I am new to political forums but after the complete joke of a decision on the last election i have found myself completley frustrated with how our "system" works . I have one very simple idea that I think could help emensly and not just to the Rebublican / Conseravtives .
My primary idea is to only allow people who are paying for the government choose its make up . Basically in order to be eligable to vote you have to have filled a tax return the year prior , that way only people who are paying have a say ! Maybe i am way off but makes sense to me ......... IMOP if this was in place we would have a very different list of elected officials .
that's not how democracy works.
Quote from: Halford9 on November 11, 2012, 02:15:44 AM
that's not how democracy works.
Were not a Democracy Dammit!
Were a Republic, and SLC is right, it's how our country started out, where only the land owner had a vote, because he alone had a vested interest.
As I remember there are people that have filled a tax return that have payed no tax at all. That way they can get more free money from the working class. :popcorn:
Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2012, 04:53:15 AM
Were not a Democracy Dammit!
:thumbup:
Still, how do you ever take away a "right" once the mob has it? Nice to kick around ideas, but it can't/wont ever happen.
I'm afraid we're jut gonna have to take our medicine and prepare for what we're gonna go through. There's really no way out except complete societal collapse. What's rebuilt will be more what was envisioned by Saul Alinski and not Thomas Jefferson. It was a great REPUBLIC while it lasted, but it's over.
Quote from: Yawn on November 11, 2012, 05:20:12 AM
:thumbup:
Still, how do you ever take away a "right" once the mob has it? Nice to kick around ideas, but it can't/wont ever happen.
I'm afraid we're jut gonna have to take our medicine and prepare for what we're gonna go through. There's really no way out except complete societal collapse. What's rebuilt will be more what was envisioned by Saul Alinski and not Thomas Jefferson. It was a great REPUBLIC while it lasted, but it's over.
No wonder were in this mess, the libs are ignorant, as evidenced by this ones quote.
Quote from: Halford9 on November 11, 2012, 02:15:44 AM
that's not how democracy works.
It's nice to bounce around these ideas. Unfortunately, for any of them to even be considered, we would need a minimum 2/3 majority of government, ( 2 out of three branches), that was made up of "conservative" republicans.
I'm not holding my breath.
Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2012, 04:53:15 AM
Were not a Democracy Dammit!
Funny; Mitt Romney and other conservatives loved talking about promoting "democracy" by installing Republics in the Middle East. Maybe you could realize that democracy is simply used in place of republic nowadays, and to stop semantics whoring.
Quote
Were a Republic, and SLC is right, it's how our country started out, where only the land owner had a vote, because he alone had a vested interest.
So who speaks for the rest of the populace?
Oh, and in that case, should tax evaders such as Mitt Romney, with his 13% income tax rate, be allowed to vote?
You know your party is dying when you have to concoct elaborate voter suppression schemes to have a chance of winning anything.
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 11, 2012, 09:36:25 AM
Funny; Mitt Romney and other conservatives loved talking about promoting "democracy" by installing Republics in the Middle East. Maybe you could realize that democracy is simply used in place of republic nowadays, and to stop semantics whoring.
So who speaks for the rest of the populace?
Oh, and in that case, should tax evaders such as Mitt Romney, with his 13% income tax rate, be allowed to vote?
You know your party is dying when you have to concoct elaborate voter suppression schemes to have a chance of winning anything.
Wow, the ignorance in your post is mind boggling.
Answer this one question:
Are we a Republic or not, Yes or No.
Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2012, 09:45:31 AM
Wow, the ignorance in your post is mind boggling.
Answer this one question:
Are we a Republic or not, Yes or No.
Yes. But we are a heavily democratized republic. We select senators and House members by popular vote. And in all practicability, we directly select the president as well. So while we still elect representatives, that's done so directly.
Now, would you like me to pull up a list of conservative politicians that have called America a democracy?
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 11, 2012, 09:36:25 AM
So who speaks for the rest of the populace?
Oh, and in that case, should tax evaders such as Mitt Romney, with his 13% income tax rate, be allowed to vote?
You know your party is dying when you have to concoct elaborate voter suppression schemes to have a chance of winning anything.
I am not going to get into the semantics of what a person has to pay in order to recieve the privlage , IMOP that takes away the beauty of the idea , if you file tax's that is enough , leave it to the IRS to determ if your filing correctly , and to the rest of the populas ................... proper motivation i guess to get there A** up everyday and go to work win / win :thumbup: . And if your not going to work and not paying for the things being voted on why should you have a say ? By birth right ? God forbid any one today actually "earn" a privlage .
Quote from: walkstall on November 11, 2012, 05:09:22 AM
As I remember there are people that have filled a tax return that have payed no tax at all. That way they can get more free money from the working class. :popcorn:
Like i said above , let the IRS sort out if there in the tax code law , simple as that no need to over complicate .
Quote from: SLC conserve on November 11, 2012, 12:04:55 AM
I am new to political forums but after the complete joke of a decision on the last election i have found myself completley frustrated with how our "system" works . I have one very simple idea that I think could help emensly and not just to the Rebublican / Conseravtives .
My primary idea is to only allow people who are paying for the government choose its make up . Basically in order to be eligable to vote you have to have filled a tax return the year prior , that way only people who are paying have a say ! Maybe i am way off but makes sense to me ......... IMOP if this was in place we would have a very different list of elected officials .
Back to the OP, even illegals get W2 forms, even the illegals that receive SSI get a W2.
You have the right idea, I just see issues with the way we let illegals tap our treasure.
Sad isn't it?
Quote from: Solar on November 12, 2012, 08:07:23 PM
Back to the OP, even illegals get W2 forms, even the illegals that receive SSI get a W2.
You have the right idea, I just see issues with the way we let illegals tap our treasure.
Sad isn't it?
I def agree its sad , but w-2 or not they would still have to "file there return , which would mean they need a legit SSN # , if they actually found a way to file then maybe they would deserve the right , if every elegal that was here was paying taxe's how much do you think it would impact our current need for more revinues ? Probably would be quite a bit .
I don't understand why it is so difficult to come here legally. We did it twice.
Quote from: SLC conserve on November 12, 2012, 09:37:48 PM
I def agree its sad , but w-2 or not they would still have to "file there return , which would mean they need a legit SSN # , if they actually found a way to file then maybe they would deserve the right , if every elegal that was here was paying taxe's how much do you think it would impact our current need for more revinues ? Probably would be quite a bit .
But they are already getting free money through SSI, and the Govt takes it's cut off the top.
As a person claiming poverty, they get it all back at filing time.
Where is the incentive to vote for the best interest of the country and not their own self interests?
I agree in principle, we just need to actually enforce the laws in place.
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 11, 2012, 09:48:20 AM
Yes. But we are a heavily democratized republic. We select senators and House members by popular vote. And in all practicability, we directly select the president as well. So while we still elect representatives, that's done so directly.
Now, would you like me to pull up a list of conservative politicians that have called America a democracy?
The people who founded this Republic,
NEVER meant for it to be a democracy. They were well educated men
ESPECIALLY IN CLASSICAL HISTORY, and they had seen the fate of democracies throughout history. All those democracies eventually foundered on the MOB. There is nothing worse then giving those who don't pay into the public treasury, any say on the spending of the public treasury.
Quote from: SLC conserve on November 11, 2012, 12:04:55 AM
I am new to political forums but after the complete joke of a decision on the last election i have found myself completley frustrated with how our "system" works . I have one very simple idea that I think could help emensly and not just to the Rebublican / Conseravtives .
My primary idea is to only allow people who are paying for the government choose its make up . Basically in order to be eligable to vote you have to have filled a tax return the year prior , that way only people who are paying have a say ! Maybe i am way off but makes sense to me ......... IMOP if this was in place we would have a very different list of elected officials .
That is how it used to be, and how it should be today. My criteria for voting would be:
1 - Homeowner
2 - Not on welfare
You wouldn't see a liberal for centuries.
One last thing. I know it's fingernails across the blackboard of our conservative sensibilities; but perhaps it's time to reconsider a national ID card - with the penalty for carrying a falsified one, or attempting to falsify one, or assisting anyone to gain a falsified one; being the same as high treason. I know the Dems, would try to bury that idea in a hole near the center of the Earth, but I still like to see it purposed. Oh, and I like to see all voting done in person on election day, no early voting, with the only absentee ballots allowed being members of the Armed services on active duty.
I agree with all. I especially agree with this.
QuoteOh, and I like to see all voting done in person on election day, no early voting, with the only absentee ballots allowed being members of the Armed services on active duty.
This is a recipe for Democrat fraud. On principle it's wrong. Voting shouldn't be TOO easy. People who CARE should have to work for the opportunity to vote. It helps weed out those who don't pay attention until the day before an election.
Quote from: mdgiles on November 13, 2012, 10:15:41 AM
One last thing. I know it's fingernails across the blackboard of our conservative sensibilities; but perhaps it's time to reconsider a national ID card - with the penalty for carrying a falsified one, or attempting to falsify one, or assisting anyone to gain a falsified one; being the same as high treason. I know the Dems, would try to bury that idea in a hole near the center of the Earth, but I still like to see it purposed. Oh, and I like to see all voting done in person on election day, no early voting, with the only absentee ballots allowed being members of the Armed services on active duty.
