Their = Possessive for they, what you're looking for is "THERE"
With that out of the way, no, I'm not
And I'm having difficulty seeing how establishing a weighted voting system based on merit, in which anyone, From a big company CEO down to local mom & pop grocery store owners or any equivalent entrepreneurial efforts could apply, would equate to establishing Aristocracy.
If anything that kind of thing would only motivate individuals who are pretty capable, but just a bit lazy, to make more of an effort, and contribute more.
You're deeply in the 8 or 80 mindset, either is every retarded welfare user can vote or ARISTOCRACY!!!!!!111!!one
No, there's plenty of room in-between to find a way to make it right, we are not born equal, period, differences in intellect and overall capacity are absurd.
If you had a business would you pick any idiot from the streets to run it or make a very careful selection to decide who would be the best? so why being able to help decide the fate of a nation be any different?
thanks for the catch on their/ there, was ignorant of me to make such a mistake. makes me look bad, and am sure puts you in the frame of mind that i am not bright enough to make an argument intelligently.
how about this then, if only property owners can vote, maybe only property owners can serve in the military by draft.
all others strictly on a volunteer basis.
what exactly was the aristocracy back in the day if not landed nobles and the upper class.
in your mindset, it would seem tenant farmers and people that rent their (not there) domiciles would not have their voices heard at the polls, correct?
the poor schmucks that work for someone at minimum wage or for just a salary could not vote unless they are gifted property or struggle real hard to get their own place.
would they be able to vote while the bank owns the mortgage on what ever property they do buy?
the founding fathers considered what you are talking about and found it lacking. perhaps you would also prefer counting those that do not own property or businesses at 1/5th the value of real americans that own something?
what would you consider the value of people like those that own blackrock, vanguard and alphabet?
I didn't say anything about owning property specifically, I just mentioned perhaps having entrepreneurial efforts as ONE of the ways to decide who gets to have a greater weight.
What would be other factors? I don't know, that's why this sort of thing must be discussed and reflected upon.
You're also forgetting I specifically suggested a weighted system, so yeah "the poor schmucks that work for someone at minimum wage or for just a salary" would totally get to vote, it's just that their vote would count for less, but they would still count, at a minimum what they count for today (1 person = 1 vote)
Plus isn't America supposed to be a meritocracy? a place where, with hard work, anyone should be able to rise out of the minimum wage, salary to salary level? isn't owning property a goal everyone should have?
Well this, in my mind, would just be a great catalyst for that ideal.
And with all that I said, which was just an idea I came up with on the spot mostly, the sole point I'm trying to make is that these sort of conversations must happen, we can't discard the idea over a knee-jerk reaction based on our current systems.
Also, even in an idyllic system, where law is fair, where officials are truly chosen by the people, and where a system alike the one I imagined is fully in function and has been tweaked to perfection, I guarantee you, you would still have many "schmucks that work for someone at minimum wage or for just a salary"
Not because the system is oppressing them, not because their employers are exploiting them, but just because they're perfectly content where they are, they could change it, with hard work, but they just can't be bothered, in fact I'm sure most of these wouldn't even care to vote...
Because again, were not all born equal.
And this does not reflect the value of the person as a child of God, in spirit we are all created equal under him, and we all have the same potential in destiny, we're only talking about voting here...
what would you consider the value of people like those that own blackrock, vanguard and alphabet?
I'd consider their value at 0, they're only good for the gallows as far as I care
Well... In God's plan everyone has value of course, their part perhaps was being so horrible as to create a very hostile environment in which some hardy folk would be nurtured.
well, we are discussing the issues. I think I also pointed out some points that you brought up as being lacking.
one thing I strongly disagree with, but falls in line with you thinking is, we ARE all born equal, just we are not all born into equal circumstances. men can create a better life for themselves, which is where people rise above others.
while I certainly do not espouse marxist ideals, I definitely do not wish to be dragged back into a feudal system that western society has been fighting to get away from for the last couple of centuries.
hopefully you are correct and people will discuss the ideas and come to a conclusion that will help ensure liberty for the people.
