EXPAND THE VOTE

[Penner]

Hard to tell someone they can be drafted in to war but can not vote.

How different would the world be today if the original requirements for voting as set forth by the Constitution were still in place??

Do you fall into the rich landowning male demo? Is that why you have no problem in denying over half of our population the right to vote?

[nmoore63]

Hard to tell someone they can be drafted in to war but can not vote.

How different would the world be today if the original requirements for voting as set forth by the Constitution were still in place??

Do you fall into the rich landowning male demo? Is that why you have no problem in denying over half of our population the right to vote?

THe challenge is how much is voting a means versuses an ends?

[Penner]

Hard to tell someone they can be drafted in to war but can not vote.

How different would the world be today if the original requirements for voting as set forth by the Constitution were still in place??

Do you fall into the rich landowning male demo? Is that why you have no problem in denying over half of our population the right to vote?

THe challenge is how much is voting a means versuses an ends?

If the idea is taxation with representation then trying to eliminate millions of people from voting because they don't have any money, are black, and/or is a woman isn't really going solve any issues. Landowners are not going to solve the issue- more likely than not, they will be the ones who will vote in people who will start more wars base on political donations/voting (like they do now) and government corruption will probably be even more of a mess than it is today thanks to having a small group of people holding the power and also holding the power to vote these corrupt people in.

[Speaker to Animals]

They shouldn't vote if (1) they are not signed up for the draft or have served or (2) they do not pay taxes.

Which would eliminate most women and minorities. Maybe there was a reason for the original constraints that had nothing to do with muh bigotry and muh sexism..

When people vote who don't pay any of the costs, democracy becomes a gang rape. No?

[Kath]

If the idea is taxation with representation then trying to eliminate millions of people from voting because they don't have any money, are black, and/or is a woman isn't really going solve any issues.

It might solve plenty of issues. Why don't we let children decide what vacations we go on, what we have for dinner, where we live, etc? Let's assume we agree on the answer.

Now, you have people who only survive because they get money from the government. Why should they get to vote on how many bennies they get? Same reason we don't let kids decide if we can have ice cream for dinner.

Let's ask the people who do NOT contribute to society to decide on how much money the people who DO contribute have to fork over to support their asses.

SMH...

I'm totally amiable to requiring contributing to society in order to vote. Maybe it will inspire people to start, you know, participating in society.

[Penner]

If the idea is taxation with representation then trying to eliminate millions of people from voting because they don't have any money, are black, and/or is a woman isn't really going solve any issues.

It might solve plenty of issues. Why don't we let children decide what vacations we go on, what we have for dinner, where we live, etc? Let's assume we agree on the answer.

Now, you have people who only survive because they get money from the government. Why should they get to vote on how many bennies they get? Same reason we don't let kids decide if we can have ice cream for dinner.

Let's ask the people who do NOT contribute to society to decide on how much money the people who DO contribute have to fork over to support their asses.

SMH...

I'm totally amiable to requiring contributing to society in order to vote. Maybe it will inspire people to start, you know, participating in society.

Did I say anything about letting children decided on anything? Honestly, if a 17-year-old can join the military then he/she can vote. This was the case when we changed the voting law from only allowing 21-year-olds to vote to 18-year-olds to vote (sure we had a draft back then but still if a person who is 17 can join the military then I am all for letting them vote as well), roughly 40-50 years ago.

[katarn]

If the idea is taxation with representation then trying to eliminate millions of people from voting because they don't have any money, are black, and/or is a woman isn't really going solve any issues.

It might solve plenty of issues. Why don't we let children decide what vacations we go on, what we have for dinner, where we live, etc? Let's assume we agree on the answer.

Now, you have people who only survive because they get money from the government. Why should they get to vote on how many bennies they get? Same reason we don't let kids decide if we can have ice cream for dinner.

Let's ask the people who do NOT contribute to society to decide on how much money the people who DO contribute have to fork over to support their asses.

SMH...

I'm totally amiable to requiring contributing to society in order to vote. Maybe it will inspire people to start, you know, participating in society.

Did I say anything about letting children decided on anything? Honestly, if a 17-year-old can join the military then he/she can vote. This was the case when we changed the voting law from only allowing 21-year-olds to vote to 18-year-olds to vote (sure we had a draft back then but still if a person who is 17 can join the military then I am all for letting them vote as well), roughly 40-50 years ago.

The children thing, as I understand, was not meant as something you actually said directly. Instead, it's an argument by analogy that could be stated thusly: If we don't let children, who don't earn the money for vacations et al, decide things, why should we let members of society who don't earn the money for stuff decide things?

[nmoore63]

Do you fall into the rich landowning male demo? Is that why you have no problem in denying over half of our population the right to vote?

THe challenge is how much is voting a means versuses an ends?

If the idea is taxation with representation then trying to eliminate millions of people from voting because they don't have any money, are black, and/or is a woman isn't really going solve any issues. Landowners are not going to solve the issue- more likely than not, they will be the ones who will vote in people who will start more wars base on political donations/voting (like they do now) and government corruption will probably be even more of a mess than it is today thanks to having a small group of people holding the power and also holding the power to vote these corrupt people in.

So my farmer buddy, who’s land crosses counties. He only gets to vote on half his farm.

No representation in that taxation.

I am skeptical the ends would be different if he could vote, it he certainly is no part of the process.

Is that an injustice?

[kybkh]

The real question is, would the nature of the voting class be such that they would do a better job managing society than the mobs.

Or would they be Nazis?


History would suggest they wouldn’t be Nazis.

[Penner]

The real question is, would the nature of the voting class be such that they would do a better job managing society than the mobs.

Or would they be Nazis?


History would suggest they wouldn’t be Nazis.

Actually, I would argue that history does suggest they would be Nazis, but this is still all hypothetical.