Fixing America

[Snuby642]

Since there are areas infested with communists in every state and more problematic some in controll of the state it's time to fix things one way or another.

This is what needs to happen in several states.

DNyuz - Latest Breaking U.S. News

Latest Breaking News, U.S. and World Politics, Crime, Business, Science, Technology, Autos, Entertainment, Culture, Movie, Music, Sports.

dnyuz.com

 

[Maser]

For me I feel a perfect start would be to stop apologizing for everything! The whole reason why these Leftist cucks and cunts get away with all their bullshit is because they're allowed to get away with it. Just because they were raised by boomers who didn't believe in spanking their kids or even punish them for that matter should not be an excuse why we all should have to suffer because of bad parenting. It's time we start putting our feet down as a freedom and liberty loving country and telling these spoiled rotten bedwetters something their parents never told them and that is "NO!" We are not gonna apologize because their snowflake feelings got melted. We are not gonna buy into the whole multiple gender thing anymore. The list goes on, but you get where I'm going with this. All the problems we currently got going on were problems that began in the home and could have been fixed back then. As a Libertarian I believe everyone should be allowed to have a voice and speak their mind, but if you feel your voice should be allowed to trump other's voices you don't agree with, then you're the problem not the solution.

 

[Snuby642]

People are scared to get off thier ass. It's a simple numbers thing.

Consolidate all the good counties into properly ran states untill the shithole in charge stands alone.

Eventually you can take it back if there were any reason left to do so.

In other cases if you have enough support in enough counties form a new state better that way.

Too many states have a minority county or two running the whole place. That is unacceptable.

 

[Snuby642]

The way I see it the counties Garrett, Allegany and Washington are being held as political prisoners by the communist state.

They should be freed.

 

[Jim Out]

 

[RUTGERS95]

same with Cali, needs to be done

 

[The D]

Not just secession, counties and/or states need to start some campaigns of nullification against unconstitutional federal laws/mandates

 

[Fig]

Rajneesh had alot of fucked up ideas, but he was very funny, and he is right about democracy. It is extremely poisonous. Like chemotherapy, in the correct doses it can kill the cancer of corruption, but too much and it will certainly kill the patient. That is definitely what is happening to us now. Democracy is poisonings our Republic.

One of the biggest problems we have in our Democracy today is the 17th amendment neutering the power of the states legislatures to elect/appoint Senators. This was a huge check on the power of the Federal Government. After this disastrous amendment was passed not only did the state legislatures no longer have any power or pull in Washington DC, but we also lost the 10th Amendment in it's entirety (along with a slow slide of The Nine eroding our Constitution) , and now the Federal Government can do whatever the hell it wants wthout fear it is violating the principals of Federalism.

In truth there is no more Federalism. It has been entirely eliminated from our system of government. There is only the supremacy of the Federal Government now, and they are so brazen, bold, and they hate you so very much from the bottoms of their black little hearts, that they don't even hesitate to threaten parents, who don't want racism taught to their children, with the full power of the Injustice Department and the FBI. Put that in your commie pipe and smoke it!

 

[Maggot]

Since there are areas infested with communists in every state and more problematic some in controll of the state it's time to fix things one way or another.

This is what needs to happen in several states.

DNyuz - Latest Breaking U.S. News

Latest Breaking News, U.S. and World Politics, Crime, Business, Science, Technology, Autos, Entertainment, Culture, Movie, Music, Sports.

dnyuz.com

Here in Virginia we need just the opposite. We need to kick about 5 counties tothe curnb. Maybe give them back to New Yolk.

 

[DocRDS]

“Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”
-Churchill

These arguments are not new and actually date to our founding.
How do we allow people the freedom to pursue their life in their own fashion and control their own life
How do we unify in order to defend ourselves and provide large scale growth/projects

Those two are the tension we must deal with and have ALWAYS been dealing with since our founding. A government strong enough to get things done, but not so strong as to override the individual.

