Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 08-09-2012, 01:41 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
9,701 posts, read 5,109,464 times
Reputation: 4270

Advertisements

The problem I'm seeing with the people who support the OP is that they only see voting as something to do to affect what they already have ie voting to lower property tax for their home, or voting to lower spending on schools they don't use.

What is bad or wrong about people who haven't made it, voting to direct resources so that they can make it ie more money for schools, for job training, for businesses in their neighborhood?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:43 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,443,387 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Pancake View Post
I am a firm believer in the ONLY people voting should be property owners and those who actually have a tax liability. What we have now is a large number of non contributors voting for whoever promises them more of other peoples money. That is contradictory to the idea of freedom and success.

Voting could be a reward for finally finding a job for those who are unemployed.

My high school GF inherited $1M on her 18th birthday and the first thing she did was buy a house on the Jersey Shore three blocks from the water, and invested the other $900K. (Great location, but the house itself is just like your typical middle class house, nothing special.)

She still lives in the house (worth $1.5M in 2007), collects investment income, and pays taxes, without actually having a job. Has she earned the right to vote in your world?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:46 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,971 posts, read 44,780,079 times
Reputation: 13681
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good View Post
The problem I'm seeing with the people who support the OP is that they only see voting as something to do to affect what they already have ie voting to lower property tax for their home, or voting to lower spending on schools they don't use.

What is bad or wrong about people who haven't made it, voting to direct resources so that they can make it ie more money for schools, for job training, for businesses in their neighborhood?
We already know more money for schools doesn't work. It's just throwing more good money after bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:47 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,971 posts, read 44,780,079 times
Reputation: 13681
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
My high school GF inherited $1M on her 18th birthday and the first thing she did was buy a house on the Jersey Shore three blocks from the water, and invested the other $900K. (Great location, but the house itself is just like your typical middle class house, nothing special.)

She still lives in the house (worth $1.5M in 2007), collects investment income, and pays taxes, without actually having a job. Has she earned the right to vote in your world?
What are the annual real estate taxes on that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:48 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,659,127 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
what is so unfair about one having skin in the game as a prerequisite to voting?
Oh look. It's another conservative who wants to take away Americans' right to vote. Why do we never see conservatives argue in favor of expanding voting rights? Or even maintaining the voting rights that we've got?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
9,701 posts, read 5,109,464 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
We already know more money for schools doesn't work. It's just throwing more good money after bad.
Throwing money at schools is how we built our public education system into one of the finest in the world by the 70s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:50 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,971 posts, read 44,780,079 times
Reputation: 13681
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good View Post
Throwing money at schools is how we built our public education system into one of the finest in the world by the 70s.
Then what happened? We keep throwing more and more money at it, and it's horrible. Even our best students rank last among their international peers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:51 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,443,387 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Pancake View Post
First, we are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic.

Secondly, what section of the Constitution do you believe this would violate? If your answer is the 15th or 19th Amendment, you better try again. That does not guarantee a right to vote, they simply deal with prohibiting voting due to race or gender.

So does this mean that you (and the OP) acknowledge that renters are second class citizens under the Constitution?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:54 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,094 posts, read 25,996,493 times
Reputation: 6128
I propose that only property owners be allowed to vote.

The only tax that will be collected will be property tax - which obviously can only be paid by property owners.

It is simple and elegant: if you want to vote - you must own property - if you don't want to pay taxes - rent.

(This proposal would disenfranchise most of the liberal inhabitants of New York City - which can't be a bad thing.)

It would also disenfranchinse me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2012, 01:57 PM
 
3,436 posts, read 2,948,111 times
Reputation: 1787
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
Oh look. It's another conservative who wants to take away Americans' right to vote. Why do we never see conservatives argue in favor of expanding voting rights? Or even maintaining the voting rights that we've got?

They want religion (as long as it is Christian) in schools, want to control who marries who and who votes but want no control over guns - something that can be used to kill people. So people who don't own property or pay taxes shouldn't have the right to vote but should have the right to own missile launchers and bazookas.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:13 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top