View Full Version : we should reorginize the country by counties

07-29-2005, 08:23 PM
thier are about 3086 counties in this country and in election maps for the last couple of times showing which way each countie voted you have to look really hard to find counties that voted democrat ( I still shake my head at how the formerly republican blue got changed into comunist red but we'll skip that {mostly} for now)

some have posted the blue states susceding and how much better off they would be. seems to me that by countie would be much more equitable/ let the cityied that bussed all the poor and idnerent wards of the state to stack the poles and we red republicans will keep our counties. I also advocate completly free transit from one country to the next and let each pay taxes to his countie where he votes. but then it would how how dependant on the working part of america the cityies are

07-29-2005, 08:30 PM
I've got an even better idea: One person, one vote.


07-29-2005, 08:37 PM
only people who are not wards of the goverment should vote

origionally you had to be a land owner to vote. I think this is a good thing because non owners do not have the stake in the goverment that owners do. you can'y pack up your land and move the way transe isate(sp) peoples can

only when picking on a small group can loss of freedom be imposed.

example had they declaired that every operater of a conveyance be required to have drivers liscences their is no way that could have been passed but it was directed at only motor vehicles at a time when less than 2 percent of the population would be affected, not all the wagon drivers or horse and mule riders.
the same thing with income taxes when instuted only a very very few would be affected. of course using the war as an excuse its affected group was very quickly broadened.

Bruce Hooke
07-29-2005, 08:44 PM
I pay my taxes every year, sit on the boards of two non-profit corporations, and do independent consulting work for companies whose names would be recognized around the world; but I do not happen to own any land. To suggest that I should not have the right to vote is unbelievably narrow-minded and insulting. Futhermore, to suggest that non-landowners do not have a stake in the government is also appallingly stupid, narrow-minded and insulting.

Wayne Jeffers
07-29-2005, 09:15 PM
FWIW, property requirements were once a fairly common condition for voting.

If you read Madison's notes, you'll find that property requirements were discussed at the Constitutional Convention. But since several of the Delegates were wealthy urban businessmen, without significant land holdings, the decision was to omit the requirement in drafting the Constitution.

At the time of secession, Virginia (to cite one specific example with which I am familiar) had a requirement that you must own at least 50 acres free-and-clear in order to be eligible to vote.

The rationale was substantially as seafox suggests, i.e., that this was considered a threshold test for having a sufficient "interest" in the community.

Of course, the country has become much more egalitarian in the last hundred fifty years, much to our credit.

Do you own at least 50 acres, without a mortgage, seafox? ;)


07-31-2005, 11:59 PM
no as a matter of fact I do not owns 50 acres free and clear < G >
I would note however that their was a time when the amount of real property one owned was a distinct measure of how much income one had and thus justifieable taxed. I don't know that that holds true any more

my apologies to bruce that he feels I insulted him I actually have great respect for the mental ability he has shown and the knowelege he has shared here. however I do find it intresting that he (evidently , for I am guessing here) completely rents his space his home and his office. and should his comunity pass laws he can not tolerate, taxes and fees he can noit suffer, he simply moves to another jurisdiction. my ancesters left misouri when a law was passed stating mormans were to be shot on site. this " extermination order" and the actions of mobs lead them to abandant their homes farms and businesses. I to could move on should I chose to leave everyting my folks and I have worked for all our lives. it has come close to this. yet parasites on our society , piglets feeding on the goverment porkbarrel trough . get a vote for the goverment that feeds them just like mine.

I do not know that the country's egalitarian stance in the last hundered years has been a benifit.
do you remember John R Lott he studied every countie in the country and found statistical evidence that the more guns in the hands of the people as they passed "shall grant concelied carry laws" unless the goverment can prove the person should not have such a permitt has reduced crime.
mr lott has since done another study that directly ties the start of women voting to the expodentual growth of goverment and taxes.

I personaly would not ban americans from voting because they were female but it has been sugested by at least one libraterian writer vin supranowice that only those who are net taxpayers should get to vote ( eg if you pay 5,000 a year but the school system eduicated your 5 childern at a cost of 25,000 then you are not a net tax payer. also if your on welfare and thus a ward of the goverment you are definitely not a net tax payer).

one other thought I posted the fact that nye countie population 750 people nevada is larger than three the three smalest states that I belive would be rhode island conetticate? and deliware right? I remembered their was a ranch in origon of 17 milion acreas that sold for about 35$ milion give or take a million was compared to being the size of deliware. jefferson or the other founders proable never even though of the densitys of people that have come about. and I think that it was relitively common in virgina in 1860 for any settled member of the comunity to own 50 acres.
in compairison the settlement pattern in utah was to grant each family a 2 acre town lot for their home two 10 acre town edge lots for their truck garden two 20 or 40 acre fields farther out for their grain production and then grazing was done outside of town in the mountians. in fact their was an area that is now a town called hooper that was where the herds of livestock given to the church in tithing were tended.
guess I am lamenting today to many people not enough space

Phillip Allen
08-01-2005, 05:44 AM
Bruce, I think your comments above (insulted, payment of taxes) are a bit over the top. The discussion can only be an academic one and to get yourself insulted at such is to get the cart on top of the horse as it were.

Payment of taxes holds no water with me because they are not voluntary...in spite of rhetoric to the contrary. In the end taxes are collected by force of arms. Payment of those taxes does not bestow preemptory rights to dictate to one's neighbors or own one's own personal politician. Our founders understood this and likely thought of their exclusive voting rights as a job…running the country for the sake of those not able to. Those boards you sit on do not extend the right of veto or other political powers to the lowest paid workers…those rights are held for the voting elite…the owners of the business/company/institution. Now there has always been rhetoric claiming that WE all own this country together…I have said it myself…it is an abstraction.

As to seafox’s lament of the change of political coloring…it was not an accident…no one is that stupid. However there are people stupid enough to make subliminal connection with the hated red as a negative. The Democrats didn’t want it to be applied to themselves (I don’t blame them) but don’t mind it being applied to their political rivals…so much for the egalitarian left. I am afraid that Rathergate is already forgotten by those with less subtle minds and terms like “democratic” (over Democrat), “red states”, “representative democracy” and even “you-name-it-gate are generously substituted in for the purpose of mental manipulation of those less subtle minds.

08-01-2005, 10:00 AM
By the Virginia standard, I could cast 1/25th of a vote! :D

Seriously, folks, there is a tiny movement afoot, that has the ear of at least one U.S. Senator, to award Electoral College votes by Congessional District. Not quite as local as the county level, but a whole lot better than "Cook county takes all." Apparently, there is some precedent for this way back when.

In the Swamp. :D

George Roberts
08-01-2005, 10:52 AM
seafox ---

Be careful what you wish for.

I am sure you would not enjoy the situation you propose.