Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 133

Thread: Culture War

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    33,564
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    . Tell me more about this net taxpayer though. I'd be more interested in a tax filer designation though.
    Have fun going down that rabbit hole. He makes up his own definition as usual. Anyone retired on SS can't vote for example even though they paid in for years

    And beyond that, how would it be administreed? Yes, let's have a system where you have to turn in your tax returns and bank statements in order vote. And a government bureaucrat will determine if you're eligible. Small government!


  2. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    How did they become a citizen?
    I see you are pretzeling because you realized how dumb of a comment you made. I don't need to run in circles with you. No one was referencing new citizens and their right to vote. Everyone is talking about eligible voters. Try to keep up.

    You want the government to administer tests to eligible voters before they can vote. You are a moron. (period)
    Who hates iowa?

  3. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Have fun going down that rabbit hole. He makes up his own definition as usual. Anyone retired on SS can't vote for example even though they paid in for years

    And beyond that, how would it be administreed? Yes, let's have a system where you have to turn in your tax returns and bank statements in order vote. And a government bureaucrat will determine if you're eligible. Small government!
    I'm actually interested in his thoughts on the matter.
    Who hates iowa?

  4. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    Define landowner? Does owning a condo count? People who rent can't vote? What if when I'm old and retired I get tired of owning a house and decide to rent instead, now I can't vote? What a ridiculous idea. Tell me more about this net taxpayer though. I'd be more interested in a tax filer designation though.
    I'd be fine with a whole host of restrictions. I don't really care to get into the details of any particular idea.

    I'm not sure on the net taxpayer idea. But essentially, you're allowing retirees and welfare and disability recipients to be wards of the state in exchange for their vote. This is a million miles away from being reality, so it's not worth it to me to nitty gritty the details.

  5. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    I'm actually interested in his thoughts on the matter.
    The details really aren't worth getting into. Howie disagrees with the idea in principle. Of course he's going to find a million reasons why it can't work, but it's not worth discussing his million reasons because he disagrees in principle. I'd rather argue the idea than the execution.

  6. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    I'd be fine with a whole host of restrictions. I don't really care to get into the details of any particular idea.

    I'm not sure on the net taxpayer idea. But essentially, you're allowing retirees and welfare and disability recipients to be wards of the state in exchange for their vote. This is a million miles away from being reality, so it's not worth it to me to nitty gritty the details.
    At least you agree beeg's test idea is stupid.
    Who hates iowa?

  7. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    The details really aren't worth getting into. Howie disagrees with the idea in principle. Of course he's going to find a million reasons why it can't work, but it's not worth discussing his million reasons because he disagrees in principle. I'd rather argue the idea than the execution.
    Yeah that's fine, I don't remember ever seeing someone make the argument for that type of restriction before so I was interested, that's all.
    Who hates iowa?

  8. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    At least you agree beeg's test idea is stupid.
    Well, yeah. Pressure to assimilate and learn the language, etc, should come from the culture and society, not government. There are a lot of great American immigrants, I'm just leery of the ones from failed communist states who reject american values.

  9. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    I'd rather argue the idea than the execution.
    You cannot have a serious discussion about an idea without understanding the execution. We can discuss traveling to different galaxies all we want, but those ideas must be considered within the context of how that would be executed. It's stupid to avoid that context.

  10. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    Yeah that's fine, I don't remember ever seeing someone make the argument for that type of restriction before so I was interested, that's all.
    The idea is that with universal suffrage, the middle class is going to vote themselves benefits at the expense of the rich and the poor (Milton Friedman explains this idea beautifully). There is no check on this. It will bankrupt us (and is, which Howie really cares about ). So there has to be some kind of check on this. My idea for a check is that if you're dependent on the state (there are lots of ways to determine this), then you are counting on the generosity of your fellow citizens, but you don't have the right to vote more benefits for yourself. That puts a check on all kinds of welfare spending. And might actually discourage some people from becoming wards of the state. It's not taking away voting from anyone, it's offering them a choice. Anyway, that's my basic gist. It's actually an original idea of mine (I think! Don't go googling DPO), which are rare. I usually pick ideas from here and there that make sense to me.

  11. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GopherJake View Post
    I'M IN CONTROL OF THIS DISCUSSION!!!
    Settle down Jake.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    33,564
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GopherJake View Post
    You cannot have a serious discussion about an idea without understanding the execution.
    38,000 posts suggest otherwise.

  13. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    The idea is that with universal suffrage, the middle class is going to vote themselves benefits at the expense of the rich and the poor (Milton Friedman explains this idea beautifully). There is no check on this. It will bankrupt us (and is, which Howie really cares about ). So there has to be some kind of check on this. My idea for a check is that if you're dependent on the state (there are lots of ways to determine this), then you are counting on the generosity of your fellow citizens, but you don't have the right to vote more benefits for yourself. That puts a check on all kinds of welfare spending. And might actually discourage some people from becoming wards of the state. It's not taking away voting from anyone, it's offering them a choice. Anyway, that's my basic gist. It's actually an original idea of mine (I think! Don't go googling DPO), which are rare. I usually pick ideas from here and there that make sense to me.
    Interesting, thanks for explaining. I would be totally against something like this but I'm sure you knew that already. In your idea have you thought about the consequences of giving all the power to the upper class? I guess technically big money is already buying our government and their policies. I personally see getting the most people to vote as the only way to take the power back from a corrupt government and that any further voter restrictions like yours would just give the big government more power.
    Who hates iowa?

  14. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    38,000 posts suggest otherwise.
    I absolutely guarantee you that there is no one who is open to the idea, who thinks it couldn't be easily accomplished logistically. 100% guarantee. Would it be perfect? Of course not. So what?

  15. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    Interesting, thanks for explaining. I would be totally against something like this but I'm sure you knew that already. In your idea have you thought about the consequences of giving all the power to the upper class? I guess technically big money is already buying our government and their policies. I personally see getting the most people to vote as the only way to take the power back from a corrupt government and that any further voter restrictions like yours would just give the big government more power.
    why would it be the upper class? The group which it reduces voting numbers from most is the elderly. The dependent poor don't really vote in huge numbers anyway. I think it might put a lid on spending. Spending is big government's main tool for power.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •