Jump to content

Supreme Court Decisions


Parsad
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've think voting should be as easy as possible and longer than 8-12 hour window.

 

I'm open to understanding the opposing view on that. 

 

Convenience has been a tremendous investing trend. 

 

If there is going to be a government then voting should be as difficult and inconvenient as possible.  It should require a huge fee and limited to only property owners and business owners.  Voter ID cards should be as secure as passports and far more difficult to get.  With a 10 year mandatory sentence for illegally voting and a life sentence for any type of fraud by those who run the elections or count the votes.  And even if you qualify with the above conditions receiving any income at all from government or owning a company which receives subsidies or does business with the government in any year should disqualify you from voting for that year and the 7 following years.  Politicians, public employees, people on the dole, and government contractors should not be voting.

 

You want only property owners and business owners to vote. So you want it the way it was before 1850. Hmm... yeah maybe not.

 

 

Because other things sucked a long time ago doesn't mean that they didn't do anything right.  You want clean air?  So you want it the way it way hundreds of years ago?  Hmmm... yeah maybe not.

 

Since you're dumb enough to think voting and air pollution are the same thing. Let me say it more clearly.  Property and businesses in the US are disproportionally controlled by White Men. Saying only property owners and business owners get to vote is the same as saying White Men get to vote. So like before 1850 it would mean women and minorities don't really get to vote. What's next? Do you also want to bring back slavery?

 

https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/elections/right-to-vote/the-founders-and-the-vote/

Unfortunately, leaving election control to individual states led to unfair voting practices in the U.S. At first, white men with property were the only Americans routinely permitted to vote. President Andrew Jackson, champion of frontiersmen, helped advance the political rights of those who did not own property. By about 1860, most white men without property were enfranchised. But African Americans, women, Native Americans, non-English speakers, and citizens between the ages of 18 and 21 had to fight for the right to vote in this country.

 

I agree that voting is violence and it would be best to get rid of it altogether, which is why I started my post with "If there is going to be a government then...".  There is no way to make violence, theft, and murder good and fair.  Expanding voting certainly won't (and hasn't), it is just making things worse and government bigger.

 

 

I'm still trying to understand WHY voting should be very difficult.  I see the list of people who should not be allowed.  But doesn't have a rationale included. 

 

FYI- Hard to tell if @rkbabang is joking.  As maybe just have a dry sense of humor.  So disregard.

 

It comes from the point of view that only people who pay a lot in taxes get a vote on how the money is spent. Its basically a way to turn democracy into oligarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've think voting should be as easy as possible and longer than 8-12 hour window.

 

I'm open to understanding the opposing view on that. 

 

Convenience has been a tremendous investing trend. 

 

If there is going to be a government then voting should be as difficult and inconvenient as possible.  It should require a huge fee and limited to only property owners and business owners.  Voter ID cards should be as secure as passports and far more difficult to get.  With a 10 year mandatory sentence for illegally voting and a life sentence for any type of fraud by those who run the elections or count the votes.  And even if you qualify with the above conditions receiving any income at all from government or owning a company which receives subsidies or does business with the government in any year should disqualify you from voting for that year and the 7 following years.  Politicians, public employees, people on the dole, and government contractors should not be voting.

 

You want only property owners and business owners to vote. So you want it the way it was before 1850. Hmm... yeah maybe not.

 

 

Because other things sucked a long time ago doesn't mean that they didn't do anything right.  You want clean air?  So you want it the way it way hundreds of years ago?  Hmmm... yeah maybe not.

 

Since you're dumb enough to think voting and air pollution are the same thing. Let me say it more clearly.  Property and businesses in the US are disproportionally controlled by White Men. Saying only property owners and business owners get to vote is the same as saying White Men get to vote. So like before 1850 it would mean women and minorities don't really get to vote. What's next? Do you also want to bring back slavery?

