Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-02-2013, 06:32 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
Taxation defines citizenship?

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 07:33 AM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2013 07:44 AM by Greatest I am.)
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(10-02-2013 07:48 PM)closet.atheist Wrote:  Anyone who spends money is paying taxes.

Yes but those on the dole pay it with your money. I see that 4 other short sighted shaloow thinkers like paying someone else's taxes.
The current system seems to allow for some fairly obvious abuse. For example, some politicians attempt to buy votes by expanding the welfare state massively - inventing new ways of buying voters' loyalty with tax credits and other hidden taxpayer’s money. It nearly works. In fact left wing governments in the UK have a track record of spending vast amounts of money on welfare and ending up in financial trouble.

It's an easy vote winner because there are a lot more poor and middle class peopl e than there are rich people.

Maybe those who get benefits should be excluded from voting because they are only voting for your money and negating your vote. If you happen to be a taxpayer.

My basic view is what the law of the land in many countries in the past was; no taxation without
representation. In effect that says that if you do not pay taxes or are a taxtaker you have not earned representation through a vote. IOW, if you do not pay for representation, you do not get it.

The logic is clear.

Government is a service and services are never free. The logic is thus sound.


Tax is a payment but do not fixate just on that.
Payment can be made in various ways so do not think I am going after the poor. In the case of Vets,
representation can be earned by serving to protect the country. Those who sometimes pay taxes and at other times take taxes would have to be looked at once a standard is set. If a person pays 15 years out of 20 for instance, he would vote. Someone who only paid 5 years out of 20 and was on the dole or public purse for 15 may not get a vote.


The point is that when more and more fall into the poor categories, their vote can and is bought by the unscrupulous politicians who are elected by promises of a raise in welfare checks.

The rich are getting richer and the poor better off and the middle is squeezed by both side and any election basically becomes a war against the middle thanks to the fact that politicians are owned by the rich.

This is unjust and unsustainable and must end.


Regards

DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 07:45 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(10-02-2013 08:00 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Under 18's that work pay taxes and yet are unable to vote.

Taxation without repersentation anyone?
True. That is not fair to them.
Was that your point?
Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 07:48 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(10-02-2013 08:50 PM)poolboyg88 Wrote:  OP seems to be under the impression that there is only one type of tax. Income? And not property tax, payroll tax, or sales tax..

OP doesn't understand that the middle to poor spend the highest percentage of their income on taxes listed above. Doesn't matter if a population is so impoverished that it's impossible to pay federal tax. They have to buy goods and supplies like anyone else, and they are taxed for it.

OP also seems to be under the impression that you should be able to buy votes. If you have financial power, then only can you have political power. Which only acts to further impoverish and disenfranchise the poor if it's a result of political policy. In OPs example, the tax payers have already profited from the status quo (rich enough to pay "taxes"?), while there are those that haven't (too poor to pay "taxes")
Thanks for telling me what I understand.
Please read the post to closet atheist that this system screwed up and tell me what you know and not what I know then I can respond.

Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 07:53 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(11-02-2013 05:54 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  Prisoners and people with criminal records also work, but are prohibited from voting in certain areas[1]. "According to the Sentencing Project, 5.3 million Americans are denied the right to vote because of a felony conviction"

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_righ...#Prisoners
I take it you do not agree with that policy.
Neither do I if he is a taxpayer.
Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 07:56 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(11-02-2013 08:41 AM)Peterkin Wrote:  Well, that makes good capitalist sense. Whoever has been cheated, dispossessed, robbed, stripped of his economic autonomy, should then also be politically disenfranchised, lest he demand back "even the little which he hath" that's been taken away. Disposable workers; disappearing citizens - Yea!
Exactly. Taxpayers are getting screwed by the government. on one side and the poor on the other.
Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 07:58 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(12-02-2013 07:33 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  The rich are getting richer and the poor better off and the middle is squeezed by both side and any election basically becomes a war against the middle thanks to the fact that politicians are owned by the rich.

This is unjust and unsustainable and must end.
...
The solution is simple: kill both the poor and the rich so the middle can starve to death by themselves without the contribution of the poor. Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 08:06 AM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2013 08:11 AM by Greatest I am.)
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(11-02-2013 10:35 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Poll taxes were one way former confederate states minimized black people voting. I'd rather it be the case that more people pay taxes.

Others mentioned there are a variety of taxes the poor pay--in the US as in many placed, that is of course true. However the US also has the 'earned income tax credit' that essentially rebates many of those taxes (they have a negative income tax rate). A tax system that encourages the electorate to demand government spending without any obligation to paying for the demanded expenses is missing a critical check against government excess.

Well put.
I was starting to wonder where the thinkers were.
Only 2 so far.
That is from MPOV of course.
Let me try to post this again although the system here is screwing it up.


