Zone1 Do you believe in a PAYG society

[Captain Caveman]

In Switzerland, then have a system where important issues are decided by the people via referendums as opposed to their government just deciding all laws, or what to do etc..

So I would like to take this a step further.

I would like to see a system where the burden of cost is not borne by the taxpayer or certain corporations, or at least the bulk of it. I would like to see those who support certain important public issues contribute directly. A Pay As You Go System.

So every four years when you vote for the president, you also get to vote on the important public issues. So for example, if you're in favour of illegal immigrants, the pro rata cost is direct debited out of your bank account, each year for four years. Rather than tax money pay the costs associated with illegal immigration, it's equally shared out to those in favour on the register. This may cost you a few dollars, to a few hundred or several thousand, if not more.

Therefore, a PAYG system is a fairer system and it'll be a great educator. I would like to see this system in the UK.

 

[westwall]

In Switzerland, then have a system where important issues are decided by the people via referendums as opposed to their government just deciding all laws, or what to do etc..

So I would like to take this a step further.

I would like to see a system where the burden of cost is not borne by the taxpayer or certain corporations, or at least the bulk of it. I would like to see those who support certain important public issues contribute directly. A Pay As You Go System.

So every four years when you vote for the president, you also get to vote on the important public issues. So for example, if you're in favour of illegal immigrants, the pro rata cost is direct debited out of your bank account, each year for four years. Rather than tax money pay the costs associated with illegal immigration, it's equally shared out to those in favour on the register. This may cost you a few dollars, to a few hundred or several thousand, if not more.

Therefore, a PAYG system is a fairer system and it'll be a great educator. I would like to see this system in the UK.

I actually like that idea.

Of course, it would never happen because those in power never willingly give it up.

 

[Pellinore]

Not in the United States, thanks to the 24th Amendment. That's a pretty egregious poll tax.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In Switzerland, then have a system where important issues are decided by the people via referendums as opposed to their government just deciding all laws, or what to do etc..

So I would like to take this a step further.

I would like to see a system where the burden of cost is not borne by the taxpayer or certain corporations, or at least the bulk of it. I would like to see those who support certain important public issues contribute directly. A Pay As You Go System.

So every four years when you vote for the president, you also get to vote on the important public issues. So for example, if you're in favour of illegal immigrants, the pro rata cost is direct debited out of your bank account, each year for four years. Rather than tax money pay the costs associated with illegal immigration, it's equally shared out to those in favour on the register. This may cost you a few dollars, to a few hundred or several thousand, if not more.

Therefore, a PAYG system is a fairer system and it'll be a great educator. I would like to see this system in the UK.

The thread premise is idiocy.

And no one ‘favors’ illegal immigrants, whatever that’s supposed to mean.

Conservatives are truly incapable of sound, responsible governance.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I actually like that idea.

Of course, it would never happen because those in power never willingly give it up.

lol

Of course you would.

 

[westwall]

The thread premise is idiocy.

And no one ‘favors’ illegal immigrants, whatever that’s supposed to mean.

Conservatives are truly incapable of sound, responsible governance.

As opposed to you morons who can't define woman.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The thread premise is idiocy.

And no one ‘favors’ illegal immigrants, whatever that’s supposed to mean.

Conservatives are truly incapable of sound, responsible governance.

You will find that those that apply a soft touch in America to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are Democrats. You will find that those who implement and seek weak border control are Democrats.

But the thread is not illegal immigrant specific. Apply it to the full range of public issues. Whatever issues governments spend money on, such as illegal immigrants, asylum seekers, abortions, etc.. (the NHS in the UK fully covers the cost of an abortion) so then try to aim that cost towards those who support that cause.

So come election day, there are two issues to vote on, asylum seekers and abortions. So on everyone's ballot paper, you are deemed in. So people have to get off their backside and go vote, and when they vote, they can tick the, "No I don't support......", or you get a yearly bill for supporting it.

Then it would be interesting to see who leans Left or Right votes in or out, especially when they realise it's gonna be their pocket.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You will find that those that apply a soft touch in America to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are Democrats. You will find that those who implement and seek weak border control are Democrats.

But the thread is not illegal immigrant specific. Apply it to the full range of public issues. Whatever issues governments spend money on, such as illegal immigrants, asylum seekers, abortions, etc.. (the NHS in the UK fully covers the cost of an abortion) so then try to aim that cost towards those who support that cause.

So come election day, there are two issues to vote on, asylum seekers and abortions. So on everyone's ballot paper, you are deemed in. So people have to get off their backside and go vote, and when they vote, they can tick the, "No I don't support......", or you get a yearly bill for supporting it.

Then it would be interesting to see who leans Left or Right votes in or out, especially when they realise it's gonna be their pocket.

The notion of allowing the government access one one’s bank account for ‘selective funding’ is true idiocy – both unfeasible and un-Constitutional.

It’s another example of big government conservatives’ contempt for sound, responsible governance.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

As opposed to you morons who can't define woman.

Conservatives are at least consistent at being idiotic and ridiculous.

Indeed, bad conservative governance is also dangerous – House Republicans are currently determined to have the Federal government default on its debt resulting in economic ruin.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The notion of allowing the government access one one’s bank account for ‘selective funding’ is true idiocy – both unfeasible and un-Constitutional.

It’s another example of big government conservatives’ contempt for sound, responsible governance.

The bill is sent to your address, so either pay it at the local post office, or send your bank details to set up a direct debit.

 

[Captain Caveman]

So they reckon abortion costs the US economy $69 trillion. So if 100 million support abortion, then simply pay $69,000 each year to the government. That'll soon bring down the national debt

REPORT: Abortion Costs U.S. Economy $6.9 Trillion - House Committee on Ways and Means

Or determine what a 32% loss of GDP costs the government and let the 100 million foot that bill. So pro-lifers will meet you half way, there's a compromise, are you up for it?

 

[Kruska]

So I pay taxes, and at the same time I am supposed to pay on top of that for political decisions - are you daft? or working for a bank?
Why not simply adopt the only real democratic system of the western world? - namely that of Switzerland.

 

[DudleySmith]

In Switzerland, then have a system where important issues are decided by the people via referendums as opposed to their government just deciding all laws, or what to do etc..

So I would like to take this a step further.

I would like to see a system where the burden of cost is not borne by the taxpayer or certain corporations, or at least the bulk of it. I would like to see those who support certain important public issues contribute directly. A Pay As You Go System.

So every four years when you vote for the president, you also get to vote on the important public issues. So for example, if you're in favour of illegal immigrants, the pro rata cost is direct debited out of your bank account, each year for four years. Rather than tax money pay the costs associated with illegal immigration, it's equally shared out to those in favour on the register. This may cost you a few dollars, to a few hundred or several thousand, if not more.

Therefore, a PAYG system is a fairer system and it'll be a great educator. I would like to see this system in the UK.

First you would need to bring back literacy tests and civics tests, and that is just a start. Most of those countries where this system works are small and relatively culturally homogeneous First World affluent.

 

[Captain Caveman]

First you would need to bring back literacy tests and civics tests, and that is just a start. Most of those countries where this system works are small and relatively culturally homogeneous First World affluent.

You could also possibly do certain things at state level

 

[luiza]

In Switzerland, then have a system where important issues are decided by the people via referendums as opposed to their government just deciding all laws, or what to do etc..

So I would like to take this a step further.

I would like to see a system where the burden of cost is not borne by the taxpayer or certain corporations, or at least the bulk of it. I would like to see those who support certain important public issues contribute directly. A Pay As You Go System.

So every four years when you vote for the president, you also get to vote on the important public issues. So for example, if you're in favour of illegal immigrants, the pro rata cost is direct debited out of your bank account, each year for four years. Rather than tax money pay the costs associated with illegal immigration, it's equally shared out to those in favour on the register. This may cost you a few dollars, to a few hundred or several thousand, if not more.

Therefore, a PAYG system is a fairer system and it'll be a great educator. I would like to see this system in the UK.

It has all the splendid hallmarks of Lunacy .

" Smart " people / group entities would simply use their claimed choice ( preference / decision ) as a means of minimising their own tax contributions .

But, more fundamentally , most propositions are not binary . They exist on a spectrum of approval /acceptability / disagreement .

A very simple example ; To hang people ot not ( other types of kill available) .
Depends on the defendant's past record , exact crime and full circumstances etc . Yet the public would be faced with a binary ( Yes or No) decision .

As for trying to include company/organisation votes / decisions for a multitude of individuals with different notions --- mayhem and chaos .

General Tax rules with evolving exemptions as legally defined and agreed are vastly superior.

BTW There is / was a UK Radio 4 programme titled, Genius ,whch looks at unusual solutions to problems . But for entertainment .
Which your OP is , imho .

 

[Dekster]

In Switzerland, then have a system where important issues are decided by the people via referendums as opposed to their government just deciding all laws, or what to do etc..

So I would like to take this a step further.

I would like to see a system where the burden of cost is not borne by the taxpayer or certain corporations, or at least the bulk of it. I would like to see those who support certain important public issues contribute directly. A Pay As You Go System.

So every four years when you vote for the president, you also get to vote on the important public issues. So for example, if you're in favour of illegal immigrants, the pro rata cost is direct debited out of your bank account, each year for four years. Rather than tax money pay the costs associated with illegal immigration, it's equally shared out to those in favour on the register. This may cost you a few dollars, to a few hundred or several thousand, if not more.

Therefore, a PAYG system is a fairer system and it'll be a great educator. I would like to see this system in the UK.

Populism is the bane of good governance. The UK can do as it likes, but I would oppose it in the US.

 

[Captain Caveman]

It has all the splendid hallmarks of Lunacy .

" Smart " people / group entities would simply use their claimed choice ( preference / decision ) as a means of minimising their own tax contributions .

But, more fundamentally , most propositions are not binary . They exist on a spectrum of approval /acceptability / disagreement .

A very simple example ; To hang people ot not ( other types of kill available) .
Depends on the defendant's past record , exact crime and full circumstances etc . Yet the public would be faced with a binary ( Yes or No) decision .

As for trying to include company/organisation votes / decisions for a multitude of individuals with different notions --- mayhem and chaos .

General Tax rules with evolving exemptions as legally defined and agreed are vastly superior.

BTW There is / was a UK Radio 4 programme titled, Genius ,whch looks at unusual solutions to problems . But for entertainment .
Which your OP is , imho .

Yet you provide no solutions to your perceived problems in implementing such a system.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Populism is the bane of good governance. The UK can do as it likes, but I would oppose it in the US.

I would who heartedly opt out of tax payers money going to such things as asylum seekers, illegal immigration, abortion etc.. Anyone who champions those can foot the cost.

And the topic is not solely aimed at the US and UK. Switzerland is more direct democracy, so important public decisions are put to the people via a referendum, the people decide. Like I said, where there's tax payers money involved, take that idea forward so those that vote "yes/for" can share the cost of that decision.

 

[luiza]

Yet you provide no solutions to your perceived problems in implementing such a system.

You don't waste time and effort on a humorous idea raised for fun .

If people cannot immediately see the humour in your OP , there is no need to try and flog the proverbial dead horse .

 

[Captain Caveman]

You don't waste time and effort on a humorous idea raised for fun .

If people cannot immediately see the humour in your OP , there is no need to try and flog the proverbial dead horse .

There are two types of people in life, the problem solvers and complainers.