Federal Vote Reform? You vote according to taxes...

August1991 · June 14, 2016

That's how my friend's condo association works. Indeed, her condo vote is based on how much she pays in condo fees.

If someone pays no taxes, why should that person have the right to vote? That's an invitation to use "other people's money".

From what I understand, about 30% of Canadians pay no tax at all (they're too poor). If the NDP/Trudeau Jnr Liberals want to spend more government money, these 30% of Canadians don't care.

IMHO, this system/State/Constitution/Supreme Court is not sustainable. Heck, even Canada is not sustainable.

Edited June 14, 2016 by August1991

?Impact · June 14, 2016

If someone pays no taxes, why should that person have the right to vote?

So you want to steal food from children and limited income pensioners who built this country that you benefit from?

August1991 · June 14, 2016

So you want to steal food from children and limited income pensioners who built this country that you benefit from?

Pensioners pay and paid taxes.

Gawd, you Leftists really miss the point.

=====

About 30% of Canadians pay no taxes. When a politician wants to spend more money (spew more CO2 in the atmosphere, fly wherever), these Canadians don't care.

About one third of Canadians pay no taxes: they're not part of the game. They don't care.

TimG · June 14, 2016

If someone pays no taxes, why should that person have the right to vote? That's an invitation to use "other people's money".

We not all issues are questions of spending money. Fro example, the right to die bill is a moral issue that every Canadian should have a say in. You also have to consider that a significant portion of the people paying no tax are students or young people who hope to earn enough to pay tax in the future so it not reasonable to describe those people as having no stake in the system. IMO, the best option is to favor sales taxes over income taxes because everyone pays sales taxes even if the poor get a rebate at tax time. If a new program is to be created it must be funded by increased sales taxes.

Argus · June 14, 2016

We not all issues are questions of spending money. Fro example, the right to die bill is a moral issue that every Canadian should have a say in. You also have to consider that a significant portion of the people paying no tax are students or young people who hope to earn enough to pay tax in the future so it not reasonable to describe those people as having no stake in the system. IMO, the best option is to favor sales taxes over income taxes because everyone pays sales taxes even if the poor get a rebate at tax time. If a new program is to be created it must be funded by increased sales taxes.

Half the population pays 04% of taxes.

Half the population pays 96% of taxes.

Clearly, when voting for politicians, these two groups are going to have much different preferences.

August1991 · June 14, 2016

We not all issues are questions of spending money. Fro example, the right to die bill is a moral issue that every Canadian should have a say in. You also have to consider that a significant portion of the people paying no tax are students or young people who hope to earn enough to pay tax in the future so it not reasonable to describe those people as having no stake in the system. IMO, the best option is to favor sales taxes over income taxes because everyone pays sales taxes even if the poor get a rebate at tax time. If a new program is to be created it must be funded by increased sales taxes.

The right to die bill is admittedly not a question for rich or poor: we each value life differently.

But TimG, the rest? It's money. And when 30% of voters have no stake, I'm scared. Romney referred to 47% who don't care.

It's not sustainable.

Edited June 14, 2016 by August1991

Archduke al-Qaddafi · June 14, 2016

We not all issues are questions of spending money.

Bull. Every election is essentially a referendum on who gets to spend our tax dollars. I agree 110% with the OP, those who do not pay tax should not have the right to vote, I have always believed this and always will, but good luck turning it into legislation.

TimG · June 15, 2016

But TimG, the rest? It's money. And when 30% of voters have no stake.

Does a university student really have no stake? Seems to me that any young person who believes their income will rise in the future would have a stake in the taxes that are paid. This is particularly true of questions such as pension spending where rich tax paying old people could vote to reduce their taxes by heaping liabilities on the taxpayers of the future. The taxpayers of the future should have a say in those questions. Edited June 15, 2016 by TimG

cybercoma · June 15, 2016

Yes, the greedy self-centred approach to politics that refuses to recognize that you live in a society with other people and their lives affect you as much as your life affects theirs, regardless of how much income you have.

Edited June 15, 2016 by cybercoma

eyeball · June 15, 2016

From what I understand, about 30% of Canadians pay no tax at all (they're too poor).

People who have no say in how the laws of the country are formulated shouldn't have to abide by them and from what I understand the richest tax-avoiders don't have to so...fair is fair.

Edited June 15, 2016 by eyeball

Archduke al-Qaddafi · June 15, 2016

Does a university student really have no stake? Seems to me that any young person who believes their income will rise in the future would have a stake in the taxes that are paid. This is particularly true of questions such as pension spending where rich tax paying old people could vote to reduce their taxes by heaping liabilities on the taxpayers of the future. The taxpayers of the future should have a say in those questions.

Post-secondary education is heavily subsidized in this country. I don't really mind because I live in a university town and my business mainly caters to students, but I would have no problem with having funding cut to certain liberal arts programs.

