• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the Poor not be allowed to vote

Should the Poor not be allowed to vote

  • The poor should be banned from voting

    Votes: 1 33.3%

  • The richest 10% should be banned from voting

    Votes: 1 33.3%

  • The top 1% should be banned from voting

    Votes: 1 33.3%

  • Only the middle class should be allowed to vote

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    3
Higgins86 said:
ok then but maybe we should have the top 1% live as the bottom 20% for like a week so they can see what its like before they deceide on how much taxes they want to pay?
Click to expand...

that's really stupid. lots of people in the top one percent are the sons or daughters or grand kids of such people and being in the bottom 20% is what motivated them to get their butts in gear and make something of themselves.

Your point has no relevance to Jamesrage's sound argument. besides, taxing the rich more does little if anything to help the bottom 20% and some would argue convincingly that dependency is the biggest enemy of the bottom 20%, not tax cuts for the rich or less handouts to the poor
 
Higgins86 said:
ok then but maybe we should have the top 1% live as the bottom 20% for like a week so they can see what its like before they deceide on how much taxes they want to pay?
Click to expand...

Maybe we should make everyone pay a flat tax on income and make tax increases effect all income tax brackets equally and see if the bottom 20% would be for tax increases.
 
TurtleDude said:
that's really stupid. lots of people in the top one percent are the sons or daughters or grand kids of such people and being in the bottom 20% is what motivated them to get their butts in gear and make something of themselves.

Your point has no relevance to Jamesrage's sound argument. besides, taxing the rich more does little if anything to help the bottom 20% and some would argue convincingly that dependency is the biggest enemy of the bottom 20%, not tax cuts for the rich or less handouts to the poor
Click to expand...


being a grand-kid of a former poor person does not mean they can relate to the bottom 20%, my point was if you wanted to force the poor from the vote and make the rich judge, jury and executioner then they should at least get a fair trial.

p.s Many would argue convincingly that increased tases on the top bracket would help the bottom 20% who are still waiting for that infamous trickle down...
 
TurtleDude said:
everyone should be allowed to vote who is of age etc but those who pay the most ought to have more votes just like a corporation and stockholder votes
Click to expand...

Today is just rich with great planks for the extreme right wing platform. So far today we've got "Gaddafi should still be in power," and now "the rich get more votes."

Any other winners you want to add today? Eating puppies and raping grandmas?
 
jamesrage said:
Maybe we should make everyone pay a flat tax on income and make tax increases effect all income tax brackets equally and see if the bottom 20% would be for tax increases.
Click to expand...


well since many in the bottom 20% are out of work and struggling it would be a pretty pointless excercise.
 
Higgins86 said:
being a grand-kid of a former poor person does not mean they can relate to the bottom 20%, my point was if you wanted to force the poor from the vote and make the rich judge, jury and executioner then they should at least get a fair trial.

p.s Many would argue convincingly that increased tases on the top bracket would help the bottom 20% who are still waiting for that infamous trickle down...
Click to expand...

executioner?

is this an attempt to win the oscar in a leading drama queen role?
 
rocket88 said:
Today is just rich with great planks for the extreme right wing platform. So far today we've got "Gaddafi should still be in power," and now "the rich get more votes."

Any other winners you want to add today? Eating puppies and raping grandmas?
Click to expand...


how is that extreme right? the founders didn't want those who had no skin in the game voting away the wealth of those who did
 
TurtleDude said:
executioner?

is this an attempt to win the oscar in a leading drama queen role?
Click to expand...

talking more about the fact you wanted to excute them as citizens by taking the vote away, not texas style!
 
TurtleDude said:
how is that extreme right? the founders didn't want those who had no skin in the game voting away the wealth of those who did
Click to expand...

The Founders wrote a document for the world of 1787 when we had an isolated backwater nation of 4 million farmers and small merchants on a part of the Eastern seaboard. Those days are long gone. And so are the Founders ideas of skin in the game.
 
haymarket said:
The Founders wrote a document for the world of 1787 when we had an isolated backwater nation of 4 million farmers and small merchants on a part of the Eastern seaboard. Those days are long gone. And so are the Founders ideas of skin in the game.
Click to expand...

Fantastic post
 
haymarket said:
The Founders wrote a document for the world of 1787 when we had an isolated backwater nation of 4 million farmers and small merchants on a part of the Eastern seaboard. Those days are long gone. And so are the Founders ideas of skin in the game.
Click to expand...

So by your logic so are the days of free speech, right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant, the right to peacefully assemble and other rights are only for the world of 1787?
 
jamesrage said:
No one wants to pay more than they have to.A lot of dishonest people are for tax increases that they themselves would not be paying for.
Click to expand...
Which is why I do not favor "sin taxes".


Blackdog said:
Punishment for a crime is not the same thing and legal. Your reply is nothing more than a fallacy as you know what I meant.
Click to expand...
Yes, I knew exactly what you meant, and I pointed out the fatal flaw in your argument resulting from your inconsistency. I am curious to know exactly which "fallacy" you feel I am guilty of.

Oh, and something being legal does not automatically mean it is right or consistent. It just means it is legal.
 
haymarket said:
Why thank you Higgins. I am humbled by your praise.
Click to expand...

lol the founding fathers is a debate I have got into with many of my American friends and even my wife many times. but Im always looking for the right words and you have just wrote them down for me so thank you!
 
TurtleDude said:
how is that extreme right? the founders didn't want those who had no skin in the game voting away the wealth of those who did
Click to expand...

Good lord, what a cliche. "The Founders wanted it this way." They also wanted slavery. Sorry, but many of them did. Has anybody ever considered that they were wrong, and that they're dead?

Those with wealth have been voting higher taxes on those without for the entire history of the US. It's only "class warfare" when we do it though.
 
rocket88 said:
Good lord, what a cliche. "The Founders wanted it this way." They also wanted slavery. Sorry, but many of them did. Has anybody ever considered that they were wrong, and that they're dead?

Those with wealth have been voting higher taxes on those without for the entire history of the US. It's only "class warfare" when we do it though.
Click to expand...

indeed they have.
 
lpast said:
Or should the top 10% not be allowed to vote, since their money influences all politics. I laugh at certain forum posters who say that the poor shouldnt be allowed to vote because they only vote for who is going to give them something...that is one of the most disgustingly disengenuous statements ever uttered on this foru...because the RICH vote for who is going to give them something and they PAY them millions to do it for them in lobbiests cash and gifts to superpacs...its hypocrisy to the ooomph degree.
Click to expand...
one person, one vote, regardless if you are rich or poor, top 1%, bottom `10%, black, white, man or woman. the amount of money you make or have, or your lack thereof, don't make you special.
 
jamesrage said:
So by your logic so are the days of free speech, right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant, the right to peacefully assemble and other rights are only for the world of 1787?
Click to expand...

no that is not what hen is saying! He is saying that you can't take everything the founders said as the gospel as they lived in a different world. Obviously some of the key points the founders made still hold true today but some need updated.
 
If you pay taxes, then you should be able to vote.

This is coming from an anarchist, but it is simple and common sense.
 
radcen said:
Yes, I knew exactly what you meant, and I pointed out the fatal flaw in your argument resulting from your inconsistency.
Click to expand...

No flaw in my argument, the only flaw is your reasoning.

Legal punishment for a crime is not even remotely the same thing as forcing someone to preform for a right that is guaranteed by our Constitution.

radcen said:
I am curious to know exactly which "fallacy" you feel I am guilty of.
Click to expand...

False Dilemma

Attaching the word slavery to both situations does not make my argument invalid or inconsistent.

radcen said:
Oh, and something being legal does not automatically mean it is right or consistent. It just means it is legal.
Click to expand...

No one said it was, I said it was a right and therefore legal, not that it is right.
 
Higgins86 said:
no that is not what hen is saying! He is saying that you can't take everything the founders said as the gospel as they lived in a different world. Obviously some of the key points the founders made still hold true today but some need updated.
Click to expand...


If you are going to use they didn't have that back or the it was a different time argument to **** on the constitution or the ideas of the authors of our constitution then this applies to everything else in the constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom