1188
Comments (101)
sorted by:
73
Ferrous_Tarkus 73 points ago +73 / -0

Net Taxpayers.

41
markolbb 41 points ago +41 / -0

I think also should be able to pass the citizenship test. People then argue that voting is a right so having a test would exclude people. But if somebody is illiterate, they can't give us a book report. If someone doesn't have the basic understanding of how our government works, they can't guide the future of our political system.

24
deleted 24 points ago +24 / -0
9
markolbb 9 points ago +9 / -0

Excellent point!

5
HanginChad 5 points ago +5 / -0

The supreme court decided that the constitution gives you the right to vote and doesn't specify ID as a requirement so people don't need to show an ID to vote.

The constitution also doesn't specify that you need an ID for your second amendment right, and yet you have to show one to get a gun.

Some states don't require license, but there's always a background check, unless it's at a gun show.

2
markolbb 2 points ago +2 / -0

That dang gun-show-loophole! That's how felons get machineguns! /s

1
GarudaDarkblack 1 point ago +1 / -0

Where do you need a license to own a firearm?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
9
Ferrous_Tarkus 9 points ago +9 / -0

I can approve that.

6
ProgramNerd 6 points ago +6 / -0

"Merit-Based Voting"

We need Merit-Based Voting that gives equality to all races and genders. Call it Progressive Voting and act like it's some sort of "fuck you" to Republicans for their imaginary slights against minority voters so libs get all aboard. They won't research it anyways.

We should put voting back in the hands of tax-paying, property owners. The most successful Americans (merit-based voting) and least communistic of us would be making the decisions again. It doesn't differentiate based on race or gender and it would naturally send voting power away from high density voting blocs (which always vote the same due to proximity and group-think) into more varied demographics, just like our founding father's originally intended.

Best of all, is that after we achieve merit-based voting, all we would have to do is sit back and wait as society naturally corrected itself like a pendulum on all the important issues. Gun rights? Defended by property owners. Small businesses? Loved by property owners most of all. Who is most invested in raising and schooling children? People who have them, often times raising them in a family home. Why should a bunch of college kids who are hardly even old enough to have a kid, be deciding how you school, teach and raise yours?

4
kwall2020 4 points ago +4 / -0

voting is not a right, it's a privilege

9
johnrambo 9 points ago +9 / -0

This is what I support, taxpaying citizens of the US. Been saying that for 20 years now.

8
DasBurt 8 points ago +8 / -0

Net taxpayers is my preference, as well. No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation.

2
Kekkin4Kembla 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just a fuckin ID to prove citizenship would suffice

1
DasBurt 1 point ago +1 / -0

It would be great start!

1
HiddenDekuScrub 1 point ago +1 / -0

The real answer. Chinese own land, but there's plenty of net taxpayers.

1
droden 1 point ago +1 / -0

do you could all state and local as well as federal taxes?

2
Ferrous_Tarkus 2 points ago +2 / -0

Net Federal Taxpayer = you vote in federal elections.

States and Localities = they set the rules.

44
Alphahorizon 44 points ago +44 / -0

China would have a huge say then as they own tons of land in the former free nation of America.

57
Getfuckedcommietrash 57 points ago +57 / -0

So ban foreign countries from owning land in the us.

26
Alphahorizon 26 points ago +26 / -0

Some have called for just this, and were ignored. We have been selling our land for years to foreign states.

15
Instagram 15 points ago +15 / -0

we are the only idiots in the world who allow non us born citizens (ilhan omar) to hold a position in our government.

7
Alphahorizon 7 points ago +7 / -0

Coming from being born and raised in South Minneapolis, I fully am aware of the idiocy of it all. Thankfully I have since left. But yeah....The water here makes people really, really stupid. Not sure why some of us dont get that dumbed down.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
3
suckmycorona 3 points ago +3 / -0

Bin Ladens entered the chat.

39
CommieCrats 39 points ago +39 / -0

BAN FOREIGN LAND OWNERSHIP. CITIZENS ONLY!

