• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Idea: third House in the government

SagaLore

SagaLore

Elite Member
For the longest time now, I've thought that it would be beneficial to have a 3rd House of a different representation. The house (and only this hosue) would be primarily responsible for creating the Budget, and would have little to do with creating actual laws. They would be the financial controllers basically, to let the other houses do their job with as little influence by money as possible.

This house would be represented by Taxes.

Those who pay a higher percentage of their income into taxes, the more their vote counts.

Someone paying 20% of their income will have a vote weight of 20 points. Someone paying 50% of their income will have a vote weight of 50 points. Someone paying no income taxes will have no vote.

What this does is give fair representation to those who support the government funds. This also helps balance the class struggle that the other houses create by their tax legislation. If Congress feels that the very rich are having too much say in how the government gets budgeted, then they are forced to lower their taxes. If Congress feels that the poor aren't getting much say at all, then they have to raise taxes on them. The equillibrium will be a flat tax, which will be the unachievable goal.

This will also help slow down or get rid of the social programs that keep growing.

Okay please discuss.
 
Discuss:
Step #1: Move to the P&N forum.
Step #2: Read up on lobbying groups.
Step #3: Read up on checks and balences.
 
1. I'm not discussing politics, I'm discussing government.
2. The current checks and balances aren't enough.
 
You wrote:
Originally posted by: SagaLore
This house would be represented by Taxes.
Click to expand...

I saw:
Originally posted by: SagaLore
This house would be represented by Texas.
Click to expand...

😀

It's an interesting concept, but it's a very Rube Goldberg way to try to push for a flat tax.

 
So you want to give rich people more power and take it away from poor people? Sounds like a real great idea... If the USA were an oligarchy!
 
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
So you want to give rich people more power and take it away from poor people? Sounds like a real great idea... If the USA were an oligarchy!
Click to expand...

The House of Taxes would mainly have power over the budget. The House of Reps would still represent all those poor voters. The House of Reps could legislate taxes to help give the poor more say in the House of Taxes. It's based on tax percentage not total taxes paid. This will just help put everyone on an even playing ground.

Like I said, the Flat Tax is the goal, but it doesn't have to be achieved. It is just the baseline of perfect fairness. And remember that if the "Rich" try and influence legislation to lower their taxes, then they will lose a degree of representation. But they can also influence legislation to increase their taxes to gain stronger representation - which then funds more programs in the budget.
 
Texas? I'd give it to North Dakota...poor North Dakota...no one wants to visit you, you're like the ATOTer in the high school of USA...2 senators and barely any representatives...state flower is the snowball by Hostess...
 
Actually, I support the idea of a third house, but instead of letting them legislate taxes, how about having a third house that's sole job is to repeal laws. Thats all they would have the power to do, they couldnt pass laws, just take them off the books.

The real way to put an end to "the era of big government"
 
Originally posted by: Mookow
Actually, I support the idea of a third house, but instead of letting them legislate taxes, how about having a third house that's sole job is to repeal laws. Thats all they would have the power to do, they couldnt pass laws, just take them off the books.

The real way to put an end to "the era of big government"
Click to expand...

No, the House idea is that they *wouldn't* be able to legislate taxes, but simply control the budget. And they would be representated by the tax point system. The congress would still have control over tax legislation.

A secondary function perhaps could be to repeal laws. The whole point is that this House is built to make the government lean.
 
Originally posted by: SagaLore
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
So you want to give rich people more power and take it away from poor people? Sounds like a real great idea... If the USA were an oligarchy!
Click to expand...

The House of Taxes would mainly have power over the budget. The House of Reps would still represent all those poor voters. The House of Reps could legislate taxes to help give the poor more say in the House of Taxes. It's based on tax percentage not total taxes paid. This will just help put everyone on an even playing ground.

Like I said, the Flat Tax is the goal, but it doesn't have to be achieved. It is just the baseline of perfect fairness. And remember that if the "Rich" try and influence legislation to lower their taxes, then they will lose a degree of representation. But they can also influence legislation to increase their taxes to gain stronger representation - which then funds more programs in the budget.
Click to expand...

Interesting, but when you have a house controlling taxes, you have a house controlling the rest of the government. When you have the rich controlling this house, well, then you have the rich controlling government. Special interests are bad enough now.
 
Originally posted by: Ameesh
Tax money should go where its needed not where rich people want it to go. this is a stupid idea
Click to expand...

Tax money should go where its needed not decided by a population explosion of rabbit breeding poor people. Besides, the top 5% wealthiest people will have a little more weight, but aren't going to pull so much weight as to shift the power. And I don't think people who live soley on government funding should have so much power as to legislate their own dependency at the cost of others. The majority of voting power is going to be by the equilibrium middle of the middle class, where is should be.
 
Controlling the budget = control of the government. A system such as that would esentially eliminate democracy and set us on a path to feudalism.
 
I dunno...doesn't seem like we can get anything accomplished with two parties butting heads...I don't know how adding a third would make it any better.
 
Originally posted by: SagaLore
Originally posted by: Ameesh
Tax money should go where its needed not where rich people want it to go. this is a stupid idea
Click to expand...

Tax money should go where its needed not decided by a population explosion of rabbit breeding poor people. Besides, the top 5% wealthiest people will have a little more weight, but aren't going to pull so much weight as to shift the power. And I don't think people who live soley on government funding should have so much power as to legislate their own dependency at the cost of others. The majority of voting power is going to be by the equilibrium middle of the middle class, where is should be.
Click to expand...

do you realize how much of the US's tax revenue comes from the top 5% of the population?
 
Originally posted by: Ameesh
Originally posted by: SagaLore
Originally posted by: Ameesh
Tax money should go where its needed not where rich people want it to go. this is a stupid idea
Click to expand...

Tax money should go where its needed not decided by a population explosion of rabbit breeding poor people. Besides, the top 5% wealthiest people will have a little more weight, but aren't going to pull so much weight as to shift the power. And I don't think people who live soley on government funding should have so much power as to legislate their own dependency at the cost of others. The majority of voting power is going to be by the equilibrium middle of the middle class, where is should be.
Click to expand...

do you realize how much of the US's tax revenue comes from the top 5% of the population?
Click to expand...

Sure, the total amount is huge. But the vote system via tax points will be based on the percentage of the contribution, not the total. If the top 5% is going to pay 50% of their income then that contribution should be represented. For example, a guy making $10,000 a year can pay 10% taxes, and get a 10 point vote, while the lady making $1,000,000,000 a year could pay 10% taxes and still get an equal 10 point vote. But the rich lady still paid more. This isn't about how much money you HAVE but how much you GIVE.
 
Originally posted by: oboeguy
This makes no sense. Who's in this third house to discuss the budget?
Click to expand...

The reps that are voted in per state, based on tax contribution (via percentage). It will be like the Senate except not based on 1 vote per person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top