HELP ME OUT HERE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THEIR SHOULD BE AN ARISTOCRACY?
Their = Possessive for they, what you're looking for is "THERE"
With that out of the way, no, I'm not
And I'm having difficulty seeing how establishing a weighted voting system based on merit, in which anyone, From a big company CEO down to local mom & pop grocery store owners or any equivalent entrepreneurial efforts could apply, would equate to establishing Aristocracy.
If anything that kind of thing would only motivate individuals who are pretty capable, but just a bit lazy, to make more of an effort, and contribute more.
You're deeply in the 8 or 80 mindset, either is every retarded welfare user can vote or ARISTOCRACY!!!!!!111!!one
No, there's plenty of room in-between to find a way to make it right, we are not born equal, period, differences in intellect and overall capacity are absurd.
If you had a business would you pick any idiot from the streets to run it or make a very careful selection to decide who would be the best? so why being able to help decide the fate of a nation be any different?
thanks for the catch on their/ there, was ignorant of me to make such a mistake. makes me look bad, and am sure puts you in the frame of mind that i am not bright enough to make an argument intelligently.
how about this then, if only property owners can vote, maybe only property owners can serve in the military by draft.
all others strictly on a volunteer basis.
what exactly was the aristocracy back in the day if not landed nobles and the upper class.
in your mindset, it would seem tenant farmers and people that rent their (not there) domiciles would not have their voices heard at the polls, correct?
the poor schmucks that work for someone at minimum wage or for just a salary could not vote unless they are gifted property or struggle real hard to get their own place.
would they be able to vote while the bank owns the mortgage on what ever property they do buy?
the founding fathers considered what you are talking about and found it lacking. perhaps you would also prefer counting those that do not own property or businesses at 1/5th the value of real americans that own something?
what would you consider the value of people like those that own blackrock, vanguard and alphabet?
I didn't say anything about owning property specifically, I just mentioned perhaps having entrepreneurial efforts as ONE of the ways to decide who gets to have a greater weight.
What would be other factors? I don't know, that's why this sort of thing must be discussed and reflected upon.
You're also forgetting I specifically suggested a weighted system, so yeah "the poor schmucks that work for someone at minimum wage or for just a salary" would totally get to vote, it's just that their vote would count for less, but they would still count, at a minimum what they count for today (1 person = 1 vote)
Plus isn't America supposed to be a meritocracy? a place where, with hard work, anyone should be able to rise out of the minimum wage, salary to salary level? isn't owning property a goal everyone should have?
Well this, in my mind, would just be a great catalyst for that ideal.
And with all that I said, which was just an idea I came up with on the spot mostly, the sole point I'm trying to make is that these sort of conversations must happen, we can't discard the idea over a knee-jerk reaction based on our current systems.
Also, even in an idyllic system, where law is fair, where officials are truly chosen by the people, and where a system alike the one I imagined is fully in function and has been tweaked to perfection, I guarantee you, you would still have many "schmucks that work for someone at minimum wage or for just a salary"
Not because the system is oppressing them, not because their employers are exploiting them, but just because they're perfectly content where they are, they could change it, with hard work, but they just can't be bothered, in fact I'm sure most of these wouldn't even care to vote...
Because again, were not all born equal.
And this does not reflect the value of the person as a child of God, in spirit we are all created equal under him, and we all have the same potential in destiny, we're only talking about voting here...
I'd consider their value at 0, they're only good for the gallows as far as I care
Well... In God's plan everyone has value of course, their part perhaps was being so horrible as to create a very hostile environment in which some hardy folk would be nurtured.
well, we are discussing the issues. I think I also pointed out some points that you brought up as being lacking.
one thing I strongly disagree with, but falls in line with you thinking is, we ARE all born equal, just we are not all born into equal circumstances. men can create a better life for themselves, which is where people rise above others.
while I certainly do not espouse marxist ideals, I definitely do not wish to be dragged back into a feudal system that western society has been fighting to get away from for the last couple of centuries.
hopefully you are correct and people will discuss the ideas and come to a conclusion that will help ensure liberty for the people.