While the numbers were a little difficult to determine, we have somewhere between two and four million teenagers who are employed and paying state and federal taxes. If their tax dollars can be spent on government-based programs, why are they unable to be a part of the voting process to help determine where those tax dollars should go?
Conversely, there are millions of individuals whose only income is through non-taxed sources. Since they have no earned income providing to the federal and state governments (aside from sales taxes), should they still have the privilege of voting to affect how tax dollars are potentially spent?
Effectively, between the two we have 'taxation without representation' and 'representation without taxation'. What, exactly, is our "American" ideal supposed to be?
Hello world!
5 years ago
3 comments:
You can vote and die for your County but you can't drink alcohol.
And you can vote without paying Federal Income Taxes. Currently 42%-47% of voters pay no Income Taxes.
When half the voters get a free ride our Nation will become the official Nanny State and it will be impossible to turn back from taking from the few to supply life for the many.
The Democrats rely on this equation to remain in power, even if it means the fall of The United States.
As a moderate liberal (the more I post and comment to other blogs, I'm starting to notice a turn towards the center in my political views), I agree that we might potentially become a nation of welfare, where the majority vote will be those who add nothing to the fiscal element of government.
That's what I was thinking with the idea of 'representation without taxation'. Honestly, I fall into that category with what I pay into taxes compared to what I receive as a refund. I voted because I could, of course, and it would've been silly to not do so. However, I felt awkward at the booth, as I really don't give anything to the government.
As it is, I feel I can rationalize my military service as an acceptable reason.
Perhaps that should be the solution, something similar to the "Starship Troopers" model. If you want to vote, you have to serve a two year term in a military branch. I know from first hand experience that South Korea operates on that basis, to a degree, as I worked with a number of KATUSAs (Korean Augmentees to the U.S. Army) and RoK soldiers who are required to serve once they reach a certain age.
I digress (I use that a great deal, don't I?).
Back to your comment, I'm of the opinion we should allow those who are eighteen rights to consume alcohol or, if not, then move the voting and military age to twenty-one. Make it equal across the board, one way or the other.
As per the voting without paying taxes, I stand by my opinion in the above paragraphs that, barring military (or some similar) service, you shouldn't have the right to vote if you do not contribute in some fashion.
Addendum to the previous comment:
As for the teens mentioned in the actual post, I feel they should have the option to vote, as they are tax-paying citizens. At their age and in their living situations, they don't have the option to claim many tax exemptions. As such, they are actually putting more into the system than the 42%-47% mentioned by Muse.
I know many people would object, stating they aren't mature enough or that they would vote more liberally due to their age. However, I've met quite a few Young Republicans who could easily displace the votes of their more liberal peers.
Honestly, has anyone looked at the classes these kids are taking today? When I was in highschool, I was lucky to have access to a small handful of A.P. courses. Now, they're readily available. These kids are probably better educated than the majority of 'of age' voters. I'd rather have them making thoughtful choices than people blindly voting along party lines.
Post a Comment