Below are my two contributions to Cleggy's excellent idea.
http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/direct-democracy-under-a-narrower-taxpayer-only-franchise/idea-view
No representation without taxation
Only taxpayers who pay a minimum of tax, say £1,000 per annum, will be entitled to vote.
This would stop most women from voting.
Women are, as we know, potentially parasitical because they
1. want to mother everything
2. find mothering an expression of their nature and identity
3. know that the more they mother and the more dependent their charges are, the more important they are perceived to be (You therefore get quite a few mothers "boasting" of their disabled and autistic child and therefore their martyrdom.)
4. are sentimental, masochistic, hypocritical, irrational, emotional, and often in the dishonourable position of wishing to wound but being afraid to strike, eg single mothers, criminals etc. They are the most vociferous proponents of bail-outism.
5. are the ones who are always whingeing for more state handouts. (If you don't believe me, visit Mumsnet and see them asking for more state assistance because they have messed up their lives through being unmarried mothers, divorced mothers or are messing up their children by becoming bad mothers and messing up their employers by being bad employees suing for sex discrimination at the drop of a hat.)
Notice how our male politicians abase themselves before Mumsnet and Woman's Hour chasing the female vote. Imagine if a female politician were asked what kind of knickers she wears or what her favourite biscuit was, and then mocked because she didn't have an answer ready. She would soon tell her questioners where to go.
Having a taxpayer-only only franchise would therefore exclude most women, which would be a good thing because they are always the ones asking for more nannying legislation and state handouts.
Even if these women were given a sum representing the minimum of tax required to entitle a citizen to become a voter by their husbands, it is a given that most of them would buy something nice to wear with it rather than spend it on exercising their democractic right.
A society under this government would find most women in wedlock doing only one job: of being a housewife and mother, rather than being a working mum. This does not imply coercion but choice. Women are not completely stupid and would vote with their feet to have one occupation rather than two if they did not need the money enough to go out to work.
Government by Referenda in a One Party State
This need not mean totalitarian government if the party constitution properly protects the rights of freee speech, party position and income of individual members against the leader and his cronies.
It should be quite clear by now that MPs in fact have no free speech in this country. Powell, Mercer, Duncan and Grayling were all expelled and demoted by their leader for saying something that incurred the wrath or displeasure of the leader.
Under this proposed system all who have an interest in politics - whatever their view - have only one party to join. This means that changing one's mind on totemic policies does not mean career-disaster as one merely cultivates a different set of people within the party with whom one shares common objectives.
I therefore propose that all differences be settled INTRA party rather than INTER party.
This would mean that the whips will be retired and all votes by MPs would be free votes, entitling them to vote according to their convictions and principles rather than the behest of their party whip.
All MPs would have a residential connection with the constituency they represent, and the practice of the national party parachuting in someone disliked by local party would be ended.
This would actually mean more accountable government doing what the voters want and greater job security for MPs.
Elections would be conducted annually, rather like an AGM where shareholders vote to appoint or reappoint directors, approve accounts, vote for or against resolutions etc.
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=107
has a draft party constitution losely based on the constitution of the Chinese Communist Party.
Proportionately More Votes for Proportionately More Taxes
This idea mirrors the power of a shareholder. It would then become a privilege and an honour to pay tax. There would be a Register of Voters with the top taxpayer of the year being accorded the title of Taxpayer of the Year with accompanying honours and publicity, if this is what he wishes.
Individual voters would be able to get in touch with each other to organise campaigns through this Register of Voters, which would be online, rather like http://www.1party4all.co.uk
My idea is important because it would
Remember, bad motherhood causes the deterioration of the next generation and the degeneration of the nation!
The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world!
Unfortunately, 46% of the hands that rocks the cradle is a promiscuous never-married mother who couldn't find herself a husband or is too short-sighted and foolish to think she does.
It should also be noted that 70% of our prison population were singly parented.
It is about time the government discouraged the poor and stupid in the breeding the next generation of feral youth, CHAVs, NEETs and benefit scum mums. It is after all its role to encourage the prudent taxpayer to marry and have children who will be future taxpayers, in the long-term national interest.
It is now time for the government to re-examine the role of the women and motherhood if Britain does not want to sink into barbarism and irreversible decline.
There really is not much time left. When the percentage of babies born out of wedlock reach 50%, the British would be locked into a vicious cycle of irreversible decline and descent into barbarism.
http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/repeal-the-sex-discrimination-act-1975-1/idea-view
It basically urges the government to disenfranchise most women - especially the parasitical female - by requiring citizens to pay a minimum of tax before they can vote.
It recommends that the UK dump representative democracy in favour of one-party direct democracy under a narrower taxpayer-only franchise where voters get proportionately more votes if they pay proportionately more tax.
This has benefits for the government and the governed. MPs would get better job security and the governed would be better and more rationally governed and given the lower taxes and fewer laws that they actually want.
http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/direct-democracy-under-a-narrower-taxpayer-only-franchise/idea-view
No representation without taxation
Only taxpayers who pay a minimum of tax, say £1,000 per annum, will be entitled to vote.