So while we may agree on Federal Overreach currently, we can't de-fang the govt so badly we revert to Articles of Confederation where nothing got done. Its a more delicate balance than many realize.

 

[Rthur]

State's electoral college.
We don't allow a few populous states to dictate national votes, at least in theory these days.

R

 

[Snuby642]

Well you people in VA are in the same situation as Illinois to a certain extent.

A new state would have to be formed unlike a few counties wanting to leave and join an existing state.

I say pool support and resources between VA, WV, and MD and petition the SCOTUS for an imidiate solution for divorce and correction to your political incarceration.

Time to cut the cancer off while there is some semblance of hope in the high court maybe.

 

[Snuby642]

State's electoral college.
We don't allow a few populous states to dictate national votes, at least in theory these days.

R

We're you paying attention during the last communist take over (election) ?

We fix this by strengthening existing red states by adding counties from the communist regime and creating new states by divorcing communist strongholds controlling entire states.

 

[Rthur]

We're you paying attention during the last communist take over (election) ?

If you look closely you'll see the word "theory".

R

 

[Snuby642]

Letting a handful of counties turn an entire state blue is unacceptable.

Time to take it back.

Edit: Appologies to @Rthur I'm a little spun up. The status quo can't support a free land.

 

[Fig]

“Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”
-Churchill

These arguments are not new and actually date to our founding.
How do we allow people the freedom to pursue their life in their own fashion and control their own life
How do we unify in order to defend ourselves and provide large scale growth/projects

Those two are the tension we must deal with and have ALWAYS been dealing with since our founding. A government strong enough to get things done, but not so strong as to override the individual.

So while we may agree on Federal Overreach currently, we can't de-fang the govt so badly we revert to Articles of Confederation where nothing got done. Its a more delicate balance than many realize.

You’re not living in fucking reality if you honestly believe that’s a concern AT ALL. Let our children worry about strengthening the Federal government. Right now it is about to eat the American people for breakfast and do away with our liberty.

They say our Capitol was built to inspire awe in visiting foreign dignitaries. It has been turned to a new purpose. It has become a symbol of the gulf between the governed, and those who believe in their own right to rule over us. I for one will never look upon the idolatrous buildings of Washington DC the same way ever again. I used to think they were “our” buildings, but I am no longer so foolish and childish. We see who 0wns them, and who thinks they own us. To me they are no longer American, and they now belong to a small class of rulers and stand as an edifice of their power over us and against us.

 

[DocRDS]

You’re not living in fucking reality if you honestly believe that’s a concern AT ALL. Let our children worry about strength ing the Federal government. Right now it is about to eat the American people for breakfast and do away with our liberty.

They say our Capitol was built to inspire awe in visiting foreign dignitaries. It has been turned to a new purpose. It has become a symbol of the gulf between the governed, and those who believe in their own right to rule over us. I for one will never look upon the idolatrous buildings of Washington DC the same way ever again. I used to think they were “our” buildings, but I am no longer so foolish and childish. We see who 0wns them, and who thinks they own us. To me they are no longer American, and they now belong to a small class of rulers and stand as an edifice of their power over us and against us.

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it.

Let's use small ideas and go step by step so you don't get lost.

1) The government is too powerful
2) A weak government has been shown in the past to also be a problem
3) The trick is to find a balance between government power and personal freedom, and the current situation, govt is too powerful.
4) Going back to point (1), when you weaken the government, you must be careful not to weaken it so far that it becomes ineffective.

A simple visual number example: If our government is currently at a 7 on a scale of 1-10 and we agree (note: we agree!) that it is too powerful. What number is our goal? 0, 1, 2, etc??

Well if a government with 0 or 1 power was ineffectual during the revolution, don't repeat that lesson.

If anyone needs a reality check its someone who read what I posted and thought I was in favor of strengthening the government.

"Cut a lot but don't cut too much" is not the same as "Add on some more", but I am very old fashioned with words.

 

[The D]

A simple visual number example: If our government is currently at a 7 on a scale of 1-10 and we agree (note: we agree!) that it is too powerful. What number is our goal? 0, 1, 2, etc??