 

https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/elections/right-to-vote/the-founders-and-the-vote/

Unfortunately, leaving election control to individual states led to unfair voting practices in the U.S. At first, white men with property were the only Americans routinely permitted to vote. President Andrew Jackson, champion of frontiersmen, helped advance the political rights of those who did not own property. By about 1860, most white men without property were enfranchised. But African Americans, women, Native Americans, non-English speakers, and citizens between the ages of 18 and 21 had to fight for the right to vote in this country.

 

I agree that voting is violence and it would be best to get rid of it altogether, which is why I started my post with "If there is going to be a government then...".  There is no way to make violence, theft, and murder good and fair.  Expanding voting certainly won't (and hasn't), it is just making things worse and government bigger.

 

 

I'm still trying to understand WHY voting should be very difficult.  I see the list of people who should not be allowed.  But doesn't have a rationale included. 

 

FYI- Hard to tell if @rkbabang is joking.  As maybe just have a dry sense of humor.  So disregard.

 

It comes from the point of view that only people who pay a lot in taxes get a vote on how the money is spent. Its basically a way to turn democracy into oligarchy.

 

It comes from the point of view that people should spend their own money and not other people's.  "Theft is wrong" is wanting an oligarchy?  "We should steal from other people simply because they have more than us and spend it as we like" is what exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've think voting should be as easy as possible and longer than 8-12 hour window.

 

I'm open to understanding the opposing view on that. 

 

Convenience has been a tremendous investing trend. 

 

If there is going to be a government then voting should be as difficult and inconvenient as possible.  It should require a huge fee and limited to only property owners and business owners.  Voter ID cards should be as secure as passports and far more difficult to get.  With a 10 year mandatory sentence for illegally voting and a life sentence for any type of fraud by those who run the elections or count the votes.  And even if you qualify with the above conditions receiving any income at all from government or owning a company which receives subsidies or does business with the government in any year should disqualify you from voting for that year and the 7 following years.  Politicians, public employees, people on the dole, and government contractors should not be voting.

 

You want only property owners and business owners to vote. So you want it the way it was before 1850. Hmm... yeah maybe not.

 

 

Because other things sucked a long time ago doesn't mean that they didn't do anything right.  You want clean air?  So you want it the way it way hundreds of years ago?  Hmmm... yeah maybe not.

 

Since you're dumb enough to think voting and air pollution are the same thing. Let me say it more clearly.  Property and businesses in the US are disproportionally controlled by White Men. Saying only property owners and business owners get to vote is the same as saying White Men get to vote. So like before 1850 it would mean women and minorities don't really get to vote. What's next? Do you also want to bring back slavery?

 

https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/elections/right-to-vote/the-founders-and-the-vote/

Unfortunately, leaving election control to individual states led to unfair voting practices in the U.S. At first, white men with property were the only Americans routinely permitted to vote. President Andrew Jackson, champion of frontiersmen, helped advance the political rights of those who did not own property. By about 1860, most white men without property were enfranchised. But African Americans, women, Native Americans, non-English speakers, and citizens between the ages of 18 and 21 had to fight for the right to vote in this country.

 

I agree that voting is violence and it would be best to get rid of it altogether, which is why I started my post with "If there is going to be a government then...".  There is no way to make violence, theft, and murder good and fair.  Expanding voting certainly won't (and hasn't), it is just making things worse and government bigger.

 

 

I'm still trying to understand WHY voting should be very difficult.  I see the list of people who should not be allowed.  But doesn't have a rationale included. 

 

FYI- Hard to tell if @rkbabang is joking.  As maybe just have a dry sense of humor.  So disregard.

 

It comes from the point of view that only people who pay a lot in taxes get a vote on how the money is spent. Its basically a way to turn democracy into oligarchy.

 

False....I'm assuming they didn't teach you this in school did they?

