Connect with us

Voter Criteria

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by amdx, Jul 14, 2013.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. rickman

    rickman Guest

    Oh, I looked it up and SSI *is* about need. You have to be over 65,
    blind or disabled... *and* be financially challenged (my term) which you
    wouldn't be if you had paid enough into the SS system.

    Why is the financial need issue relevant? Why do these people lose the
    right to vote?
  2. rickman

    rickman Guest

    Why not just require a poll tax? Make it large enough so that most
    people who don't really care can't vote. Make it hurt enough that only
    those who are truly committed vote. While we are at it, let's institute
    a test so that those who are not aware of the issues of the day (and
    past) can't vote. We don't want uninformed voters deciding the fate of
    our country do we?
  3. rickman

    rickman Guest

    Can we do the same of anyone running for an elected office... *and* for
    those who are allowed to express an opinion in a public place!
  4. rickman

    rickman Guest

    Save the country what, forty Shillings?

    So this includes retirement pay to those who have paid into social
    security? How about the government worker's retirement? Or was that
    combined into SS some years back? My dad worked for the railroad and
    never paid a penny into SS, the railroad retirement preceded and
    outstripped SS and was allowed to usurp it for those entitled to it. So
    he was never counted in your entitlements number.

    I'm very glad I'm not you. I would hate to be as miserable as you seem.
  5. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Look at the CFRs; there are various sections that describe, limit and
    allow specific actions - TITLE xxx etc.
    Government promulgations in writing; if TITLE sss covers your
    situation,you are enTITLEd.
    Spekka deah Engrish?
  6. -there is no fund, and never was
    -since1968 it's part of the general treasury, so it's like any tax
    -it's a graduated tax, so it must be a tax
    -FDR told the supreme court it was a tax

    Instead of paying tax to qualify for voting, receiving benefits should
  7. cameo

    cameo Guest

    Why? This country started out with the battle cry: No taxation without
    representation, so the opposite sounds just as ligit to me.
  8. Charlie E.

    Charlie E. Guest

    There are different disability benefits in Social Security. My wife
    has been on SSDI for a long time now due to her vision, but she would
    never qualify for SSI. That requires you to have NO assets, no
    savings, no stocks, no nothing. If is also why so many try to game
    the system to get on it, as you don't have to have any earned credits.
    My wife worked many years (usually at low paying jobs) to earn her

    Suplemental Security (SSI) is a very strange beasty...
  9. Charlie E.

    Charlie E. Guest

    For a while I worked at UCSB, and was in CALPERS. Because of this, I
    was not in Social Security. I still have all them money in an IRA. My
    wife's father is retired railroad, so has no Social Security for the
    same reason, but my wife's mother is on SS.

    Unfortunately, in this country, you have to do something pretty
    serious to be denied the right to vote, and now the congress critters
    are trying to expand the right of citizenship as well!
  10. So thne you shouldn't be able to vote on anything that might affect your tax
    since that would indirectly affect your income?

    that is why direct democracy seldom works, every wants to pay less and
    get or be paid more

  11. Jasen Betts

    Jasen Betts Guest

    So you're sayoing those who pay taxes shouldn't be allowed to vote
    where the vote could change the taxation?
  12. Jasen Betts

    Jasen Betts Guest

    Nor should anyone who is not a renter vote on issues which effect
    rental prices like zoning or property taxes.

    Everything effrects everyone.
  13. Tell me who is *not* paying taxes these days? You can't even buy a potato
    without paying VAT.

    petrus biybyter
  14. Jasen Betts

    Jasen Betts Guest

    Well yeah, that pretty much limits the eligible voters to only the prison
    population, I was just applying "reductio ad absurdum" to this recent plague
    of "X should not vote" arguments.
  15. josephkk

    josephkk Guest

    I think i have a better idea. Instead of limiting voters, double the
    vote weights of those most like to be adversely impacted.

  16. Guest

    "Oh maybe, about 50% don't pay taxes and about 50% do.
    Mikek "

    You are too optimistic. Only about a third file taxes according to usdebtclock, easily findable online. Their page however does not state whether thatmany people actually PAY income tax. With the state of the crappy jobs these days, which will get worse as everyone who is not a primadonna gets cut to below 29 hours a week to avoid mandatory healthcare costs, alot of people barely make fifteen grand a year or so. At that rate even a single personpays so little in fed tax it is not even a drop in the bucket.

    While not getting into why I don't know for sure I think minimum wage is around sixteen grand at full time no ? Rake off about seven grand of that andpay around 14 % on what's left which is about $1,350. Now there is a possibility of an EIC payment which might give you back half of that. That whopping $700 covers about a toilet seat for the government. If you have a qualifying person live with you and can claim head of household you will pay noting. Have a kid and you will get back more than they deducted and also likely get foodstamps and free medical at least for the kid. So just how many of that about 115 million filers actually PAY ?

    Now for the math heads, officially the US debt is what, $15 tril for a round figure. This of course does not include a whole lots of things they are committed to but just haven't had to cut the check for yet. Estimates of that go up to $100 tril but it is very hard to be sure. Suffice it to say thatwe are paying interest on the $15 trill as a round figure. Let's say it's one percent per annum which is easy, $150 bill. Now take for round figures actually 150 million filing taxes instead of 115, and that's a grand apieceper year which is only interest. Logically, is that system sustainable ?

    That interest is going to go up if the debt does not go down as it is already way too high in relation to the GDP. Anyone notice what happened to Greece ? People are taking their own kids to orphanages becasue they can't afford to feed them. Think it's bad here ? Give it a few more years, and neither party has any intention of stopping this fall into the financial abuyss. The only solution apparently is military might so we can exploit others. That obviously means more wars and less people to pay for them, and the spoils of war are not shared with the People anymore just like the proceeds fromnatural resources, unlike some places. In Norway for example the taxes arekept very low for what they get because of their oil revenues. In another country you get mail from the electric company containing not a bill, but acheck. We don't get that unless to are an Alaskan resident and that was the state of Alaska that made that happen. The feds would never be so generous. In fact they'll just take your land if something useful is found on it. With a good lawyer you MIGHT get a little bit of it, but one of those new people called corporations will get the lion's share of all proceeds.

    Now SS is not a tax ? Well that's the theory. I will admit that in the beginning it was probably not intended to be a Ponzi scheme but now, due to devaluation of the currency (inflation for those who choose to see it that way) it does and must operate like a Ponzi scheme, except fo one minor problem.. Because of the dollar falling the system needs to adjust. There are only so many factors to adjust, one is the rates paid by current workers, one isthe amounts paid out to recipients and the last is of course the relative numbers of the two sets of people.

    The problem is that payees are not dying soon enough and the payors are notearning enough, whether that's considered individually or collectively is of no import.

    So I will agree that SS was not intended to be a tax, it pretty much amuonts to one now. That is sixteen percent of every penny you make on the books,no deductions for having a crop of kids or a high rate mortgage on your ivory tower, right off the top. Though they don't want you to know it, you can opt out. Years ago all you had to do was request the forms, now it is a bit harder and you will have to make some noise. And yes I am fully aware that the SS website states that participation is mandatory, but that is a bare faced lie, period. The government lie ? Say it ain't so........

    Don't get me wrong, if you consider everything, opting out of SS is not a wise move for most people. If you work for wages just pay it and the taxes, I mean cheat as much as possible of course, but to fight them over this shit is not worth it usually. I mean it, if you know how to workk the system, stay in it. No health insurance and need a triple byopass or some new kneesjust tell them you hear voices and they will pay everything. So what you can't carry a gun anymore, it's better than not being able to carry anythingat all.
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day