The Fair and Balanced Tax Plan

Upon returning from the local Tax Day Tea Party rally this afternoon, this old engineer/systems guy has the tax plan that is both fair and balanced.  It goes like this:

  1. Neither taxation without representation nor representation without taxation can be sustained as a social contract–sooner or later either the parasites vote themselves the treasury or the beasts of burden throw off their yoke.
  2. Since there is no chance in the world of making the franchise to vote conditional on anything like property ownership or payment of taxes, let’s say that every living citizen of voting age gets their “heartbeat” vote (this assumes only the living are legal to vote, of course, so Chicago might have to rethink their current practices).
  3. As an offset to the non-payers perpetually electing corrupt legislators who will “spread the wealth” to their corrupt constituency, there will be authorized a corresponding pool of vote “tokens”, equal in count to the number of “heartbeat” voters paying no taxes.  Those tokens will be allocated in proportion to the share of the tax collections paid by a given individual.  This way, the vote is “progressive” in direct correspondence to the tax rate structure.  Fair is fair, Progressives.

Just to see how this would work, let’s assume there are 200 total voters, 50% of which pay no taxes and 50% of which pay all the taxes.  Each of the 200 would get one “heartbeat” vote, for a subtotal of 200.  There being 100 voters paying no taxes, there are created 100 vote “tokens”.  Further, let’s assume that 10 of the 100 tax payers pay 70% of the tax collections and, for simplicity’s sake, they all pay the same amount.  Those 10 top payers would get 7 “tokens” each, giving them 8 total votes at the next election.  The other 30 tokens would be allocated among the other 90 tax payers in proportion to the amount paid (in the actual population this could be designed so the smallest token allocated was a one vote token).  The end result of this would be that tax payers could “zero out” non-taxpayer’s vote with their vote “tokens”, retaining their ability to cast a vote based simply on their citizenship with their “heartbeat” vote.  The possibility would still exist, of course, for elections to hinge on issues upon which most or all citizens agreed, in which case tax payer’s and non-taxpayer’s votes would all count toward the agreed outcome.