# Are there any good arguments for property qualifications for voting? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 19, 2009, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659 "2009-04-19T22:14:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/21 "2009-04-20T18:22:27Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > How do they do that? Bills have to be offered on the floor to do that. They vote for the people who will vote for the bills they want to see offered on the floor. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/22 "2009-04-20T18:28:24Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > . . . but as the poor are the vast majority in any society . . . But, they’re not. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/23 "2009-04-20T18:32:57Z")
> [@Huerta88](#): > > There is no realistic scenario in which rich citizens would vote in a way that would lead them to get “government money” (there’s no such thing) that had been extorted from poor citizens, so the cases are not as parallel as you imply. There are precedents in history. For instance, Britain, before the reforms of the 1830s, featured a corrupt patronage system where influential gentlemen who supported the government (what we would call “administration”) currently in power would be rewarded with sinecures, lifetime offices with fat salaries and few or no duties. And, under the tax system of the time, it was the poor who mostly paid for those salaries. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/24 "2009-04-20T18:35:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, they’re not. It’s all relative to the incentive to work isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/25 "2009-04-20T18:40:38Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > One can profit from government favoritism without receiving a direct subsidy. The government can build infrastructure that directly benefits you, pass laws that harm your competitors, or weaken regulations on shady business practices. > > This is why we have lobbyists. An entire industry has been built up with the sole purpose of getting Congress to vote in ways that will lead to financial gain for powerful individuals and corporations. I’m afraid you’re not including the whole story here - lobbyists represent numberless industries, interests and organizations, and it is a lock that you belong to many of these yourself and that you have no problem lobbying the government when you want your own opinion heard. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/26 "2009-04-20T18:47:25Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > I’m afraid you’re not including the whole story here - lobbyists represent numberless industries, interests and organizations, and it is a lock that you belong to many of these yourself and that you have no problem lobbying the government when you want your own opinion heard. Oh, of course. I view lobbyists as an inescapable evil. And if business interests are lobbying for benefits, then non-business interests better match their effort if they’re going to get their fair share. My point is that **Huerta88** ’s schtick about the rich not wanting to manipulate governance to their financial benefit is laughable when we have such a clear example of them behaving otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/27 "2009-04-20T18:52:25Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > It’s all relative to the incentive to work isn’t it? 😕 Are you defining everyone who is not independently wealthy, everyone who has to work for a living or depend on welfare, as “poor”? So defined, they **are** “the vast majority in any society.” But that’s not the definition used in daily discourse nor any government’s official definition. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/28 "2009-04-20T18:55:02Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > 😕 Are you defining everyone who is not independently wealthy, everyone who has to work for a living or depend on welfare, as “poor”? That’s not the definition used in daily discourse nor any government’s official definition. Nope just the opposite. I am defining everyone who lives off of welfare as poor, and that the more welfare benefits that are supplied the higher the wages must be to compete with welfare, therefore welfare disincentivizes work. Why work for minimum wage when I can live in public housing, received food stamps and get on Medicaid? ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/29 "2009-04-20T18:55:49Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > It’s all relative to the incentive to work isn’t it? And if you can’t influence the system peacefully, why work? Revolution is your only real option: They’ve locked the door against you, so batter it down. The French, Russians, and Chinese all learned that the hard way. One of the biggest reasons we don’t have violent revolution in this country is the fact the vast majority of adults can vote. Whether they do or not seems to matter less than whether they can. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/30 "2009-04-20T18:57:32Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > And if you can’t influence the system peacefully, why work? Revolution is your only real option: They’ve locked the door against you, so batter it down. The French, Russians, and Chinese all learned that the hard way. Well that is a good argument regarding property rights. I expanded the meaning a little to say essentially, “No representation without taxation.” ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/31 "2009-04-20T19:01:55Z")
