Forums | MacLife

"All men are created equal..."

One jackass telling one good joke is worth a thousand A-Bomb building physicists and engineers, and his vote is just as worthwhile.

Take your ruling elite caste to some other country and enjoy the fruits and efficiency of fascism.

Farmerkev wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

Starship Troopers is just a book, dude.

So's the Bible.

Try to remember, you said that.

Farmerkev wrote:

ScifiterX wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

So's the Bible.

Try to remember, you said that.

Why would I forget it?

We'll see. Just to clear up one detail, though, was RAH a god among men?

Farmerkev wrote:

jerwin wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Why would I forget it?

We'll see. Just to clear up one detail, though, was RAH a god among men?

What's RAH?
Ralcorp Holdings, Inc?

Robert A Heinlein. Do try to keep up.

A mod among sod.

I'm confused, radarman, in your system (which, BTW, I think is utterly ridiculous) who pays taxes? Citizens? Everybody?

If it's only citizens, some would decide to not "join up" so they could keep their hard earned cash. Or can only citizens work?

Non-citizens, do they pay taxes? If not why do they have access to public education, fire, police or road construction? If they do, are they then not being taxed without representation?

Your idea is so incredibly flawed.

this book isn't bad

Pithecanthropus wrote:

I'm confused, radarman, in your system (which, BTW, I think is utterly ridiculous) who pays taxes? Citizens? Everybody?

If it's only citizens, some would decide to not "join up" so they could keep their hard earned cash. Or can only citizens work?

Non-citizens, do they pay taxes? If not why do they have access to public education, fire, police or road construction? If they do, are they then not being taxed without representation?

Your idea is so incredibly flawed.

It's really not so outlandish, and I've talked to many others who have independently come to the same conclusion.

Essentially, little would change - except that only citizens would be allowed to vote, hold public office, or otherwise participate in government.

Thus, non citizens would be taxed without representation - but with the understanding that a bit of studying could clear that up. I don't get what is so awful about such a system.

Pariah wrote:

radarman wrote:

Pithecanthropus wrote:

I'm confused, radarman, in your system (which, BTW, I think is utterly ridiculous) who pays taxes? Citizens? Everybody?

If it's only citizens, some would decide to not "join up" so they could keep their hard earned cash. Or can only citizens work?

Non-citizens, do they pay taxes? If not why do they have access to public education, fire, police or road construction? If they do, are they then not being taxed without representation?

Your idea is so incredibly flawed.

It's really not so outlandish, and I've talked to many others who have independently come to the same conclusion.

Essentially, little would change - except that only citizens would be allowed to vote, hold public office, or otherwise participate in government.

Thus, non citizens would be taxed without representation - but with the understanding that a bit of studying could clear that up. I don't get what is so awful about such a system.

Get to work on the required amendment. See how that works out for you.

Oh, I know it's a total fantasy. The idiocracy is far too strong for such a bill to ever get brought up, much less voted on. Sadly, we are stuck with the current system - where any knuckledragger with a pulse can alter the course of the nation.

radarman wrote:

It's really not so outlandish, and I've talked to many others who have independently come to the same conclusion.

Essentially, little would change - except that only citizens would be allowed to vote, hold public office, or otherwise participate in government.

Thus, non citizens would be taxed without representation - but with the understanding that a bit of studying could clear that up. I don't get what is so awful about such a system.

So let's break this down--you would find it appropriate to take a step back from the advances we've made towards equality in this country.  You would amend the Constitution in order to allow the ruling class to construct barriers capable of preventing the masses from acquiring representation in government or making use of government services.  At the same time, you're forcing these nationless people to pay taxes.  Those who control government suddenly have free reign to set the standards by which others can gain access to the system--they also hold complete control over not only the educational system of the disenfranchised, but laws that govern workplace conditions, wages, housing, etc. etc. etc.

But of course, those in control will act benevolently--obviously having a vested interest in making sure their lower class brethren gain representation to go along with their taxation.  Because that makes sense.

Hey, and THEN after you have the citizens and the non-citizens socialized into accepting the non-equality, you can keep jacking up the requirements of just how much education you need to be a citizen. Why not? And then, all the liberals from the universities will be in control of your government and you get left out, reduced to dumbass non-citizen status, and then comes the menial labor. Philosopher kings!!!

resedit wrote:

However, I don't really think that's the issue, I think the real issue is a sense of Utopian idealism that just doesn't work, and even highly educated people have that problem.

Yeah, you're right. I've read so much stuff on the left and the right that has the underlying postulate "if only people were better educated, they'd be less apathetic and agree with me"

robco wrote:

The problem with California wasn't the idea behind the populist measures, but their implementation.

Yet people still voted for them.
And no, we aren't a state full of ignorant tools that would have the problem solved by a citizenship test. Intelligent educated people voted to spend money without thinking about what would happen when the economy dips. The idealistic ends resulted ignoring thought about whether we had sustainable means to reach those ends.