4 ms·

how is disproportional in a voting system where each adult has a vote? I would say it is proportional it is just that you don't like a proportion right now beca

by cunac 11y ago

how is disproportional in a voting system where each adult has a vote? I would say it is proportional it is just that you don't like a proportion right now because people live longer so there is more older adults voting

tomp 11y ago
It's disproportional in the sense of who's contributing to society (working) versus who's deciding what to do (voting).
- mason240 11y ago
  This isn't the first time I've read this idea of only allowing taxpayers to vote be floated by someone on the left. There's been a weird number of things like this that I've seen bubbling up, like extreme anti-union rhetoric in regards the police. It's usually in reaction to a specific issue, but it's still weird to see.
  - tomp 11y ago
    You don't get to dismiss a valid idea by denoucing it as "leftist". IMO, the protections against the majority oppressing the minority is just as important for democracy as everybody having exactly one vote. Obviously, 51% of the population voting to enslave the "other" 49% would be completely unfair and IMO un-democratic (even if it was enacted by democratic means). We could argue about how much each subsection of the society should contribute (or get) for the world to be "fair", but honestly, I'm not even that concerned about that; what I'm concerned is the trend (of older people increasing in numbers (power to enact benefits for themselves by taxing others) but decreasing in productivity (contributions)). If that trend continues making the benefits/contributions disproportionate, at some point it's bound to become unsustainable and the system will collapse.
    - mason240 11y ago
      I didn't dismiss anything. I was remarking that it's unusual to see "only taxpayers should be allowed to vote" coming from someone on the left.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- cunac 11y ago
  I am pretty sure that currently taxes paid by baby boomers (51+ age) outweigh taxes paid by millennials. And taxes are contributing to a majority (all?) of public services. Things look even worse for a millennials if you add my generation (gen X). That would include population 40+ which arguably is at a peek of earnings. I am not sure which contribution you are measure so I used a simple money based one. I would "love" to have vote proportional to taxes I pay (kidding ..)
  - tomp 11y ago
    > I am pretty sure that currently taxes paid by baby boomers (51+ age) outweigh taxes paid by millennials. How about in 10 years, when they stop working and retire?
    - cunac 11y ago
      then you will have same conversation with my generation (X) and after another 10 some other generation will have same conversation with millennials :-)
  - hiram112 11y ago
    Don't fall for the same tricks that the establishment uses. Yes of course the wealthy pay more in absolute taxes than the rest of us plebs. That's because they HAVE so much more. My parents lived at a time where their savings earned 10% at the local bank. The stock market did better. Houses were 3x one earner's median wage. University could be paid for via a summer job. So of course they're paying a lot more in taxes as most younger people have negative wealth. But the older are paying 15%-25% on capital gains and dividends, while the young are paying 30% on income. The old are living off of huge pensions and medical insurance being paid for RIGHT NOW by income from the young. They did not save it. That is why most localities are pretty much kicking the debt can down the road: increasing things like property taxes, fines (e.g. speeding tickets), toll roads, etc. all the while providing less services. The vast majority of the federal budget is not Planned Parenthood, the EPA, or road costs. It is the military, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the vast majority of which benefit the old. Even the military is more about keeping the US system propped up instead of ensuring our 'safety'. Two large oceans have always been more than enough.
- cunac 11y ago
  to add another data point I am currently paying a bills for a two millennials so you should understand my skepticism about contributions of millennials :-)
  - tomp 11y ago
    I'm not sure why you're singling out millenials... There are other sections of the population (between 30 and 50) that are probably very productive but slowly loosing the power compared to 50+.
    - cunac 11y ago
      I really don't see me losing anything to any generation (older or younger) but I also don't have feeling of entitlement. It is "normal" to blame everything else for one's perceived misfortune/lack of opportunity but in most cases it is yourself. I don't prevent young people to vote for any type of change they want but if voting doesn't go your way it is not really fair to complain about it.
      - tomp 11y ago
        I don't care much about "fairness" and complaining, I'm more interested (and concerned) about incentives. If people see there's no way for them to succeed, they won't even try. They'll check out of the society and stop being productive ("herbivore men" (Japan) or "the beautiful ones" (mouse experiment)). The problem is systematic, of course, but if disproportionately affects the young, which in average have much less capital and thus rely much more on their (present and future) work income.