 

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

- Alexander Fraser Tytler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

- Alexander Fraser Tytler"

 

That is a little depressing. However:

 

"There is no reliable record of Alexander Tytler's having written any part of the text. In fact, it actually comprises two parts which didn't begin to appear together until the 1970s. The first paragraph's earliest known appearance is in an op-ed piece by Elmer T. Peterson in the 9 December 1951 The Daily Oklahoman, which attributed it to Tytler..."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

- Alexander Fraser Tytler"

 

That is a little depressing. However:

 

"There is no reliable record of Alexander Tytler's having written any part of the text. In fact, it actually comprises two parts which didn't begin to appear together until the 1970s. The first paragraph's earliest known appearance is in an op-ed piece by Elmer T. Peterson in the 9 December 1951 The Daily Oklahoman, which attributed it to Tytler..."

 

 

It is true regardless of who said it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a load of nonsense. Democracy can be reduced to a monarchy with red tape and distractions? Spoken like a true servant of the crown, as Teytler was.

 

Like I said earlier, I don’t see you guys packing your bags for anarchistic or undemocratic states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Name the socialist would make a fun drinking game:

The president also adopted a number of COVID-19 relief measures without Congress, issuing a moratorium on evictions and taking disaster money away from FEMA to pay for expanded temporary unemployment assistance.

https://www.npr.org/2020/12/10/944758815/what-joe-biden-can-and-cant-do-to-stimulate-this-pandemic-economy-on-his-own

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not packing but, they are considering to kick you out to keep what has been made great again before you ruin it.

 

Cardboard

 

The one thing I do respect about certain board members is their sense of dignity and grace regardless of whether they 'win or lose' or are 'right or wrong'. The pursuit of knowledge and truth is ultimately more important than the individual scorecard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a load of nonsense. Democracy can be reduced to a monarchy with red tape and distractions? Spoken like a true servant of the crown, as Teytler was.

 

Like I said earlier, I don’t see you guys packing your bags for anarchistic or undemocratic states.

 

LOL? Tytler was a servant of the crown? You're crazy. He was a realist and was constantly skeptical of people thinking some utopia could be created by men.

 

@cwericb, you really want to throw a technicality at it? It's highly likely he said it based on his other work. Maybe go read some Frederic Bastiat: The Law as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It comes from the point of view that people should spend their own money and not other people's.  "Theft is wrong" is wanting an oligarchy?  "We should steal from other people simply because they have more than us and spend it as we like" is what exactly?

 

You can keep your money and move somewhere with no taxes. You think restricting votes to property owners and business owners was about money?  Its was never about the money it was always about keeping the power with rich white men. If you are a woman you don't get to vote. If you are black you don't get to vote. If you are poor you don't get to vote.

 

PS: Deleted the quotes in quotes in quotes because it was getting too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL Everything is about race with this guy. Dont waste your time. In his world if you arent a white male you arent allowed to own a property or a business. In the real world this is unequivocally not true. There has never been a better time to be a non white male in America...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It comes from the point of view that people should spend their own money and not other people's.  "Theft is wrong" is wanting an oligarchy?  "We should steal from other people simply because they have more than us and spend it as we like" is what exactly?

 

You can keep your money and move somewhere with no taxes. You think restricting votes to property owners and business owners was about money?  Its was never about the money it was always about keeping the power with rich white men. If you are a woman you don't get to vote. If you are black you don't get to vote. If you are poor you don't get to vote.

 

PS: Deleted the quotes in quotes in quotes because it was getting too long.

 

If you are a woman you don't get to vote. If you are black you don't get to vote.

 

Women and minorities can't own businesses or property? WTF?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL Everything is about race with this guy. Dont waste your time. In his world if you arent a white male you arent allowed to own a property or a business. In the real world this is unequivocally not true. There has never been a better time to be a non white male in America...

 

Even from a historical point of view what he said is blatantly wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

- Alexander Fraser Tytler"

 

That is a little depressing. However:

 

"There is no reliable record of Alexander Tytler's having written any part of the text. In fact, it actually comprises two parts which didn't begin to appear together until the 1970s. The first paragraph's earliest known appearance is in an op-ed piece by Elmer T. Peterson in the 9 December 1951 The Daily Oklahoman, which attributed it to Tytler..."

 

 

It is true regardless of who said it.

 

Yea I don't care what this worthless racist piece of shit wrote.

