I was just now washing and polishing the kitchen sinks and I had a thought. I thought about my post regarding who should have the honor and privilege of voting.
Well, I thought, what about the business entities that own property. Who votes on behalf of those property taxes? Not the business. Not the owner, CEO, or COO or whatever all the alphabet soup options are. If a piece of real property is not owned by a human, then that property does not have representation.
Now this is not a fully developed thought, but I don’t like that a business, which pays all kinds of taxes with each breath it takes to remain healthy not to mention grow in spite of overarching and smothering regulation, should not have representation.
But it does. Towns, cities, counties, commonwealths, states all want business development. It grows the tax base in every direction. So the business really does have representation – through the free market – to move where the atmosphere is most favorable.
And if only property owned by individuals creates an opportunity to vote, well, maybe more individuals would own property therefore creating an atmosphere of greater responsibility.
Sure, there are always loopholes and ways around. This is just a raw thought. Probably induced by the vinegar, salt, and Sheila Shine.
Coming soon after I finish developing the thought…a growing global government model in my (and likely other) communities.
I once has a business owner tell me…”I pay taxes three times and only get one vote”. And although he didn’t say it he most likely is paying 6 or 7 times the normal voter. So shouldn’t he have an extra vote as a business property owner?
No. He chose to be a business owner. Just like my Husband and myself, we chose to enter into an unfriendly business environment.
He, just as we, has an option, though. Own the property privately…
Well, a couple of years ago the Supreme Court ruled in favor of corporate personhood where a corporation represented by groups of individuals can exercise certain rights under the law.
I’m not going to relate my contrary feelings and opinions on this
Mine are contrary to that decision as well. Specifically because the choice can be exercised to choose which rights and regulations to accept. I, as a private citizen, don’t have that flexibility.
It makes me think the SC has opened the door to considering what you’re talking about but I haven’t read deeply enough into the subject to say w certainty.
From my lay person perspective, SCOTUS opened the door and propped it with a full edition of the tax code.
HA!