• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Voter tax

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So I was thinking of the following thing.

A minimal tax when you go to vote. Normally I would be against this idea but today it it hit, what it is needed to be done to make it a viable option.

What is the minimal amount of money one person would be interested in paying in order to participate to something important? The act of paying for things in general drives people to be more aware of what they are paying for. It's psychological really. Now of course, for people who have a lot of money this isn't a problem, but the vast majority of the people in any given country don't have a lot of money and don't spend money idly.

So a minimal tax. Say, 10eurocents. Or 1euro. The sum is not important, the psychological effect is. By demanding that people pay a small fee before going in the voting booth you increase the chance of those people tuning into the news and being informed about the product they are "buying" before they buy it , i.e., the vote. Even more so since you only get to 'buy' 1 vote. No more.
But still, if we leave it at this, it's a bad idea and I would be against it. The way that I wouldn't be against it is if it were tax deductible 100%. So next month, after you paid (say...) 1 euro for your vote, you pay X sum taxes - 1euro. So you don't lose money. You just create the psychological effect that makes people pay more attention on what they do with the vote.

It's an overall win situation. What do you guys think?
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
35,661
Reaction score
18,199
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So I was thinking of the following thing.

A minimal tax when you go to vote. Normally I would be against this idea but today it it hit, what it is needed to be done to make it a viable option.

What is the minimal amount of money one person would be interested in paying in order to participate to something important? The act of paying for things in general drives people to be more aware of what they are paying for. It's psychological really. Now of course, for people who have a lot of money this isn't a problem, but the vast majority of the people in any given country don't have a lot of money and don't spend money idly.

So a minimal tax. Say, 10eurocents. Or 1euro. The sum is not important, the psychological effect is. By demanding that people pay a small fee before going in the voting booth you increase the chance of those people tuning into the news and being informed about the product they are "buying" before they buy it , i.e., the vote. Even more so since you only get to 'buy' 1 vote. No more.
But still, if we leave it at this, it's a bad idea and I would be against it. The way that I wouldn't be against it is if it were tax deductible 100%. So next month, after you paid (say...) 1 euro for your vote, you pay X sum taxes - 1euro. So you don't lose money. You just create the psychological effect that makes people pay more attention on what they do with the vote.

It's an overall win situation. What do you guys think?
Better to fine people who don't vote.
 

Cyrylek

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
3,467
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Boston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The sum is not important, the psychological effect is.
I love it. But parting with 1 euro is just not psychologically-effective enough.

I have a better idea: A slap in the face. Before handing you the ballot, a uniformed state official has to smack you, open palm (in a disposable glove, of course, safety first - we are not barbarians), on the cheek.

I mean, here you are, all ready to vote for one of two or three professional sociopaths grasping for power they cannot possibly handle properly, in the modern complex and chaotic world, your choice based on some half-truth he (maybe) said at some point that resonated with something you think you believe, though you had never given it much thought....

SLAP!!!

Could wake some people up....not many, probably.
 

ChezC3

Relentless Thinking Fury
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
11,513
Reaction score
3,960
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I love it. But parting with 1 euro is just not psychologically-effective enough.

I have a better idea: A slap in the face. Before handing you the ballot, a uniformed state official has to smack you, open palm (in a disposable glove, of course, safety first - we are not barbarians), on the cheek.

I mean, here you are, all ready to vote for one of two or three professional sociopaths grasping for power they cannot possibly handle properly, in the modern complex and chaotic world, your choice based on some half-truth he (maybe) said at some point that resonated with something you think you believe, though you had never given it much thought....

SLAP!!!

Could wake some people up....not many, probably.
a jikijitsu with his keisaku.....:yes:

I like this idea...very much...
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I love it. But parting with 1 euro is just not psychologically-effective enough.

I have a better idea: A slap in the face. Before handing you the ballot, a uniformed state official has to smack you, open palm (in a disposable glove, of course, safety first - we are not barbarians), on the cheek.

I mean, here you are, all ready to vote for one of two or three professional sociopaths grasping for power they cannot possibly handle properly, in the modern complex and chaotic world, your choice based on some half-truth he (maybe) said at some point that resonated with something you think you believe, though you had never given it much thought....

SLAP!!!

Could wake some people up....not many, probably.
Well all right then.
 

Spriggs05

Anarcho Facist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,428
Reaction score
854
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I love it. But parting with 1 euro is just not psychologically-effective enough.

I have a better idea: A slap in the face. Before handing you the ballot, a uniformed state official has to smack you, open palm (in a disposable glove, of course, safety first - we are not barbarians), on the cheek.

