Fair Choice Party Vote Scaling Techniques Copyright © 2002 : Steve Glickman
	FairChoice.org
First Election
Person Wealth Position	Wealth	Percentage of Wealth	Arc Vote	Inverse Percentage Vote	Robert's Way
1	$     5,000	1%	1.00	0.99	2.10
2	$     7,500	1%	0.99	0.99	1.73
3	$   15,000	2%	0.97	0.98	1.37
4	$   22,000	3%	0.94	0.97	1.25
5	$   25,000	3%	0.90	0.97	1.22
6	$   25,000	3%	0.83	0.97	1.22
7	$   40,000	5%	0.75	0.95	1.14
8	$   60,000	7%	0.63	0.93	1.09
9	$ 120,000	14%	0.46	0.86	1.05
10	$ 550,000	63%	0.00	0.37	1.01
10	$ 869,500	100%	7.47	9	13.18
			Everybody remains at equal distance from (0,0) regardless of gap size between rich and poor.	Vote size calculated by the inverse of the individuals wealth as a percentage of the entire wealth of the population. Rewards society for decreasing wealth gap between rich and poor.	Everybody gets 1 vote, plus more depending on their income compared to the wealthiest. Rewards society for decreasing wealth gap between rich and poor. (I'm a little confused exactly how to formulate his ideas.)
Second Election - Smaller gap between rich and poor.
Person Wealth Position	Changed Wealth	Percentage of Wealth	Arc Vote Same results	Inverse Percentage Vote	Robert's Way
1	$   11,892	1%	1.00	0.99	1.34
2	$   16,119	2%	0.99	0.98	1.25
3	$   27,108	3%	0.97	0.97	1.15
4	$   36,128	4%	0.94	0.96	1.11
5	$   39,764	5%	0.90	0.95	1.10
6	$   39,764	5%	0.83	0.95	1.10
7	$   56,569	7%	0.75	0.93	1.07
8	$   76,673	9%	0.63	0.91	1.05
9	$ 128,948	15%	0.46	0.85	1.03
10	$ 403,926	48%	0.00	0.52	1.01
10	$ 836,890	100%	7.47	9	11.22
Send you vote scaling technique to:
Techniques@FairChoice.org
… and we'll try to plot them for you.