Well if a government with 0 or 1 power was ineffectual during the revolution, don't repeat that lesson.

What numbers do you think are represented by

a) the federal gov?

b) your ideal number?

And, why do you think the articles of confederation and the powers of the individual states couldn’t be effective at protecting the populace?

 

[Fig]

Were it so easy to change the equation like moving a slide rule. It isn’t. The power only goes one way, and once they have it we know they never give it up, ever. They may go dormant for a while, but when was the last time the Federal Government was scaled back?

It’s not just a continuum. It only goes one way.

 

[Choid]

What numbers do you think are represented by

a) the federal gov?

b) your ideal number?

And, why do you think the articles of confederation and the powers of the individual states couldn’t be effective at protecting the populace?

Mainly because they fell apart about as quickly as any government in history.

I think people on the right generally way overestimate just how libertarian the founding fathers, and thus the founding documents, were. There was never a sense that things like morality, speech and religion etc could not be governed. They just couldn't be governed at a federal level. So I guess what I am saying is that I pretty much agree with DocRDS, in that the issue is that federal power needs to be decreased to a lower level, say a 3 or 4 on his scale perhaps, but that in turn state power should be returned to what it was meant to be, as the concept of having states that have different policies for different wants rests squarely on the power of the states to make important policy decisions.

 

[308pirate]

Letting a handful of counties turn an entire state blue is unacceptable.

Time to take it back.

Edit: Appologies to @Rthur I'm a little spun up. The status quo can't support a free land.

@New York

 

[308pirate]

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it.

Let's use small ideas and go step by step so you don't get lost.

1) The government is too powerful
2) A weak government has been shown in the past to also be a problem
3) The trick is to find a balance between government power and personal freedom, and the current situation, govt is too powerful.
4) Going back to point (1), when you weaken the government, you must be careful not to weaken it so far that it becomes ineffective.

A simple visual number example: If our government is currently at a 7 on a scale of 1-10 and we agree (note: we agree!) that it is too powerful. What number is our goal? 0, 1, 2, etc??

Well if a government with 0 or 1 power was ineffectual during the revolution, don't repeat that lesson.

If anyone needs a reality check its someone who read what I posted and thought I was in favor of strengthening the government.

"Cut a lot but don't cut too much" is not the same as "Add on some more", but I am very old fashioned with words.

I'm more than willing to experience what a federal government at 1 on your scale will be like.

 

[DocRDS]

What numbers do you think are represented by

a) the federal gov?

b) your ideal number?

And, why do you think the articles of confederation and the powers of the individual states couldn’t be effective at protecting the populace?

Because they (Articles of Conf) didn't: the government was absolutely ineffective. That's why there was a convention in the first place.

As soon as I write down a number the local Hitler youth will be all over that like its some sort of commandment written in stone.

Its too high.

Just don't make it too low.

Is it really that hard to comprehend? You want some magic litmus test like I must agree it has to be 1 or I am a commie?

Fine: the number is e. Its only natural.

 

[Jim Out]

 

[BytorJr]

State's electoral college.
We don't allow a few populous states to dictate national votes, at least in theory these days.

R

If you're proposing a county-wide electoral college in states, I'd agree to that 100%. Not sure you can amend COTUS since the 10th would be an issue on that; but, any "red" state should pass this shit ASAP so that there is an electoral college of counties. THEN you're talking REAL HONEST-to-GOD local elections that count for a real score.

 

[Choid]

If you're proposing a county-wide electoral college in states, I'd agree to that 100%. Not sure you can amend COTUS since the 10th would be an issue on that; but, any "red" state should pass this shit ASAP so that there is an electoral college of counties. THEN you're talking REAL HONEST-to-GOD local elections that count for a real score.

If you amend the constitution that would supersede the 10th as the 10th specifically applies only to things not in the constitution or its amendments. But it wouldn't happen anyway.

