Voting rights

[Scrapheap]

I heard this on TV the other day and I think it makes sense.

If you recieve more money from the Governmnet than you've paid in, you shouldn't have the right to vote, because if you do, you will simply vote to take more money from the government for yourself.

A good example of this is the AARP and other old-fogie groups. They are the most powerful political lobby in Washington DC, and between Social Security, Medicare and Medicaide, they take the most money.

[Callaway]

Retired people have paid into Social Security for many years if they are drawing Social Security money out now, and even if someone is disabled and drawing Social Security Disability, either they (or a parent, if the person was disabled before 21) has paid into Social Security for years to entitle them to this payment now.

Even if this were not the case, to vote yes that people in this situation should lose their voting rights would make it a sort of crime to be poor.

I wonder if the people you saw on TV who are making this argument would like to return to a system where only white male landowners are permitted to vote?

[Queen Victoria]

I heard this on TV the other day and I think it makes sense.

If you recieve more money from the Governmnet than you've paid in, you shouldn't have the right to vote, because if you do, you will simply vote to take more money from the government for yourself.

A good example of this is the AARP and other old-fogie groups. They are the most powerful political lobby in Washington DC, and between Social Security, Medicare and Medicaide, they take the most money.

I agree with Callaway and will add:

Fallacies

1)  Under a democracy you cannot "simply vote to take more money from the government for yourself".  In a democracy the individuals vote on each matter directly.  America has a republic form of government where we elect individuals to (ideally) vote for the best interests of America as a whole.  

2)  Medicaid is not an age related subsidy.  It is asset/income driven. And is a joint Federal/state program.  

An Aside:  I again thank everyone in America who has pays into Social Security and Medicare.  Thanks to your contributions she receives Social Security (disabled before 21, on her father's account), SSI (to bring her up to the minimum Social Security benefit amount), paid Medicare premiums, assistance with her prescriptions ($7,000+ so far this year at market price) and Medicaid (pays what Medicare doesn't.)  Her bill for 3 days in the hospital in October was $11,480+, of which she will pay only a minimal amount if anything.  Lest you think she is "faking it", she has 5 documented medical conditions starting from 7 months old which taken as a whole preclude her from meaningful employment.

Oh and yes, she is a registered voter.  I made sure of that.

[Scrapheap]

Retired people have paid into Social Security for many years if they are drawing Social Security money out now, and even if someone is disabled and drawing Social Security Disability, either they (or a parent, if the person was disabled before 21) has paid into Social Security for years to entitle them to this payment now.

But Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The people drawing off of it now will take out more money than they paid in. Where does that extra money come from?? you and me and our children and their children, untill the system finally collapses. You and I probably won't see a single dime of the money we paid in. Socail Security has done this to us.

Even if this were not the case, to vote yes that people in this situation should lose their voting rights would make it a sort of crime to be poor.

No, it wouldn't make it a crime, it would just prevent people from voting to get "free" stuff from the government.

I wonder if the people you saw on TV who are making this argument would like to return to a system where only white male landowners are permitted to vote?

Ad-Hominem!!! 

[Frolic_Fun]

The same person (ie. you) would happily beg for benefits if the shit hit the fan.

[Scrapheap]

Fallacies

1)  Under a democracy you cannot "simply vote to take more money from the government for yourself".  In a democracy the individuals vote on each matter directly.  America has a republic form of government where we elect individuals to (ideally) vote for the best interests of America as a whole.

I don't recall making the claim that America is a pure Democracy. People who want to suck off of the government teat generaly form lobby groups.  These lobby groups then pressure politicians, by virtue of their numbers (voting blocs), to do what's in the short term intrest of the lobby group, NOT the country as a whole.  

2)  Medicaid is not an age related subsidy.  It is asset/income driven. And is a joint Federal/state program.

Yes, but the majority of people drawing off of it are old folks.  

An Aside:  I again thank everyone in America who has pays into Social Security and Medicare.  Thanks to your contributions she receives Social Security (disabled before 21, on her father's account), SSI (to bring her up to the minimum Social Security benefit amount), paid Medicare premiums, assistance with her prescriptions ($7,000+ so far this year at market price) and Medicaid (pays what Medicare doesn't.)  Her bill for 3 days in the hospital in October was $11,480+, of which she will pay only a minimal amount if anything.  Lest you think she is "faking it", she has 5 documented medical conditions starting from 7 months old which taken as a whole preclude her from meaningful employment.

Oh and yes, she is a registered voter.  I made sure of that.

I cartianly don't begrudge help for those who need it, I simply think the programs we have in place now, are ineficcient drains on the US taxpayer.

[Osensitive1]

They can't even successfully prevent convicted criminals from voting in restricted states, so it sounds messy. The majority of people don't vote anyway, so can't see any reason to prevent those who care enough to vote from doing so.

[Parts]

No. If they did that the next step would be the more you paid in the more your vote would be worth what a mess that would be. 

[Queen Victoria]

I don't recall making the claim that America is a pure Democracy. People who want to suck off of the government teat generaly form lobby groups.  These lobby groups then pressure politicians, by virtue of their numbers (voting blocs), to do what's in the short term intrest of the lobby group, NOT the country as a whole.  

No you stated that they will vote to take more money from the government.  That is not forming a lobby group.  It takes money to lobby.  Poor people and most people with illnesses/handicaps do not have money to hire lobbyists.  

If AARP were that effective, then Congress would not have voted down the $250 one-time Social Security payment today.  And AARP would be pressuring for a change that would allow Social Security increases based on current year index increases.  As the law stands now Social Security increases are not allowed when the CPI falls below the previous high figure.  The increases only begin again when the CPI passes the previous high CPI value (2008 in this instance.  Remember the fuel spike?  That's the reason 2008 CPI spiked).

The majority of people drawing off of Medicaid are not old folks.  You do not get Medicaid if your social security benefit check is more than the Social Security minimum check.  

[Osensitive1]

No. If they did that the next step would be the more you paid in the more your vote would be worth what a mess that would be. 

Already know my vote isn't worth anything, so therefore a step ahead of them.

[Parts]

No. If they did that the next step would be the more you paid in the more your vote would be worth what a mess that would be. 

Already know my vote isn't worth anything, so therefore a step ahead of them.

Then the argument would be why then does it even matter voting at all.  In Connecticut the recent governors race was decided by a very slim margin and some of the local elections even less.  Votes do matter especially on a local scale which has the most influence on your day to day affairs

[Osensitive1]

Then the argument would be why then does it even matter voting at all. 

Agreed.

['andersom']

People in the government, and all their employees are paid by the government too. As are people in the army. Will they lose their right to vote too?

[Dexter Morgan]

So college students and people serving in the armed forces shouldn't vote?

[Al Swearegen]

I voted YES!


Then I read the question.