Do you think NEETs should be allowed to vote? If so, should everybody?
I think to vote you should need to provably have a positive net worth, because otherwise you have people voting whose incentives are actually opposite what they'd need to be to promote a productive society.
I also think you should have to have a minimum IQ, say like 85, and a similar EQ (say, no more than one standard deviation below the mean) simply because people below this aren't going to be able to make wise decisions.
I think this would exclude most NEETs, though certainly not all of them. For example, independently wealthy people who simply don't want to work anymore would be able to vote still.
Why do my threads always die?
>>27338397
Exactly. The wrong assumption is that NEET means welfare. Not at all.
>>27338345
I think only white male land owners over the age of 30 should be allowed to vote.
>>27338618
Not sure, but here, I'll help you out.
>>27338345
Why would i bother? your voting in the problems you have only yourselves to blame after all...you voted the trash in haha.
>>27338345
Everyone should or no one should. Especially the misfits should, seeing as how the system isn't working for them, there is obviously a problem from their perspective. Would this create drama? Sure, but not as much as ignoring an entire groups' opinion. Fuck democracy is my perspective seeing as how no one is going to do it right.
>>27339733
Why should people who've fucked up their lives be able to fuck up others'?
Voting is an act of aggression. It appears to be necessary, since governments are necessary and /somebody/ has to decide on the government, preferably somebody accountable, but it still boils down to people forcing their way onto others. Why shouldn't we be careful about who has that power?
>>27339128
I agree with this. A poll tax would be nice to have as well. Now this would make America great again.
>>27339810
>implying the majority doesn't 100% of the time fuck up the minority's life with democracy
Other than that, simply fuck democracy. The majority of people are idiots that should be controlled, so why is giving them ANY POWER in making the rules good?
>>27339945
Because giving them any power makes the rulers' power more fragile, and makes them more careful about doing drastic destructive things. It also makes it easier for people to enter and leave the ruling class, so you don't wind up with a monarch entirely obsessed with protecting its own family.
I'm suggesting we reduce the number of people the rulers are accountable to from everybody to just those who are halfway intelligent and who will benefit from the country being more productive. And presumably those who have some skin in the game when it comes to preserving culture and national identity.
