If only landowners voted, would we have a welfare state?

[JoeB131]

I dont think we would. At least, not much of one.
Weak people vote for policies for the weak because they have no skin in the game. Doesnt that make sense?
Im not saying i want to go back to just land owners voting. Im just saying we should have kept it that way

Then we would have had a revolution some time in the 1920's or so, and that would have really sucked for you guys.

Here's why we have a welfare state.

We have a welfare state to give the poor just enough of the rich's stuff to keep them from taking it all by force.

That's why we have a welfare state.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's true slogan or not.
Your plan goes against the founding principles of this country. Any other rights you'd like to strip away from those you feel don't quite measure up?

Guess thats why states could set their own standards?
YOUR premise is stupid.
Also, most states would let non land owners vote if they paid a tax.

What does this even mean?

States can't set standards for a national election.

This is 2017 not 1790....
"in the beginning" states could do what they wanted. Some states wouldnt even let catholics and jews vote.

This is 2017 not 1790...

Exactly.

you are a sharp one, buddy

Sharper then you can comprehend, little hen.

 

[TNHarley]

In today time you pay taxes in many ways from land to sales, so most have skin in the game including the poor drunk that drink his or her wild Irish Rose under the bridge.

What should change is there should be no political parties and you just vote for the crooked idiot that you believe that lies the best...

Isnt certain forms of tax redundant? Considering they are paying sales tax with my tax money?

 

[BlackSand]

Never said anything about the UCMJ, you were the one to bring it up.

The OP had originally stated that maybe only land owners should be allowed to vote. I showed them where that would leave out most of the military, because military members don't buy houses or own much land until they are in the upper ranks and are getting close to retirement, because of duty station changes.

Military people as a rule don't buy, they rent because of their nomadic lifestyle of moving from place to place every 3 to 4 years.

I said it was because they move so much that they wouldn't be allowed to move, not because of the UCMJ.

The only thing I meant by stating the UCMJ ... Is that it is an example of how the military already are not subject to the same conditions as the general public.

I didn't mean anything more ... And nothing less.
If you would like to suggest that it isn't an example of how the military is not subject to the same conditions as the general public ... You are just wrong ...


.

 

[OldLady]

I dont think we would. At least, not much of one.
Weak people vote for policies for the weak because they have no skin in the game. Doesnt that make sense?
Im not saying i want to go back to just land owners voting. Im just saying we should have kept it that way

Of all the things we spend money on in this country, including half of all our money going to the military, why are you so all fired concerned about keeping kids from starving or people from living in cardboard boxes on the street like they do in India? Why is that such a big concern to you Harley? Take away people's right to have a say in their government because they aren't rich enough to own property? Is there nothing else the government does except spend a sliver of its income on food stamps and low income housing? It's not generous and it isn't even enough to meet the demand, so that should make you feel good at least.

There's enough land in the US for everyone to own property.

Some people don't want to as it requires work to maintain.

Not everyone has enough money for a mortgage or the down payment, let alone the upkeep.
It doesn't mean they don't have a right to a say in their government. If it affects their lives, they have a right to vote about it, whether they are well off enough to own land or not.

Interesting tidbit: Most of the people on welfare don't vote. They know the system is set up to screw them and they don't trust any of 'em. This is true, I've worked with poor folks a long time. They don't vote.

 

[TNHarley]

Guess thats why states could set their own standards?
YOUR premise is stupid.
Also, most states would let non land owners vote if they paid a tax.

What does this even mean?

States can't set standards for a national election.

This is 2017 not 1790....
"in the beginning" states could do what they wanted. Some states wouldnt even let catholics and jews vote.

This is 2017 not 1790...

Exactly.

you are a sharp one, buddy

Sharper then you can comprehend, little hen.

Apparently. Your knowledge on this has blown me away like a 600 pound fatass farting in my general direction.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Everyone pays taxes. Every citizen has “skin in the game.”

sales tax LOL ok
Such a lame argument.
Not to mention, that sales tax is paid for with tax dollars

Most working class people pay taxes via payroll taxes. That means that it's taken out of your check before you get paid.

In the military, payroll taxes were at around 28 percent if you didn't have to pay state taxes, and 32 percent if you had to pay state taxes.

One of the times I liked the best was when we were deployed to war zones. Why? Because when the military is in a war zone or hostile fire zone, their paycheck is tax free during the time spent in the designated area.

Knew a lot of RM's (Radiomen) and ET's (Electronics Technicians) who were SRB eligible (Selective Reenlistment Bonus) and would try to schedule their reenlistment to coincide with being in the hostile fire zone, because then their SRB check was also tax free. And, for bonuses that can be up to 30,000, that is a significant savings in taxes.

 

[bripat9643]

I dont think we would. At least, not much of one.
Weak people vote for policies for the weak because they have no skin in the game. Doesnt that make sense?
Im not saying i want to go back to just land owners voting. Im just saying we should have kept it that way

Most land owners are responsible people who have no need for welfare. Of coure we wouldn't have it.

 

[TNHarley]

I dont think we would. At least, not much of one.
Weak people vote for policies for the weak because they have no skin in the game. Doesnt that make sense?
Im not saying i want to go back to just land owners voting. Im just saying we should have kept it that way

Of all the things we spend money on in this country, including half of all our money going to the military, why are you so all fired concerned about keeping kids from starving or people from living in cardboard boxes on the street like they do in India? Why is that such a big concern to you Harley? Take away people's right to have a say in their government because they aren't rich enough to own property? Is there nothing else the government does except spend a sliver of its income on food stamps and low income housing? It's not generous and it isn't even enough to meet the demand, so that should make you feel good at least.

There's enough land in the US for everyone to own property.

Some people don't want to as it requires work to maintain.

Not everyone has enough money for a mortgage or the down payment, let alone the upkeep.
It doesn't mean they don't have a right to a say in their government. If it affects their lives, they have a right to vote about it, whether they are well off enough to own land or not.

Interesting tidbit: Most of the people on welfare don't vote. They know the system is set up to screw them and they don't trust any of 'em. This is true, I've worked with poor folks a long time. They don't vote.

That was a problem then too. Newly arrived citizens couldnt afford land, for the most part. So they WORKED for it.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I dont think we would. At least, not much of one.
Weak people vote for policies for the weak because they have no skin in the game. Doesnt that make sense?
Im not saying i want to go back to just land owners voting. Im just saying we should have kept it that way

Of all the things we spend money on in this country, including half of all our money going to the military, why are you so all fired concerned about keeping kids from starving or people from living in cardboard boxes on the street like they do in India? Why is that such a big concern to you Harley? Take away people's right to have a say in their government because they aren't rich enough to own property? Is there nothing else the government does except spend a sliver of its income on food stamps and low income housing? It's not generous and it isn't even enough to meet the demand, so that should make you feel good at least.

There's enough land in the US for everyone to own property.

Some people don't want to as it requires work to maintain.

Not everyone has enough money for a mortgage or the down payment, let alone the upkeep.
It doesn't mean they don't have a right to a say in their government. If it affects their lives, they have a right to vote about it, whether they are well off enough to own land or not.

Interesting tidbit: Most of the people on welfare don't vote. They know the system is set up to screw them and they don't trust any of 'em. This is true, I've worked with poor folks a long time. They don't vote.

Well, it definitely doesn't mean the government doesn't tax about 35% of their income, so based on that, they should have a say.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

In today time you pay taxes in many ways from land to sales, so most have skin in the game including the poor drunk that drink his or her wild Irish Rose under the bridge.

What should change is there should be no political parties and you just vote for the crooked idiot that you believe that lies the best...

Isnt certain forms of tax redundant? Considering they are paying sales tax with my tax money?

Some of it.

Booze and smoking you is not paid with your tax dollar unless we are discussing SSD ( Not SSI ) then yes.

You pay taxes wheb you drive, buy and work, so you have skin in the game from local tl federal taxes.

I say let do away with political parties.

I mean how many people voted for Clinton because she was and is Democrat?

Would she have recieved that many votes had she been Green or had no political connections?

How many voted for Trump because he ran on the GOP ticket?

Had he ran third party would he have been the next Ross Perot or just worst?

The two party system hurt us more and true the ignorance of the common voter is appalling but the poor should have the right to vote...

 

[bripat9643]

We'd have a country made up of the elite and everyone else wouldn't have any rights or say in anything.

What is so wrong with helping the poor? Oh'yess, they don't matter and should be used as cannon folder in your wars.

Liberal Dictionary:
==================================================
The elite - people who work, pay their bills and make this country work.

No one is stopping you from helping the poor, douche bag.

 

[Seawytch]

Everyone pays taxes. Every citizen has “skin in the game.”

sales tax LOL ok
Such a lame argument.
Not to mention, that sales tax is paid for with tax dollars

State taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ricku...ent-these-people-paying-federal-income-taxes/

Instead of trying to keep people from voting, have better policies that make them want to vote for you.

