Should only taxpayers be allowed to vote?

Would tax avoiders be allowed to vote?

I would say that I am opposed to democracy in principle.

You wouldn't give everybody a say in any other important decision; how to fly a plane, how to build a nuclear powerplant, how to draft a complex contractual document - so why is everybody, including those with absolutely zero knowledge of economics, given a say in how the country is run?

Now, we like to think that politics isn't rocket science, but it's often not simple. It's bizarre to me. Most voters haven't got a clue about the implications of policies they support. Terrible policies often pass by popular demand.

I can't recommend the book 'The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies' by Bryan Caplan highly enough.

However, I don't think in this day and age that reducing democracy would be possible. Instead, I think the only solution is to limit the scope of government to that of a minimal state; a state that exists only to protect life, liberty and property.

that would mean traveling back in time when we discriminated between rich and poor, it would allow the rich to have more power and be able to make more money off the poor as they already do by taking away their rights. think we should respect everyones rights not just people who are better off i dont see how you can actually think that?

everyone pays tax

No because non-taxpayers are still subject to the power of the state just as much as taxpayers are, by removing a non-taxpayers right to vote you are essentially giving one group power over the other. Additionally, people may become non-taxpayers through no choice of their own e.g. by being made redundant.

Think of it this way. The government have made you redundant from your public sector job and the economy hasn't picked so there aren't any jobs going in the private sector. You have been unemployed, through no fault of your own for the last 6 months and when the general election takes place you don't have the right to elect a more competent government that the previous one as you are no longer a 'taxpayer'. Do you actually think that is a good and fair system?

If we were going to start limiting who could vote, I'd prefer the introduction of a political aptitude test (as someone above suggested), as this means those who vote actually know what they're voting for and the implications their decisions may have.

What about those who are working but receive so little money they are below the tax threshold?

What's next - getting more votes for the more tax you pay?

No tax, no vote.

And yes, the one who pays millions in taxes as compared to the average should have more of a say.

Sure but much of it is done with someone else's money and only the foolish will not recognize that many do not pay taxes.

Regards
DL

Hmm. Taxpayers ie income tax payers? That sounds pretty fair. They're contributing more than those who don't pay income tax, or are on JSA - since it's their money being spent it should really be their decision. Plus, it's encouraging right (ie voting) and responsibility (contributing back, helping those who need it) to go together. And if anything is an incentive to work hard and earn well.
EDIT: the only real issue I can see is students, who will be future taxpayers not getting their day. But I guess when they are able to contribute they will, so it's fair enough really.

I agree but you fail to recognize that at present, the poor have power over the rich and their wealth. Those who do not pay tax discriminate against the taxpayers by denying his right to spend where he wants.

Regards
DL

Just as much rights except that the poor usurp the rights of the taxpayer to decide where his wealth will be spent.

The rich have lost their rights to the poor.

Regards
DL

I agree but you fail to recognize that at present, the poor have power over the rich and their wealth. Those who do not pay tax discriminate against the taxpayers by denying his right to spend where he wants.

Regards
DL

Not if caught.

Regards
DL