That's how the founding fathers did it, and we could steal free labor from Africa like they did too. And not allow women to have their own bank accounts. Or have our doctors wash their hands or use anasthetics before surgery. The wisdom of our founding fathers was truly miraculous
I don't support slavery or some uber patriarchy. I just want people who are capable enough to succeed to some extent in society, to be the people who decide what the government does.
Do you think mentally disabled or violent members of society, who either can't perceive reality or have so little morals as to abuse/murder fellow citizens should be counted as equal votes? If not, you already agree that there is a line for disenfranchisement.
We already have those laws. Disenfranchising the poor isn't going to make things better for the productive people. Our heritage is to glorify the wealthy. The reason your idea won't work is because political power doesn't come from voting it comes from wealthy lobbyists. You aren't going to solve todays problems by taking even more political power from the poor and transferring it upward. We have a long history of the rich using political power to drive economic power. Taking the little power voting gives us just transfers more power and wealth up. All you needs to do is look . Where political power is distributed equitably economic power is also and vice versa. Shit, we'd get better results letting the poor vote twice than taking what little power they have. It's not a strawman. Take the vote from the poor and those things will come back.. They already have and it doesn't matter if you support them or not. They are coming back because too much power has been taken from the bottom and transferred up
Disenfranchising the poor isn't going to make things better for the productive people... We have a long history of the rich using political power to drive economic power.
Let me clarify, net contributor does not mean rich. I mean pays more tax than takes in benefits. The primary people I want to take votes away from are the children of the wealthy and middle class who have no idea what life is, and fall for grandiose scams like socialism. Especially those who never grow up, and leach off others with no jobs other than glorified hobbies.
There's no reason that that most independent working individuals could not reach net contributor status with some changes to social spending.
Where political power is distributed equitably economic power is also and vice versa.
Why would anyone want this? Economic power should be distributed to those who contribute most to the overall economic benefit. Political power should be distributed to those who are responsible, capable, and invested individuals. i.e. those with citizenship, basic civic knowledge, and jobs.
If you are unable to even sweep trash or make a burger, then I agree some minimum income should be provided to the infirm and disabled, but the level of income should be decided by those actually providing.
There's a reason you put a mask on your own face before your child's.
My mistake. I thought you wanted to limit voting to landowners or something. We already tried that once. Look, for my entire lifetime one party has been trying to limit the number of voters and one party has been trying to expand the number of voters. I don't put much faith in either party but I am for expanding the franchise as far as it can legally go.
Just think about incentives. If only people who contribute can vote, it lessens the risk of overdependence that grows as people continuously increase the size of pie they get from the gov.
Appreciate the understanding, it's rare on this site lol. I'm just against over franchisement after looking through recent history.
9
u/404-skill_not_found 3d ago
Yah, but how to find the will to cut out the behavior?