seedload wrote:Diogenes wrote:Also, did any of you give this idea serious thought, or did you just blurt out the first thing that came to your mind?
Actually, I thought I gave a very thoughtful reply, which you didn't quote or respond to, followed by a bit of a joke, that you did respond to. Remember this?
There are lots of things that are shared equally or even disproportionately more by those who don't pay as many of the bills. For example, military service, especially during a time of a draft. Not having an equal say in whether you are conscripted to die in defense of your country is a pretty big example of why you can't just make it about who pays the bills. Bills get paid in ways other than just money.
I did see it, and am thinking about how it should be handled. I personally believe that the people who risk their life defending their country are better people than those that don't, and most definitely should have a say in how their lives are risked and who leads them.
It is another example of a condition in which those who carry the load should have more say than those who don't.
seedload wrote:
Regarding your numbers, yes the millionaires have a giant effect. First, you are talking about taxes paid. Most people earning up to say 100K or so aren't paying much more than say 10% of their income, after deductions, in income tax. So, say 10K of vote worth for the average 100K earner (call them me although this is very approximate). A teacher making 40K might only get a thousand bucks or so of vote after taking all of their deductions. Matt Damon makes 10M a year and is paying a larger percentage in income tax, say approaching 28%. So Matt gets 2800000 in voting power. As a ratio, Matt gets 3000 votes to my 10 and the teachers 1. A miliary man fighting for you in Afganistan probably isn't paying any federal income tax. He doesn't get a vote. Nor does 40% of the population.
Now I admit that being a millionaire doesn't necessarily mean that you have a million dollars of income in a year, like Matt does. But, there are plenty that have far more income than Matt. I don't want a Fannie Mae executive getting 1000 votes to my one. My son's friends dad makes a million a year. He would get 20 votes to my 1. He is an exec of a Hostpital. Do you recognize the conflict of interest to give him 20 times the voting power on Health Care that I have? Yes, I think that 1% millionaires can have a huge influence.
Yes, I considered your idea. I don't like it.
I have yet to hear a single person say they like it, and i've been asking about it for years.
While you were considering it, did it ever occur to you that some millionaires and billionaires might be on your side as well as the opposite side?
I find it amusing that there are so many people who support fairness until they perceive it as adversely affecting them. (at least in their own thinking.)
There is more merit to the idea than is obvious at first glance. Is it not reasonable to believe the people who are the most productive are also likely to have the best judgement? That those who produce little or nothing are very likely idiots whose counsel should not be sought or heeded?
No one likes the idea that anyone is better than they are, but in fact of life, there are many people that are better than other people. I cannot sing like Elvis Presely, or Dance like Michael Jackson. I cannot fight like Mike Tyson, or Act like Nicholas Cage. I do not have the financial talent of Warren Buffet, or the Speaking talent of Abraham Lincoln. I cannot do physics like Albert Einstein, or Chemistry like Fritz Haber.
In short, there are titans among us, and we are silly to think that everyone's opinion or judgment is the equal of everyone else.
I can live with the idea that The Value of others to the country is more than the value of myself to the country. I can likewise live with the idea that those people most responsible for paying the country's bills and fighting the country's wars, ought to be listened to more than those who do little or nothing.
A Better reasoned argument would be along the lines that such a system would create a graft feedback loop. That such a system would inherently empower people who were in a position to keep themselves in power.
Unlike the system we have now. [/sarcasm]
