The simple switch in the survey, from a verb defining an action (voting), to a noun defining the self, (voter), dramatically increased turnout.
And if they did, did we wonder what awful future lay in wait for self-voters?
WE know the hard-won thrill of Friday-night town halls, when Mr. Romney is often his most giddy self and voters are liable to say anything.
For example, panel 1 shows a case with 3 identical rich (self-interested) voters who have ideal points at r R ⁎ and 2 (self-interested) poor voters with ideal points at r P ⁎.
The problem is that, despite their economic self-interest, voters often elect, and reelect, politicians who enact laws that are inconsistent with such goals.
An heuristic argument commonly invoked to explain this stylized fact resides in the observation that in general, the number of relatively poor (self-interest) voters exceeds that of richer ones.
This result seems in line with the heuristic argument commonly invoked to explain the prevalence of the marginal-rate progressivity, that is, the number of relatively poor (self-interest) voters exceeds that of richer ones.
Fukuyama admits that this Westminster scheme will probably never come to pass, but he clearly wants to remove the budget process from the baleful influence of ignorant, corrupt or self-interested voters -- thus his "democratic dictatorship".
The upper panels show cases with self-interested voters, the lower panels cases where some voters are inequality averse.
Thus, the median-voter model with strictly self-interested voters predicts low redistribution if the rich are in majority but intermediate redistribution if the poor are in majority.
One of the saleswomen politely did what any self-respecting voter would have done, seeing the unruly campaign at her doorstep.
