In countries without mandatory voting, if voting is more inconvenient for certain groups than for others, the latter will be over-weighed in the election. With mandatory voting, casting a valid vote is no more and no less inconvenient than spoiling the ballot, so that’s not an issue—all eligible people who ceteris paribus would prefer, no matter how slightly, to vote will do so.
(Unlike wedrifid I’m not in a country with mandatory voting, BTW.)
I’m tapping out of this conversation. It’s predisposing me towards racism. I’m sure anybody actually interested will have no problem finding a book on game theory.
Well, informed voting is, but how do you reliably check if somebody was well-informed as they voted, to legally enforce it?
Only requiring informed voters to vote would be a potentially useful optimisation. As you point out that distinction does not seem to be practical.
So what problem is mandatory voting supposedly solving again?
In countries without mandatory voting, if voting is more inconvenient for certain groups than for others, the latter will be over-weighed in the election. With mandatory voting, casting a valid vote is no more and no less inconvenient than spoiling the ballot, so that’s not an issue—all eligible people who ceteris paribus would prefer, no matter how slightly, to vote will do so.
(Unlike wedrifid I’m not in a country with mandatory voting, BTW.)
I’m tapping out of this conversation. It’s predisposing me towards racism. I’m sure anybody actually interested will have no problem finding a book on game theory.
Taboo “racism”. From context it seems to mean [having beliefs that while more accurate make me uncomfortable].