So that nobody has to pay taxes if they don't vote. Then people would be able to completely opt out of paying the government if they choose not to vote. Wouldn't that be more like the free market than anything else?
2007-07-02 10:42:08 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
It really isn't all that uneconomical, because everybody would keep all the money that goes to the other taxes and the hidden taxes (such as the one on gasoline) would also be repealed. Plus, it would require the parties to offer quality candidates in order to get people to vote because nobody would vote for the lesser of 2 evils if by not voting, they could avoid taxation.
1 Vote, 1 Tax. Isn't it fair that the people who consent to the government by voting pay the taxes, while the people who don't consent pay no taxes. Afterall, don't governments claim to rule on the "Consent of the Governed?"
2007-07-02 11:01:21 · update #1
Yeah that would be cool, then we could raise the tax and make it so more money would be worth more votes, right?
Oh hey, this would even keep the poor from voting. Sweet, huh?
Come on already. The right to vote should not be tied to anything other than age and citizenship.
2007-07-02 10:51:19 · answer #1 · answered by seth 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No
-24th amendment restricts this
-not as many people would vote and that's a responsibility of citizens
-the poll tax would have to be extremely high in order for the government to make enough money to provide the things it does like free educations and to support the war and run our country
-we have a social contract formed between citizens and the government, we have to sacrifice some things (which includes paying taxes) but in return we get things from the government like free education provided, just because you don't vote doesn't mean other people should have to pay so you can get an education for free or have access to everything that our government gives us
it wouldn't work at all to do this, our country would fall apart and not remain successful
2007-07-02 18:20:12 · answer #2 · answered by kitcat9125 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would truly promote a government of the rich. People who are disadvantaged and the elderly would be hard pressed to get any representation in government. Let alone the corruption that a system like that would breed. (pay the tax for me and I'll vote for whoever you want) This system would be so flawed that it's laughable.
2007-07-08 13:35:27 · answer #3 · answered by Rick W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is a ridiculous premise. Let's just say that the govt. budget was 2 trillion dollars. That is about $6,000 from each resident. It is about $24,000 from each voter. Since most of us will not be able to pay that much to vote, the right would go up to $75,000 for the right to vote. Do you think people with that kind of money will elect anybody to support public interest?
2007-07-02 17:55:48 · answer #4 · answered by Larry R 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There would be no country to vote in if there were not enough taxes collected. Your idea is more like a free for all than a free market.
2007-07-06 13:21:20 · answer #5 · answered by ringolarry 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about, one vote for every dollar you paid in taxes the previous year. Just like how votes are counted in stock companies.
2007-07-02 18:39:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
lol thats the funniest thing i've heard all day. Voting Tax. lol. that would discourage people from voting and last time i checked we dont have a high percentage of people voting for these monkeys now.
2007-07-02 17:51:04 · answer #7 · answered by Ben S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about we just cut government so we don't NEED to worry about making 40 zillion dollars in tax every year to throw down the drain?
2007-07-02 21:53:54 · answer #8 · answered by NoLeftTurn 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, we need to replace all taxes with a consumption tax, like Congressman Linder's FairTax.
2007-07-04 10:25:54 · answer #9 · answered by Bawney 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wouldn't that keep people from voting? Isn't that bad?
2007-07-02 17:49:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