You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
4
zk3hf9dB on scored.co
1 month ago4 points(+0/-0/+4Score on mirror)2 children
My ancestors settled Wyoming. We built families and farms in the middle of nowhere. My ancestors were raising sheep, had a wife and kids, and were trying to build communities and such. There were others who came looking for free grass for their cattle herds. They would move with the herds throughout the plains. These men were not civilized, liked gambling and raping and pillaging. We called them "cowboys" but in those days it meant something completely different than what you'd see in the movies.
We had elections and we were losing the elections because the cattlemen could bring in as many cowboys as they wanted and win whatever election they needed. We wanted to build fences and roads, they wanted to make sure no one could do that. We ended up shooting each other rather often as one of our guys would build a fence and the cattlemen would come by and rip it down.
In the end we granted women the right to vote because it meant homesteaders had twice as many votes as the cowboys.
The idea that women would live by themselves was unthinkable at the time. It was literally impossible for a woman to survive in the West without a man to take care of her.
My proposal: Take away individual voting rights. Grant voting rights to real estate. If you own property, you get 1 vote. If that's community property (AKA a married couple owning that property) they have to agree to vote, or they send a delegate to vote for them.
Women don't like owning property because it's ridiculously hard work and requires they understand things like laws and contracts. Inevitably they screw something up and lose the rights to the property. Those smart enough to own property are probably smart enough to vote. At the very least we'll know they are voting with their property interests in mind.
Alternatively, if we really want to encourage white people to have kids, grant the father the right to vote on behalf of his minor children. If the kid is below 18, the dad gets to vote for him. At the same time, take away voting rights from anyone getting assistance from the government, or even anyone employed by the government as it's a conflict of interest.
1 month ago5 points(+0/-0/+5Score on mirror)2 children
> My proposal: Take away individual voting rights. Grant voting rights to real estate. If you own property, you get 1 vote.
So how many votes does BlackRock get?
> "Corporations are people, my friend." ~ Mitt Romney, August 11, 2011
I like the idea, but it needs to be constrained to natural persons and only to those living on developed land in a single continuous lot. This way jews can't sell the right to vote with 0.00001% of an acre, or an entire extended family claiming voting rights because they're all co-owners or beneficiaries to an abandoned house in Detroit.
It's going to have to be very strictly defined, but I like the idea in principle. It's just that we have too many clever jokers these days.
BlackRock isn't a person and doesn't get any votes.
If someone owns a piece of property and they lease it out to BlackRock, they can vote, however. Not BlackRock.
The history of corporations in the US is crazy. We need to get rid of them. We used to require people to create temporary trusts that would expire after a certain number of years or die with one of its members dying. The reason was simple: We wanted to know who to blame when crimes are committed.
We should abolish the modern corporation altogether. If you want to bring a lot of people together, write contracts for each of them. Don't create new fictions.
> people living on the land
Yes, that should absolutely be a requirement. Absentee owners don't get a vote. People who rent their property out and live somewhere else don't get to vote, and the leasee doesn't get to vote either.
Actually, here's my real proposal. It's really simple. On election day, or the day before election day, muster the militia. If you show up in good physical condition with all equipment in good working order, you get to vote. If you aren't physically fit or don't have all your kit in working order, no vote for you.
Then hold a range test. Those who score high enough pass and get to vote. Those who can't shoot straight don't get to vote.
In short, only people who are physically able to fight get to vote. No one else counts.
The next day, or the same day, have all the militia men show up with all of their gear ready for battle. Hold elections by having them stand on the side they agree with. If people disagree with the count, they can start shooting each other then and there and get it over with. Otherwise, have a ceremony where the losing side bends the knee or surrenders their weapons and acquiesces to the winners. Do this every year or every other year and you're guaranteed the vote will always be fair and you'll never have a civil war.
1 month ago3 points(+0/-0/+3Score on mirror)1 child
take it back to 1779: only land-owning white men in good standing with their community may vote.
the reason is that the person voting must have a stake in the nation. they must be a tax payer and most likely the head of a family, and they'll be responsible for defending the nation as required. they also can't be an outcast of their community and probably shouldn't have any felonies.
We had elections and we were losing the elections because the cattlemen could bring in as many cowboys as they wanted and win whatever election they needed. We wanted to build fences and roads, they wanted to make sure no one could do that. We ended up shooting each other rather often as one of our guys would build a fence and the cattlemen would come by and rip it down.
In the end we granted women the right to vote because it meant homesteaders had twice as many votes as the cowboys.
The idea that women would live by themselves was unthinkable at the time. It was literally impossible for a woman to survive in the West without a man to take care of her.
My proposal: Take away individual voting rights. Grant voting rights to real estate. If you own property, you get 1 vote. If that's community property (AKA a married couple owning that property) they have to agree to vote, or they send a delegate to vote for them.
Women don't like owning property because it's ridiculously hard work and requires they understand things like laws and contracts. Inevitably they screw something up and lose the rights to the property. Those smart enough to own property are probably smart enough to vote. At the very least we'll know they are voting with their property interests in mind.
Alternatively, if we really want to encourage white people to have kids, grant the father the right to vote on behalf of his minor children. If the kid is below 18, the dad gets to vote for him. At the same time, take away voting rights from anyone getting assistance from the government, or even anyone employed by the government as it's a conflict of interest.
So how many votes does BlackRock get?
> "Corporations are people, my friend." ~ Mitt Romney, August 11, 2011
I like the idea, but it needs to be constrained to natural persons and only to those living on developed land in a single continuous lot. This way jews can't sell the right to vote with 0.00001% of an acre, or an entire extended family claiming voting rights because they're all co-owners or beneficiaries to an abandoned house in Detroit.
It's going to have to be very strictly defined, but I like the idea in principle. It's just that we have too many clever jokers these days.
If someone owns a piece of property and they lease it out to BlackRock, they can vote, however. Not BlackRock.
The history of corporations in the US is crazy. We need to get rid of them. We used to require people to create temporary trusts that would expire after a certain number of years or die with one of its members dying. The reason was simple: We wanted to know who to blame when crimes are committed.
We should abolish the modern corporation altogether. If you want to bring a lot of people together, write contracts for each of them. Don't create new fictions.
> people living on the land
Yes, that should absolutely be a requirement. Absentee owners don't get a vote. People who rent their property out and live somewhere else don't get to vote, and the leasee doesn't get to vote either.
Actually, here's my real proposal. It's really simple. On election day, or the day before election day, muster the militia. If you show up in good physical condition with all equipment in good working order, you get to vote. If you aren't physically fit or don't have all your kit in working order, no vote for you.
Then hold a range test. Those who score high enough pass and get to vote. Those who can't shoot straight don't get to vote.
In short, only people who are physically able to fight get to vote. No one else counts.
The next day, or the same day, have all the militia men show up with all of their gear ready for battle. Hold elections by having them stand on the side they agree with. If people disagree with the count, they can start shooting each other then and there and get it over with. Otherwise, have a ceremony where the losing side bends the knee or surrenders their weapons and acquiesces to the winners. Do this every year or every other year and you're guaranteed the vote will always be fair and you'll never have a civil war.
the reason is that the person voting must have a stake in the nation. they must be a tax payer and most likely the head of a family, and they'll be responsible for defending the nation as required. they also can't be an outcast of their community and probably shouldn't have any felonies.