Prerequisites for universal suffrage

[valenzuela]

Lets make this thread intresting, should people be allowed to sell their vote?

edit: If this is a hijack, I will just start another thread.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
Lets make this thread intresting, should people be allowed to sell their vote?

edit: If this is a hijack, I will just start another thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. Without question.

natedogg

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just to take a step aside from the real discussion, lets focus on that example you just gave, because it's slightly...ridiculous.

Poor people are disadvantaged when it comes to a drivers license test because they don't have cars.

...

Why do they need a drivers license if they cannot afford a car?


[/ QUOTE ]

You are right.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but it does. Who has more time to spend learning? The kid from a wealthy family (ie me) who didn't have to work during school, and had no job growing up, and therefore had plenty of time to read? Or the kid from the poor family who has to work night hours to help his family get food for the week, and therefore has very limited time to read?

I'm not really sure how this is a debate?


[/ QUOTE ]

By ability, I meant mental capacity. I don't have a problem with not letting someone vote if they can't find enough time in their lives to study for an important test to give them that ability. If they can't study for the test they won't have time to study issues which are important to them in order to make an informed decision on voting day.

[/ QUOTE ]

(That first sentence was very complicated because of all the negatives by the way, I'm taking it to mean "people who can't find time to study for a test to allow them to vote, should not be allowed to vote." Right?)

I don't see how knowledge is needed. Poor people know what they need in their lives. They need free healthcare, bought and paid for by the upper class. They need welfare, again, paid for by the upper class. A knowledge of US history won't change what they want. All a requirement like this would do is ensure that people who don't have time to study for these tests, (ie: the poor) would not have a say in our government anymore, and therefore would not be able to get what they want from their government. This tactic was tried before. Whites didn't want the recently freed blacks to have a say in their government, so they made a series of laws that resulted in it being almost impossible for any of the financially empty, educationaly empty blacks to vote to change laws in their governments.

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lets make this thread intresting, should people be allowed to sell their vote?

edit: If this is a hijack, I will just start another thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. Without question.

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure if this is a level or not, but I disagree with it.

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just to take a step aside from the real discussion, lets focus on that example you just gave, because it's slightly...ridiculous.

Poor people are disadvantaged when it comes to a drivers license test because they don't have cars.

...

Why do they need a drivers license if they cannot afford a car?


[/ QUOTE ]

You are right.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but it does. Who has more time to spend learning? The kid from a wealthy family (ie me) who didn't have to work during school, and had no job growing up, and therefore had plenty of time to read? Or the kid from the poor family who has to work night hours to help his family get food for the week, and therefore has very limited time to read?

I'm not really sure how this is a debate?


[/ QUOTE ]

By ability, I meant mental capacity. I don't have a problem with not letting someone vote if they can't find enough time in their lives to study for an important test to give them that ability. If they can't study for the test they won't have time to study issues which are important to them in order to make an informed decision on voting day.

[/ QUOTE ]

(That first sentence was very complicated because of all the negatives by the way, I'm taking it to mean "people who can't find time to study for a test to allow them to vote, should not be allowed to vote." Right?)

I don't see how knowledge is needed. Poor people know what they need in their lives. They need free healthcare, bought and paid for by the upper class. They need welfare, again, paid for by the upper class. A knowledge of US history won't change what they want. All a requirement like this would do is ensure that people who don't have time to study for these tests, (ie: the poor) would not have a say in our government anymore, and therefore would not be able to get what they want from their government. This tactic was tried before. Whites didn't want the recently freed blacks to have a say in their government, so they made a series of laws that resulted in it being almost impossible for any of the financially empty, educationaly empty blacks to vote to change laws in their governments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry about that first part, yeah you got it right.

As for the rest of it, I will have to address it later tonight or tomorrow morning, because I'm going to go watch the Cowboys beat up on the Bills.

[AlexM]

You have to have Democracy to get Universal Sufferage. And, of course, you need Constitution and Printing Press to get Democracy. Also with Democracy, you get Emancipation and the ability to build the Statue of Liberty. Pretty sweet.

[Archon_Wing]

[ QUOTE ]
You have to have Democracy to get Universal Sufferage. And, of course, you need Constitution and Printing Press to get Democracy. Also with Democracy, you get Emancipation and the ability to build the Statue of Liberty. Pretty sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's easier to warmonger if you're a republic. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You have to have Democracy to get Universal Sufferage. And, of course, you need Constitution and Printing Press to get Democracy. Also with Democracy, you get Emancipation and the ability to build the Statue of Liberty. Pretty sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's easier to warmonger if you're a republic. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Pfft. There is no Republic anymore!

[Archon_Wing]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You have to have Democracy to get Universal Sufferage. And, of course, you need Constitution and Printing Press to get Democracy. Also with Democracy, you get Emancipation and the ability to build the Statue of Liberty. Pretty sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's easier to warmonger if you're a republic. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Pfft. There is no Republic anymore!

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, they don't have blanket terms for your government anymore. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] I just remember playing the really old Civilization II and thought it was funny how the game compared the governments. Fundamentalism= Everyone is happy, Communism= No corruption, it was just funny imagining what that would be like. "You are happy, and you'll continue being happy!"

Anyhow, I always picked the republic over democracy. Didn't want my citizens to have too much say in what I did. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Archon_Wing]

[ QUOTE ]

By ability, I meant mental capacity. I don't have a problem with not letting someone vote if they can't find enough time in their lives to study for an important test to give them that ability. If they can't study for the test they won't have time to study issues which are important to them in order to make an informed decision on voting day.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I don't know or care about an issue or I don't know the candidates, I can simply omit on that issue and vote on issues that I do know about. So what if they are well informed about the issues that are relevant to them, but it's an extremely narrow range of issues? It wouldn't really take much mental capacity at all.

Perhaps we just need large bold letters on top of voting forms: YOU CAN LEAVE BOXES BLANK.