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

[sinkingfeeling]

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/14/investing/tom-perkins-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

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?"

Pressed for examples of how the rich were being demonized, Perkins said that he feared higher taxes.

[LakeVermilion]

1. If we do that...

then there is a 100% inheritance tax. Everyone gets to start at zero. No one gets a head start. Furthermore, you would have to marry and keep the money separate. No gifts that would change your financial status.

The we could give everyone $100,000 at age 18. They could invest it in education or start a business.

[WovenGems]

2. I can relate

Should not one with MPD be allowed a vote for each individual that lives in their split level head?

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Actually, after Citizens United, this is pretty much the way it is already.

The Government permits the poor, as well as the rich, to buy politicians and influence public opinion with massive PR campaigns, even though the poor contribute nothing to the well-being of the rich. With the poor population growing at such prodigious rates, it is clear that they could overwhelm the oligarchy with sheer numbers if left unchecked, so such a biased system needs to be rectified by distributing the voting power of individual citizens in terms of their personal wealth.

[warrior1]

4. how about you don't get any votes

but one. You ass.

[davekriss]

5. It already is 1 dollar, 1 vote, you fascist idiot Tom Perkins!

There are two votes in the United States. The first is the dollar vote, followed closely by the democratic vote. Those of us with lots of dollars get to "vote" much more heavily than those of us without. No candidate nor their policies and ideas survive the first vote if it does not either benefit those at the top or at least cause them no harm.

In Iran, the religious leaders pick the candidates that the general population gets to vote for, they are the gatekeepers ensuring continuance of their desired theocracy. In the United States, Wall Street and other modern robber barons pick the candidates we get to vote for, perpetuating and increasing class advantage. Hardly an ideal representative democracy.

I am not surprised, therefore, with the end result: Increasing income and wealth inequality, decreasing class mobility, and a declining living standard for the many of us who really, given that dollar vote, are nearly powerless in face of the changes being made in our nation.

NSA Stasi-like spying, drones flying over our skies, the militarization of our police, the end of net neutrality (the last bastion of free speech besides the village square) - what do any of us think that is for? What purpose could that serve except to quell unrest over an increasingly disfavorable political-economic environment?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

6. Why does this fucking chode keep showing up on my internet??!! nt

[shenmue]

8. Some days, the Interwebs are just mean

Take a deep breath. It's going to be all right.

[shenmue]

7. That's already illegal

It's called a poll tax and we already eliminated it.

What an asshat.

[Retrograde]

9. Look on the positive side

The US deficit will vanish as billionaires outdo each other to pay more in taxes in order to get more votes - and think of all the years Romney wouldn't have been able to vote!

(Do I really need a or a here?)

[louis-t]

10. "And ICE CREAM...WE WANT ICE CREAM!!1!!1"

[City Lights]

11. Fuck him and the snake he slithered in on!

[jsr]

12. What taxes do corporations pay?

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/04/top-tax-dodging-companies-politicians

10 Corporations With Multi-Billion In Profits That Pay No Taxes

Verizon Communications
Profits: $19.8 billion Effective tax rate: -3.8%

General Electric
Profits: $19.6 billion Effective tax rate: -18.9%

Boeing
Profits: $14.8 billion Effective tax rate: -5.5%

NextEra Energy: North America's largest solar and wind power operator, based in Florida
Profits: $8.8 billion Effective tax rate: -2%

American Electric Power: Electric utility based in Columbus, Ohio
Profits: $8.2 billion Effective tax rate: -6.4%

Pacific Gas & Electric: California electrical utility
Profits: $6 billion Effective tax rate: -8.4%

Apache: Houston-based oil and gas company
Profits: $6 billion Effective tax rate: -0.3%

Consolidated Edison: New York energy company
Profits: $5.9 billion Effective tax rate: -1.3%

El Paso: Houston-based energy company that operates the country's largest natural gas pipeline
Profits: $4.6 billion Effective tax rate: -0.9%

CenterPoint Energy: Electric and gas utility company based in Houston
Profits: $3.1 billion Effective tax rate: -11.3%

[El_Johns]

13. May Tom Perkins get sick & live a long life full of pain and ill health.

[jsr]

14. Everyone knows higher taxes will force them to go on food stamps.

[bullwinkle428]

15. Someone did the number-crunching on this proposal:

"Billionaire venture capitalist Tom Perkins, who suffers from a disease in which he is rapidly transforming into Montgomery Burns from The Simpsons, told a Fortune-sponsored conference that his big idea to change the world would be “You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes.”

In aggregate, this means that the top 1% of taxpayers would have equal voting power with the other 95% of the country and, given that people on the cusp of wealth (or people who think they are) often side with their betters, it means a great deal more power even than that.

The Roper Center of the University of Connecticut tells us that Barack Obama beat Mitt Romney largely with the support of people making less than $50,000 a year where voters broke 60% for the president compared to 38% for his rich rival. These are the people making less than the median household income, which has hovered around $50,000 for years now. Voters making between $50,000 and $90,000 a year started to break for Romney. He took 52% of those voters compared to 48% for Obama. Voters who made more than $100,000 a year went 54% for Romney and 44% for Obama...

Conservatives like Perkins whine about the earned income tax credit because it gives money to people who pay no taxes. A little history here – in 1986 the earned income tax credit was expanded by Ronald Reagan because he wanted to give people an incentive to work rather than apply for government welfare programs. It is a subsidy for low wage work so that people aren’t tempted to turn down a job offer because they might lose their assistance checks. It is cheaper than welfare, because people are working, and it encourages people to take lower paying jobs while they look for opportunities. This tax credit is a classically Republican notion that Republicans now hate."

Read more: Daily Politics Blog - Charles P. Pierce - Political Blogging - Esquire
Follow us: @Esquiremag on Twitter | Esquire on Facebook
Visit us at Esquire.com

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I fear Tom was born in the wrong century

And the rumblings from the peasants are making him really afraid.

[PowerToThePeople]

17. How about inverse wealth to votes

Those with more wealth get less votes. That way the less well off get more representation. Then the wealth may begin to balance out.

[MisterP]

18. that's an idea from terrifying nightmare-lord H.L. Hunt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Hunt
heck, the ancien regime only gave the nobles one out of three houses (since the <i>sang<i> didn't want the mercantile rich outbuying them)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_General_(France)

[Nay]

19. That anyone could even say this in public and not be stoned to death is, IMO,

unbelievable.

[PD Turk]

20. ...