@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:
maxdancona wrote:
Quote:No it is not - continually increasing taxes automatically for years to come is taxation without representation. Increasing the tax rate once is representaion. What is the representation for year 2, 3, 4....etc. It is not voted on that the tax is needed. There is no representation for later increases - they would need to vote on each tax increase separately in order for it to have a representation for each increase.
I think this is a silly argument.
The law was voted on by duly elected representatives. Onn Tuesday, it may well be approved by the majority of Massachusetts voters. You may disagree with the result of this democratic process... but to claim that it isn't democratic is nonsense.
There are many high information voters who, along with me, will be voting an emphatic NO!
Explain how in 30 years an unborn child is being represented by an automatic tax increase?
The individuals who originally came from England and then lived in the American colonies or even those unborn but were descendants from England did not feel they were being represented - how is this different from some one not born yet that will not have the opportunity to be represented 30 years from now and the taxes are being automatically increased? I bet England thought the colonists were silly too.
I must admit, I am having trouble deciding if you are being serious or not.
I feel a bit silly pointing this out... it seems so obvious. In 30 years these future citizens will get the same chance to vote on tax policy as we have on Tuesday. If they want to change tax policy either through their elected representatives or through referendum they can.
That's how democracy works. If the ballot initiative fails it can be brought up again in two years. At any time the duly elected representatives can change it. It is the will of the people represented in a democratic process.
If you aren't being serious... your humor is a little dry, but I like it.
You have every right to vote on Tuesday.