 

[BytorJr]

If you amend the constitution that would supersede the 10th as the 10th specifically applies only to things not in the constitution or its amendments. But it wouldn't happen anyway.

The 10th would have to be mentioned and it'd be a "clause" or something that would still give states rights as in 10th, but force these mini-electoral colleges. Yes, you are correct. Never will it happen; and no I'm not smoking...or snorting...or anything else.

 

[Fig]

The Marshal Court ended in 1835. Our real problems did not start until the 1st Progressive movement of the 1890s, and the nakba of the "Progressive Amendments", which are only now coming into their full fruition to destroy our Republic.

 

[The D]

Mainly because they fell apart about as quickly as any government in history.

I think people on the right generally way overestimate just how libertarian the founding fathers, and thus the founding documents, were. There was never a sense that things like morality, speech and religion etc could not be governed. They just couldn't be governed at a federal level. The whole concept of incorporating the bill of rights to the states was a progressive era shift, and even then it required the 14th amendment. So I guess what I am saying is that I pretty much agree with DocRDS, in that the issue is that federal power needs to be decreased to a lower level, say a 3 or 4 on his scale perhaps, but that in turn state power should be returned to what it was meant to be, as the concept of having states that have different policies for different wants rests squarely on the power of the states to make important policy decisions.

Because they (Articles of Conf) didn't: the government was absolutely ineffective. That's why there was a convention in the first place.

As soon as I write down a number the local Hitler youth will be all over that like its some sort of commandment written in stone.

Its too high.

Just don't make it too low.

Is it really that hard to comprehend? You want some magic litmus test like I must agree it has to be 1 or I am a commie?

Fine: the number is e. Its only natural.

Are you guys going to be able to handle a critique of the constitution that involves its drafting because it contained enough weasel-y language to expand gov power? If I’m just going to be called an idiot and a commie I’ll just go bullshit with my friends, they’ll at least make me laugh as we bust each other’s balls…

All I see here(the pit as a whole) is bitching and moaning about the federal gov being too massive and overstepping it’s bounds. This also always centers around the argument that “If these fucking politicians just started following the constitution all the problems would be fixed”. Realistically the constitution either wasn’t strong enough to limit gov growth -or- it opened the doors for the expansion(thank you, Lysander Spooner). The Articles did a better job of limiting gov power and expansion and they, along with individual state power, could have been enough to properly run a country.

 

[Choid]

Are you guys going to be able to handle a critique of the constitution that involves its drafting because it contained enough weasel-y language to expand gov power? If I’m just going to be called an idiot and a commie I’ll just go bullshit with my friends, they’ll at least make me laugh as we bust each other’s balls…

All I see here(the pit as a whole) is bitching and moaning about the federal gov being too massive and overstepping it’s bounds. This also always centers around the argument that “If these fucking politicians just started following the constitution all the problems would be fixed”. Realistically the constitution either wasn’t strong enough to limit gov growth -or- it opened the doors for the expansion(thank you, Lysander Spooner). The Articles did a better job of limiting gov power and expansion and they, along with individual state power, could have been enough to properly run a country.

I kind of think that was the point I was trying to make. I don't think the articles were perfect, but I think the constitution is a far less libertarian document than people like to think these days, when it suits their purposes. But that is often the point I am trying to make, and also end up getting called a commie, in that screaming "it's against my constitutional rights" is generally a shitty argument because people think far more is protected than really is, so what is really necessary is to make a substantive argument against what is bad policy, and why it is bad policy, not to fall back on saying stupid shit and hoping you get "yass kween" from a bunch of like minded people while never being able to move the needle in your direction because you haven't said anything of substance. So I absolutely welcome this point of view, and any discussion of it. It moves past the bullshit that usually stops stuff up here.

On the articles, they were probably a better framework but not enough. Do I know what would have been just enough? No. I wish I did.

