Ineptocracy
It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least like to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with the goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a deminishing number of producers.
Is there a way to reverse this trend?
Originally posted by whodeyYeah you could set up a medieval system whereby only a select few get To decide on policy by means of an income based suffrage qualification. In this way none of those scumbag 'least capable' types will have any political power to exercise and those nice 'producer' types can focus on exploiting the 'least capable' and stop worrying about that pesky hand maiden of demagoguery and collectivism we now wrongly label as democracy.
Ineptocracy
It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least like to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with the goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a deminishing number of producers.
Is there a way to reverse this trend?
Go on Whodey you know you want toðŸ˜
Originally posted by whodeyIt's fortunate that this "system of government" is a fantasy of your paranoid right-wing mind, and, accordingly, there's no "trend" to reverse.
Ineptocracy
It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least like to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with the goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a deminishing number of producers.
Is there a way to reverse this trend?
Originally posted by whodeyBy what empirical measure is this a "trend"?
Ineptocracy
It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least like to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with the goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a deminishing number of producers.
Is there a way to reverse this trend?
Originally posted by kevcvs57Does properly limited democracy allow voting ourselves into other people's wallets and bank accounts?
Yeah you could set up a medieval system whereby only a select few get To decide on policy by means of an income based suffrage qualification. In this way none of those scumbag 'least capable' types will have any political power to exercise and those nice 'producer' types can focus on exploiting the 'least capable' and stop worrying about that pesky hand mai ...[text shortened]... and collectivism we now wrongly label as democracy.
Go on Whodey you know you want toðŸ˜
Carried a step farther, could we vote to put to death people with unapproved beliefs?
Originally posted by TeinosukeI don't know the source, but recently I heard that 70% of American taxpayers and non taxpayers get benefits exceeding what they pay.
It's fortunate that this "system of government" is a fantasy of your paranoid right-wing mind, and, accordingly, there's no "trend" to reverse.
It's the norm for individuals to draw from the public purse for the first 2 decades of their lives (education, health, family assistance), then be net contributors for the next 4 decades (paying taxes, not drawing anything for themselves outside of short periods of unemployment), then go back to drawing from the public purse for the remainder of their lives (health costs and Social Security payments, less anything they may be still paying by way of taxes). I doubt this pattern varies much from country to country.
For a closer study of the topic, http://usgovinfo.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=usgovinfo&cdn=newsissues&tm=40&f=10&su=p284.13.342.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.brookings.edu/articles/2006/0315welfare_haskins.aspx for the US
and http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2556 for Australia.
Others can dig up the relevant European stuff, that's just my contribution.
Originally posted by normbenignWhat a ridiculous slippery slope attempt. Just because both death and taxes are inevitable does NOT make them the same thing!
Does properly limited democracy allow voting ourselves into other people's wallets and bank accounts?
Carried a step farther, could we vote to put to death people with unapproved beliefs?
Originally posted by normbenignDoes properly limited democracy allow voting to leave in poverty and ignorance the children of the parents we are exploiting as low wage earners?
Does properly limited democracy allow voting ourselves into other people's wallets and bank accounts?
Carried a step farther, could we vote to put to death people with unapproved beliefs?
Carried a step further could we vote to put to death the 'least capable' non 'producers'?
Originally posted by normbenignIn the context of the most unequal society in the developed world, maybe that suggests that the redistributive function of taxation is working?
I don't know the source, but recently I heard that 70% of American taxpayers and non taxpayers get benefits exceeding what they pay.