Tom Perkins' big idea: The rich should get more votes

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1
Tom Perkins' big idea: The rich should get more votes:




Tom Perkins suggested Thursday that only taxpayers should have the right to vote -- and that wealthy Americans who pay more in taxes should get more votes.

The venture capitalist offered the unorthodox proposal when asked to name one idea that would "change the world" at a speaking engagement in San Francisco moderated by Fortune's Adam Lashinsky.

"The Tom Perkins system is: You don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes," Perkins said.

"But what I really think is, it should be like a corporation. You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes. How's that?"
More here:

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/14/investing/tom-perkins-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Rich people are on a role lately with all the dumb stuff they have been saying the last past couple of weeks.
 
#5
How about rich people that pay more than $100K in taxes get to shoot 1 person who makes less than $100K each year.

Would that make you happy, Tom? I bet it would give you a big boner.

Maybe he is trolling? Maybe he is trying to wake people up?
 
#6
Some of these rich people have a seriously twisted mind and warped reality. These people have really been corrupted by greed to the very core.
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
#7
"It just kills me that my input into the political process is limited to a single vote per election, just like everyone else. If only there was some way I could convert my immense financial power into political power... I know! Extra votes! You genius Perkins, no wonder you're so rich."
 
#11
As if the system isn't skewed in their favor already.

Like I keep saying, we need to line them up like a pinata and beat them with a stick until they start to trickle down.
 
#12
Democracy - "rule of the people".

Not "rule of some people", not "Rule of the guy with the big wallet". Rule of the people.

We want money eliminated from politics at all levels, not introduced to it at a greater level.
 
#18
So, using his logic, tax evasionists should be completely stripped of their right to vote? Wouldn't that leave him and all his buddies without voting power completely?

Actually, that sounds great. Make it so.
 
#20
Democracy - "rule of the people".

Not "rule of some people", not "Rule of the guy with the big wallet". Rule of the people.

We want money eliminated from politics at all levels, not introduced to it at a greater level.
Well, the poors do, but what do they matter?
 
#21
It makes sense.

Cut the middleman out of the equation, and this country could save literally billions of dollars each election cycle and have a more efficient government to boot. Think about all the money that is spent on political campaigns... and hell, half of it goes to losing candidates in the first place. You might as well flush those millions in donations to Kerry, McCain, Hillary Clinton, Romney or Ron Paul down the toilet for all the good it does.

If corporations and the rich can just vote directly, you can stop the whole song and dance around campaigning and just cut right to the issues. You'd also cut emissions from all the constant travel politicians are doing glad-handing every police chief across the country.

Plus, if you cut down the time politicians spend worrying about getting elected, you'd be leaving them a lot more time to actually do some governing for a change.

With all the extra money saved, the job creators can then create even more jobs, meaning the wealth will trickle down to the rest of the economy instead of getting sucked into the black hole that is politics. It also means that people can literally vote with their wallet by not patronizing corporations that vote against their interests.

The rich already pay so much in taxes to this country that it makes sense that they should get more of a say -- it's only fair. When you make family decisions, do you let your kids have an equal say in what happens? Of course you don't. It's the exact same thing here.

I think we could stand to have a more efficient political process and this seems like just the ticket. What could go wrong?
 
#22
I never understand how people don't realize that sales tax is one of the taxes everyone pays.

Like jesus christ people. Income tax isn't the only tax there is.
Sales tax is levied by the state. Not all states have one. Other states have no income tax. Why do you think NeoGAF is based in Texas?
 
#23
Do they not have someone that these responses are run by before they're made public? I mean, what the fuck is he thinking? He might as well have just said suck my dick poors, I'm rich. The sentiment is very much the same.
 
#28
And I bet the 1% would have the majority of votes in becoming the biggest "shareolders" of the country?

Oh Tom shut up, keep saying things like that and then complain the poor are making class war...
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
#29
i'd feel really dumb and embarrassed if i said something this stupid

i guess being really rich insulates you against that feeling
 
#34
While we are at it... We should eliminate voting rights for people on welfare since they will only vote for more welfare and continue to live work-free while the rest of us have to work hard for them.

I mean... Like 99% of people on welfare have refrigerators... How disgusting! I have to work hard for my cold-storage box. I should get more votes. Its so unfair.
 
#41
There not really being that secretive about their desire to rule the world.

Well its hard to see how its his intelligence or schooling thats made him rich, he really isnt that smart.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
#42
Essentially, this is what it was like in England prior to the Reform Acts (and continuing, in some form through the first few of them). Naturally, it did not lead to a very representative democracy.
 
#47
I remember a dude I work with said something that stupid before. I wonder if people actually understand what is coming out of there mouths before they say it.
 
#50
Democracy - "rule of the people".

Not "rule of some people", not "Rule of the guy with the big wallet". Rule of the people.

We want money eliminated from politics at all levels, not introduced to it at a greater level.
You can say that all you want but sadly it's the people with money who control everything so "the people" have very little say on what actually happens at all. :/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.