 

[DocRDS]

Are you guys going to be able to handle a critique of the constitution that involves its drafting because it contained enough weasel-y language to expand gov power? If I’m just going to be called an idiot and a commie I’ll just go bullshit with my friends, they’ll at least make me laugh as we bust each other’s balls…

All I see here(the pit as a whole) is bitching and moaning about the federal gov being too massive and overstepping it’s bounds. This also always centers around the argument that “If these fucking politicians just started following the constitution all the problems would be fixed”. Realistically the constitution either wasn’t strong enough to limit gov growth -or- it opened the doors for the expansion(thank you, Lysander Spooner). The Articles did a better job of limiting gov power and expansion and they, along with individual state power, could have been enough to properly run a country.

You mean like the commerce clause and necessary and proper clause? (habeaus corpus is another, but rarely used--suspend the 'unless Congress....')

Then yeah.

Income tax is another that need serious fixing--I know that was amended in, but there needs to be an enumerated right protecting property.

Executive Orders.

Give me longer than 30 seconds and I could probably have multiple pages.

We'll just have to disagree on the articles of confederation. No way were they going to work. They failed.
Equally you could say our current constituion has failed in the other direction. Valid point.

The constitution was designed for George Washington. He was a special person. It needs to be designed for our current crop of thieves.

 

[The D]

I kind of think that was the point I was trying to make. I don't think the articles were perfect, but I think the constitution is a far less libertarian document than people like to think these days, when it suits their purposes. But that is often the point I am trying to make, and also end up getting called a commie, in that screaming "it's against my constitutional rights" is generally a shitty argument because people think far more is protected than really is, so what is really necessary is to make a substantive argument against what is bad policy, and why it is bad policy, not to fall back on saying stupid shit and hoping you get "yass kween" from a bunch of like minded people while never being able to move the needle in your direction because you haven't said anything of substance. So I absolutely welcome this point of view, and any discussion of it. It moves past the bullshit that usually stops stuff up here.

On the articles, they were probably a better framework but not enough. Do I know what would have been just enough? No. I wish I did.

My bad, I didn’t read that right then

You mean like the commerce clause and necessary and proper clause? (habeaus corpus is another, but rarely used--suspend the 'unless Congress....')

Then yeah.

Income tax is another that need serious fixing--I know that was amended in, but there needs to be an enumerated right protecting property.

Executive Orders.

Give me longer than 30 seconds and I could probably have multiple pages.

We'll just have to disagree on the articles of confederation. No way were they going to work. They failed.
Equally you could say our current constituion has failed in the other direction. Valid point.

The constitution was designed for George Washington. He was a special person. It needs to be designed for our current crop of thieves.

How do you think the Articles couldn’t work?

 

[Choid]

My bad, I didn’t read that right then

How do you think the Articles couldn’t work?

I think it is a good question, and brings up a good discussion. I am not sure we need to start at the Articles, since they are not operative, they are only a reference. Anyway, the Constitution is what it is, I am not wedded to it as an article of faith, but I do think that, in the current day and age, we would only get a worse version if we ever tried to rewrite. But like I said, I have no emotional attachment to it. I do have an emotional attachment to reality and to good governance, and I think that by screaming "the constitution" all the time, conservatives can lose their tether to the other two.

 

[Snipe260]

Here!

 

[DocRDS]

My bad, I didn’t read that right then

How do you think the Articles couldn’t work?

Because they didn't. I don't have to think about it. Its a matter of history.

John Adams couldn't get a treaty with the UK
Jefferson complained we couldn't defend ourselves from pirates.
Inflation was nuts
Shays rebellion

Don't argue with me.
Argue with the founding fathers. They saw fit to alter it. I am in no position to dispute their wisdom, even if we do need a further fix of our current govt. The Articles lasted barely 10 years.

 

[Animal357]

The takers now outnumber the makers. We are terminally wounded, just waiting for the bleed out.

The only solution is the Divided States of America. Push the litburds out and don't let them back in.

 

[Fig]

I’m not arguing the Articles of Confederation we’re adequate. I am arguing that we need to restore the Constitution by repealing The Progressive Amendments. Our Federal Government is totally out of control because the states are powerless and meaningless. They are no more than rump municipal governments. Our federal government literally believes that we now serve it, and they have a right to rule over us forever. Just look at HR1. It is a declaration of war against Americans and what’s left of our Constitution.

