• 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!

Would you vote for the compromise?

How would you vote on the compromise as described in the OP?

  • Total voters
    49
TurtleDude said:
this is a frigging chat board dude

you take this place WAY too seriously
Click to expand...

This is a debate site. Isn't that what we're doing?

And I never do anything half-assed. What would be the point? ;)
 
TurtleDude said:
1) nothing you say here is going to have any real impact on the real world

2) same with me
Click to expand...

I don't agree. What we say here can have an impact on other individuals. THAT, in turn can have an impact on things in a larger sense. You do know that my position on gun control has made a complete 180 since coming to DP... and you are probably the biggest reason. Don't underestimate the power of the pen.
 
TurtleDude said:
1) nothing you say here is going to have any real impact on the real world
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. I was once a part of a space forum where some of the ideas that were stated were actually looked at by NASA. So you never know what effect a forum is going to have.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I don't agree. What we say here can have an impact on other individuals. THAT, in turn can have an impact on things in a larger sense. You do know that my position on gun control has made a complete 180 since coming to DP... and you are probably the biggest reason. Don't underestimate the power of the pen.
Click to expand...

An excellent example of this would be the news papers and media.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
So...... again if you have money, your vote counts according to Turtle. That is what the founding Fathers DIDNT want!!!!!! Where is Turtle so I can smack em????
And NO! This whole idea discussed in this poll is assinine.
Click to expand...

Probably posting in other threads how we should make those that are poor and on welfare do slave labor lol
 
In America your freedoms aren't based on your income. It would be unconstitutional to force citizens who receive more than they put in to not have their vote equal to the millionaires. It would be an injustice and inequality of epic proportions. Every legal adult citizen should have the right to vote regardless of beliefs, income, or if they receive money from the government. It's un-American, unethical, and unjust to deny them their vote or lessen their vote.
 
TurtleDude said:
what the OP fails to note is that I want a tax system where those who do not pay taxes cannot vote up the taxes of those who do

that is the main point-such as a NST, a consumption tax or a flat tax. I oppose progressive income taxes so the OP is being less than honest which figures
Click to expand...

I wasn't the least bit dishonest. Everything I said about your position was 100% correct. If I didn't go into the details, it's because the details weren't relevant to the poll question, because the details weren't what provided the inspiration for the poll.

I also didn't take a shot at you personally.

Who's being dishonest? Oh, yeah... :lol:
 
haymarket said:
But citizens DO NOT vote for income tax hikes or decreases.
Click to expand...

You're right. They vote for people who promise to tax the wealthy and leave every one else alone. They vote for people who promise all kinds of goodies.
 
Kal'Stang said:
I'm poor, but I am by no means a dem. I think both dems and rep should be booted out and more independents should be brought in. And by indepenent I'm talking about people that are not affiliated with ANY party and will tell them both like it is. So sorry but poor people do not always vote dem.
Click to expand...

Watch out, if you're poor and don't vote Dem you might be called an idiot. They might say it's voting against you're own best interest and that's stupid.
The thing is, liberals don't know what someone's best interest is. They just think they do.
 
digsbe said:
In America your freedoms aren't based on your income. It would be unconstitutional to force citizens who receive more than they put in to not have their vote equal to the millionaires. It would be an injustice and inequality of epic proportions. Every legal adult citizen should have the right to vote regardless of beliefs, income, or if they receive money from the government. It's un-American, unethical, and unjust to deny them their vote or lessen their vote.
Click to expand...

you do know that the when the nation was founded only male landed property owners could vote.

so how is it unamerican to limit voting to those who are net tax payers.

I want to see a rational argument
 
Kali said:
Probably posting in other threads how we should make those that are poor and on welfare do slave labor lol
Click to expand...

making someone work to pay for the existence of someone unwilling to do that for himself is not slave labor to you but making someone who is on the dole contribute to society in lieu of paying taxes is slave labor?

now that is some strange hypocrisy IMHO
 
TurtleDude said:
you do know that the when the nation was founded only male landed property owners could vote.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It was also American to keep slaves, deny the women the right to vote, employ children outside of family businesses, and expect laborers to endure dangerous conditions with little or no protection simply for the sake of having a job.

TurtleDude said:
so how is it unamerican to limit voting to those who are net tax payers.

I want to see a rational argument
Click to expand...

Simple.

As a nation, we've evolved. :lol:
 
Barbbtx said:
Watch out, if you're poor and don't vote Dem you might be called an idiot. They might say it's voting against you're own best interest and that's stupid.
The thing is, liberals don't know what someone's best interest is. They just think they do.
Click to expand...

And if you think that conservatives don't erroneously think that they know what is in someone's best interest, you are fooling yourself.
 
TurtleDude said:
you do know that the when the nation was founded only male landed property owners could vote.

so how is it unamerican to limit voting to those who are net tax payers.

I want to see a rational argument
Click to expand...

I don't think you want to go this route. There are far too many contradictions if you start comparing voting rights from 1789 to those of today.
 
TurtleDude said:
you do know that the when the nation was founded only male landed property owners could vote.

so how is it unamerican to limit voting to those who are net tax payers.

I want to see a rational argument
Click to expand...

When the US was founded you could own slaves, rape your wife without being punished as well. Shall we consider those things to be American?
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Absolutely. It was also American to keep slaves, deny the women the right to vote, employ children outside of family businesses, and expect laborers to endure dangerous conditions with little or no protection simply for the sake of having a job.



Simple.

As a nation, we've evolved. :lol:
Click to expand...

the claim that something is unamerican might have some emotional appeal but its often profoundly inaccurate.

the only sound reason to allow basically everyone the right to vote is the harm that comes from invariably improperly drawing lines.

its like the old saying, a democracy (a constitutional republic in reality) is the worst form of government save all the others that have been tried
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
When the US was founded you could own slaves, rape your wife without being punished as well. Shall we consider those things to be American?
Click to expand...

I think the more accurate term is those were morally wrong. I don'[t think its a question of morality as to who has the franchise
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
When the US was founded you could own slaves, rape your wife without being punished as well. Shall we consider those things to be American?
Click to expand...

OK give me a rational argument why people who make no real contribution to society should have equal say to those who do.
 
TurtleDude said:
the claim that something is unamerican might have some emotional appeal but its often profoundly inaccurate.

the only sound reason to allow basically everyone the right to vote is the harm that comes from invariably improperly drawing lines.

its like the old saying, a democracy (a constitutional republic in reality) is the worst form of government save all the others that have been tried
Click to expand...

What is or is not American depends on the time period in which we are talking. The tenets of a society tend to be fluid and progress as that society evolves. The only constant is change.
 
TurtleDude said:
the claim that something is unamerican might have some emotional appeal but its often profoundly inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it is, especially when it's some asshole politician using the term to make political hay, but sometimes something is genuinely unAmerican.

Used genuinely, sometimes that term is used to describe the America we're striving for, and sometimes it's used to describe the America that the nation has evolved into.
 
TurtleDude said:
OK give me a rational argument why people who make no real contribution to society should have equal say to those who do.
Click to expand...

Define contribution. Oh... and as a qualifier, paying taxes is NOT the only way one contributes to society.
 
TurtleDude said:
OK give me a rational argument why people who make no real contribution to society should have equal say to those who do.
Click to expand...

Well, first we'd have to agree on what "a real" contribution is, and then we'd have to figure out how to measure it.

The nation has a record of sucking at the first thing (agreement), and the government has a record of sucking at the second thing (accurate measurement).
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Define contribution. Oh... and as a qualifier, paying taxes is NOT the only way one contributes to society.
Click to expand...

lets stop being evasive

You know there are plenty of people who make no positive contributions to society-lets start with them.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Well, first we'd have to agree on what "a real" contribution is, and then we'd have to figure out how to measure it.

The nation has a record of sucking at the first thing (agreement), and the government has a record of sucking at the second thing (accurate measurement).
Click to expand...

that's true which is why I said the improper line drawing is the best argument in favor of no line drawing-sort of like its better to let 1000 murderers go free than to string up an innocent man

but lets-for the sake of argument-agree that we could find an objective way of determining a non-contributor-and why should that person have equal say to someone who is a major contributor-be it a medal of honor hero or the guy who discovered a cure for Polio or AIDS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom