rleete

iTrader: (21)

I'd like to see income tax abolished in favor of a VAT. That way, there's no hiding income, and everyone pays the same amount.

DNMakinson

iTrader: (3)

I'd like to see the end of taxing Social Security benefits. Moving $$$$ from the SS trust into the general fund makes no sense at all. Give me the same net benefit, I don't care.

DNM

golftdibrad

its stealing from peter to pay paul. Its incredibly stupid. In my system once you start taking SS and stop paying taxes you lose right to vote too, so those people cant vote themselves more benefits.

L337TurboZ

iTrader: (1)

My suggestion for a new Constitution is simply to rescope the powers that be. Sure it can be amended but once again you might run into the same issues down the line.

One amendment I would suggest to add is that no constitutional amendment may be passed without vote by citizens then by Congress. We have enough technology and communications now that voting can be scheduled, setup, and processed for us to vote ourselves for amendments. This could in theory limit the governments ability to erode the constitution or change the amendments without public approval.

However it also circles back to having full faith and ability for our elections to be fair, fully vetted, and trusted. So it's a crappy situation all around.

golftdibrad

an amendment to the amendment process?


I jest but that a really good idea. I'd suggest it need a super majority so we don't fall into democracy. And also somehow protect the bill of rights from this new process.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

So you want to abolish representative republic and form a new government based on a hybrid both pure democracy and a republic??

DNMakinson

iTrader: (3)

Only half my income is from SS. The rest I pay taxes on anyway, so would keep my right to vote under that system. The balance would be that those paying into SS would not stop it and let the old guys starve, or otherwise... Logan's Run, etc.

I suspect that you would have welfare recipients also not be able to vote. Hmm Perhaps only land holders? Seems familiar.

DNM

DNMakinson

iTrader: (3)

DNMakinson

iTrader: (3)

golftdibrad

Originally it was only land owners because they were the only one that paid taxes, and that was the intent. If you pay, you get a say.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

On the whole, such policies as you describe would have a stabilizing effect on both State and Federal budgets and spending.

I recognize where you're going with the whole "... seems familiar" thing.

But pointing out that a certain fiscal policy shared space in time with other policies such as slavery and segregation does not make them inseparable or equivalent.


The present architecture of "everyone gets to vote," along with direct election of the Senate, means that the electorate now get to vote for how to spend other people's money.

L337TurboZ

iTrader: (1)

Not necessarily form a new government, just limit the ability of the representatives to blindly pass laws or spend funds without consent of those they represent. I'm not saying we have to vote in every single thing in our government. I'm saying that things such as spending bills, amendments, or laws that affect a majority of the population should be voted on by the public for approval.

Take the student loan forgiveness plan Biden wanted to enact. Lots of people don't agree with it and for good reason. If our budget was in the black then maybe it wouldn't be so bad. What's going to happen when we reach 40-50 trillion in debt?

Or how about our politicians being worth millions and millions of dollars but their salaries are a miniscule fraction of that?

We no longer live in a representative republic anyways. We live in a form of an oligarchy. Only the rich have enough money to run for office. You have to be part of that good ol boy system in some ways to even get a chance. They send their kids to Ivy league schools, grease some palms, and end up in positions of power. They live by the rules for thee but not for me mentality. They give us "voting" to maintain the illusion of choice.

If voting was that important to the ruling class then it would be a more scrutinized and secured process with no way to cheat the system.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

While I'm not arguing against the vision you have overall per-se, I feel that you're mis-characterizing representative democracy.

Representatives do act with the consent of those they represent. That consent comes in the form of them having been elected, and subject to periodic re-election.

Does this work perfectly in actual practice? Well, no. And, specifically, it works much worse today than it did when this structure was first enacted when, as noted earlier, those doing the electing were the same ones doing the tax-paying.





I really don't see how anything would be different, other than it taking longer and costing more.

Might even be worse.

The folks who are #VotingBlueNoMatterWho are the same ones decrying center-leaning and right-leaning politicians for questioning whether limitless spending on things like loan-transference, welfare, etc is a good idea. They are presently whipping themselves into a frenzy about the fact that some people are starting to look closely at Medicare and Social Security spending.



Hard to say.

But bear in mind that one of the hot-button items in this past midterm election is the fact that a lot of Republicans have said that eliminating the debt-ceiling altogether is a bad idea, and a lot of Democrats have cried that by refusing to eliminate the debt ceiling altogether, Republicans pose the gravest and most sinister danger to America in all its history.


People will always vote to spend other people's money, or non-existent money, on themselves.

At least when Congress is doing the spending, there's some form of accountability. Giving the voters direct authority over the exchequer would eliminate this safeguard.

xturner

Let’s go to corporate awareness in 2022 -

KFC apologizes for Kristallnacht promotion in Germany

At least it wasn’t oven-roasted chickens.
https://nypost.com/2022/11/10/kfc-ap...on-in-germany/

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

​​​​​​​Tell that to the counties still counting...

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Best commentary on this story I've het heard.

xturner

Meanwhile, in the world of finance….

DNMakinson

iTrader: (3)

My, "seems familiar" was not negative in any manner. I'm not sure what the reasoning was for the amendment that made electing Senators popular vote, but it was during the timeframe when lots of amendments were passed (like income tax), which makes me leery as to the motivation. I do understand that state legislatures were spending a lot of their energy selecting Senators. But that is not necessarily bad, as the Senators basically represented the states.

I think that reserving the vote to those that have a vested interest and also 'drive' was a good policy.

DNM

L337TurboZ

iTrader: (1)

Now suddenly his company is facing bankruptcy.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/financia...mated-zero.amp

Make a company, get billions of dollars and funnel it into Democrats hands and then get the company to fold?

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

A company whose entire business model consisted of "It's Blockchain!" sprang up, rapidly amassed a huge theoretical valuation, squandered all of its investors money on political contributions and speculative crypto investments, then collapsed virtually overnight.

Yup, that's climate change for you...