It is a betrayal of the right of every adult American citizen to vote. That is the important thing.
this whole "net taxpayer'' thing reminds me of the scene in FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH where Spicolli and a teacher exchange ideas about whether an idea is half assed or is fully assed. In this case it just might be both.
Just what it is the exact definition of a "net taxpayer"?
How is it measured?
When is it measured?
For what period of time are we measuring?
Which taxes are we considering and why?
Which taxes are we not considering and why not?
Are all levels of government considered?
Can you bounce back and forth between classifications of being a "net taxpayer" and not being one?
How often can you bounce back and forth?
Who will make this determination?
Is there an appeals process?
Is it regularly reviewed?
Is it a violation of the equal protections clause of the 14th Amendment?
Is it a violation of the 24th Amendment?
How many people would be stripped of the right to vote at any given time?
Could they still vote in purely local elections?
How would you manage such a system?
and on and on and on it goes.
from cpwill
this is the thrust of Turtle and mine's claims here; that our current incentive structure encourages voters to make uninformed and irresponsible decisions, and that at least one major party and a significant portion of another take advantage of this.
Simply because a person has money and meets some criteria for being a net taxpayer does NOT make them either
informed or
responsible in terms of being able to cast the intelligent vote that you seem to feel they will then cast. Nobody here advocating such a scheme has established and connection between those things.