Who Should Have The Right To Vote?

Nov 1, 2014
16,594
2,310
We've come a long way in this country. At the start, voting laws were determined on a state by state basis. Many required land ownership for voting rights. Women and colored people were not necessarily excluded since they too have been landowners since well before the start of this country. The concept was that those who had no investment in this country should have no say in in our government, a concept not without merit.

These days it seems we've accepted this idiotic notion that everyone should be able to vote. It's created a serious conflict of interest when people dependent on government are able to vote to increase and sustain such dependence extorting the toils of the producers in this country.

So here's my proposal. Zero liability voters should be banned!

That's right. If you're a net consumer of government, you don't get to vote. It's perfectly fair since I'm the one paying taxes to fund your entitlements. This doesn't include people on Social Security. They paid into that and they deserve to draw from it. That isn't welfare.

But for those of you who pay ZERO taxes, who are on welfare, foodstamps, or disability, I don't hate you, I have no animosity toward you, but I don't think you should have the right to vote in this country.
 
Who in their right mind can disagree with this?
If you have no skin in the game you wont do whats right for the country,only that which will further enrich you at the cost of the tax payer.
It's a no brainer really.
 
Who in their right mind can disagree with this?
If you have no skin in the game you wont do whats right for the country,only that which will further enrich you at the cost of the tax payer.
It's a no brainer really.

Who indeed! It is in fact those who's power basis is on perpetual dependency that would disagree with this. It's why the Democrat party wants amnesty, so that illegal aliens can become dependents too and vote for Democrats. Their motives could not be more transparent.
 
Cool! Another USMB nutter has outlined the primary USMB nutter motivation. Fear that some lesser being is going to take their shit.
 
Cool! Another USMB nutter has outlined the primary USMB nutter motivation. Fear that some lesser being is going to take their shit.

You mean you're not afraid when people are trying to take your "shit"?

Nope. I'm sane and secure. Answer the question in my sig line with a number. Lets find out how many people you wish to disenfranchise.
 
We've come a long way in this country. At the start, voting laws were determined on a state by state basis. Many required land ownership for voting rights. Women and colored people were not necessarily excluded since they too have been landowners since well before the start of this country. The concept was that those who had no investment in this country should have no say in in our government, a concept not without merit.

These days it seems we've accepted this idiotic notion that everyone should be able to vote. It's created a serious conflict of interest when people dependent on government are able to vote to increase and sustain such dependence extorting the toils of the producers in this country.

So here's my proposal. Zero liability voters should be banned!

That's right. If you're a net consumer of government, you don't get to vote. It's perfectly fair since I'm the one paying taxes to fund your entitlements. This doesn't include people on Social Security. They paid into that and they deserve to draw from it. That isn't welfare.

But for those of you who pay ZERO taxes, who are on welfare, foodstamps, or disability, I don't hate you, I have no animosity toward you, but I don't think you should have the right to vote in this country.

So American troops don't get to vote?
 
We allow everyone to vote on school issues. Which is why schools in districts with a lot of older people or single people have such a hard time getting votes for funding. People with no children in school aren't likely to vote to raise their own taxes to pay for someone else's children.
 
So that means if I have more land than the next guy, I get more votes...
 
Cool! Another USMB nutter has outlined the primary USMB nutter motivation. Fear that some lesser being is going to take their shit.

it's the government that takes your "shit".....not "lesser beings", little partisan.

Does the government vote? What part of the OP did you agree with?

Your comment "Fear that some lesser being is going to take their shit" is irrelevant then.
How much can you sell shit where you is at?
 
We've come a long way in this country. At the start, voting laws were determined on a state by state basis. Many required land ownership for voting rights. Women and colored people were not necessarily excluded since they too have been landowners since well before the start of this country. The concept was that those who had no investment in this country should have no say in in our government, a concept not without merit.

These days it seems we've accepted this idiotic notion that everyone should be able to vote. It's created a serious conflict of interest when people dependent on government are able to vote to increase and sustain such dependence extorting the toils of the producers in this country.

