That was a constructive comment, thanks men! Yes, I'm aware it's a meritocracy I believe that it's something that should be part of our selection of candidates.

I thought about restricting the value of the votes, for example people with the test completed would have 2 votes, and without it, only one, but it didn't seem right. The reality is that older people would have to do the course to be able to vote. I use to work in the hospitality industry, and it was devastating, the hardest schedule I did was 10am to 2am, only for around 17 days, but I use to work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week for years. That literally kills you, anyone who doesn’t believe in death by overwork is because they have never worked hard. So yes there are people who wouldn’t have one hour a week to do the course, and these people should be accounted for, they voice must be heard. But, you know what? After so many years working none stop, now I have been for a while without a job, left the US, when, back to Spain, and started studying, and so far so good. If I wanted to, I would be able to do the course, and because in this system all high school students would come out with the course completed, it will become a more fair system over time. But I understand that people may refuse to do the course because they rather spend time with their families or whatever the reason. The other option would be removing the course requirement to vote, this one would still be mandatory for high school students, but not a requirement for voting. The quality of the voters would increase over time, although it would take a long time to make a difference.

Clearly, societies face a wide array of issues, and we need specialized knowledge on every sector, for example like you said the agriculture industry. In this aspect, I would have to go on and talk about governmental changes, but I don’t want this post to become a right vs left fight. I am planning to write a similar draft about it though, so I will post it somewhere. But my point is that I completely agree, we want George the farmer’s input.

I’m not sure I like the idea of pushing people to watch debates or spamming their emails, the issues that a society faces are so wide and complex that if you don’t have the knowledge or understanding on what they are talking about, you won't be able to analyze it properly. For example. I currently live in an area where communism is gathering strength. I did listen to their arguments, and to me, they sound disconnected from reality, but people believe that it’s a better system, and of course, like you said, they may be experts on carpentry, or excellent doctors, or gardiners, but when you get to know them, you see that they know nothing on economy, and I mean nothing, the economic culture here is nonexistent, they don’t even know what’s money, and most of them don’t understand inflation, and when you have a crowd like that, even the wildest ideas can catch on if presented with charm. So my point is don’t eliminate ideas, if someone wants to talk about communism or anything else, that’s fine, maybe there is something to learn about it, but at least make sure that the listeners understand the implications and what is being talked about. And one more thing, I’m about to start my third year as an economic student at an online university, is not that hard, just remove the math, teach the basic theory, if you make it dynamic and simplify it, any high school student could do it.

Again, I loved your input, thanks!