It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FL lawmaker’s ‘radical’ cure for uninformed voting: You ‘have to be a property owner’

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob

The assumption that someone that pays no Federal Income Tax or doesn't own property doesn't pay taxes fails.

Even the poor pay taxes on gasoline, groceries and every other expense. Hell...even illegal immigrants pay taxes on those things and they don't have the right to vote.

And those who rent property pay property taxes through rent.

Now...in that context you are saying that those who pay more taxes should have more say in our government?

Well, unfortunately, the system is already tuned in that way except rather than taxes that can be spent on the general welfare, those funds arrive in government as lobbying and payola and end up in politicians accounts rather than returned to the public.

This whole line of argument is ugly...a call for Monarchial rule...and an idea that the founders would hang people for.




posted on May, 21 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
www.rawstory.com...




Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL) has warned that uninformed voting is as dangerous as a “loaded gun,” and that one solution could be allowing only “property owners” to vote.


So my question is...

How does owning property make you more informed than anyother taxpayer?

If a person pays taxes in this country and is a legal resident then his right to vote should not be impinged even if you rent an apartment.

Elitist GOP scumbags, just trying to maintain preferential treatment for the wealthy.



Your first problem is just thrusting the Elitist GOP scumbag label on the guy. Until some of you quit seeing everyone as either this or that, we'll get no where. Secondly didn't somebody on the other side of the aisle just get quoted as saying something like "we proved communism works" ? There are crackpots on both sides, quit falling for the, only 2 sides, crap, there's always more than 2 sides.

There's obviously no room for closed minded idiots like this in our government, no big surprise to see him being from FLA.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: EvillerBob

The assumption that someone that pays no Federal Income Tax or doesn't own property doesn't pay taxes fails.

Even the poor pay taxes on gasoline, groceries and every other expense. Hell...even illegal immigrants pay taxes on those things and they don't have the right to vote.

And those who rent property pay property taxes through rent.

Now...in that context you are saying that those who pay more taxes should have more say in our government?

Well, unfortunately, the system is already tuned in that way except rather than taxes that can be spent on the general welfare, those funds arrive in government as lobbying and payola and end up in politicians accounts rather than returned to the public.

This whole line of argument is ugly...a call for Monarchial rule...and an idea that the founders would hang people for.


The founders would certainly not hang anyone for it. In fact it would be, quite literally, suicidal - the right to vote was restricted to property owners or tax payers, a situation which persisted long into the mid 1800's. Politics was long regarded as the preserve of those who had "skin in the game." It could be quite rightly pointed out that the taxation system was different then, so only a certain group would actually be paying tax (directly or indirectly) of any kind.

"The assumption that someone that pays no Federal Income Tax or doesn't own property doesn't pay taxes fails."

Actually, it doesn't fail at all.

If I went out and earned some money by my hard work, by investing my blood and tears and the sweat from my brow... ahh who am I kidding? The closest I come to breaking as sweat is when I try to type too fast. The principle remains, however. I pay income tax on the money that I have earned. When I buy things, I pay more tax... from the money that I have earned.

But what if I gave you a wad of cash to spend? Yes, you would be "paying" tax on the purchases... but you would be paying it from the money that I have earned. Does the fact that you are spending my money give you any say in how that money is earned, or the politics that I have to work under? Your entire contribution to society is to give it more of my money, but without me having any of the benefit of spending it.

In that scenario, you have made absolutely zero real contribution; to somehow equate taking my money and spending it on yourself as any kind of meaningful contribution is actually, to be blunt, grossly offensive.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Perhaps only permitting property owners to vote is a bit out there but it may have some merit.
People vote towards what they have vested interests in.
Business owners vote to protect their businesses
Workers vote to protect their income and retirement.
Politicians vote to ensure their continued office.
Union member vote to uphold their unions.
Welfare recipients vote to ensure their lifestyle is continued.
Unemployed vote for extended benefits.
Having voters who are productive and informed has certain appeal.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Welcome to FL...the land of crazy. But that's just my opinion from experience. Anyone who is a legal citizen and has the right to vote should be able to vote. End of story. Renting, or living in a tent or RV whatever your abode of choice is, shouldn't make a difference. Starred and Flagged



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Tax payers, retirees and their dependents have skin in the game.

Those not paying taxes and their dependents have other peoples skin in the game.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   
i know,,
really large land owners could be called,, Barons, for instance,
and these land barons could bring blocks of votes too the King,,

might work. u know that is radical. lol



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
www.rawstory.com...




Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL) has warned that uninformed voting is as dangerous as a “loaded gun,” and that one solution could be allowing only “property owners” to vote.


So my question is...

How does owning property make you more informed than anyother taxpayer?

If a person pays taxes in this country and is a legal resident then his right to vote should not be impinged even if you rent an apartment.

Elitist GOP scumbags, just trying to maintain preferential treatment for the wealthy.


I always knew that when they said, "they were going to take their country back," they literally meant take it back some 200+ yrs. to the good ole days that everyone loved so much, when only white property owners could vote and a black man was only worth 2/3 of a white man.

Old Yoho would probably like to take us back to those precise standards, he just too afraid to say it in public.

Pathetic, just pathetic.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 10:47 PM
link   
At some point we need to come up with non-partisan solutions. A huge step forward would be to end lobbying. All lobbying. No late-night backroom deals, no corporate written legislation in exchange for campaign contributions. No quid-pro-quo favors where mega-corporations can legislate profits. Special interest groups and elected representatives should stand naked and afraid in front of the voting public.

I don't think this is the solution that will fix everything, but I think any change has to start here.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 11:05 PM
link   
I keep telling people they're going to turn the US into an aristocracy.

Between this and study that just came out saying our government is an oligarchy, maybe people will listen now.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 11:36 PM
link   
i dont think the name is oligarcy,,its Communism,,,


"Rep. Joe Garcia (D-FL): Communism Works (Seriously!) "



seems its spreading, quick,,,Communism that is.


a reply to: CB328


edit on 5/21/2014 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: yeahright
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I'd rather we have an enforceable requirement where you have to be a citizen to vote.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


That may remove a distinct advantage for one of the major parties:
which I will not mention at this point.
On the other hand, nothing seemed to change for the constituencies
being roped into an either-or choice of two parties.
Last year I reminded an old friend that for about fifty years the Soviet
Union had two major political parties.
"Hell we don't even let them think... why should we let them vote?" Stalin
I'm from around, and still live near Chicago... alive would be cool too.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12
Wow, olaru.. bumped to the ceiling if possible. Just say Yo?
It's small wonder that Harvard recently described our system as a
fascist oligarchy.

Butch long before my post suggested a jury pool approach.. I like
it but it could be even more refined for randomness.

I'd like to stick with Lewis Black's method for the next POTUS...
Spin the blindfolded incumbent around a few times, and have the
individual throw a dart into a political map of the US (or course
with Alaska/Hawaii tucked in close enough to be part of the toss).
Then have a transport static-line drop in a young chimpanzee... and
let him wander around the drop zone.
Whoever the primate walks up to and takes his hand... THAT's the
new President! Gender nonspecific to the "he" thing of course.

I've always felt deep down that lower life forms, to some extent and
sufficiently down the evolutionary ladder to avoid second-guessing,
are always going to be better judges of character than humans.
How many of us trust our dog's gut instinct with strangers? It's all too
bad the American body politic has been a collective lab rat for this
long, look at what we're letting into the ivory towers in the last century.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: yeahright
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

What evidence do you have that that's even remotely possible?


Well, the representative in question is torqued off because he feels the voters are misinformed. To add insult to injury, instead of looking at ways to reform the political system, he instead wants to restrict who can vote to property owners.

How does one come to a conclusion that only property owners are qualified to vote? What criteria did he use?

Instead he could have introduced a bill that would reform campaign contributions at the state level while requiring greater transparency by elected officials.

Is apathy by the voters a problem - Absolutely.
Is it right for a representative to blame the voters for the perception they don't care / are uninformed? Nope. extra DIV



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Its a good thread with decent debate / conversation.

I am the first person who would say the voters must get involved. I have echoed that in other threads dealing with politics.

In this case the rep is pissed because he feels voters are misinformed. Instead of researching why that is and developing a game plan based on that research, coupled with speaking to his constituents, he lays the blame on voters while at the same time commits the very action he is chastising the voters of doing.

Identifying a problem is one thing.

Making absolutely no effort to address the issue, he suggests a plan of action.

He staked a claim on the issue while being completely uneducated and uninformed on the topic. The suggestion he made demonstrates his level of ignorance of the laws in Florida and the US Constitution.

He also took the crown for arrogance by blaming the voters while conveniently taking the position that politicians are not to blame.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12


Is it just me or does it look like the GOP is self destructing by it's members even suggesting such an asinine proposition.

Do they actually think they can win elections by alienating everyone but pissed off white affluent males?

Are they so out of touch?


It's almost as if the GOP was split up during some kind of catastrophe and is now trying to operate from separate, disconnected locations - while simultaneously foraging for food and collecting firewood

Most bizarre thing I've ever seen these past few years...2014 especially - and it's still new

We can only hope that out of the ashes rises something better - something useful

:-)



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: EvillerBob
But what if I gave you a wad of cash to spend? Yes, you would be "paying" tax on the purchases... but you would be paying it from the money that I have earned. Does the fact that you are spending my money give you any say in how that money is earned, or the politics that I have to work under? Your entire contribution to society is to give it more of my money, but without me having any of the benefit of spending it.


That is some bizarre logic? I do not "give" cash to spend to any of my employees, they earn it. Just like I earn my money from my clients. Just like whatever money you receive, you theoretically earn...no idea what you, nor do I care. It is a trade of labor or services for money. Unless your are donating, anyone you "give" cash to has justly traded their own labor for it, presumably at a fair exchange. They are not spending YOUR money...Just a bizarre premise..



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
i have a feeling "uninformed voting" means anyone who disagrees. this is a bad idea. a very bad idea.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: olaru12
I think that the citizens would be better off if it was more like jury duty. Everyone has their name in the pool, they draw your name.... you are the new congressman for your district.

I'd rather take the chance that a neo-Nazi, New Black Panther or even some raving lunatic were to become my latest congressman over having the Corporations pay for a drawn out fake arse election that buys their candidate.

This is similar to some older forms of democracy, dating back to Athens and Rome. Much later, in Florence, Italy, there was a variation on this. In science, we also rely on randomness to create valid experiments.

One idea I've had for this is to adopt it in a tiered manner and incorporate elections to some extent. Here's how it'd work:
  1. You may only register in your home district.
  2. Everyone who wants to run for an office registers for the lottery.
  3. If more than 5 people register or win a lower election, a reverse election is held to eliminate unwanted influence.
  4. The top 20% of 'winners' of that election are removed from the lottery, provided at least 3 remain.
  5. The winner is selected by random drawing.
  6. If a higher office, combine winners from previous lottery into new pool, and repeat again from step 3

This combines the idea of voting and random selection, which should nearly eliminate money in politics. The last step is perhaps less clear - for national office, these steps would loop several times. Take a U.S. Senator for example, he or she would have to win his or her home district, then the county, then the state cycle. The President would have to win his or her home district, then the county, then the state, then the national cycle.
edit on 11Fri, 23 May 2014 11:31:17 -0500America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago5 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Indigo5, I believe he was refering to the welfare fraud types, not the honest and hard working types.

I happen to agree with him 100%. I drive past numerous people in their mid 20's sitting around and basically doing nothing while I'm working 45 to 60 hours in a average week. You can smell pot, see the beer cans laying on the ground, etc from these people. That's my tax dollars supporting these POS's.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
26
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join