Taxation and Shares

[GeeMoney]

When you put money into a company, you get a share. 1 share usually = one vote. Therefore, if you pay taxes (=money) shouldnt you get a vote (=share) Govenment taxion of people from the age of 16 is unfair i believe because they do not get a say in the running in the country in political votes or elections. If they are giving money to the government, shouldnt they be able to vote in elections, etc. 1 side of the argument is that they are only mature enough to vote from the age of 18. If they are only mature enough to vote from 18, how are they mature enough to pay taxes under 18 ! ? How does everyone else feel about this ?

[Hgrove]

You certainly have a point, but the other side of the coin is, some people continue to study and don't earn money until they are older than 18; for ex. a student cd hv a p/t job which pays just under the min. to pay tax; so they are not paying tax yet they get to vote. Likewise someone who does not pay tax (e.g. a f/t mum) gets to vote. So I think overall it evens itself out.

[GeeMoney]

Keep to the point... if you put money in you should get a vote shouldnt you ? A f/t woman (whatever that is) doesnt pay tax, but she does get a vote, because she is 18. If it works like you say it does, shouldnt the 16-year-old get a vote, but not the woman ?

[GeeMoney]

(just a change f/t = full time ... my bad)

[Alej]

Tax and the right to vote are in no way linked. Taxation of those under 18 could be seen as a way of encouraging them to go for higher education(not pay taxes). I think it would be ridiculous for under 18s to vote as the majority would have no idea what they are doing and cast it in ridiculous places for the sake of it. As for viewing the process as a company, i feel its a ludicrous capitalist way of looking at it to say the amount of money you give to the govt. should dictate your say. The rich would give more on purpose and we'd have a conservative govt. You havent really thought it through have you. I could keep on and make stronger points but i've got to go out now, ill post later if you contest my argument.

[GeeMoney]

We live in a capitalist society.

[SmarterThanU]

That is Wrong Think. Agents have been alerted. Please stay where you are.

[Alej]

yes but that would bring it over the line

[GeeMoney]

Where is the line drawn in a capitalist society. Either you're part of it or you are against it. If you're against it, i hear China is a good place for communism....

[Alej]

there is a difference between constructive capitalism and paying to run the country. Is it fair in your opinion that a rich man have more say than a poor one? Surely you agree that putting a price on democracy cant be right. Im no communist but i certainly dont believe power should go hand in hand with wealth.

[GeeMoney]

I said nothing about a rich man having more of a share than a poor man, but that if a man puts money in, then they should have some sort of say in where the money goes to / is used for. Take the war of independance in North America, "No taxation without representation" was one of the phrases used ... they didnt want to put money in and not have a say in what it did, so they had a war about it... My views arent that extreme but i do feel that something should be done about it. My idea is that 1 person has 1 vote, regardless of how much tax they pay, in the same way that (usually) 1 share = 1 vote in the running of a business.