Topaz · June 15, 2016

Isn't the Right to vote by citizenship and not income?

?Impact · June 15, 2016

Time to bring back the landlords and robber barons, it appears we have lots of volunteers; the serfs await your command.

Ash74 · June 15, 2016

How does anyone not pay taxes?

HST/GST is on just about everything.

If a student has a beer he or she pays taxes for the beer.

Income tax is just one of the many ways all Canadians pay for the services we have.

The question should be asking is "should you have more say if you pay more taxes"

Archduke al-Qaddafi · June 15, 2016

How does anyone not pay taxes?

HST/GST is on just about everything.

If a student has a beer he or she pays taxes for the beer.

Income tax is just one of the many ways all Canadians pay for the services we have.

The question should be asking is "should you have more say if you pay more taxes"

Low-income earners get money back in lump sums several times a year. I don't get money back when I file my taxes, I pay out the nose, and yes I deserve more of a say.

Bonam · June 15, 2016

Half the population pays 04% of taxes.

Half the population pays 96% of taxes.

Clearly, when voting for politicians, these two groups are going to have much different preferences.

That's true, but that doesn't mean people who don't pay tax shouldn't have a right to vote. As TimG already mentioned, there are many people who might not be paying tax in a particular year, but who most certainly do pay tax throughout their lifetime and therefore do care about how taxes are spent. Furthermore, there are many people that work real jobs but at a low enough level of income and with enough deductions that they pay no net tax. Should these people really not have a say? Also, many retirees do not pay any net tax, should a large fraction of people simply lose the right to vote once they retire because their income drops?

As long as we have a system based on democratic voting, it cannot be restricted based on income. Those who make more money already have the ability to have more influence over politics than those who make less since they can contribute more to various political causes as they see fit.

jacee · June 15, 2016

One person one vote.

cybercoma · June 15, 2016

Low-income earners get money back in lump sums several times a year. I don't get money back when I file my taxes, I pay out the nose, and yes I deserve more of a say.

which isn't even remotely close to the amount they spend on GST/HST, excise taxes, government fees, etc.

TimG · June 15, 2016

which isn't even remotely close to the amount they spend on GST/HST, excise taxes, government fees, etc.

Logically this statement must be false because if the taxes/fees paid by poor people really exceeded the net cash transfers from government that would mean that government support programs are completely ineffective. If you limit the question to GST paid vs GST rebate then it is also not likely that any poor person would pay more in GST than they receive in rebate given the fact that items like food and rent are excluded. The only way someone could pay more if they hide income or are not paying for their own rent or food expenses. Edited June 15, 2016 by TimG

Argus · June 15, 2016

Isn't the Right to vote by citizenship and not income?

It didn't used to be.

Argus · June 15, 2016

Income tax is just one of the many ways all Canadians pay for the services we have.

By far the largest.

Smeelious · June 15, 2016

I can't even...

Argus · June 15, 2016

That's true, but that doesn't mean people who don't pay tax shouldn't have a right to vote. As TimG already mentioned, there are many people who might not be paying tax in a particular year, but who most certainly do pay tax throughout their lifetime and therefore do care about how taxes are spent.

No doubt. But there remains the issue of what happens as a growing percentage of the electorate can feel free to vote for any amount of government largess with the confidence that they will not be responsible for paying for it.

The Atlantic provinces are an excellent guide. You have four welfare provinces filled with people constantly looking for handouts, run by incompetent governments steering their provinces towards bankruptcy, going 100% for the politicians who promised them the most goodies. These people had zero interest in parties which promised to hold the line on taxes or balance the budget. Why would they care about such things? They wanted more spending on themselves, and that's why they voted Liberal.

Bonam · June 15, 2016

No doubt. But there remains the issue of what happens as a growing percentage of the electorate can feel free to vote for any amount of government largess with the confidence that they will not be responsible for paying for it.

The Atlantic provinces are an excellent guide. You have four welfare provinces filled with people constantly looking for handouts, run by incompetent governments steering their provinces towards bankruptcy, going 100% for the politicians who promised them the most goodies. These people had zero interest in parties which promised to hold the line on taxes or balance the budget. Why would they care about such things? They wanted more spending on themselves, and that's why they voted Liberal.

I understand what you are saying but I think the downsides of disallowing a large portion of the population from voting based on their income are more dangerous than the downsides of allowing them to vote.

Argus · June 15, 2016

I understand what you are saying but I think the downsides of disallowing a large portion of the population from voting based on their income are more dangerous than the downsides of allowing them to vote.

You are probably right, but I'm not suggesting that as a solution. To be honest, I'm not sure what solution would be best. But what we do need to do is to make all citizens in some way responsible for helping sustain the government they elect. Whether it's through taxation or some kind of required government service. Maybe we could even consider some kind of 'ranked ballot' which gives those who pay more taxes a somewhat higher degree of influence than those who pay none.