So here's my proposal. Zero liability voters should be banned!

That's right. If you're a net consumer of government, you don't get to vote. It's perfectly fair since I'm the one paying taxes to fund your entitlements. This doesn't include people on Social Security. They paid into that and they deserve to draw from it. That isn't welfare.

But for those of you who pay ZERO taxes, who are on welfare, foodstamps, or disability, I don't hate you, I have no animosity toward you, but I don't think you should have the right to vote in this country.
I support a literacy test, but I do not support property requirements or tax paying as a requirement to vote.

We offer all people an equal chance to become literate, through free public education Pre-k-12, and even beyond into trade schools.

At this point in our history, not all are born on an equal economic footing, so that would not be fair.

All are born with the ability to get a free education, unless just mentally deficient, and then they should not vote anyway.

In short, literacy test, fair, property requirements not fair at this stage in our history. Later maybe.
 
We've come a long way in this country. At the start, voting laws were determined on a state by state basis. Many required land ownership for voting rights. Women and colored people were not necessarily excluded since they too have been landowners since well before the start of this country. The concept was that those who had no investment in this country should have no say in in our government, a concept not without merit.

These days it seems we've accepted this idiotic notion that everyone should be able to vote. It's created a serious conflict of interest when people dependent on government are able to vote to increase and sustain such dependence extorting the toils of the producers in this country.

So here's my proposal. Zero liability voters should be banned!

That's right. If you're a net consumer of government, you don't get to vote. It's perfectly fair since I'm the one paying taxes to fund your entitlements. This doesn't include people on Social Security. They paid into that and they deserve to draw from it. That isn't welfare.

But for those of you who pay ZERO taxes, who are on welfare, foodstamps, or disability, I don't hate you, I have no animosity toward you, but I don't think you should have the right to vote in this country.
I support a literacy test, but I do not support property requirements or tax paying as a requirement to vote.

We offer all people an equal chance to become literate, through free public education Pre-k-12, and even beyond into trade schools.

At this point in our history, not all are born on an equal economic footing, so that would not be fair.

All are born with the ability to get a free education, unless just mentally deficient, and then they should not vote anyway.

In short, literacy test, fair, property requirements not fair at this stage in our history. Later maybe.

Not just literacy, but it should also include some basic civics also.
 
Then you'll want a drug test for voters, just to waist money and then complain about expanded govt and right to privacy issues..
 
We've come a long way in this country. At the start, voting laws were determined on a state by state basis. Many required land ownership for voting rights. Women and colored people were not necessarily excluded since they too have been landowners since well before the start of this country. The concept was that those who had no investment in this country should have no say in in our government, a concept not without merit.

These days it seems we've accepted this idiotic notion that everyone should be able to vote. It's created a serious conflict of interest when people dependent on government are able to vote to increase and sustain such dependence extorting the toils of the producers in this country.

So here's my proposal. Zero liability voters should be banned!

That's right. If you're a net consumer of government, you don't get to vote. It's perfectly fair since I'm the one paying taxes to fund your entitlements. This doesn't include people on Social Security. They paid into that and they deserve to draw from it. That isn't welfare.

But for those of you who pay ZERO taxes, who are on welfare, foodstamps, or disability, I don't hate you, I have no animosity toward you, but I don't think you should have the right to vote in this country.
I support a literacy test, but I do not support property requirements or tax paying as a requirement to vote.

We offer all people an equal chance to become literate, through free public education Pre-k-12, and even beyond into trade schools.

At this point in our history, not all are born on an equal economic footing, so that would not be fair.

All are born with the ability to get a free education, unless just mentally deficient, and then they should not vote anyway.

In short, literacy test, fair, property requirements not fair at this stage in our history. Later maybe.

Not just literacy, but it should also include some basic civics also.
I should specify civic literacy.

I mean, we wouldn't want to exclude someone not up on medieval Japanese lesbian poetry.
 

Forum List

Back
Top