Universal citizenship a bad idea?

[Owen Sparks]

Again, as the OP I said let those who choose to pay their fair share have the right to vote and disenfranchise those who choose not to participate.
It would be totally fair because it is totally voluntary.

Do you really want people who are not even capable of supporting themselves steering our ship of state?

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.

OS

 

[Caimlas]

Again, as the OP I said let those who choose to pay their fair share have the right to vote and disinfranchise those who choose not to perticipate.
It would be totaly fair because it is totaly volentary.

Do you really want people who are not even capable of supporting themselves steering our ship of state?

Thank you Owen - this is a very good paraphrase of what I've been attempting to say here.

 

[rhubarb]

I didn't take the time to read through all the posts; maybe this has already been posted.

Here is a link to a Census Bureau page listing statistics for Voting and Registration in the Election of November 2000.

You can see from this page that regardless of age group, people who make more money (and presumably pay more taxes and own property) are much more likely to be registered to vote.

This page shows that Hispanics are much less likely to be registered to vote than blacks or whites, so the assumption that citizenship by birth is dragging down our country holds less water.

The page on veteran status shows that veterans already have a large margin over non-veterans in their likelihood to be registered to vote.

For what it's worth.

I agree that those we have elected to represent us aren't doing a good job. Didn't some 72% of Americans say the same thing in a recent poll? Duh. We all know it. I'm not so sure that gerrymandering the voting bloc is the way to correct the problem. Electing the right people to office will correct our problems. If other voters don't agree with your choice, it's gonna be easier to convince them to change their mind on the candidate than to take away their vote.

 

[Slamfire]

I have not recently looked at the money spread, but I believe I have seen pie charts where most of the money spent by the Federal Government is going to Medicare, Medicade, and Social Security. Things like welfare, or National Defense, are not even equal, in expenditures, to any one of these programs. At least that is my recollection.

Just wait until you have a parent sick, or in 24 hours a day care. And wait till you see the costs. I do not know what the National Average is, but 24 hour a day care in a Nursing home is easily $4,000 a month. For a medium cost Nursing home. For most of the people in a Nursing home, the Government is picking up the cost. Now how many tax payers does it take to fund one person at $4,000 a month? And you will also be surprised to find that the prescription drug cost is probably a $1,000 a month.

These entitlement programs are expensive. And if they are not funded, well what are you going to do with Grandma, or Ma, just leave her out on an ice flow and hope a Polar Bear eats her? Just because you don't see these people at a mall or grocery does not mean they are not around. And the reason you don't see them at a mall or grocery store is because many are physically unable to walk, or mentally incapable of operating a remote control. That's why they require 24 hour a day care, someone has to change the diapers, and feed them, and watch over them.

Arguing over welfare to the illegals, or those who don't pay taxes (and corporations are the worst offendors in this particular) and their rights to vote, is all nice. But in terms of dollars, you are ignoring the elephant in the room.

 

[Alphazulu6]

Naw give all the illegals Universal citizenship so they can vote universally.... yeah, I am going to have to again say no. Thank you.

 

[thirty-thirty]

"Universal citizenship" is just another of many steps towards world government. It doesn't take much of an imagination to understand what that means to the Constitution of the United States.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Slamfire1,

My 80 year old mother was recently in the hospital for a few days,
They charged her $67 every time they changed the bed sheets!

If the Holliday Inn tried that they would not stay in business long. People would go to another motel. Medicine has NO COMPITITION because government has granted them a monopoly. Third party payer programs like medicade and medicare drive costs up. The reason we have these "give away" programs is because people who can't pay their bills
have, through voting, used the power of government to pass the cost directly on to you, the productive citizen.

OS

 

[Alphazulu6]

My 80 year old mother was recently in the hospital for a few days,
They charged her $67 every time they changed the bed sheets!

And to think that the same government made "preying on the elderly" laws!

 

[obxned]

Letting anyone have the rights of full citizenship with out swearing an oath 'to preserve and protect the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic' is a bad idea. Letting people hold public office who cannot do so without lying will weaken and destroy our country.

 

[mountainclmbr]

Having those who pay little in taxes vote on what the productive class will pay for is simply wrong. If people are voting for issues that have a tax consequence, they need to be prepared to pay their fair share.

 

[Sage of Seattle]

Having those who pay little in taxes vote on what the productive class will pay for is simply wrong. If people are voting for issues that have a tax consequence, they need to be prepared to pay their fair share.

Hahahah! And in which class do you belong?

After instituting this little money-for-votes scheme, does anyone really think they can compare with the likes of Bill Gates? Funny thing, I was under the impression that Mr. Gates, with all of his current wealth, could affect voting FAR FAR more than all of THR combined.

Yup, I guess I'll just take my little ole' gubmint disability check and quietly sit in the corner and watch all the rest of you hard working societal contributors vote in the next presidential election. No one here would probably like my vote anyway, you know, 'cause all I'd do is make sure to increase my lordly seven hundred bucks a month to an outrageous eight hundred a month.

G*d d*mn, but this thread reeks of elitism and it's making me ill.

 

[Joe Demko]

Thing is, it's not that small of a %.

Let's do a little checking here: The NRA has ~4.3 million members. The population of the USA is 300 million. That's 1.4% of the population.
The NRA is considered to be a big scary special interest group, with a 'mere' 1.4% of the population. You're talking about 6% being small? That's larger than many election margins today!

As for not voting - the Democrats tend to send busses and vans around to collect them for voting. If even 1 out of 5 of the 6% on welfare get out to vote, that's still enough of a groupd to be noticed and pandered to.

Sure, it'd be a marginal effect in many ways - but it wouldn't take much of a shift to have a much leaner government over time.

Roughly 40% of the population that is eligible to vote actually does so. The figures given for the welfare roles show total numbers of individuals and total families. In other words, those figures include children who are not eligible to vote. If we go with the idea that roughly the same percentage of welfare recipients who are eligible to vote do so, you are looking at _maybe_40% of less than 2.5% Less than 1% if we eliminate the children, convicted felons, and others who can't vote. That is still a number that could influence an election, I concede, if they voted in a bloc which I have seen no convincing evidence they do.
I keep seeing accusations in this thread that wlefare recipients are voting themselves a paycheck out of the public treasury. It appears to be something that many of you genuinely believe is happening. Would one of you be so kind as to supply some kind of documentation about the voting habits of those on public assistance that backs up your claim? Until I see some kind of proof that this assertion is based in fact, I will no longer respond to it.