We are now post federalism and post America. It is only a question of how much slavery and deprivation we will take. I’m done, so I’m just waiting for the rest of you to wake the fuck up. I’m not going to be John Brown, but I will sure as hell be Patrick Henry.

 

[Fig]

It’s not magic that’s destroying our country. Neither is it inevitable. It’s just a question of how many rapes of your daughter in the women’s bathroom you’re ok with, how much of you’re income you’ll let them steal, and how much discrimination and racism you’re ok with.

 

[NoDopes]

We are now post federalism and post America. It is only a question of how much slavery and deprivation we will take. I’m done, so I’m just waiting for the rest of you to wake the fuck up. I’m not going to be John Brown, but I will sure as hell be Patrick Henry.

Is it time yet?

 

[Snuby642]

Yes it's past time.

 

[Bender]

It’s not magic that’s destroying our country. Neither is it inevitable. It’s just a question of how many rapes of your daughter in the women’s bathroom you’re ok with, how much of you’re income you’ll let them steal, and how much discrimination and racism you’re ok with.

 

[addertooth]

Interesting views. They focus on weaknesses of the Government. I tend to focus on the inherent weaknesses of the voters.
Those who are highly dependent on government services tend to move into cities, where government support services are more readily available. More often than not, they are people who have made bad choices in life. They tend to think "emotionally" rather than pragmatically. They are looking for someone to lift them out of the problems their bad choices made. They will ALWAYS love whatever politician offers them MORE support. As they are emotional voters, they will be quick to side with (vote) whatever cause/group is promoted as being oppressed/downtrodden. They do not require real and rational proof for their positions.

Many big cites have added bail reform, as well as a cessation of arrest for theft under one thousand dollars. If a city-dweller is hungry, he need only go to the local store and steal 500 dollars worth of groceries. He will face no consequences (no arrest and no charges). If a dweller from the country-side is hungry, and shoots a deer (without the proper season and license/tag), he loses his truck and gun, pays onerous fines, and may face jail time. In many cases his truck was his only means to get to work. People from the country face stiffer consequences for the same level of harm (taking food).

We have the commonly discussed "Disneyland Problem". If a home is a Democracy (where the three children get the same vote as the parents), the children will vote for everyone to go to Disneyland every day. The parents (who work the jobs and pay the bills) will be outvoted. Eventually the family will go bankrupts, the house will be repossessed, and family will find itself on the streets. There needs to be the recognition that the parents (who pay the bills) should have more "weighing" to their votes. Currently, everyone's votes in the USA are weighed the same.

The only fix is unconstitutional, but there is one. It would work like this:
For every thousand dollars you pay into taxes, but do NOT get back as a refund, you get one extra vote (up to a maximum of 10). The limit of 10 is prevent millionaires from controlling the vote. With this system, everyone gets at least one vote. Those who are paying in MORE to support the nation, have a greater say in WHO gets elected. Those who are dependent upon government services and support only get a single vote. This will put the Adults back in charge of "home", and not get outvoted by the "children". This will make big cities less of a "powerhouse of the liberal movement". If a person who pays for initiatives with their taxes, is willing to pay for what they want, their motives are less questioned. Currently, people are demanding pie-in-the-sky, because they know their aspirations will be paid for by "some rich guy". It won't be the burden of those who earn little or nothing.

 

[Fig]

Don’t kid yourself. The left is no longer patient enough for the long slide to tyranny. They demand communism now, and they will most certainly attack first. They have done so every single solitary time in history. When every single policy you advocate is based on force it is a logical imperative that force is all you understand.

 

[Inifinty]

Parable of the Fig Tree.

Learn it and you might understand there is no really fixing things until the end of this age.

There will be ups and downs like labor pains. But the lies, deceit, and manipulation only gets worse until then.

 

[Limedust]

This wouldn't even fix America.

