If Doesn't Matter Who You Vote For, Just Don't Vote
Have you ever heard, "It Doesn't Matter Who You Vote For," or "We Should Force People To Vote?" Well, that is quite possibly some of the most foolish nonsense to ever grace the earth. You have the right to vote, but if you are uninformed, you forfeit your right to vote. Forcing people to vote so we have bigger turnouts would not help our country, but hurt it. Then, whoever has the better sounding name would win elections.
Instead of requiring people to vote, we should require them to take a poll test before voting. That's right, bring the poll test back. Poll tests were once a bad thing, used to disenfranchise people based on race, totally wrong, but now we can use them for good to disenfranchise the uninformed. We would make sure it wasn't biased in favor of one race. If naturalized citizens have to pass a test to get citizenship (and they should), its only right that naturally-born citizens be able to pass a test as well. It's sad to think how many Americans wouldn't pass a test for citizenship. If we went further and did require Americans to pass such a test for citizenship, it might make people pay more attention in school and to politics, since if you failed not only would you not be able to vote, but you would lose, many other rights as well, such as certain legal protections. We all know Americans are innocent until proven guilty, but not anyone else. Habeas corpus, forget about it if you fail. Nothing like a indefinite day, indefinite-minus-one night free vacation at Guantamano Bay.
Furthermore, I say bring back the poll tax as well. Clearly, only the rich deserve to vote. They can manage their own money, therefore they have what it takes to vote for leaders to manage our nation's financial resources. The rich have more money, therefore they have more on the line and should have more say over the course of our nation. Think of it like stock in our nation, the rich have more stock, i.e., pay more taxes, meaning more votes just as the more shares you have the more votes you have in a company. I say we get rid off all taxes but the poll tax. We'll pay the poor not to vote using the money from making the rich pay to vote. The poor can't afford not to not to vote. Neither would they want to, as they are getting money and not paying taxes. Or, the poor would still get votes, just the rich would get proportionally more votes, and as its proportional its therefore fair, like a flat tax. If we expect the rich to pay more, they should get more of a say, its only fair. This could encourage people from going into debt, since they'd have to have money if they want to vote. And we shouldn't forget, a poll tax makes voting profitable, meaning polling stations become like businesses running more efficiently. We'll actually be able to afford decent voting systems so that we will be sure that the select few's votes get counted fairly and accurately.
Now politics is about what is prudent, so how to get this in place you might ask? Well, politics is also about framing the issue and getting your terms to define the debate. "End Poor And Uneducated Suffrage Amendment." (EPA USA) What politician could vote against ending the suffering of the poor and uneducated, especially when its patriotic and environmentally friendly?
We're not taking away people's right to vote, as anyone could educate themselves and fulfill the American dream by becoming rich and then vote. Nor is it discriminatory since people across the board would fail to either invest enough in America or to know enough about America. It's equal opportunity. And I am not rich, so I am not biased and have nothing to gain. But for the sake of our nation, I would give up my right to vote if it keeps those who shouldn't be voting from voting. We already entrust the running of our country to elected officials, so why not entrust the decision of who to entrust with power to smart rich people. There's checks and balances. People from different competing companies would be voting, keeping the government from favoring one business over another, it might actually reduce that. And or course the rich will respond to money, so the people can hold the rich in check by carefully exercising their spending power. Of course, because this is a democracy their votes are by secret ballot to avoid intimidation which might make that a little difficult. It's an imperfect system, but its the best we got.
Instead of requiring people to vote, we should require them to take a poll test before voting. That's right, bring the poll test back. Poll tests were once a bad thing, used to disenfranchise people based on race, totally wrong, but now we can use them for good to disenfranchise the uninformed. We would make sure it wasn't biased in favor of one race. If naturalized citizens have to pass a test to get citizenship (and they should), its only right that naturally-born citizens be able to pass a test as well. It's sad to think how many Americans wouldn't pass a test for citizenship. If we went further and did require Americans to pass such a test for citizenship, it might make people pay more attention in school and to politics, since if you failed not only would you not be able to vote, but you would lose, many other rights as well, such as certain legal protections. We all know Americans are innocent until proven guilty, but not anyone else. Habeas corpus, forget about it if you fail. Nothing like a indefinite day, indefinite-minus-one night free vacation at Guantamano Bay.
Furthermore, I say bring back the poll tax as well. Clearly, only the rich deserve to vote. They can manage their own money, therefore they have what it takes to vote for leaders to manage our nation's financial resources. The rich have more money, therefore they have more on the line and should have more say over the course of our nation. Think of it like stock in our nation, the rich have more stock, i.e., pay more taxes, meaning more votes just as the more shares you have the more votes you have in a company. I say we get rid off all taxes but the poll tax. We'll pay the poor not to vote using the money from making the rich pay to vote. The poor can't afford not to not to vote. Neither would they want to, as they are getting money and not paying taxes. Or, the poor would still get votes, just the rich would get proportionally more votes, and as its proportional its therefore fair, like a flat tax. If we expect the rich to pay more, they should get more of a say, its only fair. This could encourage people from going into debt, since they'd have to have money if they want to vote. And we shouldn't forget, a poll tax makes voting profitable, meaning polling stations become like businesses running more efficiently. We'll actually be able to afford decent voting systems so that we will be sure that the select few's votes get counted fairly and accurately.
Now politics is about what is prudent, so how to get this in place you might ask? Well, politics is also about framing the issue and getting your terms to define the debate. "End Poor And Uneducated Suffrage Amendment." (EPA USA) What politician could vote against ending the suffering of the poor and uneducated, especially when its patriotic and environmentally friendly?
We're not taking away people's right to vote, as anyone could educate themselves and fulfill the American dream by becoming rich and then vote. Nor is it discriminatory since people across the board would fail to either invest enough in America or to know enough about America. It's equal opportunity. And I am not rich, so I am not biased and have nothing to gain. But for the sake of our nation, I would give up my right to vote if it keeps those who shouldn't be voting from voting. We already entrust the running of our country to elected officials, so why not entrust the decision of who to entrust with power to smart rich people. There's checks and balances. People from different competing companies would be voting, keeping the government from favoring one business over another, it might actually reduce that. And or course the rich will respond to money, so the people can hold the rich in check by carefully exercising their spending power. Of course, because this is a democracy their votes are by secret ballot to avoid intimidation which might make that a little difficult. It's an imperfect system, but its the best we got.
posted by Gregarious at 8:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home