Sadly it's time, it could be a National ID via State level, meaning every state regulates their own data base.
As in Ca, we have strips across the back that have additional info as well as other security features.
Point is, were already required to carry an ID, why not a National one?
Quote from: mdgiles on November 13, 2012, 10:06:42 AM
The people who founded this Republic, NEVER meant for it to be a democracy.
You are correct. But the 17th amendment clearly overrode their wishes. America is not a pure democracy. It is a democratic-republic.
This still doesn't justify voter suppression either way.
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 13, 2012, 01:08:44 PM
You are correct. But the 17th amendment clearly overrode their wishes. America is not a pure democracy. It is a democratic-republic.
This still doesn't justify voter suppression either way.
Explain why someone who doesn't pay into the public treasury, should have any say as to how the public treasury is spent. I don't work for whatever wages you earn, should the posters on this board, have any say in how you spend your wages?
Quote from: mdgiles on November 13, 2012, 01:14:07 PM
Explain why someone who doesn't pay into the public treasury, should have any say as to how the public treasury is spent.
You don't understand why they don't pay into the public treasury. Unless if they're pulling off a Romney and evading taxes (in which case they ought to be locked up and no, they shouldn't be allowed to vote without some major payback), most of these people are too poor to pay taxes. Others are seniors on medicare. Some are disabled. Many are veterans.
QuoteUnless if they're pulling off a Romney and evading taxes
Math, Nate Silver. Math.
You do realize TAX EVASION is a CRIME, right? Can you explain how he got away with this caper?
Quote from: Yawn on November 13, 2012, 01:21:53 PM
Math, Nate Silver. Math.
You do realize TAX EVASION is a CRIME, right? Can you explain how he got away with this caper?
He used tax loopholes and stored money overseas (I love America! :rolleyes:). I guess technically, he wasn't evading taxes...just relocating his wealth. Whatever.
"loopholes" = DEDUCTIONS. That's not a CRIME. What CRIME has he committed?
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 13, 2012, 01:16:39 PM
You don't understand why they don't pay into the public treasury. Unless if they're pulling off a Romney and evading taxes (in which case they ought to be locked up and no, they shouldn't be allowed to vote without some major payback), most of these people are too poor to pay taxes. Others are seniors on medicare. Some are disabled. Many are veterans.
AS I SAID BEFORE YOU STARTED INTO YOUR USUAL EXCUSES. EXPLAIN WHY SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T SUPPORT THE PUBLIC TREASURY SHOULD HAVE ANY SAY AS TO HOW THAT TREASURY IS DISPENSED. Your simply existence doesn't entitle you to anything, besides your GOD given rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
NOTHING guarantees that you will attain these. And you definitely have no claim on your fellow citizens assisting you in their attainment. As I asked, explain why the members of this board should have a say in how you spend YOUR money.
The kid does what all libs do. He plays fast and loose with terms. Now, someone who takes advantage of legitimate deductions is a CRIMINAL--unless it's him deducting legitimate expenses. Damn liberal hypocrites!
Quote from: mdgiles on November 13, 2012, 01:40:05 PM
AS I SAID BEFORE YOU STARTED INTO YOUR USUAL EXCUSES. EXPLAIN WHY SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T SUPPORT THE PUBLIC TREASURY SHOULD HAVE ANY SAY AS TO HOW THAT TREASURY IS DISPENSED.
Because the government exists to serve the people, and there is no "except for those who don't do X, Y and Z!" caveat.
Now, answer my question. Should veterans who don't pay income taxes be allowed to vote? Yes or no.
QuoteYour simply existence doesn't entitle you to anything, besides your GOD given rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
And privacy, and equal protection under the law, and a host of other rights that ultimately serve to benefit the three you mentioned.
Of course, none of these are absolute. But by your logic, someone from Texas shouldn't be allowed to drive on a state highway in Massachusetts because he didn't pay for it.
There's something called "shared responsibility". I know that, in your brain, this probably reads "communism". But you don't have to worry. It's the basis of society.
-----------
Oh, and if we want to go down the Appeal to the Constitution path, I'll ask you to tell me where in the Constitution is the government given the right to restrict people who do not pay taxes from voting.
QuoteNOTHING guarantees that you will attain these.
What does this have to do with the right to vote?
QuoteAnd you definitely have no claim on your fellow citizens assisting you in their attainment. As I asked, explain why the members of this board should have a say in how you spend YOUR money.
For better or for worse, part of your tax money goes into making sure that I don't purchase illegal substances, that I don't buy a rocket propelled grenade and that I don't hire a prostitute. So even that is not absolute.
But even taxpayers voting determines to an extent the fate of other people's money, so your point is moot, unless if you want to abolish taxation altogether.