If only 1/2 of America pays taxes, I wonder which half that could be? Theoretically what would happen if that 1/2 didn’t file in April? Keep in mind Boston Tea Party was about taxation too.
Comments (84)
sorted by:
If only 1/2 of America pays taxes, I wonder which half that could be? Theoretically what would happen if that 1/2 didn’t file in April? Keep in mind Boston Tea Party was about taxation too.
The Boston tea party was carried out by men who thought only land owning men should vote. (A good thing)
Taxation without representation DOESN'T MEAN on an individual basis.
Also, yall realize that they don't send people out May 1st to come and get the delinquent taxpayers right??
It'll be years before they arrest you.
If only we had listened to them
I feel like it was a dirty mind fuck to tell women their place isn't in the home raising kids, but in the workplace. Who benefits from that arrangement? We literally doubled our workforce, raising competition and lowering pay. Same thing for voting, the man of the house used to vote for his whole house, keeping the issues focused on a strong nuclear family and politicians had to run on policies that benefitted the family. Now politicians run on how much free shit we can give those who are higher on the "oppressed ladder" I had chills run down my spine when EVERY SINGLE DEM CANDIDATE raised their hand for being in favor of giving illegal aliens free Healthcare, while we still have veterans living in the streets. Fuck these people, it's time to right the ship.
They mind fucked us good. Intellectually I believe this 100% but I still feel like a jerk saying it to liberal women irl.
The socialists benefit.
I am not ashamed that my role as a female is to be in the home. I am proud, not oppressed at all.
The only purpose of suffrage was to increase their support by increasing the number of working class people and increasing poverty.
These policies are ANTI WOMEN. Feminism is anti women.
I think female land owners, or anyone who is a citizen with a positive yearly income should be able to vote. Land owning's the "strict" version but I'm open to someone's taxes proving they're a net payer rather than a dependent or a beneficiary being the requirement. (Or have served in the military with present status or non-dishonorable discharge.)
This will disenfranchise most females, but that's not because they're female, it's because of different priorities and ability levels.
The negative I see is the rich could "buy" voting rights. Toss a property under your wife's name. Give your slacker son a paper salary.
I disagree. If you're a net positive contributor who doesn't own land then you don't understand wealth or have no investment in your future and your lineage and I definitely don't think you should vote.
The idea that each sex has their own interests and needs to be represented i disagree with. We have shared interests. That is what needs to be advanced through the government.
There aren't a lot of issues they need to be controlling in the first place. And there are plenty of ways to have influence without having a vote.
Women should be encouraged to be married, not to work to buy land to secure their "voting rights." They will have much more effect that way and people who can't see that are pretty brainwashed.
Have you met women who are in their 30s and unmarried because they chose their career?
Mentally ill. And many of them later in life end up regretting their decision.
I dont think women who go against a strongly ingrained natural instinct for worldly goals should be telling any of us what to do. Their logic is nonexistent, their egos have taken over and they are ready to prove they are just as good as men. They don't represent me or my interests at all and more importantly I think their goals lead to a decline in society.
They have willing signed up for a life as a wage slave and think they've discovered Nirvana. Pardon my French, but they're fucking morons.
"Be the change you wish to see"
I don't want to see women in the rat race, and I don't see how that is an accomplishment.
Besides. I have much more influence as the wife of a business owner than I ever would on my own. Not only did I cofound the company and contribute equally to our initial goals and business plan, on a day to day basis I'm involved in purchasing, personnel, client selection and I am always consulted before any major decisions are made.
Why would I think women who either aren't smart enough to realize that their efforts are better felt in the home or are too selfish learn to compromise to find a husband to have more say than I do if it is moved to a landowner (not dependent) situation?