U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-02-2016, 11:02 AM
 
11,909 posts, read 14,390,999 times
Reputation: 7541

Advertisements

It would mean even more giveaway programs for landlords. Don't they get enough already?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2016, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,222 posts, read 7,002,169 times
Reputation: 6603
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakkarin View Post
Let's say that only people who own real property ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_property ) are allowed to vote, but that in return the only form of taxation is taxation on property. Would this not incentivize good economic policy since only people who have actual economic resources to lose would have a say while people who don't have property don't need to pay taxes? It just seems reasonable that only the people holding wealth get to decide how said wealth is spent for the whole, as compared to the current system where people just vote themselves into prosperity using other people's stuff.

One thing that is needed is a voter that has at least the IQ of a monkey. Our so called "education" system has been turned into a propaganda system. THE elites that control us are not always the 1%rs but bureaucrats and others that depend on an ignorant citizenry to vote in the programs that keep them in power. A renter should realize that if he votes for HIGH TAXES on those that own the real estate He will be paying those higher taxes through increased rent costs. Recent examples of the total ignorance of the Laws of Reality is the call by many for an increase in the MINIMUM wage to $15.00/hour nationwide.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2016, 10:10 PM
 
Location: The analog world
15,715 posts, read 8,794,392 times
Reputation: 21102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manimuni View Post
Maybe home ownership would be too exclusive. Maybe just proof of employment, and of course proof of citizenship.
So a SAHM would not be permitted to vote? (BTW, I own my home free and clear and our household pays a generous amount of federal and state taxes.) Sorry. I'm not feeling it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2016, 11:25 PM
Status: "I voted!" (set 1 day ago)
 
Location: CO/UT/AZ/NM Catch me if you can!
4,284 posts, read 3,966,935 times
Reputation: 9493
Quote:
Originally Posted by augiedogie View Post
Colorado Rambler wrote:


This is exactly what Democratic voters hope they are doing. Just look at the increase in the number of people on food stamps, even though supposedly we have a national unemployment rate of 5%? Remember the video of the woman in Chicago at Obama's victory celebration that believed that Obama would now pay all their expenses. The Democrats have been great at handing out a free living to their voters. SSI, welfare, food stamps, Sec 8, heat assistance, subsidized college education, school lunch program, jobs programs, etc, etc, etc. That's why so many of the underclass vote for them.
Well, I tend to disagree with your assessment. The statistics I've seen from reputable sources do not indicate that the "underclass" are rolling in gov't benefits. In my own recent experience, admittedly anecdotal, I was talking to a guy in his late 20's or early 30's whom I was meeting for the first time. I made the usual chit-chat, asking him about his job, etc. He replied that currently he had 3 jobs and was also getting SNAP (foodstamps). I expressed surprise that even working 3 jobs, he had to get gov't assistance. He replied, "Oh, I'm doing great financially. I just go into social services and lie about my income, so I can have extra money to spend on stuff besides food." I wanted to give that little, law breaking freeloader the slap across the face he so richly deserved. Kid was going to vote for Donald Trump, too! Our political system has so deteriorated that both parties just find ways to get large numbers of sycophants to vote for them. And the thing is all both parties do is tell lie after lie. For example, Hillary does NOT love every single illegal immigrant from Mexico, and if elected, she'll just forget most every speech she made on the subject. Trump (if he gets the Republican nod) will quickly forget any populist ideas and do all he can for Wall Street. Anymore, I call it the War of the Reptilicans vs the Demoncrats. And no matter who wins, the American people still lose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Athol, Idaho
2,182 posts, read 1,059,331 times
Reputation: 3184
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdelena View Post
1790
Only white male adult property-owners have the right to vote.

1810
Last religious prerequisite for voting is eliminated.

1850
Property ownership and tax requirements eliminated by 1850. Almost all adult white males could vote.

1855
Connecticut adopts the nation's first literacy test for voting. Massachusetts follows suit in 1857. The tests were implemented to discriminate against Irish-Catholic immigrants.

1870
The 15th Amendment is passed. It gives former slaves the right to vote and protects the voting rights of adult male citizens of any race.

1920
Womens suffrage.
Good way to point out that doing what the OP suggests is a huge move backwards.

I'm a real estate investor so such a discriminating law wouldn't oust me but I would for sure vote against it. You have to make an enormous purchase in order to vote? NO. Being an adult citizen and being required to prove that you are should be all that is required.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 11:47 AM
 
8,301 posts, read 3,469,221 times
Reputation: 1589
Quote:
Originally Posted by I love boots. View Post
Good way to point out that doing what the OP suggests is a huge move backwards.

I'm a real estate investor so such a discriminating law wouldn't oust me but I would for sure vote against it. You have to make an enormous purchase in order to vote? NO. Being an adult citizen and being required to prove that you are should be all that is required.
Did the OP suggest that the amount of land/property had to be huge?

I would envision some partisan Super Pac buying up land by the sq inch and handing over the ownership to whatever voters they prefer.

Own A Piece Of America - Unique Gifts and Personalized Gift Ideas
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 11:50 AM
 
2,746 posts, read 3,439,634 times
Reputation: 4255
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakkarin View Post
Let's say that only people who own real property ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_property ) are allowed to vote, but that in return the only form of taxation is taxation on property. Would this not incentivize good economic policy since only people who have actual economic resources to lose would have a say while people who don't have property don't need to pay taxes? It just seems reasonable that only the people holding wealth get to decide how said wealth is spent for the whole, as compared to the current system where people just vote themselves into prosperity using other people's stuff.
I've rented apartments pretty much all of my adulthood and i paid taxes in the form of rent. If you don't think the landlord includes property taxes into the rent payment you are naive. I also pay taxes on every purchase i make and live in a state with the 2nd highest gas tax in the country of .50 a gallon.

Also I've rented a few places where the landlord turned out to be a slumlord. I don't need slumlords voting for my next president.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 12:27 PM
 
10,875 posts, read 6,589,361 times
Reputation: 6161
A better idea is to limit voting to those who pay federal income taxes, rather than allowing those who use the tax system as a welfare program to further loot taxpayers by voting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Iceland
876 posts, read 608,079 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
Did the OP suggest that the amount of land/property had to be huge?
No, simply owning a piece of land/estate in any form would would be enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie1278 View Post
I've rented apartments pretty much all of my adulthood and i paid taxes in the form of rent. If you don't think the landlord includes property taxes into the rent payment you are naive.
Then perhaps one could make it so that income taxes are used instead, but only registered property owners have to pay it. There would of course be those who would not register their property to avoid the tax, but this would also mean not getting to vote.

EDIT: I should add that owning a car should also count as property since it means you will be using the roads paid for by government, and thus you should be considered a property owner and given the right to vote and be taxed.

Last edited by hakkarin; 04-04-2016 at 02:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 02:20 PM
 
Location: The analog world
15,715 posts, read 8,794,392 times
Reputation: 21102
Really I find this entire thread obnoxious. If you are eighteen and a citizen of the United States, you may register to vote, and that's the way it should be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top