 

[OldLady]

I dont think we would. At least, not much of one.
Weak people vote for policies for the weak because they have no skin in the game. Doesnt that make sense?
Im not saying i want to go back to just land owners voting. Im just saying we should have kept it that way

Of all the things we spend money on in this country, including half of all our money going to the military, why are you so all fired concerned about keeping kids from starving or people from living in cardboard boxes on the street like they do in India? Why is that such a big concern to you Harley? Take away people's right to have a say in their government because they aren't rich enough to own property? Is there nothing else the government does except spend a sliver of its income on food stamps and low income housing? It's not generous and it isn't even enough to meet the demand, so that should make you feel good at least.

There's enough land in the US for everyone to own property.

Some people don't want to as it requires work to maintain.

Not everyone has enough money for a mortgage or the down payment, let alone the upkeep.
It doesn't mean they don't have a right to a say in their government. If it affects their lives, they have a right to vote about it, whether they are well off enough to own land or not.

Interesting tidbit: Most of the people on welfare don't vote. They know the system is set up to screw them and they don't trust any of 'em. This is true, I've worked with poor folks a long time. They don't vote.

That was a problem then too. Newly arrived citizens couldnt afford land, for the most part. So they WORKED for it.

You're far too young to be talking like this.

People are still WORKING for it, ya jamoke. Not all can achieve it. So they don't deserve the same rights you have because you're RICHER than them?
Ewwww.....that smells really bad, Harley.

 

[JoeB131]

Most land owners are responsible people who have no need for welfare. Of coure we wouldn't have it.

Well, that depends on what you define as "Welfare"

Do you just mean entitlements that poor people get, like food stamps, Section 8, TANF?

Or do you mean entitlements middle class folks get, like Unemployment, Social Security, Medicare....

We spend a lot more "Welfare" on white middle class folks than we ever do on the poor.

 

[TNHarley]

In today time you pay taxes in many ways from land to sales, so most have skin in the game including the poor drunk that drink his or her wild Irish Rose under the bridge.

What should change is there should be no political parties and you just vote for the crooked idiot that you believe that lies the best...

Isnt certain forms of tax redundant? Considering they are paying sales tax with my tax money?

Some of it.

Booze and smoking you is not paid with your tax dollar unless we are discussing SSD ( Not SSI ) then yes.

You pay taxes wheb you drive, buy and work, so you have skin in the game from local tl federal taxes.

I say let do away with political parties.

I mean how many people voted for Clinton because she was and is Democrat?

Would she have recieved that many votes had she been Green or had no political connections?

How many voted for Trump because he ran on the GOP ticket?

Had he ran third party would he have been the next Ross Perot or just worst?

The two party system hurt us more and true the ignorance of the common voter is appauling, but the poor should have the right to vote...

The duopoly problem is an effect of the "appalling common voter"

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What does this even mean?

States can't set standards for a national election.

This is 2017 not 1790....
"in the beginning" states could do what they wanted. Some states wouldnt even let catholics and jews vote.

This is 2017 not 1790...

Exactly.

you are a sharp one, buddy

Sharper then you can comprehend, little hen.

Apparently. Your knowledge on this has blown me away like a 600 pound fatass farting in my general direction.

It's a stupid premise. A hypothetical backed by a story for children.

 

[TNHarley]

Everyone pays taxes. Every citizen has “skin in the game.”

sales tax LOL ok
Such a lame argument.
Not to mention, that sales tax is paid for with tax dollars

State taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/09/19/the-real-truth-behind-the-47-percent-why-arent-these-people-paying-federal-income-taxes/

Instead of trying to keep people from voting, have better policies that make them want to vote for you.

hey genius, non working section 8 dwellers arent paying payroll and property taxes..

 

[Seawytch]

Everyone pays taxes. Every citizen has “skin in the game.”

sales tax LOL ok
Such a lame argument.
Not to mention, that sales tax is paid for with tax dollars

State taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/09/19/the-real-truth-behind-the-47-percent-why-arent-these-people-paying-federal-income-taxes/

Instead of trying to keep people from voting, have better policies that make them want to vote for you.

hey genius, non working section 8 dwellers arent paying payroll and property taxes..

They ARE paying taxes. They DO have “skin in the game”. Every citizen has the right to vote. Get over it. Have better ideas.

 

[bripat9643]

Everyone pays taxes. Every citizen has “skin in the game.”

sales tax LOL ok
Such a lame argument.
Not to mention, that sales tax is paid for with tax dollars

State taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/09/19/the-real-truth-behind-the-47-percent-why-arent-these-people-paying-federal-income-taxes/

Instead of trying to keep people from voting, have better policies that make them want to vote for you.

Stupid people don't vote for smart policies. Democracy is the theory that the country should be run by the bottom 51%.