The End of Crypto Currency?

The future of cryptocurrency was looking good in early 2018, as prices rose higher and more people began to buy. Many people were growing rich off of bitcoin mining and other types of currency mining. But this inevitable rise is also followed by inevitable fall, as in most bubble economies. Competing currencies may have something to do with it, as speculators  begin jumping ship to look for the next big e-currency, like Ethereum and Tether. (Forbes). As Bitcoin becomes more popular, more new investors may unbalance the price.

In many ways the bitcoin boom is reminiscent of the early 2000s dot com boom. Massive amounts of hype surrounding the idea of online businesses over-saturated the market and caused investors to look elsewhere. The amount of crypto currencies continues to grow and includes Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tether, Classic, Dogecoin, Neo and others. (Financemagnates)

If the erratic trend of bitcoin continues, I suspect it will go the way of the dot com bubble, and cause massive damage to consumer confidence in e-currency in general.

Electoral College: Yay or Nay?

The 2016 elections were some of the most contentious and controversial elections in political history.

Many of that contention rests on the electoral college, the system responsible for electing the president of the United States. This post from election prediction website FiveThirtyEight shows the major discrepancy in prediction vs outcome: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Does the electoral college really represent the rule of the majority? Some would say that by ignoring the popular vote during 2016, the electoral college does in fact ignore it. But when the founding fathers designed the electoral college, they were thinking at the state level. So in a way the EC does represent the people, not at an individual level, but at a state level. The State’s population is the one who decides for the state itself.

If changes are to take place in the electoral college than they must happen at the state level. As it is, the EC guarantees power to the states to make their own choices in the presidential election

Force or Reward?

The civic responsibility of U.S citizens is just that, responsibility. While people refusing to vote is a problem, it cannot be solved unless two options are given. Option one is the stick method. This method involves penalties for non-voters, including fines and possibly jail time. While this method would seem to be the easiest one to implement, in the long run it would actually harm the voting population and turn out rate. It all depends on how Americans view time and personal freedom.

People don’t like to be told what to do. The idea of freedom is deeply ingrained in the American psyche. The act of voting feels like an infringement on their time and energy. They choose to not vote, and thus dedicate their time to more personal and important things in their life. The only way to actually counteract this is to appeal to something that could help grow their own personal freedoms: money.

By making voting a payed activity, Americans don’t need to feel too inconvenienced to vote. And if people were payed to vote it may also boost the economy thru extra spending cash and time spent out and about. Many complaints levelled at “millennial voters” is their little interest in politics and inability to find jobs. However due to inflation and a crowded job market, both of these activities become extremely difficult. Offering compensation to voters would help the younger generation stay on their feet and get them more engaged with the political community.