sons people should not be allowed to vote IF ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Bring your W-2 to the polls!!

---

no problem son! keep working hard at McDonalds with JoeChadildoboy and you two will be making $15,000 a year in no time!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

So contributions to society are only measured in terms of how much someone pays in taxes? Why on Earth would anyone oppose a tax increase then, since paying more taxes would demonstrate a greater contribution to society!!

But in any event, I suppose you'd argue that a nun or a monk, for instance, shouldn't be allowed to vote?

---

Correct

Why are they allowed to vote anyways?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRHornet45

no problem son! keep working hard at McDonalds with JoeChadildoboy and you two will be making $15,000 a year in no time!!!

---

FWDT, I'd like my injunction filed and SUPERSIZED, boy.

I notice you're conveniently skipping timvp's suggestion.

Every American of voting age has the right to vote. Income or educational level does not place any more weight on a vote. My vote counts the same as Warren Buffett's.
Go USA!!

Actually, there's brilliance in this idea from the standpoint of social policy, too. Obviously, those who don't work but carry substantial tax burdens -- say the stay-at-home spouses of highly-paid executives -- should be allowed to vote under this plan. So combined incomes are sufficient to give one the right to vote. Thus, imposing the $10,000 threshold would encourage those who make very little money to get married to one another and aggregate their meager incomes to obtain the right to vote -- lessen they're homosexuals or something, of course.

It's social brilliance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

I notice you're conveniently skipping timvp's suggestion.

---

that's because, not surprisingly, he didn't get it. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

FWDT, I'd like my injunction filed and SUPERSIZED, boy.

---

You want fries with that? Maybe a pie?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRHornet45

- if they are unemployed

- if they are living off of the government via welfare, housing, etc.

- if they make LESS than $10,000 per year.

After all sons. what are these people doing for the country anyways other than living off of other peoples tax dollars??? cause God knows 95% of them will vote for Democrats to give them MORE irresponsibility ... if they even vote at all. amen. thanks sons god bless.

---

Let's add those who get their news from talk radio.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

You want fries with that? Maybe a pie?

---

In triplicate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Why make the floor $10,000? I mean, it's abundantly clear that the people who are most responsible in this country are those who make the most money and, undoubtedly, those people should have the most say about who will be President. Why not make it a $50,000 threshold, or better yet, only allow voting by those who make $100,000 a year!!

Plus, I think the unemployed thing sweeps too broadly -- it would be silly to deny the vote to rich people who are unemployed!!!

---

I wouldn't actually want it just like BR explained, but I have advocated a similar thing myself. I don't know exactly where to make the cutoffs, but maybe something like the following:

1) To be eligeble to vote, you cannot be one who gets subsidies from the various government agencies over the last two years that exceed what income taxes you pay over the same period.

2) Social Security and other retirement related entitlements are not considered subsidies for voting purposes. Social Security will actually be treated as income for voting elegibility.

3) The right to vote will not be denied to the handicapped under this provision.

4) Non tax paying citizens have the right to vote as long as they are not being subsidized by the government.

5) Paymnts of Social Security and Medicare deductions are not considered taxes for these rules as they are for future benifits.

My thoughts on the subject are simply to exclude those who chose government handouts over paying their own way from voting. The rules I would support would be to those means.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...0W-JwD93FT48G0
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...0W-JwD93FT48G0
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...0W-JwD93FT48G0
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...0W-JwD93FT48G0
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...0W-JwD93FT48G0
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...0W-JwD93FT48G0


The dems get away with raping democracy because they have brain washed Amerika into this political correctness bafoonery. It's a brilliant move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I wouldn't actually want it just like BR explained, but I have advocated a similar thing myself. I don't know exactly where to make the cutoffs, but maybe something like the following:

1) To be eligeble to vote, you cannot be one who gets subsidies from the various government agencies over the last two years that exceed what income taxes you pay over the same period.

2) Social Security and other retirement related entitlements are not considered subsidies for voting purposes. Social Security will actually be treated as income for voting elegibility.

3) The right to vote will not be denied to the handicapped under this provision.

4) Non tax paying citizens have the right to vote as long as they are not being subsidized by the government.

5) Paymnts of Social Security and Medicare deductions are not considered taxes for these rules as they are for future benifits.

My thoughts on the subject are simply to exclude those who chose government handouts over paying their own way from voting. The rules I would support would be to those means.

---

Do bailed out Wall Street executives get treated as having been subsidized by the government?

What about those who have federally-subsidized student loans and are working low paying jobs? I know people who make plenty of money, but whose federally-subsidized student loan debt exceeds their income at this moment -- are you going to prohibit them from voting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Do bailed out Wall Street executives get treated as having been subsidized by the government?

What about those who have federally-subsidized student loans?

---

How about government subsidized industries, like Agriculture?

BRHornets45 just posted a great video on youtube explaining her views on the upcoming election:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wroj0FLvzs&

What happened to the youtube embed code? It's not working for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Do bailed out Wall Street executives get treated as having been subsidized by the government?

What about those who have federally-subsidized student loans and are working low paying jobs? I know people who make plenty of money, but whose federally-subsidized student loan debt exceeds their income at this moment -- are you going to prohibit them from voting?

---

Don't forget people who are layed off and are receiving workers compensation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

In triplicate.

---

You want fries with that? Maybe a pie?
You want fries with that? Maybe a pie?
You want fries with that? Maybe a pie?


That will be $651.17, sir. Please drive up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

Don't forget people who are layed off and are receiving workers compensation.

---

Those are EXACTLY the sorts of people we don't want voting -- unless they happen to be wealthy through other means, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shastafarian

---

I tried posting that video using the same coding format and it didn't work. Are you using firefox or IE?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

I tried posting that video using the same coding format and it didn't work. Are you using firefox or IE?

---

you left in the entire url

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shastafarian

you left in the entire url

---

Ah, thanks.

Man, BRHornets45 is hot! I find her views trenchant and insightful:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shastafarian

---

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

Ah, thanks.

---

np I was gonna quote you but I wanted to get the video up right after your post. Looks like I failed :lol