by cunac 11y ago

tomp 11y ago

It's disproportional in the sense of who's contributing to society (working) versus who's deciding what to do (voting).

mason240 11y ago
This isn't the first time I've read this idea of only allowing taxpayers to vote be floated by someone on the left. There's been a weird number of things like this that I've seen bubbling up, like extreme anti-union rhetoric in regards the police. It's usually in reaction to a specific issue, but it's still weird to see.
- tomp 11y ago
  You don't get to dismiss a valid idea by denoucing it as "leftist". IMO, the protections against the majority oppressing the minority is just as important for democracy as everybody having exactly one vote. Obviously, 51% of the population voting to enslave the "other" 49% would be completely unfair and IMO un-democratic (even if it was enacted by democratic means). We could argue about how much each subsection of the society should contribute (or get) for the world to be "fair", but honestly, I'm not even that concerned about that; what I'm concerned is the trend (of older people increasing in numbers (power to enact benefits for themselves by taxing others) but decreasing in productivity (contributions)). If that trend continues making the benefits/contributions disproportionate, at some point it's bound to become unsustainable and the system will collapse.
  - mason240 11y ago
    I didn't dismiss anything. I was remarking that it's unusual to see "only taxpayers should be allowed to vote" coming from someone on the left.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
cunac 11y ago
I am pretty sure that currently taxes paid by baby boomers (51+ age) outweigh taxes paid by millennials. And taxes are contributing to a majority (all?) of public services. Things look even worse for a millennials if you add my generation (gen X). That would include population 40+ which arguably is at a peek of earnings. I am not sure which contribution you are measure so I used a simple money based one. I would "love" to have vote proportional to taxes I pay (kidding ..)
- tomp 11y ago
  > I am pretty sure that currently taxes paid by baby boomers (51+ age) outweigh taxes paid by millennials. How about in 10 years, when they stop working and retire?
  - cunac 11y ago
    then you will have same conversation with my generation (X) and after another 10 some other generation will have same conversation with millennials :-)
- hiram112 11y ago
  Don't fall for the same tricks that the establishment uses. Yes of course the wealthy pay more in absolute taxes than the rest of us plebs. That's because they HAVE so much more. My parents lived at a time where their savings earned 10% at the local bank. The stock market did better. Houses were 3x one earner's median wage. University could be paid for via a summer job. So of course they're paying a lot more in taxes as most younger people have negative wealth. But the older are paying 15%-25% on capital gains and dividends, while the young are paying 30% on income. The old are living off of huge pensions and medical insurance being paid for RIGHT NOW by income from the young. They did not save it. That is why most localities are pretty much kicking the debt can down the road: increasing things like property taxes, fines (e.g. speeding tickets), toll roads, etc. all the while providing less services. The vast majority of the federal budget is not Planned Parenthood, the EPA, or road costs. It is the military, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the vast majority of which benefit the old. Even the military is more about keeping the US system propped up instead of ensuring our 'safety'. Two large oceans have always been more than enough.
cunac 11y ago
to add another data point I am currently paying a bills for a two millennials so you should understand my skepticism about contributions of millennials :-)
- tomp 11y ago
  I'm not sure why you're singling out millenials... There are other sections of the population (between 30 and 50) that are probably very productive but slowly loosing the power compared to 50+.
  - cunac 11y ago
    I really don't see me losing anything to any generation (older or younger) but I also don't have feeling of entitlement. It is "normal" to blame everything else for one's perceived misfortune/lack of opportunity but in most cases it is yourself. I don't prevent young people to vote for any type of change they want but if voting doesn't go your way it is not really fair to complain about it.
    - tomp 11y ago
      I don't care much about "fairness" and complaining, I'm more interested (and concerned) about incentives. If people see there's no way for them to succeed, they won't even try. They'll check out of the society and stop being productive ("herbivore men" (Japan) or "the beautiful ones" (mouse experiment)). The problem is systematic, of course, but if disproportionately affects the young, which in average have much less capital and thus rely much more on their (present and future) work income.