What is the point of elections? Why do we have them every X years?
If it is good that politicians retain office for X years after winning an election, why would it not be good for them to retain the office until they either retire or die?
If one doesn’t pay taxes, why should one be allowed to vote? If one doesn’t vote, why should one be forced to pay taxes?
[quote]NickViar wrote:
What is the point of elections? Why do we have them every X years?
If it is good that politicians retain office for X years after winning an election, why would it not be good for them to retain the office until they either retire or die?
[/quote]
I like a system in which a politician is held accountable for their decisions in an election every X years. As long as they keep winning elections, they can stay in office until retirement. Except the president of coarse.
[quote]
If one doesn’t pay taxes, why should one be allowed to vote? If one doesn’t vote, why should one be forced to pay taxes?[/quote]
If deciding not to vote freed you from having to pay taxes, nobody would vote! Those that don’t vote may choose not to have a say in their representation, but they still use public goods and services that are paid for by taxes.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
I like a system in which a politician is held accountable for their decisions in an election every X years. As long as they keep winning elections, they can stay in office until retirement. Except the president of coarse.[/quote]
-Why should he only be held accountable every X years? Why should the president not be allowed to remain in office the same way any other ruler is?
[quote]
If deciding not to vote freed you from having to pay taxes, nobody would vote! Those that don’t vote may choose not to have a say in their representation, but they still use public goods and services that are paid for by taxes. [/quote]
-So you don’t believe voting is valuable?
-What if Taxpayer A’s values are not represented in an election? Why should he be forced to either sanction that with which he doesn’t agree, or subsidize it when it’s elected by others?
-Why should Welfare Recipient B be allowed to vote? He only uses that which is bought by others, so why should his input be accepted?
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
I like a system in which a politician is held accountable for their decisions in an election every X years. As long as they keep winning elections, they can stay in office until retirement. Except the president of coarse.[/quote]
-Why should he only be held accountable every X years? Why should the president not be allowed to remain in office the same way any other ruler is?
[/quote]
What would you propose? IMO if you allow a president to stay in office until retirement or death, his main priority will be keeping that office. How far will they go to keep that office?
[quote]
If deciding not to vote freed you from having to pay taxes, nobody would vote! Those that don’t vote may choose not to have a say in their representation, but they still use public goods and services that are paid for by taxes. [/quote]
-So you don’t believe voting is valuable?
-What if Taxpayer A’s values are not represented in an election? Why should he be forced to either sanction that with which he doesn’t agree, or subsidize it when it’s elected by others?
-Why should Welfare Recipient B be allowed to vote? He only uses that which is bought by others, so why should his input be accepted? [/quote]
I think voting is extremely valuable. So is my money. I would prefer voting to be a right and not something that is taxed.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
What would you propose? IMO if you allow a president to stay in office until retirement or death, his main priority will be keeping that office. How far will they go to keep that office? [/quote]
-Why would it be a problem for presidents but not for other elected officials?
-Didn’t you say that the point of elections is holding elected officials accountable? As long as a president continues to win elections, is he not held accountable? Why is it necessary to bring in another?
-Why would allowing a president to continue being elected cause him to do anything more than he does now?
[quote]I think voting is extremely valuable. So is my money. I would prefer voting to be a right and not something that is taxed.
[/quote]
-You just indicated that you would not be willing to vote if not doing so would allow you to not pay taxes, so you obviously value voting less than your money.
-Should foreigners be allowed to vote if they happen to be vacationing here during an election? If not, then why not?
Nick: "You just indicated that you would not be willing to vote if not doing so would allow you to not pay taxes, so you obviously value voting less than your money. "
Yep.
"Should foreigners be allowed to vote if they happen to be vacationing here during an election? If not, then why not? "
No, for more reasons than I care to list, but the reason your looking for is that they don’t pay taxes here. I understand why someone would be upset that someone on welfare gets to have the same amount of say in who represents them. However, voting is a right and not something that is paid for which I prefer. Elected officials don’t just govern taxpayers but all of the citizenry.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
"Should foreigners be allowed to vote if they happen to be vacationing here during an election? If not, then why not? "
No, for more reasons than I care to list, but the reason your looking for is that they don’t pay taxes here. I understand why someone would be upset that someone on welfare gets to have the same amount of say in who represents them. However, voting is a right and not something that is paid for which I prefer. Elected officials don’t just govern taxpayers but all of the citizenry. [/quote]
If voting is a right, then a foreigner should be allowed to vote.
Elected officials can only use the money of taxpayers to do whatever it is they do.
