US Voting Qualifications Thread

[Speaker to Animals]

Okay. I was wrong.

You sonuvabitch.

Star Citizen is getting ready to launch interplanetary travel in the playable universe.

There will be no Star Citizen

Does it run on Linux?

[SuburbanFarmer]

It depends on what type of taxes you're talking about paying, and what types of issues that qualifies you to vote on.

If I pay sales taxes when I'm buying a strip of scratch-offs, a 40, and a vanilla blunt wrap on my ebt, does that qualify me to tell property owners how much welfare they should give me through their property taxes?

I was thinking income/property taxes, etc. Not consumption taxes

I understand.

If walmart is the largest employer in a small town, and in many cases it is, then all of those people are paying income taxes. If meth addiction is also prevalent in that small town, which in many cases it is, and if a large number of the people in that small town also receive welfare, which in many cases they do, I don't think the simple bullet point about them paying income taxes is enough to erase all other issues.

I agree with speaker that simply owning property alone isn't the only thing to look at, but in a local city council meeting, or in a municipal vote on a bill or tax, I wouldn't put the walmart employees on even footing with the property owners and local business owners.

I think most people understand why we don't let children drive corvettes on the freeway, and why we don't let adults who get too many DUIs have their license back. Different states pick different heights to place those bars, but they all agree those lines need to be defined.

Getting behind the wheel of a city, state, or nation is just as legitimate an issue to restrict as is driving a vehicle. And I'm not opposed to breaking up certain types of votes for different voters in the same way that we break up driving certain types of vehicles for different drivers.

Just because you can drive a car doesn't mean you are qualified to drive a big rig.

Getting one three-hundred-and-fifty-millionth of a say in which talking head sits in front of the machine is hardly 'driving a big rig'.

[Okeefenokee]

Okay. I was wrong.

You sonuvabitch.

Star Citizen is getting ready to launch interplanetary travel in the playable universe.

There will be no Star Citizen

Does it run on Linux?

Don't know if native support is in yet, but I'm sure it will be.

I found this,

https://www.snoost.com/us/blog/play-sta ... mac-linux/

[Okeefenokee]

I was thinking income/property taxes, etc. Not consumption taxes

I understand.

If walmart is the largest employer in a small town, and in many cases it is, then all of those people are paying income taxes. If meth addiction is also prevalent in that small town, which in many cases it is, and if a large number of the people in that small town also receive welfare, which in many cases they do, I don't think the simple bullet point about them paying income taxes is enough to erase all other issues.

I agree with speaker that simply owning property alone isn't the only thing to look at, but in a local city council meeting, or in a municipal vote on a bill or tax, I wouldn't put the walmart employees on even footing with the property owners and local business owners.

I think most people understand why we don't let children drive corvettes on the freeway, and why we don't let adults who get too many DUIs have their license back. Different states pick different heights to place those bars, but they all agree those lines need to be defined.

Getting behind the wheel of a city, state, or nation is just as legitimate an issue to restrict as is driving a vehicle. And I'm not opposed to breaking up certain types of votes for different voters in the same way that we break up driving certain types of vehicles for different drivers.

Just because you can drive a car doesn't mean you are qualified to drive a big rig.

Getting one three-hundred-and-fifty-millionth of a say in which talking head sits in front of the machine is hardly 'driving a big rig'.

Good thing it's not a popular vote, or that comment might have some validity.

[Ex-California]

Then just institute a land/wealth requirement. Don't beat around the bush about it.

No. That's not the point.

People need to be paying into the system if they want to participate in the system

Every time you purchase anything, and pay a tax, you are paying into the system.

True, but there is no federal sales tax either.

[Okeefenokee]

Then just institute a land/wealth requirement. Don't beat around the bush about it.

No. That's not the point.

People need to be paying into the system if they want to participate in the system

Every time you purchase anything, and pay a tax, you are paying into the system.

