HeinLein lite - Pay Taxes if you want to vote

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Glock Glockler

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
1,282
Location
Southern NH
Why is it that it's accepted for someone to vote even if they do not pay taxes? Granted, we really have it backwards by letting people vote who not only pay not tax but they are on a dole. How can is be fundamentally just for 2 people to derive the same benefit and legal protection yet they do not contribute the same?

Discuss.
 
Wasn't there a time in the Colonial days when only landowners could vote?

Seems like that would have some merit, because landowner == taxpayer in most cases, and someone who is at least somewhat settled/committed to the community.
 
I don't know how much of an issue it really is. How many people don't pay any taxes? And out of those, how many even bother to vote? And what about the Earned Income Credit, a reverse income tax that covers a tax liability (paid taxes) but comes from the gubmint? And what about retired people who have paid taxes all their lives, but are now on pensions and don't meet the tax paying threshhold? And how do you prevent non taxpayers from voting? Are the IRS records gonna be available to the local county clerk's office?

I agree with the premise. When freeloaders can vote themselves largess from the public treasury, the game's over, but you need to provide more details.
 
Actually, everybody pays SOME taxes - sales, excise, tariffs, etc.

Income tax is relatively new (and we can thank Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and the rest of the Progressives in general for it.)

Hmmm, a thought - under your proposal, if you can prove you didn't vote, could you get a refund on your taxes?

I do like Heinlein's franchise-only-for-veterans(Starship Troopers) idea, but his privatization of government ideas (The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress) are even better.
 
Israel's unspoken rule is almost that way (franchise for serving). The Israelis I know all look way down on someone who does not serve. There has to be a big medical reason for them to cut someone slack for not enlisting.
 
You assume that taxes are a good & necessary thing. I assume you refer to income taxes, so if you meant all taxes in general this may not be applicable.

There are more than a few people who are justly ticked off that the government forces their employers to take X% off the top prior to the tax being due (April 15th anyone?). Similarly there are a lot of people who are justly ticked off that money is stolen from their paycheck at all.

I'll skip the usual "income tax is theft" lecture & the likening of the income tax system to a mafia proteciton racket for now. I will say that preventing anyone from voting because, through "legal" or "illegal" means, they're not getting their money stolen from them is not something that would sit well with me.

Now the Swiss for years had a system where in order to vote you had to show up at the voting place with your Arms, thereby demonstrating you were prepared to defend the country. I'd lean much more in that direction (although I wouldn't want to impose Arms ownership on anyone just as I wouldn't want to impose a prohibition from owning Arms on anyone) before I'd even consider depriving peope of their vote because they figured out some way to minimize state sanctioned theft.
 
Seems like that would have some merit, because landowner == taxpayer in most cases, and someone who is at least somewhat settled/committed to the community.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that in early America there was no tax on land. Am I mistaken?
 
Glock Glockler
Why is it that it's accepted for someone to vote even if they do not pay taxes?
Click to expand...
Short answer, because the 24th amendment says so.

24th Amend. Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.

The long answer is the discussion about how in the past poll taxes were used to deny women and unwanted races from voting. Basing the poll tax on any other tax is still a poll tax. Besides, do you really want the government to start taking away votes based on how much money one pays?
 
I do like Heinlein's franchise-only-for-veterans(Starship Troopers) idea, but his privatization of government ideas (The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress) are even better.
Click to expand...

It's been a while since I read Starship Troopers, but I seem to recall that military service wasn't the only way to get the franchise.
 
Treylis-

Yes, being a veteran/voter did not require military service, just service to the State of some kind.

Which is a demurral point for me; if there were some kind of "public" service that didn't require actual servitude to The State, I'd be happier about the idea. Working for a private "service" organization should also qualify, though that gets us right back to the "who decides what qualifies" problem.

If the State is setting the standards, the State controls the result; if the People control the State, fine, but the People (as we have seen) tend to lose interest over time, while the State (like rust) never sleeps... :scrutiny: :D
 
CannibalCrowley,

I care not about the 24th amendment, nor do I care about the 16th and 17th amendment, I was simply asking about the practicality and morality of a different tax system.

The long answer is the discussion about how in the past poll taxes were used to deny women and unwanted races from voting. Basing the poll tax on any other tax is still a poll tax.

Ok, the local town govt gives you a receipt upon payment of the local head tax, with the receipt you get a ballot. You can then mark the ballot in front of a public notary and send it in via mail or you can mark the ballot when you go in on election day. What's the problem?

I suppose you can have the govt use baseball bats to persuade minorities not to vote but that shouldnt be a reason to ban baseball bats.

Besides, do you really want the government to start taking away votes based on how much money one pays?

No, I want an immediate end to the income tax, most other taxes, and I'd like to see most govt functions handled by private companies so the tax burden would be minimal.
 
I think what most people are talking about vis a vis "people who do not pay taxes" is "people who are a net drain on the public treasury." People who pay less in taxes than they consume in services.

I agree that net consumers should not vote, however I think I would feel more strongly about this if voting could change anything...

- Chris
 
Yes, being a veteran/voter did not require military service, just service to the State of some kind.
Click to expand...

The kicker was that the government got to pick the type of service. You showed up at the recruiter's office, signed the forms, took a bunch of apptitude tests, told them your wishes, and they assigned to to what they felt you to be best suited for. Service for a minimum of two years-longer if needed.

They would find jobs, no matter how dumb, for anyone who applied, even if it was serving as a test guinea pig.
 