T
he current system seems to allow for some fairly obvious abuse. For example, some politicians attempt to buy votes by expanding the welfare state massively - inventing new ways of buying voters' loyalty with tax credits and other hidden taxpayer’s money. It nearly works. In fact left wing governments in the UK have a track record of spending vast amounts of money on welfare and ending up in financial trouble. It's an easy vote winner because there are a lot more poor and middle class people than there are rich people.

Maybe those who get benefits should be excluded from voting because they are only voting for your money and negating your vote. If you happen to be a taxpayer.
My basic view is what the law of the land in many countries in the past was; no taxation without representation. In effect that says that if you do not pay taxes or are a taxtaker you have not earned representation
through a vote. IOW, if you do not pay for representation, you do not get it.


The logic is clear. Government is a service and services are never free. The logic is thus sound.

Tax is a payment but do not fixate just on that. Payment can be made in various ways so do not think I am going after the poor. In the case of Vets, representation can be earned by serving to protect the country. Those who sometimes pay taxes and at other times take taxes would have to be looked at once a standard is set. If a person pays 15 years out of 20 for instance, he would vote. Someone who only paid 5 years out of 20 and was on the dole or public purse for 15 may not get a vote.

The point is that when more and more fall into the poor categories, their vote can and is bought by the unscrupulous politicians who
are elected by promises of a raise in welfare checks.
The rich are getting richer and the poor better off and the middle is squeezed by both side and any election basically becomes a war against the middle thanks to the fact that politicians are owned by the rich.

This is unjust and unsustainable and must end.

Regards

DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2013, 08:18 AM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2013 08:35 AM by Luminon.)
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
I have to agree with Zat. Monetary contribution is not everything.

The model of voting according to a contribution is a common practice in private corporations, where people join and pool their resources voluntarily to achieve some goal.


I think there is a misunderstanding. Government is not an enterprise. It's a business of nobody and everyone. It is not a corporation where you put in money and you get your share of profits. It's the lowest common denominator and it should equally represent the will and needs of all citizens at a territory. It should do what least can be done for everyone and leave the rest free to claim more by their own labor.

But then of course the government should be strictly separate from businessmen. Municipalities and regions should keep their own taxes to solve their own problems. It makes no sense to pump up most of the money into a central government budget and then what lobbyists can't steal, pump back into regions.

Shortly said, it's not about financial contribution and neither it is about decision-based redistribution. The government should have no opinion, no voice or mind of its own, when it can ask the citizens directly through referendum. It is merely a bureau of serving well-known basic public needs.
Then the question of who pays more should not be a problem. Do not make a throne out of the government and there will be no throng of arses hasting to sit on it.

Again I must agree with Zat. Monetary tax is one thing. But a good statesman should know there is a far more valuable asset. It is a citizen. A citizen of healthy mind and body, interested in education, plannning to have a family, satisfied with the country's university and job opportunities, satisfied with the government actions, materially secure, and I dare to say, a happy citizen, that is the country's greatest asset. Money come and go and can be printed. But if a citizen flees abroad in search of education, work and money, the nation becomes poorer, deader and stupider.

People are not a source of money or taxes. They are a purpose of money. Money are worth nothing if not used for benefit of the people and the environment. People and their environment is the only thing that counts in the long term. Money are imaginary, they are a mere agreement, but we can not eat them nor breathe them, nor build out of them. Money are like energy, they move things around, but there is no such thing as a pure energy without any material basis. Government is the servant that can not serve two masters, people and money.

Governments are today made of big egos. That is a mistake. A big ego sees another ego as a threat. A government as a proud bureau will obey the vices of bureaucracy and not the needs of citizens. It will focus on measurable short-term benefit of money but not on the immeasurable long-term wealth of good citizens. If you see a government that increases taxes and payments and pursues policies that are of no benefit to the citizens (material security, health, education) then it is a corrupt government, that serves itself and the money and not the citizens. It can not be called a democracy.
A good government must see itself as a service, not as a government. It must place the citizen above itself, a valued customer, a valued customer's children and valued seniors who already made their contribution.
A government must achieve such a degree of selflessness, that it will even strive to educate a citizen, who will use critical thinking and will be able to be critical to question everything, specially the government itself. Such an educated citizen is then fit for direct democracy. A good, educated citizen should be a valuable contribution to his nation regardless of taxes he pays and that should enable him to vote and decide national matters.

From that point of view, the establishment of European Union was a big mistake and continues to be a mistake. It is putting the citizens into the service of governments and federal government for the main purpose of becoming an economically globally competitive super-power. Bullshit!

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Luminon's post
12-02-2013, 08:23 AM
RE: Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?
(12-02-2013 04:48 AM)glueparkenigma Wrote:  Leaving the fact that money and so taxed are just made up concepts, and the fact that all men are created equal, if we accept the fact that paying tax somehow makes the person more worthwhile to society (ie they get the privilege to vote) then surely it follows the people that pay more tax should get more votes than other lower taxpayers and so control the political system and eventually who can pay taxes to keep themselves in power.
Sure beats having those who do not pay taxes to maintain our systems having power over those that do.
Right?
Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: