Should Blacks Have the Right to Vote?

[Moonglow]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

This is not a democracy..

 

[Moonglow]

 

[miketx]

Should regressive liberals have the right to vote?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

The Electoral College elects the president not the masses...

The masses DO elect the president. Just not directly.

 

[Flash]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

This is not a democracy..

The distinction is minimal for the point I made. Evidently you are not smart enough to understand that. Typical confusion for a Moon Bat. The majority voting for the representatives that steal money is the same as if it was a direct vote.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”

This is what happens when the taker class is allowed to vote.

 

[Windparadox]

`
Yes. Look at it this way, at least in Wisconsin, many can't vote because of their prison record.
`

 

[Montrovant]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

How are you defining government assistance, and are you talking federal only, or state as well?

 

[Flash]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

How are you defining government assistance, and are you talking federal only, or state as well?

I don't like any form of welfare. No transfer of money from a person that earns the money to someone that didn't earn it it.

No problem in paying my fair share for defense and the few other necessary government functions. I don't mind paying for roads that I use. After all "their ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

I really don't like greedy assholes using the government to steal what they are too sorry to earn for themselves like food, medical care, housing or whatever.

 

[Montrovant]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

How are you defining government assistance, and are you talking federal only, or state as well?

I don't like any form of welfare. No transfer of money from a person that earns the money to someone that didn't earn it it.

No problem in paying my fair share for defense and the few other necessary government functions. I don't mind paying for roads that I use. After all "their ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

I really don't like greedy assholes using the government to steal what they are too sorry to earn for themselves like food, medical care, housing or whatever.

What about corporate welfare? Disability? The VA? Medicare/Medicaid? Loans? Grants? Farming or other business subsidies? There are a plethora of governmental assistance programs.

 

[jillian]

Should a people who are net takers determine the destiny of a productive First World country?

On net, whites generate a $249.52 billion surplus, or $1,260 per person if you assign 100% of military spending to whites. If you just give whites a proportional share of military spending, their surplus goes up to $553.52 billiontotal and $2,795 per capita.

Blacks, by contrast, run a budget deficit of $389.71 billion, or $10,016 per capita. If 100% of military spending is assigned to whites, blacks STILL run a$306.53 billion deficit, or $7,700 per capita.

Fiscal Impact of Whites, Blacks and Hispanics



.

so white trash shouldn't vote either, lowlife bigot?

 

[jillian]

Should a people who are net takers determine the destiny of a productive First World country?

On net, whites generate a $249.52 billion surplus, or $1,260 per person if you assign 100% of military spending to whites. If you just give whites a proportional share of military spending, their surplus goes up to $553.52 billiontotal and $2,795 per capita.

Blacks, by contrast, run a budget deficit of $389.71 billion, or $10,016 per capita. If 100% of military spending is assigned to whites, blacks STILL run a$306.53 billion deficit, or $7,700 per capita.

Fiscal Impact of Whites, Blacks and Hispanics



.

hey, pondscum:

According to 2013 data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the program, 40.2 percent of SNAP recipients are white, 25.7 percent are black, 10.3 percent are Hispanic, 2.1 percent are Asian and 1.2 percent are Native American.Feb 28, 2015

Who Gets Food Stamps? White People, Mostly | HuffPost

 

[Vastator]

If they are US citizens and registered, they get a vote

Hasn't always been that way. Used to have to be a land owner. Used to be the husband REPRESENTED the FAMILY. The family voted through the father.

According to the information I posted, whites are subsidizing the whole country.

And the way it was originally, was far superior to today's method. Letting non property owners, and those on public assistance have a say in spending and governance is insanity; and a recipe for disaster.

The insanity if what the politicians do, and what we allow them to do.

That's a buck passed too far... The first issue is that of whom has a say in which politicians get the jobs...

 

[Flash]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

How are you defining government assistance, and are you talking federal only, or state as well?

I don't like any form of welfare. No transfer of money from a person that earns the money to someone that didn't earn it it.

No problem in paying my fair share for defense and the few other necessary government functions. I don't mind paying for roads that I use. After all "their ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

I really don't like greedy assholes using the government to steal what they are too sorry to earn for themselves like food, medical care, housing or whatever.

What about corporate welfare? Disability? The VA? Medicare/Medicaid? Loans? Grants? Farming or other business subsidies? There are a plethora of governmental assistance programs.

Corporate welfare? You mean like when Obama bailed out the banks, GM, Chrysler and gave money to Solyndra?

There are all kinds of welfare queens living off that $4 trillion a year Federal budget. Not only domestic but also foreign.

I am against all welfare, entitlements, subsidies and bailouts.

No money should ever be taken from an American by the force of government and given to some asshole that didn't earn the money.

There is a legitimate function of government. Defense, police, courts etc. What we have is a big bloated out of control welfare state that is oppressive to the people that have to pay for it. It also keeps our economy from flourishing and robs us of our humanity by creating a dependent lower poverty class.

According to the CIA Factbook the expenditure of the filthy ass Federal government is more than the GDP of ll but three other countries on earth. If you include the State government that will knock one country off the list and we would be tied with the second one.

The combined cost of government either directly or indirectly in this country is the single largest household expenditure of almost every family in this country. Greater than food, or housing or anything else.

For instance, in my middle class income home last year's Federal income tax by itself is more money than I spent on any single expense (including food and housing) that I bought. That doesn't include the money I indirectly paid through the corporate tax or for other Federal taxes nor does it include the State sales tax or property tax.

The reason Americans have a hard time getting by is because of the tremendous cost of combined government. It is about 40% of the GDP. Despicable, isn't it?

 

[MizMolly]

If they are US citizens and registered, they get a vote

Hasn't always been that way. Used to have to be a land owner. Used to be the husband REPRESENTED the FAMILY. The family voted through the father.

According to the information I posted, whites are subsidizing the whole country.

Do you think we should go back to only male land owners having the right to vote?

Why?

 

[Montrovant]

I don't think anybody receiving government assistance (welfare) should be allowed to vote. In order to chose the people who takes your money by force then you should be contributing the money, not receiving it. That would probably exclude at least half of the Negros in this country. Last time I looked at the figures 5% of Whites were on welfare but about 50% of Negroes. The Democrats would never win another election, would they?

Democracy is a terrible form of government when 51% of the people find out they can use the electoral process to steal money from the 49%, isn't it?

How are you defining government assistance, and are you talking federal only, or state as well?

I don't like any form of welfare. No transfer of money from a person that earns the money to someone that didn't earn it it.

No problem in paying my fair share for defense and the few other necessary government functions. I don't mind paying for roads that I use. After all "their ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

I really don't like greedy assholes using the government to steal what they are too sorry to earn for themselves like food, medical care, housing or whatever.

What about corporate welfare? Disability? The VA? Medicare/Medicaid? Loans? Grants? Farming or other business subsidies? There are a plethora of governmental assistance programs.

Corporate welfare? You mean like when Obama bailed out the banks, GM, Chrysler and gave money to Solyndra?

There are all kinds of welfare queens living off that $4 trillion a year Federal budget. Not only domestic but also foreign.

I am against all welfare, entitlements, subsidies and bailouts.

No money should ever be taken from an American by the force of government and given to some asshole that didn't earn the money.

There is a legitimate function of government. Defense, police, courts etc. What we have is a big bloated out of control welfare state that is oppressive to the people that have to pay for it. It also keeps our economy from flourishing and robs us of our humanity by creating a dependent lower poverty class.

According to the CIA Factbook the expenditure of the filthy ass Federal government is more than the GDP of ll but three other countries on earth. If you include the State government that will knock one country off the list and we would be tied with the second one.

The combined cost of government either directly or indirectly in this country is the single largest household expenditure of almost every family in this country. Greater than food, or housing or anything else.

For instance, in my middle class income home last year's Federal income tax by itself is more money than I spent on any single expense (including food and housing) that I bought. That doesn't include the money I indirectly paid through the corporate tax or for other Federal taxes nor does it include the State sales tax or property tax.

The reason Americans have a hard time getting by is because of the tremendous cost of combined government. It is about 40% of the GDP. Despicable, isn't it?

Sure, the bailouts are a good example. Should the owners/executives of companies that received a bailout be stripped of their right to vote?

Foreign recipients of any sort of government largess do not count in this conversation as they cannot vote anyway.

You said that no one receiving government assistance should be able to vote. I'm trying to determine what government assistance counts in your opinion.

 

[Montrovant]

If they are US citizens and registered, they get a vote

Hasn't always been that way. Used to have to be a land owner. Used to be the husband REPRESENTED the FAMILY. The family voted through the father.

According to the information I posted, whites are subsidizing the whole country.

Do you think we should go back to only male land owners having the right to vote?

Why?

I'm sorry, I do not understand the question. Are you asking why I asked Death Angel that question? Are you asking why he might think that only male land owners should have the right to vote?

 

[MizMolly]

If they are US citizens and registered, they get a vote

Hasn't always been that way. Used to have to be a land owner. Used to be the husband REPRESENTED the FAMILY. The family voted through the father.

According to the information I posted, whites are subsidizing the whole country.

Do you think we should go back to only male land owners having the right to vote?

Why?

I'm sorry, I do not understand the question. Are you asking why I asked Death Angel that question? Are you asking why he might think that only male land owners should have the right to vote?

Why would anyone think only male land owners should vote

 

[Montrovant]

If they are US citizens and registered, they get a vote

Hasn't always been that way. Used to have to be a land owner. Used to be the husband REPRESENTED the FAMILY. The family voted through the father.

According to the information I posted, whites are subsidizing the whole country.

Do you think we should go back to only male land owners having the right to vote?

Why?

I'm sorry, I do not understand the question. Are you asking why I asked Death Angel that question? Are you asking why he might think that only male land owners should have the right to vote?

Why would anyone think only male land owners should vote

It does not make much sense in the modern US.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Why would anyone think only male land owners should vote

Because they have a stake in a successful country, unlike those who can vote themselves their neighbor's paycheck.