• 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 people on welfare be allowed to vote?[W:504]

Should be on welfare be allowed to vote?

  • Yes

    Votes: 99 82.5%

  • No

    Votes: 15 12.5%

  • Other

    Votes: 7 5.8%

  • Welcome To Costco I Love You

    Votes: 11 9.2%
  • Total voters
    120
ernst barkmann said:
does not need to,...... the state legislatures put the senators in office didn't they before the 17th.......yes or no?
Click to expand...

Actually it does need to say that to support your allegation. And it does NOT say that. So you just made it up.

Yes, the state legislature as representatives of the people of the state placed senators in office. They did that exactly the same way they passed laws for the state representing the people and in the name of the people. As such the senators represented the entire state - and that includes all the people of the state for without the people there would be no state.
 
AlbqOwl said:
But. . . .there is one other argument to be made. (Disclaimer: I am not uncharitable or unsympathetic to the poor. I devote a great deal of my time and talent and personal resources up close and personal with the poor.)

You may bend over backwards to accommodate the guest in your home and that makes you a good and gracious host. But how would you feel about it if that guest then assumed power to dictate to you what his sleeping accommodations will be, what food and drink you will serve at whatever expense, and that his every need be met?

How is that different from those who cannot or will not work for what they have dictating to those who must provide for them how much the others will provide?
Click to expand...
The numbers are too diluted for that to happen.
 
Of course they should have the right to vote.

The 15th and 19th amendments stopped stuffy old rich white landowners from being the only ones to vote.

(posted this without reading every page - if it's been mentioned, my apologies)
 
haymarket said:
Actually it does need to say that to support your allegation. And it does NOT say that. So you just made it up.

Yes, the state legislature as representatives of the people of the state placed senators in office. They did that exactly the same way they passed laws for the state representing the people and in the name of the people. As such the senators represented the entire state - and that includes all the people of the state for without the people there would be no state.
Click to expand...

sorry wrong.

the house the representative body of the people........the senate is the representative body of the states.

the senator is chosen by the state legislature, not the people, therefore he represents the legislative body of the state.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
These kinds of polls are so stupid. Welfare is a small federal outlay in the scheme of things. So why just single them out. Why not include everyone on Social Security and Medicare considering that those are huge federal outlays and most people on those invariably get more in benefits than they paid in payroll taxes for them. So why not just exclude everyone over 65 from voting as well if you don't want people on the dole voting?
Click to expand...

Because old broke people who use up Medicare and Social Security vote Republican in Florida. That's why.
 
ernst barkmann said:
democracy was a form of government does not secure indivdual liberty


The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty.
Click to expand...

I would ask what your ideal form of government is but I know how you're going to answer (constitutionally limited republic, blah blah blah.) Democracy and republic overlap. You cannot have a republic without a democratic system.
 
phattonez said:
What style of libertarian are you? Are you just a Communist with a libertarian label? Or are you a libertarian of the Austrian variety?
Click to expand...

I am a geo-mutualist. Feel free to look it up.
 
ernst barkmann said:
sorry wrong.

the house the representative body of the people........the senate is the representative body of the states.

the senator is chosen by the state legislature, not the people, therefore he represents the legislative body of the state.
Click to expand...

More stuff you just made up to fit your own extremist belief system contrary to reality and the US Constitution.
 
Geoist said:
I would ask what your ideal form of government is but I know how you're going to answer (constitutionally limited republic, blah blah blah.) Democracy and republic overlap. You cannot have a republic without a democratic system.
Click to expand...


sorry that is wrong....

in the time of the founders there is no such thing as a democratic republic....the founders created our government off of the roman republic of "mixed government"....mixed government employs 1 single element of democracy , the house of representatives.

the senate and presidency is not democratic votes of the people.
 
phattonez said:
Democracy may precisely be the worse system we have in order to solve societal issues.It's like letting the students decide how the class should be run.
Click to expand...

Looks like we have a follower of Hoppe. Sorry, I do not submit to his feudalist thinking.


It is lawlessness.
Click to expand...

That is just silly.
 
phattonez said:
They probably would, but they would be held back by a few things. First, those who are being stolen from would have major objections and threaten to overthrow the system. Second, if those in power can keep that power for a long time and can even pass it on to their children, then they will be interested in the long term economic health of the system instead of just stealing at the present at the expense of long term health (as commonly happens in democracy). Those with a long-term vested interest care about preserving the long term wealth of the country, but evil motives (so that they can steal more wealth for longer instead of a lot just right now) in this case would at least be less harmful than the short term oriented outlook common to democracies.
Click to expand...

Yup, definitely a Hoppe follower.

Sorry, but monarchy/landlordism goes against everything I believe in.
 
haymarket said:
More stuff you just made up to fit your own extremist belief system contrary to reality and the US Constitution.
Click to expand...

sorry but you fail basic american government 101...anyone KNOWS. that if a person is a representative of the people or body that elects them.

since the senator is elected by the legislative body of the state, he represents them and not the people
 
ernst barkmann said:
sorry that is wrong....

in the time of the founders there is no such thing as a democratic republic....
Click to expand...

Of course it wasn't, because only landowning white males were allowed to vote during that time.
 
Geoist said:
Of course it wasn't, because only landowning white males were allowed to vote during that time.
Click to expand...

has nothing to do with who votes, be they white, black or woman.

the constitution created a government, based on monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy rolled into 1.....because all three types of government by themselves, results in tyranny.

because the government employs all three inside itself, tranny cannot take place, because the system is balanced, so no single entity can have all power.
 
Geoist said:
Looks like we have a follower of Hoppe. Sorry, I do not submit to his feudalist thinking.

That is just silly.
Click to expand...

Respond to the arguments.
 
Geoist said:
Yup, definitely a Hoppe follower.

Sorry, but monarchy/landlordism goes against everything I believe in.
Click to expand...

So your retort is nothing more than a blanket dismissal. That's disappointing.
 
phattonez said:
An excuse? The right to vote?

Would you ever give the your typical welfare recipient (or anyone for that matter) your pin code? If not, then why would you allow them to vote over how much money the government takes from you?
Click to expand...

So all poor people are thieves, crooks and completely focused on self interest?
 
JANFU said:
So all poor people are thieves, crooks and completely focused on self interest?
Click to expand...

No, but people respond to incentives, and if you give people the legal ability to vote themselves money for doing nothing, then by and large they are going to do it.
 
ernst barkmann said:
has nothing to do with who votes, be they white, black or woman.

the constitution created a government, based on monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy rolled into 1.....because all three types of government by themselves, results in tyranny.

because the government employs all three inside itself, tranny cannot take place, because the system is balanced, so no single entity can have all power.
Click to expand...

...And we are broadly defined as a democracy. You are really overcomplicating things here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom