The founders didn't because it would've led to an aristocracy similar to what it was in feudal England. If that were the case nearly everyone would not own land. The only people who would own land would be robber barons.
Property owners vote to make it easier to own property. Especially small ones, like local family farms. There are (or used to be) many more of them than people wealthy enough to own lots of property.
The idea you're saying is actually the reality we live in because of the liberal politics we have succumbed to. Not because of the conservative policies I'm suggesting.
It's counterintuitive because of all the BS they feed us. But it's true. There are more obstacles to property ownership NOW than there were when landowners were the only voters.
While what you propose may appear to be a good idea, I don't believe it is.
This notion has persisted since Athens. Eventually it leads down a bad road. The alternative, (what we have now), also leads down a bad road if unchecked. We're seeing it today. Basically a democrat vote is bought with handouts.
This is the argument given in the anti-federalist papers. Freeholders failed 7-1.
Under every view of the subject, it seems indispensable that the Mass of Citizens should not be without a voice, in making the laws which they are to obey, and in choosing the Magistrates, who are to administer them, and if the only alternative be between an equal and universal right of suffrage for each branch of the Government and a confinement of the entire right to a part of the Citizens, it is better that those having the greater interest at stake namely that of property and persons both, should be deprived of half their share in the Government; than, that those having the lesser interest, that of personal rights only, should be deprived of the whole
The founders didn't because it would've led to an aristocracy similar to what it was in feudal England. If that were the case nearly everyone would not own land. The only people who would own land would be robber barons.
Just curious.
Do you own property?
Property owners vote to make it easier to own property. Especially small ones, like local family farms. There are (or used to be) many more of them than people wealthy enough to own lots of property.
The idea you're saying is actually the reality we live in because of the liberal politics we have succumbed to. Not because of the conservative policies I'm suggesting.
It's counterintuitive because of all the BS they feed us. But it's true. There are more obstacles to property ownership NOW than there were when landowners were the only voters.
While what you propose may appear to be a good idea, I don't believe it is.
This notion has persisted since Athens. Eventually it leads down a bad road. The alternative, (what we have now), also leads down a bad road if unchecked. We're seeing it today. Basically a democrat vote is bought with handouts.
This is the argument given in the anti-federalist papers. Freeholders failed 7-1.
I believe this was Madison.
You can read the whole thing here:
https://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1786-1800/the-anti-federalist-papers/qualifications-of-suffrage-(august-7-10).php