English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

No representation without taxation?

Greater representation for greater taxation?

Perhaps the Decline and Fall of Western civilisation can be attributed to "the refusal to acknowledge that there is anything wrong with a corrupt and corrupting system of indiscriminate universal suffrage, which allows politicians to bribe the voters who take in welfare with the money of those who give in taxes. "

http://1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=32

2007-11-17 02:20:35 · 28 answers · asked by Andromeda 3 in Politics & Government Elections

28 answers

So what you're saying is that rich citizens have more rights and privileges than poor citizens. How would that be fair? What if YOU ended up poor? Would the rich voters make laws to be enforced against the poor? How does money make you better than anyone else?

2007-11-17 02:28:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

This is a very good question and it is a very sane one. The question is not very popular but you are right. There are people who pay lots of taxes but cannot vote and there are parasite people that hide and vote a welfare government. But who is creating the booming economy? The parasite or the TAX PAYERS ? You are right The taxpayers the parasite takes ,is sick, (I am not talking about the pensioners they have the full right to be on welfare as they have done their job) do not study, get troubles, I have to carry on ? may be is not a popular idea but when UK start to cut but real cut the welfare system the people start to want go to work and make a living working not on welfare. by all means help the person to get a job but if he is part of the won't he has no right to vote a government to give him MONEY.

2007-11-17 23:17:43 · answer #2 · answered by tony 4 · 1 0

yes , otherwise the rich will keep getting richer and the poor will keep getting poorer


politics is all an illusion to the vulnerable whom have no business brain..........

the fact is the government run both sides of the fence , they controll all legal activity , they set the rules , and they get their tax...................... but what they dont tell you is that all this illegal mafia stuff and terrorist activity what is going on in the world is not actually a criminal underworld , but it is actually the government doing it disguised as criminals........

oh yes they get paid on both sides of the fence FACT..

have you ever stopped to think why the smoking ban come into effect ????????

not public health obviously.....or if that would be the case then they would have to ban everything in the world which is hazardous .

now if you look how much of your tax was being spent on police , ambulance , fire and nhs due to alcohol related violence and accidents , it amounts up to alot...... now if they can pull the wool over your eyes and make you beleive they care about your health, but actually its a deterrent to stop people going out to the pub to drink, which means theyre cutting the cost dramatically on alcohol related incidents, bearing in mind you will still pay the same tax but the money is now not actually being spent on what its intended for , ( call it the politics dirty pocket money )........

the royals and the government are the most crooked people in the world , its all an illusion

watch braveheart , i know its only a film, but do you understand why scots hate us english ?

if i told you i had a 13" dick , would you beleive me ?....


so why do you beleive evrything a royal or a politician tells you ?

idiots , idiots

you moan about money not getting spent on education, you had education and your more gullible than a hungry dog ,

the best education is free......... its called the streets,,

nobodys catching me slipping

2007-11-19 05:19:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

All of us have an interest in the running of our Country and therefore we should have a vote to use or not to use as we wish. it is our vote not the authorities, If compulsion comes in I will never ever vote for the party that enacts it and if it is by agreement I will ensure that I put a cross by all candidates in an attempt to spoil my ballot.

By the way I am a Tax paying pensioner and can not remember a week/month when I have not paid tax since I was 15 years of age.when I left school

2007-11-20 06:12:09 · answer #4 · answered by Scouse 7 · 0 0

You've got it backwards. It's no taxation without representation. And thank God for that!

With your logic, taxpayers who are not citizens should be allowed to vote. That would scare the piss out of me to be honest. There are far more non-citizen taxpayers than we'd care to admit -- do you REALLY want them to make our choices for us?

And in the end, virtually everyone pays some tax or another. Maybe some don't pay income taxes but sales taxes, VAT, excise taxes, property taxes, rates, etc. are paid by someone and virtually every citizen pays one or more of them.

2007-11-17 07:44:21 · answer #5 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0 0

If you took away voting power from people who refuse to contribute to society, there would not be enough people voting to elect socialist candidates.

If illegals, criminals, sex offenders, insane, terrorists, stupid, alcoholics, child molesters, career welfare recipients, bums, drunks, homeless, drug addicts and America haters could not vote- a 3rd party might over take the democratic party. All would be left are socialists and communists.

Who would socialists exploit to gain power if their base can't vote?

Hhmmmmm...... maybe you are onto something here.

PS Liberals will find the exceptions like retired, ill, disabled to deflect the point when the question doesn't include "unable to contribute to society" instead of what you mean, "choose not to contribute to society".

2007-11-17 03:07:31 · answer #6 · answered by ____ 2 · 1 0

Yes, and I'll tell you why. You are forgetting about Senior Citizens who have gone before us, worked all their lives, paid their taxes religiously and are now retired with very little or on Social Security with little. Therefore they are now excluded from paying taxes. They should not be excluded from voting just because they are not in the working class anymore. They were the working class before us and you have to have a before, before you can have an after.

2007-11-17 02:31:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Itribery going on wouldn't make that much difference to deny suffrage to welfare recipients. All citizens should have the right to vote and there is very little bribery of the type you describe going on. Such a thing would be far too expensive and transparent to succeed.

2007-11-17 02:28:17 · answer #8 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0 1

Well a high percentage of people who do pay taxes can't be bothered to vote now, so we could end up with no government at all if the one's who don't pay tax weren't allowed to. Doesn't sound like such a good idea does it?

2007-11-17 02:39:34 · answer #9 · answered by resignedtolife 6 · 0 0

Are you saying that the vast majority of pensioners will not be able to vote?I think if you are a citizen of the UK and over 18 years fo age then you have a right to vote!

2007-11-17 02:28:15 · answer #10 · answered by delete 5 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers