Kilarin wrote:
I've proposed a compromise. ANYONE can vote, as long as you are NOT taking any money from a government program. (excluding salaries). This covers welfare for both the rich AND the poor. If you are on the government dole, whether it be food stamps or corporate welfare, then you can't vote until you get back off of it and are independent again.
Of course, this isn't really practical (or entirely fair) either, but I think its a whole heck of a lot closer to addressing the problem than linking voting to property.
I could accept this compromise. Fair isn't that important to me. What's important to me is the long term viability of a free market system.
The motivation behind suggesting that only property owners vote is that it puts the power into the hands of people that are truly vested rather than in the hands of people who tend to freeload. Property owners gain or lose wealth based on the prosperity of the nation as a whole. If anything, this would be more fair rather than less fair.
Kilarin wrote:At the first of every year, the gov sends out a "Government Funding" form to every citizen. It would list things like: Standing Military, Iraq War, Afghan War, Local Road Maintenance. Interstate Highway Maintenance. Etc.
You, as a citizen, would go down the list and write in how much money you wanted to send to each government project.
The mathematician in me says this is a bad idea. I like the concept, but the execution is no good.
What if every citizen considered some particular issue to be their #2 priority, but gave 100% of their funding to their #1 priority? Then the #2 priority of the entire country would never get any funding!
The problem with this system is that it doesn't give people the ability to fund their priorities in relation to how much funding is already out there. It needs to be far, far more sophisticated than what you outlined.
well, if you'd read the book you would understand.
Its a social and political commentary. The bugs and aliens are merely a side line. In the movie there is a strong hint at fascism. If you don't read the book carefully, you can think that's what's being pushed, but it's a good bit deeper than that. It takes place in the future where there is a one world government where the United States is referred to as the great democratic experiment. Not everyone gets citizenship, it has to be earned. With citizenship, comes a number of privileges, like voting.
Lothar wrote:The problem with this system is that it doesn't give people the ability to fund their priorities in relation to how much funding is already out there.
Entirely valid. And actually, I've usually considered it to be an unimplementable dream.
Lothar wrote:It needs to be far, far more sophisticated than what you outlined.
So, how would you propose to make this actually PRACTICAL? I love the idea, but I agree entirely that without some serious modification it wouldn't work out very well.
I guess Massachusetts hasn't always been a liberal bastion. They've done the 'Tea Party' revolt before. Same racist motives now as back then, or not? Hmmmmmmm.
