Ya know, there’s been a lot of back and forth among folks on either side of the aisle concerning Voter ID laws making their way into state houses around the country. With the massive Republican win in 2010, control of state government swung hard right. And using those majorities and governorships, the GOP is passing laws that would restrict voting. Now, the restrictions are common sense and are reasonable. Basically, you have to be a citizen. Crazy talk I know, but nothing will get a bunch of statists up in arms like a good government regulation!
But serious. Think about voter id laws and the reaction to ’em. It goes back to the days when polling places, cities, counties and even entire states tried to prevent black people from voting. For no other reason than they were black. We’re stuck there. We can’t escape from there. Talk about requiring some burden of proof and the immediate reaction is the usual “Tea Party is racist!” meme.
But here is something that will REALLY get the Left up in arms. If we’re gonna restrict voting, restrict it on the basis of your Federal Tax burden.
Add up all the money an individual contributes to the federal government. Then add up all the money that an individual receives from the federal government. And if that the difference is a net contribution to the government, give ’em a ballot. If that person is a net consumer, they lose their privilege to vote.
The United States was built on the premise that individual liberty is sacrosanct . That the will of the mob does not trump the rights of the individual. Well, we’ve lost that vision in today’s America. We have a voting population made up of more than 50% net tax consumers.
More than HALF of Americans receieve more money from the government than they pay into it.
More than half.
And that number is getting larger and larger every year. We are finding an ever shrinking population that is being forced to contribute to the lifestyle of citizens who refuse to step up and giver their fair share.
heh heh – I Kill me!
These people are not contributing. They are not pulling their weight. They are directly at blame for the financial condition of this nation.
And it will just continue to get worse. As the people on the bubble begin to realize that if they just elect a politician who will promise to move that number from 51% consumers to 53%, THEY too will not have to contribute. Food, shelter, cell phones and college for me please.
It’s not hard to imagine a condition where, in time, 80% of America will reply on the remaining 20%.
But if the moocher class can’t vote, they can’t continue to elect politicians who are only looking for power. Who will only give more and more to the folks who elect them in exchange for electing them. Want a 30 hour week? Elect me! Want mandatory double pay for overtime? Elect me!
Free health care? Me.
Free food? Me.
Free house? Me.
Remove that ability and there won’t be those politicians.
First, I’m assuming this isn’t a serious proposal, but a means for you to talk about what you believe to be unfair tax burdens in the country. We’ve come a long way since the days when, for example, only white male land-owners could vote.
Second,I’ll let others who know more about this than I do weigh in with the details, but I think you’re making a couple of false assumptions here. One is the focus on federal income tax, which many who are poor do not pay. There are other taxes they do pay that are far more regressive on the poor because payments are capped. A rich person stops paying into social security each year when they hit the cap, while a poor person may pay in on every paycheck of the year. The money being taxed is of much greater value to the poor person than to the rich person because the poor person has far less money to begin with and may need every last dollar to pay bills.
Then you’ve got corporations (NewsCorp is the latest example) that pay no taxes or even end up getting paid by the government, and exert way more influence on govt policy than the poor. Matt Yglesias had an interesting post recently about how the unemployed are in fact UNDER-REPRESENTED in Congress. http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/07/12/265842/unemployed-americans-victimized-by-underrepresentation-in-the-senate/
a means for you to talk about what you believe to be unfair tax burdens in the country.
More than a discussion on fair tax burdens, it’s more of a way in which those conversations are had. I think that reasonable people can sit around a table and discuss such things. For example, I suspect that you and I have different views on taxation, yet I get the feeling that we could each make our case over beer.
My beef with the macro view of things is that large groups of people are “learning” that if they vote for people who promise them stuff, then they can keep getting more and more stuff by continuing to vote for people who will continue to give ’em stuff. I understand that the government provides cell phones for certain populations of people based on need. What motivation is there for that group of people to vote for politicians who would “take away their cell-phone”. And this phenomenon continues with each entitlement program.
Add another segment of the population to food stamps–another population of people who will vote to keep their “stuff”.
To be sure, there are such “programs” on the right. For example, the NRA is one. These people will only vote for people who preach gun rights.
There are other taxes they do pay that are far more regressive on the poor because payments are capped.
I agree. If we are forced to keep SS in its current form, we ought to either raise or abolish that cap AND means base the payments.
NewsCorp is the latest example
I enjoy the GE example. They have a tax department made up of old IRS lawyers.
However, whatever the case, I agree that if we establish tax rates for corporations, we should close the loopholes that allow them to escape those rates. I would argue for fewer loops and lower rates. Simple and cheap.
The Left keeps saying that there is no voter fraud . The lying is amazing when you think of all of the shenanigans that ACORN pulled . It is doubtful that Al Franken would be a Senator now if Democrats did not employ fraud . But they still say there is none . I love the fact that Texas accepts a concealed hand gun permit as ID to vote . The Liberals are totally beside themselves . What they refuse to see is that with the requirements to get a carry permit, it is a pretty secure ID compared with most other documents .
It is doubtful that Al Franken would be a Senator now if Democrats did not employ fraud .
Yeah, but THAT kind of fraud has nothing to do with salt of the earth voter ID fraud. THAT kinda cheating was just ballot shenanigans!
I love the fact that Texas accepts a concealed hand gun permit as ID to vote . The Liberals are totally beside themselves . What they refuse to see is that with the requirements to get a carry permit, it is a pretty secure ID compared with most other documents .