I mean, here you are, all ready to vote for one of two or three professional sociopaths grasping for power they cannot possibly handle properly, in the modern complex and chaotic world, your choice based on some half-truth he (maybe) said at some point that resonated with something you think you believe, though you had never given it much thought....

SLAP!!!

Could wake some people up....not many, probably.
This is the greatest idea I have ever heard.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,505
Reaction score
37,758
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
This is the greatest idea I have ever heard.
That would do if the political class were only inflicting minor harm upon the sheeple; for a more apt reminder, of the real situation, perhaps they would have you drop your trousers, bend over and really drive the point home. ;)
 

Spriggs05

Anarcho Facist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,428
Reaction score
854
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That would do if the political class were only inflicting minor harm upon the sheeple; for a more apt reminder, of the real situation, perhaps they would have you drop your trousers, bend over and really drive the point home. ;)
"really drive the point home"

The Images! Make them stop! :boohoo: :D
 

SBu

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,523
Reaction score
636
Location
Washington State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
So I was thinking of the following thing.

A minimal tax when you go to vote. Normally I would be against this idea but today it it hit, what it is needed to be done to make it a viable option.

What is the minimal amount of money one person would be interested in paying in order to participate to something important? The act of paying for things in general drives people to be more aware of what they are paying for. It's psychological really. Now of course, for people who have a lot of money this isn't a problem, but the vast majority of the people in any given country don't have a lot of money and don't spend money idly.

So a minimal tax. Say, 10eurocents. Or 1euro. The sum is not important, the psychological effect is. By demanding that people pay a small fee before going in the voting booth you increase the chance of those people tuning into the news and being informed about the product they are "buying" before they buy it , i.e., the vote. Even more so since you only get to 'buy' 1 vote. No more.
But still, if we leave it at this, it's a bad idea and I would be against it. The way that I wouldn't be against it is if it were tax deductible 100%. So next month, after you paid (say...) 1 euro for your vote, you pay X sum taxes - 1euro. So you don't lose money. You just create the psychological effect that makes people pay more attention on what they do with the vote.

It's an overall win situation. What do you guys think?
Sadly, nothing will change how people treat the vote now. Also, at least in America, if you try any funny business like what you propose there will be hell to pay with the ACLU.

I think the real question here is, why do we have to have one president when the country is nearly split evenly in their votes. Why not two? Let people live under the system they prefer, then the vote will matter again.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Sadly, nothing will change how people treat the vote now. Also, at least in America, if you try any funny business like what you propose there will be hell to pay with the ACLU.

I think the real question here is, why do we have to have one president when the country is nearly split evenly in their votes. Why not two? Let people live under the system they prefer, then the vote will matter again.
Well, in the case of the US, USA= UNITED states of america. Not divided. That's why 1 president (exec branch), 1 legislature (congress), 1 judicial branch at a federal level.
 

SBu

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,523
Reaction score
636
Location
Washington State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Well, in the case of the US, USA= UNITED states of america. Not divided. That's why 1 president (exec branch), 1 legislature (congress), 1 judicial branch at a federal level.
Yes, I'm familiar with the system. More a question to stimulate some thought than a real suggestion.
 

Artevelde

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
698
Reaction score
194
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So I was thinking of the following thing.

A minimal tax when you go to vote. Normally I would be against this idea but today it it hit, what it is needed to be done to make it a viable option.

What is the minimal amount of money one person would be interested in paying in order to participate to something important? The act of paying for things in general drives people to be more aware of what they are paying for. It's psychological really. Now of course, for people who have a lot of money this isn't a problem, but the vast majority of the people in any given country don't have a lot of money and don't spend money idly.

So a minimal tax. Say, 10eurocents. Or 1euro. The sum is not important, the psychological effect is. By demanding that people pay a small fee before going in the voting booth you increase the chance of those people tuning into the news and being informed about the product they are "buying" before they buy it , i.e., the vote. Even more so since you only get to 'buy' 1 vote. No more.
But still, if we leave it at this, it's a bad idea and I would be against it. The way that I wouldn't be against it is if it were tax deductible 100%. So next month, after you paid (say...) 1 euro for your vote, you pay X sum taxes - 1euro. So you don't lose money. You just create the psychological effect that makes people pay more attention on what they do with the vote.

It's an overall win situation. What do you guys think?
Doesn't really strike me as a practical or good idea.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Doesn't really strike me as a practical or good idea.
Well, it was just a thought. I wasn't putting money on it.

For me, it seems like a pretty good idea. But I'm biased since I thought of it.
 

Artevelde

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
698
Reaction score
194
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, it was just a thought. I wasn't putting money on it.

For me, it seems like a pretty good idea. But I'm biased since I thought of it.
Nothing wrong with thinking. Too few people do it.
 
Top Bottom