I work in local government. I AM SUBSIDIZED. I CAN’T pay taxes. It is impossible. My paycheck is forcibly taken from others before being given to me. Elected leaders are just reclaiming some of the property they have stolen when I “pay” taxes.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
"Should foreigners be allowed to vote if they happen to be vacationing here during an election? If not, then why not? "
No, for more reasons than I care to list, but the reason your looking for is that they don’t pay taxes here. I understand why someone would be upset that someone on welfare gets to have the same amount of say in who represents them. However, voting is a right and not something that is paid for which I prefer. Elected officials don’t just govern taxpayers but all of the citizenry. [/quote]
If voting is a right, then a foreigner should be allowed to vote.
Elected officials can only use the money of taxpayers to do whatever it is they do.
I work in local government. I AM SUBSIDIZED. I CAN’T pay taxes. It is impossible. My paycheck is forcibly taken from others before being given to me. Elected leaders are just reclaiming some of the property they have stolen when I “pay” taxes.
[/quote]
I meant voting as a right of the citizenry.
EDIT: So no, a foreigner cannot vote.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
I meant voting as a right of the citizenry.
EDIT: So no, a foreigner cannot vote.
[/quote]
So you believe a foreigner, who may very well financially support this government to a greater extent than either a welfare recipient or a government worker(sales tax), should not be allowed to vote because he is foreign. He will be ruled by this country’s leaders while here, so why not?
The fact is, you may freely leave this country two days after the next election, just like a foreigner going home, so I can’t see a compelling reason to allow you to vote.
Do you agree or disagree with my reasoning and conclusion? Please explain.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
What is the point of elections? Why do we have them every X years?
If it is good that politicians retain office for X years after winning an election, why would it not be good for them to retain the office until they either retire or die?
If one doesn’t pay taxes, why should one be allowed to vote? If one doesn’t vote, why should one be forced to pay taxes?[/quote]
No blood on the streets, peaceful revolutions can occur.
Its not ideal, its not nothing either.
I agree with Orion.
There may be a helluva’ lot of people who take their ability to vote for granted…or who feel it “mean’s nothing”…
But see what would happen if all of a sudden that right/privilege was taken away…
Mufasa
You need to get laid Nick.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
I meant voting as a right of the citizenry.
EDIT: So no, a foreigner cannot vote.
[/quote]
So you believe a foreigner, who may very well financially support this government to a greater extent than either a welfare recipient or a government worker(sales tax), should not be allowed to vote because he is foreign. He will be ruled by this country’s leaders while here, so why not?
The fact is, you may freely leave this country two days after the next election, just like a foreigner going home, so I can’t see a compelling reason to allow you to vote.
Do you agree or disagree with my reasoning and conclusion? Please explain.[/quote]
I’m pretty sure you need not only be a citizen, but have established residency to vote in your state. Do I think residents of California should be able to go to Texas and vote for bans on assault weapons? No, because they aren’t residents of the State. Same goes for registered Republicans voting in Democrat primaries. Their interests may not be to see the best guy win, vote for the shitty candidate, so their candidate can win the national election.
Give me a compelling reason why a foreigner should be able to visit Hollywood for a weekend and vote for our president and state officials?
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
But see what would happen if all of a sudden that right/privilege was taken away…
Mufasa [/quote]
Well, by and large it has been rendered meaningless and the result has been zilch, zero, nada.
However, whenever there has been a third part uprising in American politics, swallowing one of the two former leading parties, THEN a real sea change happened.
Lets see what happens if this occurs and is gerrymandered away.
Then you will have your answer.
I think we are agreeing, Orion; but we may be talking about two separate (albeit related) issues:
I think you may be speaking about having our vote being effectively rendered useless (tell me if I’m wrong)…
I’m speaking more of having our ability to vote taken completely away…it is THEN that I bet you would see people willing to die for the right.
(Some would say that your scenario is in many ways already occuring).
Mufasa
[quote]NickViar wrote:
What is the point of elections? Why do we have them every X years?
If it is good that politicians retain office for X years after winning an election, why would it not be good for them to retain the office until they either retire or die?
If one doesn’t pay taxes, why should one be allowed to vote? If one doesn’t vote, why should one be forced to pay taxes?[/quote]
I’m a rich guy, I’ve got a private security company watching over me .
Say you’re a poor guy. You and I sign a contract. Then I say fuck you buddy and don’t do my half at the end of it. Then I tell you that if you tell anyone, I’ll come back with my little army and cut you into pieces. Just to prove a point, I break your wife’s arm. I tell you to show up at my factory for work the next day. You’ll be making ten dollars a week.
Then a little while goes by, and I say: I’m gonna bang that wife of yours, and you just keep working in my factory for nothin, and if anybody hears about this, you’re dead and gone.
I get away with it completely, and you have to just go fuck yourself. Right? Or, at best, you flee in the middle of the night with absolutely no money and no hope and no property. Right?
This sounds way better than voting and paying taxes. And if you don’t think it would happen, then do some reading on the Packingtown district.
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
What is the point of elections? Why do we have them every X years?
If it is good that politicians retain office for X years after winning an election, why would it not be good for them to retain the office until they either retire or die?
If one doesn’t pay taxes, why should one be allowed to vote? If one doesn’t vote, why should one be forced to pay taxes?[/quote]
I’m a rich guy, I’ve got a private security company watching over me .
Say you’re a poor guy. You and I sign a contract. Then I say fuck you buddy and don’t do my half at the end of it. Then I tell you that if you tell anyone, I’ll come back with my little army and cut you into pieces. Just to prove a point, I break your wife’s arm. I tell you to show up at my factory for work the next day. You’ll be making ten dollars a week.
Then a little while goes by, and I say: I’m gonna bang that wife of yours, and you just keep working in my factory for nothin, and if anybody hears about this, you’re dead and gone.
I get away with it completely, and you have to just go fuck yourself. Right? Or, at best, you flee in the middle of the night with absolutely no money and no hope and no property. Right?
This sounds way better than voting and paying taxes. And if you don’t think it would happen, then do some reading on the Packingtown district.[/quote]
Despite the fact that you answered none of the questions posed in my post, I’ll play along.
What would realistically happen if Bill Gates wanted to, and was willing to pay enough, to do any of those things today? He could most likely have an army of socialized defense workers arrest me.
I know, I know, I know-that’s not how the system is supposed to work. Well, in my system, a pegasus could come and rescue the man, his wife, and his property, then fly them to safety on a private island in the Pacific-if that doesn’t happen, then you can’t blame my system, right?
It’s interesting that Upton Sinclair wrote about things supposedly occurring in a regulated society-not a free one, or do you deny that Chicago was part of the U.S. at the time?
Are the above any more true than Sinclair’s novel? I don’t know-I wasn’t there, but they make more sense.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
I’m pretty sure you need not only be a citizen, but have established residency to vote in your state. Do I think residents of California should be able to go to Texas and vote for bans on assault weapons? No, because they aren’t residents of the State. Same goes for registered Republicans voting in Democrat primaries. Their interests may not be to see the best guy win, vote for the shitty candidate, so their candidate can win the national election.
Give me a compelling reason why a foreigner should be able to visit Hollywood for a weekend and vote for our president and state officials?
[/quote]
In what way has a project-dwelling welfare recipient established residency-because leader has placed her there? Because her place on government property is technically located within the bounds of X, she has more right to choose a leader for the private areas of X than a visitor who has helped pay for the government of X? So the government should be able to move her around as it pleases, in order to gain the votes it wants in different locales? Leader is the one who determines residency, correct? So leader should be able to move his people around as he pleases, correct?
Why shouldn’t the California resident be allowed to vote in Texas? If he can’t be trusted to vote correctly for Texas, then why should he be trusted to vote correctly in California? If he hates his fellow man enough to make the wrong decision for Texas, why should he, a San Diego resident, be trusted to decide what is best for a man in Sacramento?
What difference does it make if a republican or democrat wins the national election? They both have our best interest in mind, right? Either one knows better than us what is best for us, right?
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
What is the point of elections? Why do we have them every X years?
If it is good that politicians retain office for X years after winning an election, why would it not be good for them to retain the office until they either retire or die?
If one doesn’t pay taxes, why should one be allowed to vote? If one doesn’t vote, why should one be forced to pay taxes?[/quote]
I’m a rich guy, I’ve got a private security company watching over me .
Say you’re a poor guy. You and I sign a contract. Then I say fuck you buddy and don’t do my half at the end of it. Then I tell you that if you tell anyone, I’ll come back with my little army and cut you into pieces. Just to prove a point, I break your wife’s arm. I tell you to show up at my factory for work the next day. You’ll be making ten dollars a week.
Then a little while goes by, and I say: I’m gonna bang that wife of yours, and you just keep working in my factory for nothin, and if anybody hears about this, you’re dead and gone.
I get away with it completely, and you have to just go fuck yourself. Right? Or, at best, you flee in the middle of the night with absolutely no money and no hope and no property. Right?
This sounds way better than voting and paying taxes. And if you don’t think it would happen, then do some reading on the Packingtown district.[/quote]
You will end with shitty employees and a bullet in your head.
[quote]orion wrote:
You will end with shitty employees and a bullet in your head. [/quote]
Orion, however will the lowly workers know they are being mistreated without a leader to tell them so? Certainly you don’t mean to imply they are capable of taking care of themselves?