So, what's good about people with no assets voting in populist politicians who promise them free goodies, thus bankrupting the system by making it to borrow more money from future generations? This system is bound to collapse sooner rather than later.
So, voting based on the number of assets is the most stable kind of democracy.
In your first paragraph you are describing an effect of democracy on an economic system.
In your second paragraph you seem to say that the architecture of the economic system defines if we have democracy.
Please do not call voting based on NXT assets democracy. It is capitalism.
From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy:
Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens participate equallyeither directly or through elected representativesin the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.Regarding a better approach: I currently don't have one, but I'll think about it. I'm currently thinking "One man, one vote" (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_man,_one_vote), but I see the implemtation problems with this.