 

[SilentStalkr]

Because they (Articles of Conf) didn't: the government was absolutely ineffective. That's why there was a convention in the first place.

As soon as I write down a number the local Hitler youth will be all over that like its some sort of commandment written in stone.

Its too high.

Just don't make it too low.

Is it really that hard to comprehend? You want some magic litmus test like I must agree it has to be 1 or I am a commie?

Fine: the number is e. Its only natural.

One could argue that the gov is largely ineffective now.

 

[SQ54]

Interesting views. They focus on weaknesses of the Government. I tend to focus on the inherent weaknesses of the voters.
Those who are highly dependent on government services tend to move into cities, where government support services are more readily available. More often than not, they are people who have made bad choices in life. They tend to think "emotionally" rather than pragmatically. They are looking for someone to lift them out of the problems their bad choices made. They will ALWAYS love whatever politician offers them MORE support. As they are emotional voters, they will be quick to side with (vote) whatever cause/group is promoted as being oppressed/downtrodden. They do not require real and rational proof for their positions.

Many big cites have added bail reform, as well as a cessation of arrest for theft under one thousand dollars. If a city-dweller is hungry, he need only go to the local store and steal 500 dollars worth of groceries. He will face no consequences (no arrest and no charges). If a dweller from the country-side is hungry, and shoots a deer (without the proper season and license/tag), he loses his truck and gun, pays onerous fines, and may face jail time. In many cases his truck was his only means to get to work. People from the country face stiffer consequences for the same level of harm (taking food).

We have the commonly discussed "Disneyland Problem". If a home is a Democracy (where the three children get the same vote as the parents), the children will vote for everyone to go to Disneyland every day. The parents (who work the jobs and pay the bills) will be outvoted. Eventually the family will go bankrupts, the house will be repossessed, and family will find itself on the streets. There needs to be the recognition that the parents (who pay the bills) should have more "weighing" to their votes. Currently, everyone's votes in the USA are weighed the same.

The only fix is unconstitutional, but there is one. It would work like this:
For every thousand dollars you pay into taxes, but do NOT get back as a refund, you get one extra vote (up to a maximum of 10). The limit of 10 is prevent millionaires from controlling the vote. With this system, everyone gets at least one vote. Those who are paying in MORE to support the nation, have a greater say in WHO gets elected. Those who are dependent upon government services and support only get a single vote. This will put the Adults back in charge of "home", and not get outvoted by the "children". This will make big cities less of a "powerhouse of the liberal movement". If a person who pays for initiatives with their taxes, is willing to pay for what they want, their motives are less questioned. Currently, people are demanding pie-in-the-sky, because they know their aspirations will be paid for by "some rich guy". It won't be the burden of those who earn little or nothing.

That is too complicated. If you get any kind of government check, except military, no vote. Veterans get to vote their whole life. Other retirees taking a SS check, no vote.

 

[Snuby642]

That is too complicated. If you get any kind of government check, except military, no vote. Veterans get to vote their whole life. Other retirees taking a SS check, no vote.

Kiss my wrinkled ass.
I'm a veteran and also worked defense my entire life.

I paid heavily to ss the entire time.
I recieve a retirement check and ss monthly.

I earned them both and have serious issues with commies like you.

 

[MadDuner]

Voting is part of deciding how government spends the money they get from taxation.
If you didn't or don't pay taxes - then you shouldn't get a say in how they spend the money.
This would exclude the generational welfare whores and illegal aliens - thank you very much.

People that paid into the Social Security system their entire life certainly should get a say.
They put in their time AND tax dollars to build the government we have now..... for better or worse.

How do we fix this mess?
The only way I can think of that would be starting over completely.
We will continue to kick the can down the road and wish we weren't headed for the eminent failure we are headed for.

 

[Bullfrog08]

Im good with if you own land, a home, condo, town home, RV, etc. you can vote. If you want to vote, then you need to have skin in the game. I'm pretty sure this original rule excluded the freeloaders from having a say.