Glock Glockler
Ok, the local town govt gives you a receipt upon payment of the local head tax, with the receipt you get a ballot. You can then mark the ballot in front of a public notary and send it in via mail or you can mark the ballot when you go in on election day. What's the problem?
Click to expand...
The problem is that those in power will always be in the position to decide what the amount is, and thus who gets to vote. Let's say that this system is instituted for the upcoming election and the amount required to get a vote is $1 million. Can you honestly say that you wouldn't have a problem with this?

The problem lies in the fact that such a system would eventually mean that only the rich would vote. Just imagine how things would be if the top 1% were the only ones allowed to vote. The word serf would take on a whole new meaning.
 
My man Boortz...

says the more taxes you pay, the more votes you get. And anyone who cannot learn how to vote probably does not need that vote counted.:neener:
 
CannibalCrowley,

This is very simple, you take the total budget and you divide it by the number of citizens that apply to vote. Each citizen is then responsible for that amount.
 
I think that before anyone is allowed to vote, they should be required to take a very basic test on the issues and the major candidates. You can't say it's discriminatory, because all it does is show that the person who wants to affect events actually knows what is going on!

This could never happen for the same reason that straight ticket voting will never be eliminated - the Democrats would scream bloody murder because they'd lose half of their votes.
 
The problem lies in the fact that such a system would eventually mean that only the rich would vote. Just imagine how things would be if the top 1% were the only ones allowed to vote. The word serf would take on a whole new meaning.
Click to expand...

Only the rich pay taxes, so what's so terribly wrong with giving them sole discretion over how their tax dollars are spent?

Yeah, sure, you and I pay taxes. We pay way too much in taxes. But in the end, what we mere mortals pay is insignificant compared to what the rich pay. (I assume you aren't filthy rich) The richest 1% of Americans pays 95% of the total tax bill (or something like that, I don't have the exact numbers in front of me)

Also, consider that the poorest of the 4 (viable) Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates is worth more than $10 million. Tell me again how the world would come to an end if the rich were in control of government??
 
The figure is the income earners in the top 50% pay 96% of the income taxes... And the "earned income credit is NOT paid for by the "government" it's paid for by the TAXPAYERS!!! News flash for all no government ever "earned" any kind of income.
 
We need to get to the root of the problem, ie the progressive income tax, which in point of fact is Leninist in its very nature:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/may/18b.htm

Income And Property Taxation

The second task confronting us is the correct organisation of a progressive income and property tax. You know that all socialists are against indirect taxation because the only correct tax from the socialist point of view is the progressive income and property tax. I will not conceal the fact that we shall meet with tremendous difficulty in introducing this tax-the propertied classes will put up a desperate resistance.

The bourgeoisie are today evading taxation by bribery and through their connections; we must close all loopholes. We have many plans in this sphere and have cleared the ground on which to build the foundation, but the actual foundation of that building has not yet been built. The time for this has now come.

Decrees alone will be insufficient to put the income tax into effect; practical methods and experience will be needed.

We assume that we shall have to go over to the monthly collection of the income tax. The section of the population receiving its income from the state treasury is increasing, and measures must be taken to collect the income tax from these people by stopping it out of their wages.

All income and earnings, without exception, must be subject to income tax; the work of the printing press that has so far been practiced may be justified as a temporary measure, but it must give place to a progressive income and property tax that is collected at very frequent intervals.

I should like to ask you to work out this measure in detail and draw up practical and precise plans that can be incorporated in decrees and instructions in the shortest time.
Click to expand...

Hope you are enjoying your 'freedom' boys and girls ;)
 
The very idea that you have to pay annual dues to the government in order to have the rights of a citizen makes me sad.

I would rather have Heinlin "regular" than Heinlin "lite".
 
The very idea that you have to pay annual dues to the government in order to have the rights of a citizen makes me sad.

So you prefer having some pay taxes while others freeload but everyone votes?:rolleyes:
 
Glock Glockler
This is very simple, you take the total budget and you divide it by the number of citizens that apply to vote. Each citizen is then responsible for that amount.
Click to expand...
What happens if one year everyone applies to vote, but afterwards only a small percentage decide that they can afford it? Conversely, what about when only a small percentage applies to begin with due to not expecting to afford it; which causes even fewer than applied to actually be able to vote? Does this mean that corporations will no longer be taxed?



pinblaster
Maybe we can take this one step further and require voters to be collage graduates..
Click to expand...
Am I the only one who actually laughed at this? If you can't see the humor in it, grab a dictionary.

LiquidTension
I think that before anyone is allowed to vote, they should be required to take a very basic test on the issues and the major candidates. You can't say it's discriminatory, because all it does is show that the person who wants to affect events actually knows what is going on!
Click to expand...
Our country doesn't have a very good record when it comes to voting tests. Who would write, proctor, and the tests and how would impartiality be maintained? How far before the election would the test be given? What happens if a candidate changes a few of his views and invalidates the test? What's the system of redress if the test is deemed discriminatory?

These questions and more are why a testing system will not work. There's just too much room for further corruption.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
what is a "fair" tax
2 3
Replies
55
Views
1K
trapperjohn
T
J
  • Locked
Now comes the hard part
Replies
6
Views
451
Wild Bill
W
D
  • Locked
Finally, the straight scoop on tax cuts!
Replies
6
Views
695
DRZinn
D
O
  • Locked
Could you be happy as a slave ?
Replies
3
Views
465
geekWithA.45
G
R
  • Locked
How Tax Cuts Work
Replies
9
Views
927
bastiat
B
Back
Top