US Voting Qualifications Thread

[SuburbanFarmer]

Monty -- look at the other side of the coin, what reason do you have to support universal vote? IS there any serious thinker ever that thought it was a good idea?

By 'universal', do you mean non-citizens? I don't think that was Monte's position at all.

And, I have yet to encounter anyone proposing it seriously.

[Smitty-48]

Smitty -- I agree with your criticisms of my proposal for the most part.

A problem without a solution maybe.

Are you sure you know what the problem is? I'm not seeing why you are panicking about spending, the federal budget is about the same as it was in the 1980's; inflation adjusted, but your GDP is 40% greater than it was; inflation adjusted, so in historical terms, referenced to your life so far, spending in relation to GDP is down significantly.

And in terms of entitlements, while entitelment spending has increased, it's been conpensated for by a comensurate reduction in defense spending, you're not spending on the military anywhere near what you used to, in terms of the sustained military spending of the Cold War, so it's actually balancing out.

Basically, Americans seem to be voting for more butter, less guns, slowly but surely over time. What's the big whoop? You planning on invading Russia or something?

[Montegriffo]

Monty -- look at the other side of the coin, what reason do you have to support universal vote? IS there any serious thinker ever that thought it was a good idea?

By 'universal', do you mean non-citizens? I don't think that was Monte's position at all.

And, I have yet to encounter anyone proposing it seriously.

I think by universal Apeman just meant unrestricted, ie all US citizens of age.
I'd be happy to make certain restrictions, those in prison are already denied the vote in the UK and there's an argument to deny the mentally ill.
Everyone else, employed or not, has a skin in the game and excluding non landowners is a backwards step.
Democracy has to be one man(person) one vote, anything else is not a true democracy.

[Smitty-48]

Inflation adjusted from the 1980's, you had a 3 trillion 2016 dollar budget, with a 12 trillion 2016 dollar GDP.

Now you have a 3 trillion 2016 dollar budget, with a 20 trillion 2016 dollar GDP. So net revenue is up 40%.

Oh, you're running a deficit? Easy fix; raise taxes.

[Fife]

Voting leads to having lunatics like Wilson in charge of the Gibs Empire; which, in the case of Wilson, led the entire world directly to the Third Reich and the USSR and red China and 100M+ laid low.

Less voting, sil vous plait.

From MHF anti-hero Hoppe:

Why Democracy Rewards Bad People

Consequently, under democratic conditions the popular though immoral and anti-social desire for another man's property is systematically strengthened. Every demand is legitimate if it is proclaimed publicly under the special protection of "freedom of speech." Everything can be said and claimed, and everything is up for grabs. Not even the seemingly most secure private property right is exempt from redistributive demands. Worse, subject to mass elections, those members of society with little or no inhibitions against taking another man's property, that is, habitual a-moralists who are most talented in assembling majorities from a multitude of morally uninhibited and mutually incompatible popular demands (efficient demagogues) will tend to gain entrance in and rise to the top of government. Hence, a bad situation becomes even worse.

Historically, the selection of a prince was through the accident of his noble birth, and his only personal qualification was typically his upbringing as a future prince and preserver of the dynasty, its status, and its possessions. This did not assure that a prince would not be bad and dangerous, of course. However, it is worth remembering that any prince who failed in his primary duty of preserving the dynasty — who ruined the country, caused civil unrest, turmoil and strife, or otherwise endangered the position of the dynasty — faced the immediate risk either of being neutralized or assassinated by another member of his own family. In any case, however, even if the accident of birth and his upbringing did not preclude that a prince might be bad and dangerous, at the same time the accident of a noble birth and a princely education also did not preclude that he might be a harmless dilettante or even a good and moral person.

In contrast, the selection of government rulers by means of popular elections makes it nearly impossible that a good or harmless person could ever rise to the top. Prime ministers and presidents are selected for their proven efficiency as morally uninhibited demagogues. Thus, democracy virtually assures that only bad and dangerous men will ever rise to the top of government. Indeed, as a result of free political competition and selection, those who rise will become increasingly bad and dangerous individuals, yet as temporary and interchangeable caretakers they will only rarely be assassinated.

[Smitty-48]

Voting leads to having lunatics like Wilson in charge of the Gibs Empire; which, in the case of Wilson, led the entire world directly to the Third Reich and the USSR and red China and 100M+ laid low.

Less voting, sil vous plait.

You're free to move out of the Gibs Empire anytime, they don't do much voting in Russia, and they don't pay their taxes neither, I mean, it's a little colder mind you, but you can still go hunting, the Russians are big on hunting actually.

[StCapps]

Inflation adjusted from the 1980's, you had a 3 trillion 2016 dollar budget, with a 12 trillion 2016 dollar GDP.

Now you have a 3 trillion 2016 dollar budget, with a 20 trillion 2016 dollar GDP. So net revenue is up 40%.

Oh, you're running a deficit? Easy fix; raise taxes.

The soccer moms and vets won't like that option, but otherwise it would be an easy fix, getting the populace to go along with it, that's the hard part, they'd rather just...

[Fife]

Voting leads to having lunatics like Wilson in charge of the Gibs Empire; which, in the case of Wilson, led the entire world directly to the Third Reich and the USSR and red China and 100M+ laid low.

Less voting, sil vous plait.

You're free to move out of the Gibs Empire anytime, they don't do much voting in Russia, and they don't pay their taxes neither, I mean, it's a little colder mind you, but you can still go hunting, the Russians are big on hunting actually.

ZZZZZZ.

[Smitty-48]

Inflation adjusted from the 1980's, you had a 3 trillion 2016 dollar budget, with a 12 trillion 2016 dollar GDP.

Now you have a 3 trillion 2016 dollar budget, with a 20 trillion 2016 dollar GDP. So net revenue is up 40%.

Oh, you're running a deficit? Easy fix; raise taxes.

The soccer moms and vets won't like that option, but otherwise it would be an easy fix, getting the populace to go along with it, that's the hard part, they'd rather just...

Well you do what Trudeau did, you tell them they can have their cake and eat it too, then when they vote you in, you raise taxes to pay for your spending, and then you just defy them to do something about it. And you watch, they won't do a thing.

That's what Ronald Reagan did too, works every time. Fuck Newt Gincrich, whose afraid of Newt Gingrinch? Not Justin Trudeau.

[Speaker to Animals]

Ah yes, Castro's illegitimate substitute band teacher son. I almost forgot about that guy.