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
24
CertainlyNotEdward 24 points ago +25 / -1

Not really feasible. You'll see one group buying and consolidating as much land as possible to prevent people from voting, and you'll see another group selling 1 sqft parcels of land to allow people to vote.

It'd be anarchy, and not the good kind.

15
webthing 15 points ago +15 / -0

Haven't you been paying attention.

The only anything on agenda is taking more of our rights

11
OGpsywar 11 points ago +11 / -0

"Only those who own a piece of this country should have a say in who makes the laws"

Does Chyna owning our Congress and Senators count?

2
theorymeltfool1 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ban foreign land ownership. Other countries already do that.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
Kongol626 4 points ago +4 / -0

While I understand this idea and why, this will be abused. First what about my broke ass lol. And second what will happen is a developer or corporation can just by up land and force you to not vote.

4
Squeaker 4 points ago +4 / -0

Only of they plan on preventing foreigners from buying it then.

8
Icepck [S] 8 points ago +8 / -0

Obviously it isn't the only requirement. You still have to be a citizen, lived here for however many years, not a felon, all that stuff. I'm saying to add the land owning requirement back.

3
IncredibleMrE1 3 points ago +3 / -0

And repeal the 19th Amendment.

3
TONSofFREEDOM 3 points ago +3 / -0

As a non land owner I agree. Only issue is Soros would buy all his militants 2 sq/ft of alaska

3
Gerbaski 3 points ago +3 / -0

Land ownership legal for US CITIZENS ONLY and REPEAL THE 17TH AMENDMENT as well.

3
walrusescapades 3 points ago +3 / -0

a better way is only MARRIED and PROPERTIED men can vote. that's where my money is at.

3
Conservativechick 3 points ago +3 / -0

It sounds elitist, but's it's really about whether you have an investment or not. People who don't own stock in a company, don't get to vote on it's board.

3
njb425 3 points ago +3 / -0

Um no

3
dadauggroot 3 points ago +3 / -0

I honestly think that we should end universal suffrage. I think that married males should have the right to vote for the following reasons:

  1. families, not landonwers or individuals, are the building block of society.
  2. married men, as the leaders of their homes, have a vested interest in keeping society sane and functioning. There will be some variation about what this means and not all married men will want the same thing, sure.
3
cyber_acolyte 3 points ago +3 / -0

Stable, provable employment would be enough I think. If you are taking my money, I should have a say on where it goes.

1
Kmicanakreku 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or at least an iq test.

1
VoterIDMatters 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah, inb4 china bought up all the land through american proxies

1
Thep1mp 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nice. You think you own your property? You simply hold a deed of title- you don’t own it. Don’t pay your property tax and see how you really “own” your property.

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +1 / -0

This wouldn't work anymore. There's no free land left to buy and most people live where it would be impossible to afford even a foot of land.

Also commies would just crowdfund buying farms or empty lots and then writing deeds for square inches of land.

1
pwnahontas 1 point ago +2 / -1

Not a fan of this idea. Got based family that won't be able to own a house. This is essentially a poll tax with a really big price tag. The live in an economically depressed rural area. And what about fixed income elderly that live in assisted housing?

Nah... Voter ID I am absolutely fine with. Land ownership is a hard no.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Officialglowieaccoun 1 point ago +1 / -0

And repeal the 19th

1
isitpedanticenough 1 point ago +1 / -0

This, 1000x

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Wowzer_papi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Unfathomably based

1
Kagakansas316 1 point ago +4 / -3

Fuck that noise

1
Zxc26 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think you would be surprised how much land belongs to China and other countries.

1
BenLurking 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hate to burst that bubble but now that global elite pretty much own everything this is a recipe for disaster... Might of been the solution before the fed or before we went off the gold standard, but once the dollar collapses and the economy is destroyed its own a matter of time before you can't pay the tax on your home and it's forfeited away.

1
purplemer 1 point ago +1 / -0

It worked on the native Indians.. correct?

1
y_do_i_need_to_hide 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's a wild one, but check this out. I think we should bring back the citizenship requirement for voting.

1
ineX0r2 1 point ago +1 / -0

Absolutely. I was stopped from owning property in 2020 by Fraudci The Commie Goblin. But assuming elections were conducted properly and legally, I would gladly give up my vote in order to return to the original system. It was a far, far more sensible voting system.

1
LaPastillaEscarlata 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good luck with that, everyone who pays taxes must be able to vote or you can only tax those who vote. No taxation without representation. And, since everyone pays some form of taxes (sales tax) then everyone gets to vote.

1
GiveMe1776 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep

1
revengencer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Most have this already. They didnt give a f about it. all those P.O. boxes and schools listed.

1
eplettner 1 point ago +1 / -0

I've always liked this idea. People who own a property are more aware of what is going on.

1
Lord_Nekro 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hell yes!

1
TheWilderness 1 point ago +1 / -0

A bridge too far when the simple measure of citizen voter ID solves every problem.

1
GarudaDarkblack 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sounds good to me. I own 20 acres. I'd vote on our behalf.

1
Highball 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dems would just sell tiny plots of land for voting rights. 1"x1"

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Icepck [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have never thought of that before. Nice.

1
mass55th 1 point ago +1 / -0

icepack...tried to reply to your post to me, but wasn't able to save it. It just kept saying "saving." Went back to my messages, and nothing is there for me to reply to. So here it is again...that is, if the system saves it this time:

Of course I've never felt like my vote counted. All we've ever had in this State the majority of the time are Democrats in power, because the New York City area, and Democrat-run cities like Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany continually re-elect them. I live in a small city in a red county. We don't even have a Congressional Representative yet (22nd District), because 2500 disputed absentee ballots are being reviewed, in court by a Democrat Judge.

As far as your other question, it's a what-if question, so I'm not going to offer a reply. I don't know how many of the millions of people who live on Manhattan Island, or its surrounding suburbs own homes or not, so it's not a question I can honestly answer. You're assuming everyone who lives there rents. They don't.

I know I had ancestors who settled in New Amsterdam, may have owned property, but never had the right to vote. I've had ancestors who came here on the Mayflower, ancestors who were Patriots, and family members who served in WWII and my brother in Vietnam. I've worked and paid taxes since I was 16 years old. You want to tell me I can't vote because I don't own property?

1
Icepck [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

I suggested they bring back the requirement in addition to the ones already there. I like seeing the replies and it has made me think twice about it, but my original thought was it stops foreigners (from other states or counties) from setting up an address and voting without a financial commitment to that area. Admittedly it was a clumsy thought that was meant to address election fraud. I see problems with it, but I see problems without it. I would move myself to the undecided column now.

I like the idea of submitting ballots with your tax payment. No payin'=no sayin'.

1
mass55th 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fraud of any kind would be very hard to control in this country, because nobody wants to enforce the laws on the book. If someone can make money from committing fraud, voter or otherwise, it's never going to go away. A lot of people are saying that election laws need to be changed, but as we've seen in Pa., Ga., and other's, that state officials violated election laws, circumvented them, and nothing was done. The lower courts ignored it, as did the Supreme Court. The S.C. ignored their own precedent that was set in 2000 with Gore vs. Bush, and let fraud occur. I'm 73, and the last one left in my family, and since longevity doesn't exist in my family (oldest lived to 74/youngest died at 51), it's quite possible that the vote I cast on November 3rd, may be my last in a Presidential race. How do I know it wasn't voided out by an illegal ballot? The fact that Republicans approved unlimited voter fraud on November 6th, I will never vote for another Republican candidate for as long as I live, not even if he has Jesus as his running mate.

1
Petro92 1 point ago +1 / -0

The only people allowed to vote should be legal, law-abiding citizens that pay taxes. The dollar should be backed by the labor of the people and the people in charge of the printing of money.

1
AdeptTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hell, I can only afford renting at the moment but I'd agree with this.

1
Friar_Pede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Eliminate property tax rent first.

1
Rock_Flag_Eagle 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’m not currently a landowner and I’d be open to this at this point.