This would stop most women from voting.
Women are, as we know, potentially parasitical because they
1. want to mother everything
2. find mothering an expression of their nature and identity
3. know that the more they mother and the more dependent their charges are, the more important they are perceived to be (You therefore get quite a few mothers "boasting" of their disabled and autistic child and therefore their martyrdom.)
4. are sentimental, masochistic, hypocritical, irrational, emotional, and often in the dishonourable position of wishing to wound but being afraid to strike, eg single mothers, criminals etc. They are the most vociferous proponents of bail-outism.
5. are the ones who are always whingeing for more state handouts. (If you don't believe me, visit Mumsnet and see them asking for more state assistance because they have messed up their lives through being unmarried mothers, divorced mothers or are messing up their children by becoming bad mothers and messing up their employers by being bad employees suing for sex discrimination at the drop of a hat.)
Notice how our male politicians abase themselves before Mumsnet and Woman's Hour chasing the female vote. Imagine if a female politician were asked what kind of knickers she wears or what her favourite biscuit was, and then mocked because she didn't have an answer ready. She would soon tell her questioners where to go.
Having a taxpayer-only only franchise would therefore exclude most women, which would be a good thing because they are always the ones asking for more nannying legislation and state handouts.
Even if these women were given a sum representing the minimum of tax required to entitle a citizen to become a voter by their husbands, it is a given that most of them would buy something nice to wear with it rather than spend it on exercising their democractic right.
A society under this government would find most women in wedlock doing only one job: of being a housewife and mother, rather than being a working mum. This does not imply coercion but choice. Women are not completely stupid and would vote with their feet to have one occupation rather than two if they did not need the money enough to go out to work.
Government by Referenda in a One Party State
This need not mean totalitarian government if the party constitution properly protects the rights of freee speech, party position and income of individual members against the leader and his cronies.
It should be quite clear by now that MPs in fact have no free speech in this country. Powell, Mercer, Duncan and Grayling were all expelled and demoted by their leader for saying something that incurred the wrath or displeasure of the leader.
Under this proposed system all who have an interest in politics - whatever their view - have only one party to join. This means that changing one's mind on totemic policies does not mean career-disaster as one merely cultivates a different set of people within the party with whom one shares common objectives.
I therefore propose that all differences be settled INTRA party rather than INTER party.
This would mean that the whips will be retired and all votes by MPs would be free votes, entitling them to vote according to their convictions and principles rather than the behest of their party whip.
All MPs would have a residential connection with the constituency they represent, and the practice of the national party parachuting in someone disliked by local party would be ended.
This would actually mean more accountable government doing what the voters want and greater job security for MPs.
Elections would be conducted annually, rather like an AGM where shareholders vote to appoint or reappoint directors, approve accounts, vote for or against resolutions etc.
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=107
has a draft party constitution losely based on the constitution of the Chinese Communist Party.
Proportionately More Votes for Proportionately More Taxes
This idea mirrors the power of a shareholder. It would then become a privilege and an honour to pay tax. There would be a Register of Voters with the top taxpayer of the year being accorded the title of Taxpayer of the Year with accompanying honours and publicity, if this is what he wishes.
Individual voters would be able to get in touch with each other to organise campaigns through this Register of Voters, which would be online, rather like http://www.1party4all.co.uk
My idea is important because it would
- enable a return to rational, smaller government thus safeguarding our liberties and our property
- give MPs greater job security
- enable MPs to make decisions that reflect the wishes of the people they represent rather than their party leaders, allowing them to become more popular, respected and better paid
- rid Britain's politicians of the scourge of the female vote - the cause of matriarchal degeneracy and matriarchal dementia that we are now suffering because women now have too much power.
Remember, bad motherhood causes the deterioration of the next generation and the degeneration of the nation!
The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world!
Unfortunately, 46% of the hands that rocks the cradle is a promiscuous never-married mother who couldn't find herself a husband or is too short-sighted and foolish to think she does.
It should also be noted that 70% of our prison population were singly parented.
It is about time the government discouraged the poor and stupid in the breeding the next generation of feral youth, CHAVs, NEETs and benefit scum mums. It is after all its role to encourage the prudent taxpayer to marry and have children who will be future taxpayers, in the long-term national interest.
It is now time for the government to re-examine the role of the women and motherhood if Britain does not want to sink into barbarism and irreversible decline.
There really is not much time left. When the percentage of babies born out of wedlock reach 50%, the British would be locked into a vicious cycle of irreversible decline and descent into barbarism.
http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/repeal-the-sex-discrimination-act-1975-1/idea-view
It basically urges the government to disenfranchise most women - especially the parasitical female - by requiring citizens to pay a minimum of tax before they can vote.
It recommends that the UK dump representative democracy in favour of one-party direct democracy under a narrower taxpayer-only franchise where voters get proportionately more votes if they pay proportionately more tax.
This has benefits for the government and the governed. MPs would get better job security and the governed would be better and more rationally governed and given the lower taxes and fewer laws that they actually want.
No comments:
Post a Comment