It's not even the same thing. Your property taxes are bundled in with your house payment right now, so it won't be as visible, but you'll get a tax estimate and then a statement around the end of the year. I think you're in Ohio. Take a look at what your local property taxes are paying for, and ask yourself if those are things that you had access to when you were a renter, even if you weren't paying for them. Then think about the process that lead to those things being chosen as things that should exist, and the people who decided that only the people who own homes should pay for them.

Once you've done that, and have the info, you can come back here and tell us you're fine with other people deciding you should be on the hook, but not them, for things that they want.

[Ex-California]

It depends on what type of taxes you're talking about paying, and what types of issues that qualifies you to vote on.

If I pay sales taxes when I'm buying a strip of scratch-offs, a 40, and a vanilla blunt wrap on my ebt, does that qualify me to tell property owners how much welfare they should give me through their property taxes?

I was thinking income/property taxes, etc. Not consumption taxes

I understand.

If walmart is the largest employer in a small town, and in many cases it is, then all of those people are paying income taxes. If meth addiction is also prevalent in that small town, which in many cases it is, and if a large number of the people in that small town also receive welfare, which in many cases they do, I don't think the simple bullet point about them paying income taxes is enough to erase all other issues.

I agree with speaker that simply owning property alone isn't the only thing to look at, but in a local city council meeting, or in a municipal vote on a bill or tax, I wouldn't put the walmart employees on even footing with the property owners and local business owners.

I think most people understand why we don't let children drive corvettes on the freeway, and why we don't let adults who get too many DUIs have their license back. Different states pick different heights to place those bars, but they all agree those lines need to be defined.

Getting behind the wheel of a city, state, or nation is just as legitimate an issue to restrict as is driving a vehicle. And I'm not opposed to breaking up certain types of votes for different voters in the same way that we break up driving certain types of vehicles for different drivers.

Just because you can drive a car doesn't mean you are qualified to drive a big rig.

I understand what you're saying, but doesn't someone making minimum wage end up effectively paying no tax due to returns ? And what if the Wal Mart employee owned property?

The property requirement doesn't really work due to expensive urban communities where someone may be making much more, and therefore paying a lot more income tax, than someone who happens to own property or a business in lesser populated communities

[Okeefenokee]

I was thinking income/property taxes, etc. Not consumption taxes

I understand.

If walmart is the largest employer in a small town, and in many cases it is, then all of those people are paying income taxes. If meth addiction is also prevalent in that small town, which in many cases it is, and if a large number of the people in that small town also receive welfare, which in many cases they do, I don't think the simple bullet point about them paying income taxes is enough to erase all other issues.

I agree with speaker that simply owning property alone isn't the only thing to look at, but in a local city council meeting, or in a municipal vote on a bill or tax, I wouldn't put the walmart employees on even footing with the property owners and local business owners.

I think most people understand why we don't let children drive corvettes on the freeway, and why we don't let adults who get too many DUIs have their license back. Different states pick different heights to place those bars, but they all agree those lines need to be defined.

Getting behind the wheel of a city, state, or nation is just as legitimate an issue to restrict as is driving a vehicle. And I'm not opposed to breaking up certain types of votes for different voters in the same way that we break up driving certain types of vehicles for different drivers.

Just because you can drive a car doesn't mean you are qualified to drive a big rig.

I understand what you're saying, but doesn't someone making minimum wage end up effectively paying no tax due to returns ? And what if the Wal Mart employee owned property?

The property requirement doesn't really work due to expensive urban communities where someone may be making much more, and therefore paying a lot more income tax, than someone who happens to own property or a business in lesser populated communities

All that's legitimate. At least we can agree that these things should be considered rather than sticking our heads in the ground and chanting, "vote or die."

[Ex-California]

You guys have 100% changed my views on this in the last couple months.

[Okeefenokee]

You guys have 100% changed my views on this in the last couple months.

What was it?

I was one of the guys during the occupy period ranting about the 1%.

Things change.