 

This is the same asshole who wrote a book about how the British lawyers of the Evil East India Company need to impose their superior British government and laws on the dumb natives in India for the benefit of the dumb natives in India.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL Everything is about race with this guy. Dont waste your time. In his world if you arent a white male you arent allowed to own a property or a business. In the real world this is unequivocally not true. There has never been a better time to be a non white male in America...

 

Even from a historical point of view what he said is blatantly wrong.

 

Right because women could vote in 1850 when the US had laws restricting voting to property owners.

 

In America women werent allowed to have a mortgage or Credit Card till 1974 unless it was cosigned by her father or husband.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off topic but I can assure you that American women were allowed to have a mortgage and a credit card - in their own name -before 1974.  What changed in 1974 is that they could not be denied credit based on gender any longer.  There were plenty of solo women borrowers before 1974.

 

In America women werent allowed to have a mortgage or Credit Card till 1974 unless it was cosigned by her father or husband.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off topic but I can assure you that American women were allowed to have a mortgage and a credit card - in their own name -before 1974.  What changed in 1974 is that they could not be denied credit based on gender any longer.  There were plenty of solo women borrowers before 1974.

 

In America women werent allowed to have a mortgage or Credit Card till 1974 unless it was cosigned by her father or husband.

 

tenor.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL Everything is about race with this guy. Dont waste your time. In his world if you arent a white male you arent allowed to own a property or a business. In the real world this is unequivocally not true. There has never been a better time to be a non white male in America...

 

Even from a historical point of view what he said is blatantly wrong.

 

Right because women could vote in 1850 when the US had laws restricting voting to property owners.

 

In America women weren't allowed to have a mortgage or Credit Card till 1974 unless it was cosigned by her father or husband.

 

I'm not saying it didn't exist that way. But you blatantly ignore why some of these things did exist. Also Universal White Male Suffrage didn't exists in the US until 1856. So there was also plenty of "Evil White Males" who couldn't vote as well. It didn't exist in the UK until 1918 (just 10 years before women's suffrage in 1928). It's also easy to examine these things from todays perspective looking back. But you need to look at them through the historical context and cultural lens of the time.

 

Fact is Women could and did own property for most of history. They also have rights throughout most of history contrary to what most think. An examination of Common Law will show you this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off topic but I can assure you that American women were allowed to have a mortgage and a credit card - in their own name -before 1974.  What changed in 1974 is that they could not be denied credit based on gender any longer.  There were plenty of solo women borrowers before 1974.

 

In America women werent allowed to have a mortgage or Credit Card till 1974 unless it was cosigned by her father or husband.

 

Equal Credit Opportunity Act 1974.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bigger issue is WTF does any of that have to do with the situation today? All these things have come a long way and as a society, much like an investor, when things shift and fundamentals change, you should be willing to seek out relevant information and come to a conclusion that fits the puzzle. We've gone from "only property owners" voting in the 1800s, to now everyone under the sun, including people who have zero intention to contribute anything to society and even folks who openly seek to sell their "vote" for as little as a pack of Newports....

 

On a board, if a member has a conflict of interest, they typically recuse themselves. So to rk's point, should politicians and freeloaders really be voting when all theyre after is other people's goods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also Universal White Male Suffrage didn't exists in the US until 1856

For giggles and such, what was the voting situation prior to 1856? :D

 

The bigger issue is WTF does any of that have to do with the situation today? All these things have come a long way and as a society, much like an investor, when things shift and fundamentals change, you should be willing to seek out relevant information and come to a conclusion that fits the puzzle. We've gone from "only property owners" voting in the 1800s, to now everyone under the sun, including people who have zero intention to contribute anything to society and even folks who openly seek to sell their "vote" for as little as a pack of Newports....

 

I'll tell you what it has to do with today. It is a refutation of RK's point about "voting-is-violence" and "big-government-is-bad".

 

As you correctly note, society has "come a long way" from the days of old when government was small (and rights were denied to many) and voting was restricted (and also denied to many). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...