry-level employment opportunities and whose competitiveness is most affected by the minimum wage). The political class uses the minimum wage to extort contributions from the competing interests so that they don't get trampled in the process.
"Now is the time that men work quietly in the fields, and women weep softly in the kitchen; the Legislature is in session, and no man's property is safe." - Daniel Webster
It's no paradox; it's called "non-monetary interest" or "deferred gratification". People do what they find rewarding. People (mostly women, but both sexes) remove themselves from the workforce to raise children. People live on poverty-level stipends as graduate students, in the interest of getting more education and a better position later. (Need I mention that highly-paid unskilled labor tends to be replaced by automation, and automation is created by highly-skilled people? Should I add that automation increases the productivity per hour of work and raises the general standard of living?)If people would rather work at a low-skill position than an unskilled position despite the latter paying more, it obviously has some other kind of reward. Prospects for advancement are one such reward, emotional gratification is another. However, one usually finds such situations where wages are set by government fiat, such as the higher wages of bus drivers over doctors in the (defunct) Soviet Union.
Not in the USA, it's not; it's more of an oligarchy. But this is a symptom of the political class holding out laws for sale to the highest bidder; if the political class had no such power (such as if it was forbidden to exercise such powers), the problem would cease to exist. Hah! A highly-skilled individual can earn whatever people are willing to pay, unless the government steps in and forbids individuals from running their own businesses and effectively chains them to one other another s\l\a\v\e\m\a\s\t\e\r corporate employer. The political class has a strong interest in doing this, because a few large organizations are much easier to shake down and/or control than a horde of small ones. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch, and don't delude yourself otherwise. Constitutional democracy is better, but still not perfect. The political class is too good at finding its way around constraints on its power. As practiced in Europe, this appears to set up against the "right" of the individual to be unemployed even if they would prefer to have a job; the unemployment rate in Europe was running over twice that of the USA the last time I checked. The minimum wage is one of the things keeping people from getting jobs, as any job which doesn't produce enough value to exceed the minimum wage will not exist even if a job-seeker would happily take it. Of course capitalism is anti-democratic. Capitalism is about liberty, the freedom to do things without having to obtain someone else's approval first. Democracy as practiced by socialist states in Europe has ossified, but few of its citizens seem to be able to see the source of their troubles, and fewer still are ready to make the required changes.That's all right, the USA can use the influx of your disaffected entrepreneurs.
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
And Windows is different?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing