Republican Party, Democrat Party … Tea Party
Term limits, flat taxes, strong national and border defense, strong Second Amendment, and the vote only to people who pay taxes (though, contra Neal Boortz’s position quoted at that link, it should still be one person, one vote). And then if you want to let the government buy your vote (literally: pay you taxpayers’ money so that you then lose your vote), that’s your own funeral.
I used to be against that last, but if we’re really headed into a situation where ever-larger numbers of people will be on the government dole, let them choose between the taxpayers’ money and their ability to vote more of it to themselves. That’s fine.
And as for the name, it’s not much sillier than “whig.”
On second thought, if we allowed only taxpayers to vote, would we need term limits quite so much? If legislators had to run for re-election but didn’t have to bother promising taxpayer handouts to people who couldn’t vote, would we need to limit terms? Feel free to discuss, if anybody’s still reading here.
3 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
I’m with you on all that…
Comment by woody — March 19, 2009 @ 5:39 pm
Term limits are useless. California has had them for almost 20 years now, and they haven’t done a thing to make the Legislature any better. Let legislators serve a district as many times as the voters in that district will have them. Just don’t let legislators decide what the district boundaries will be.
Comment by Xrlq — March 19, 2009 @ 5:40 pm
I’m still here, and this is an interesting question.
Income taxes get reduced to such an extent that many people are beneficiaries of the work of others, hence have no problem voting for ever higher demands on those who do pay the tax.
Note that this is a problem of progressive taxation. When conservatives vote to lower taxes, but maintain the progressiveness of the tax, they compound the problem.
Most, if not all, people should pay a general tax, such as the income tax, otherwise, you end up with a significant population voting to enrich themselves at the expense of their fellow citizens.
Comment by jbarntt — March 23, 2009 @ 10:23 pm