Saturday, February 15, 2014

Rich people should get more votes?

Tom Perkins, the venture capitalist that recently compared the attacks on wealthy people to Nazi persecution of the Jews, came up with another "supposedly" outrageous idea a few days ago.
The article is here.

His new idea, proposed in the interest of keeping his name "in the news" I feel, is to allow the wealthy to vote more often. If a person pays $1 million in taxes, they should get 1 million votes. 

 I don't agree totally with this idea because it wouldn't take much more for George Soros to be running this country even MORE so than he is now.

But I do agree, and have for a long time, with a statement he makes early in the article; 

 "The Tom Perkins system is: You don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes," Perkins said.
Of course this will never happen due to the tender sensibilities of liberals, both those self identified and the ones that call themselves republicans, who brainwash and bribe their voters to remain inside The Matrix.

How fair is it, and by fair consider that the fed.gov courts proudly allow illegal aliens to vote by refusing EVERY voter id law, to allow people that have never known anything but the govt tit vote on whether or not to pull them off the tit and send them out to work?

Nobody that receives more in welfare than they pay in taxes should be allowed to vote in any election that has a bearing on how much welfare they get.

And as a bonus, a 10 question test of the government being voted for should be required. For example, fed.gov = how many branches of gov, what is a bicameral legislature, does the constitution declare all men are created equal, etc etc.
Of course there would be quite a few people that vote against the libs that would be excluded after such tests.



4 comments:

  1. I do believe the right to vote, which by the way, isn't a true right (show me where it states such in the Constitution) should be restricted to owners of land, real estate. Only if you have a nut in the fire, so to speak.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. I've told people for years that libs are the most hypocritical people known to history, they PREACH their religion of evolution (2 hypocritical statements in 1, preaching in school and evolution) from on highest but suggest to on that their theory of evolution deems a homo-critter to be unworthy of adding to the gene pool watch their head spin!
      Now as far as that idea and taxes/voting, in nature, do the ticks get to decide what the dog does?

      Delete
  2. The Democrats would never allow any kind of property requirements or tax, because their voter base would be wiped out.

    We tried that here some years back. But all of our laws , passed by the elected representatives of the people of this state, have to be vetted by the Justice Department and they said "no."

    ReplyDelete
  3. I hear you! I heard on the radio the other day a lady say that the difference between "our" 2 parties was whether we embraced socialism with open arms and smiles or with our heads hung low.
    Now that statement makes me wonder if it's counter intuitive. On its face you and I might think the former libs, the later republicans. But what if it's the republicans putting a happy face on it and the hung head crowd is beating us into submission?
    My personal belief is that we've been socialist for a good many years now with the "crony capitalism" and lack of a sufficient "justice" system.

    ReplyDelete