Please vote

EconTalk rocks! I voted. Updated my Facebook status with a charge to vote to my friends (probably only two of whom have listened to the podcast). Posted an entry on my mostly inactive blog but with a still decent RSS subscription base. I'm trying to stuff the ballots here for you Russ. Good luck!

A,

I am not wasting time anymore than you are in your response to me.


When Prof. Roberts posted his plea for votes, I voted immediately. It was an instinctual reaction because I truly value EconTalk and I thought my utility would be increased if EconTalk were to win, or maybe just from my show of support.


It was only after I voted that I wanted to see if others approached this as they would a true political election. Dr. Boudreaux has openly advocated on this blog for not voting for political elections. Dr. Roberts offered this year that he may not vote (to my knowledge he never revealed whether he did). I consider them both superior to me in the economic way of thinking. I come here to learn from them and from the commenters. My post was an attempt to find out why the economic way of thinking led them to spend time advocating against voting in the November election but, in Dr. Robert's case, actively promoting voting in a near meaningless survey.

The answer, I think, is that the poll matters much more to Dr. Roberts than it does to me.

Russ Wood,

You seem to wasting a lot of your valuable time in regret over your vote. I get utility from expressing my support for the blog, as well as the small chance of decisiveness.

I understand my vote is much more meaningful here than in a general political election. However, this election is of no value to me.

If it is of no value to you, then you shouldn't vote in it.

You got my vote, and congrats on building such a great resource!

Professor Roberts: Keep posting these requests for votes. I don't remember this everyday, so your best bet is to keep reminding me and all your listeners/readers.

Thanks

Andrew

Russ Wood:

Just to clairfy, the economic way of thinking does not say that one should not vote, but merely demonstrate how the act of voting should be discounted in one's utility function (just as Blackadder has pointed out).

Your perception of net benefit (how much better was one candidate over the other) is subjective to your preferences, as is the act of the "warm fuzzies" one might get from the mere act of voting.

Blackadder,

I understand my vote is much more meaningful here than in a general political election. However, this election is of no value to me. What stake do I have in the outcome?

From an economic standpoint, why should I vote? The economic way of thinking suggested I should not have voted in the November elections, but now suggests I should for a frivolous pat on the back?

The argument against voting in the November election was that where one's vote would be one among millions, the chances of it being decisive are minuscule. Here, by contrast, one's vote would be seven among a few thousand.

Vote early. Vote often.

Just like in Chicago.

Russ,

From an economic standpoint, why should I vote?


The economic way of thinking suggested I should not have voted in the November elections, but now suggests I should for a frivolous pat on the back?

Just curious. I did vote for EconTalk as I thoroughly enjoy it, but now admit I did it without thinking about the value of my time.

Done. This American Life only needs to broadcast a request for votes over the radio in the final days to gain the edge. It's supposed to be a "web award". Disqualifying these cross-media players would be more interesting at this point.

You can use all of those seven for EconTalk if you're passionate about EconTalk. Or you can vote once. Or you can vote five times for EconTalk and twice for another choice.

But there's still only one winner, so it's not a market.