This “the poor will vote themselves welfare” argument reminds me of this quotation attributed to “Alexander Tyler”: > [@](#): > > A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: > > From bondage to spiritual faith; > From spiritual faith to great courage; > From courage to liberty; > From liberty to abundance; > From abundance to complacency; > From complacency to apathy; > From apathy to dependence; > From dependence back into bondage. This [has been a proliferating spamvirus for some time.](http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp) However: 1. The person to whom it is apparently attributed is actually [Alexander Frasier Tytler](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Tytler) (Scottish-British lawyer, 1747-1813), not Tyler. 2. He never said or wrote any such thing; no part of the quotation can be traced back earlier than 1943. 3. If he had said it, he would have been wrong. No republic in history – not Athens, not Rome, not France, not Germany, not any other – has **ever** self-destructed via the plebs voting themselves largesse from the treasury. Republics have self-destructed in several other ways, but not that way. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/32 "2009-04-20T19:13:56Z")
Oh, and BTW, [Ben Franklin never warned against letting Jews into America, either.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Franklin_Prophecy) It’s the same sort of canard. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/33 "2009-04-20T19:24:20Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Oh, and BTW, [Ben Franklin never warned against letting Jews into America, either.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Franklin_Prophecy) It’s the same sort of canard. Umm, what the hell are you talking about? What does this have to do with anything? Is this some sort of really clever Godwin? Franklin wasn’t an anti-semite \> it was anti-semitic propaganda by liberation magazine \> therefore linking voting rights to property rights is anti-semitic \> therefore anyone who wants to do so is HITLER!!! ??? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/34 "2009-04-20T19:28:34Z")
Well, of course not! Hitler didn’t base such rights on property, he based it on racial purity! Wholly different barrel of horseshit! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/35 "2009-04-20T19:58:05Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Umm, what the hell are you talking about? What does this have to do with anything? Just another instance of the kind of silly UL that can propagate in the Internet age – specifically, the kind that sounds serious and credible because it is associated with history or historians or historical figures. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/36 "2009-04-20T19:58:40Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Nope just the opposite. I am defining everyone who lives off of welfare as poor, and that the more welfare benefits that are supplied the higher the wages must be to compete with welfare, therefore welfare disincentivizes work. Why work for minimum wage when I can live in public housing, received food stamps and get on Medicaid? Have you ever lived in a project ? Eaten the kind of food you get with welfare coupons ? Have you, in fact ever lived, hell, ever _talked to someone_ living in the kind of squalor that lies below minimum wage (which itself leads to really shitty living conditions) ? No one lives like this by choice. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/37 "2009-04-20T20:14:53Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Nope just the opposite. I am defining everyone who lives off of welfare as poor . . . Well, the poor so defined are **not** the vast majority of American society (or any I know of). They’re a small minority. And a vote is all they’ve **got.** ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/38 "2009-04-20T20:16:12Z")
I’ve seen a message-button at SF conventions: “Democracy is four wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.” Which is clever, and funny, and a lie. In real life, democracy is four sheep and a wolf voting on what to have for lunch, because in real life, the sheep (i.e., the poor, working and middle classes) collectively outnumber the wolves **and that’s the only defense they’ve got.** ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/39 "2009-04-20T20:50:21Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Have you ever lived in a project ? Eaten the kind of food you get with welfare coupons ? Have you, in fact ever lived, hell, ever _talked to someone_ living in the kind of squalor that lies below minimum wage (which itself leads to really shitty living conditions) ? > No one lives like this by choice. I have friends who could be working and are receiving welfare, so yes. They have told me straight up that they could work but they don’t really want to. Never lived in a Project, but I’ve seen some nice ones and I’ve seen some crappy ones. I know people who have a pretty good deal with the low-income housing. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659/40 "2009-04-20T20:54:47Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Have you ever lived in a project ? Eaten the kind of food you get with welfare coupons ? Have you, in fact ever lived, hell, ever _talked to someone_ living in the kind of squalor that lies below minimum wage (which itself leads to really shitty living conditions) ? > No one lives like this by choice. I agree with everything except your last line. I accept that it sucks being poor/homeless. But a significant part of the reason it sucks is the company it puts you into – i.e., that of other poor homeless people. But recognizing it sucks is not proving that there aren’t significant volitional aspects to it. Choices that are made/not made that perpetuate the poverty. To paraphrase Thomas Sowell, most everyone is among “the poor” at some point in their life – when their skills, their age, their circumstances combine to make them capable of generating not much income. But most of us figure out how to gradually work our way out of living, as many of us did in school, at a hobo-level of subsistence. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-good-arguments-for-property-qualifications-for-voting/493659.md?page=3)