Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: HarleyD
THE problem we have is universal suffrage.

Originally people had to own property to be able to vote.

It should be returned to some version of this: People who either serve in the military or have a net paying IN TO the government, etc., should vote.

Those on the dole or who pay nothing should have no say.

Sounds tough to today's wimply ears but that is how it was back when things were sane.

You CAN NOT have people who do nothing but parasite off of others be allowed to vote.

Why? Because they eventually get the hang of it and vote for craven politicians (i.e., Rats) who give them everything in return for votes.

Then the country is destroyed, which ours almost is.

Sounds crazy to the public-skool educated person, but, it's reality.

3 posted on 04/08/2011 3:17:11 AM PDT by caddie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: caddie
THE problem we have is universal suffrage.
Originally people had to own property to be able to vote.
It should be returned to some version of this: People who either serve in the military or have a net paying IN TO the government, etc., should vote.
Those on the dole or who pay nothing should have no say.
Sounds tough to today's wimply ears but that is how it was back when things were sane.
You CAN NOT have people who do nothing but parasite off of others be allowed to vote.

I agree 100% and have been ranting for years that only people with their own skin in the game should get the vote.

There are only two possible mechanisms by which a person acquires money from someone else which they did not earn themselves via work (or investment): (1) Charity; (2) Theft.

Charity is voluntary.

Since paying taxes is not voluntary, and is in fact enforced at gunpoint, social entitlement programs are literally armed robbery, with the government acting as the proxy thief.

Thus, it is obscene that the recipients of social welfare programs are permitted to vote. If only the payers vote, and they still vote to sustain some level of social welfare safety net programs, I would actually be fine with it because at least then it would be legitimate charity.

9 posted on 04/08/2011 4:53:10 AM PDT by Zeddicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: caddie

I fail to understand how it can be considered “equality” that the vote of a deadbeat, drug-addicted petty loser carries the same weight as that of a hard-working, law-abiding pillar of the community. The former contributes nothing, even philosophically, to his society, while the latter is the very core of it. All a vote does is allow the deadbeat to steal the fruits of the worker’s labor.


14 posted on 04/08/2011 5:42:56 AM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: caddie
I agree with your post...but because there are no parameters surrounding voting we have the mess we have today...no longer are candidates priority for the people of this country...or the operations of this country...rather it's all about retaining their positions of power and influence and worse using the American citizen and his money as cannon fodder to achieve this. Worse if he or she cannot gain the trust of the citizens they will and do bait and switch the minorities and illegals etc. to satisy their lust for power and position. Sometimes our politics remind me much of the Middle Ages!
67 posted on 04/08/2011 6:41:44 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: caddie

I agree.


69 posted on 04/08/2011 7:39:40 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson