One dollar, one vote.

[hmkpoker]

Another intellectual/political thought exercise.

New tax system: taxes are voluntary. On April 15, you pay as much as you want to your federal, state and municipal governments (based on your choosing). You get a reciept for your payment, which can be later redeemed for voting priviledges.

Each dollar that you pay gives you one vote that you may use in an upcoming election of the government level you gave to. Paying $10 to the Federal government gives you ten votes for the President in the next election. Votes are transferrable.

I open this thread to predictions as to what you think would happen.

[Andrew Karpinski]

A group of super rich individuals pay many billions in taxes, vote for their organization, who's first act of business is to give them their billions back and then some.

[vhawk01]

Which is almost exactly what we have now, except in this new system there is absolutely zero chance of the less wealthy majority being served in any meaningful way. In our current system there is at least a small chance.

[hmkpoker]

A few of mine:

Politically-minded individuals will pay more than non-politically minded individuals.

Upper class people are not necessarily going to have overwhelmingly more votes than the poor (rich people like money, and go to great lengths to get tax breaks, remember. A yuppie could buy a Porsche with what he usually pays in taxes.)

Incentive to pay taxes will not completely vanish; as fewer people pay taxes, there is more value given to your dollar's voting power. At some point, it has to be worth it.

There will be more funding to Municipal and State governments than Federal governments. People care about matters that affect them, which municipal governments impact more directly than federal.

Checks will have to be put on fiat currency providers, to keep them from producing substantial voting priviledges.

Welfare will not be a strong platform, as people who want welfare will probably not want to risk their own money.

[Copernicus]

We will all soon be forced to pray to the god of whatever the richest (in terms of liquid assets) religion in the world is (Catholic church?)

[vhawk01]

I think you grossly underestimate the disparity of wealth in this country. And, of course, the even greater potential disparity that could arise. But yeah, other than that, oligarchies are a real good idea.

[DrPhysic]

You would get one individual or a small group of individuals who are politically minded and have a vested interest in the controls government places on certain interests, who would be willing to put up enough to buy the elections.

If a Paul Allen (one of the Microsoft founders) decided to buy the presidency, he could get B. Gates and a very few others and contribute enough money that it would take a concerted effort on the part of an organization the size of the Catholic church to stop him.

And there are individuals in the computer business, oil, banking, the stock market, etc that all have that kind of money.

If Paul Allen can drop $200 Million on a new boat, (yes, he really has one), or double that on the Seattle Supersonics (yeah, he owns them, too) what could he spend if he decided to buy himself a government to support his business? I truly doubt that one individual could do it. But a group of 15 or 20 similarly minded big players certainly could.

Sorry, it won't fly.

Doc

[hmkpoker]

You guys do realize that you're voting for elected officials and not on individual policies, right?

[vhawk01]

We are voting for a collection of policies. We are forced to accept them in an all-or-none fashion, yes.

[Philo]

What would happen? Um, complete corruption? Just a guess.

[vhawk01]

I'll just go ahead and tell you something you should have learned by now (paraphrase):

"Democracy is the worst form of government. Except for all the others."

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Politically-minded individuals will pay more than non-politically minded individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Power hungry and greedy individuals with means (accidentally), will capture the political agenda to serves their end even more easily than under the current system.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]
We will all soon be forced to pray

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt the veracity of this statement. Who's going to enforce this?

edit: The government (and the currency) would become unstable, nature would reclaim the infrastructure, and we would all end up growing our own food for a living in the OP's hypothetical, (provided that the population keeps its weapons)... IMHO /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Doctaprofit]

whats funny is this is the system we already have in place....you think your vote counts...haha, here you can vote on this, would you rather be deaf or mute... does this illustrate my point?

[purnell]

I think wealth and power are, as a rule, equivalent.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I think wealth and power are, as a rule, equivalent.

[/ QUOTE ]

[wmspringer]

[ QUOTE ]

Each dollar that you pay gives you one vote that you may use in an upcoming election of the government level you gave to. Paying $10 to the Federal government gives you ten votes for the President in the next election. Votes are transferrable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm...so pretty much what we have now?

(Come on, you know you were thinking it too...) /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Each dollar that you pay gives you one vote that you may use in an upcoming election of the government level you gave to. Paying $10 to the Federal government gives you ten votes for the President in the next election. Votes are transferrable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm...so pretty much what we have now?

(Come on, you know you were thinking it too...) /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Last time I checked, the head honchos of big oil only got one vote each.

[pilliwinks]

Does the word 'porkbarrelling' mean anything to you? Last time I checked it was still in fashion.

FWIW I would predict very little tax income and no govt expenditure. Everyone knows they can't compete with the big guys, so nobody pays except those who plan to win, who spend all the income making sure they win next time.

How about an alternative method: for every ten thousand dollars you spend on a registered charity, you get one extra vote. Any takers?

[moorobot]

The most unethical wealthy people control politics even more than they do in capitalistic democracies now: they create a system in which they are granted monopolies and hence the 'investment risk is worth the reward'; it is more than worth it to buy a few million votes in exchange for a few billion dollars profit. Among other devious decisions (e.g. school control, no progressive taxation, minimum wage or working condition laws etc.).

They eventually realize that they still need some kind minimum wage and working condition laws so the 'supply' of wage-labourers are not wiped out a la the UK in the early 1800s (the WC had a life expectancy in the thirties, and because of injury and illness a worker viability expectancy of much lower than that: most could not be used as wage labor till 30 because of that) and the demand for products and sevices is not wiped out a la the great depression where supply was high but nobody could afford to buy any of the built up supply. Monetary and fiscal policy would still be used, but rigged (even more) highily in favor of the most greedy and unethical wealthy people.

And/or a violent revolution changes the system.

[JMAnon]

We would become a microsoftocracy.

[KKbluff]

Monopolies would soon be legalized...

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Monopolies would soon be legalized...

[/ QUOTE ]

They are already.

[Riddick]

[ QUOTE ]
A group of super rich individuals pay many billions in taxes, vote for their organization, who's first act of business is to give them their billions back and then some.


[/ QUOTE ]

Profound.