Billionaire Wants More Votes For The Rich

Yes, billionaire investor Tom Perkins is absolutely serious, the 1% should get more votes because they pay more in taxes (and if you pay no taxes, you would get no vote). From CNN Money:

Tom Perkins suggested Thursday that only taxpayers should have the right to vote — and that wealthy Americans who pay more in taxes should get more votes.

The venture capitalist offered the unorthodox proposal when asked to name one idea that would “change the world” at a speaking engagement in San Francisco moderated by Fortune’s Adam Lashinsky.

“The Tom Perkins system is: You don’t get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes,” Perkins said.

“But what I really think is, it should be like a corporation. You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes. How’s that?”

The audience at the Commonwealth Club reacted with laughter. But Perkins offered no immediate indication that he was joking. Asked offstage if the proposal was serious, Perkins said: “I intended to be outrageous, and it was.”

Perkins seemed to be aware that he was courting controversy, saying that his voting proposal would “make you more angry than my letter to the Wall Street Journal.”

That letter, published last month, compared the supposed assault on the wealthy to a wave of Nazi attacks on Jews ahead of the Holocaust.

The letter sparked a public firestorm, and the venture capital firm he co-founded — Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers — distanced itself from his comments. Perkins has since allowed that the comparison went too far, but has not apologized for the overall message and his warning about anti-rich “radicalism.”…

[continues at CNN Money]


Majestic is gadfly emeritus.

Latest posts by majestic (see all)

46 Comments on "Billionaire Wants More Votes For The Rich"

  1. Paying more taxes = more votes I do not agree with.

    Paying no taxes = no votes I am all aboard. Those who do not pay in, vote themselves more money. We’re past the tipping point unfortunately.

    • American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:41 am |

      up yours

    • so young men and women, who may not have had a job before they are given the right to vote should be excluded. that seems like an angle that you didn’t consider very well. among many.

      • Liam_McGonagle | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:53 pm |

        Hardly. Most millionaires and billionaires are such NOT because they’re EARNED it–but because it was GIVEN to them (e.g., legacies, government subsidies, etc., etc.). Let’s face facts: there’s a good many unfertilized sperm that have a higher net worth than you or I ever will.

    • Anarchy Pony | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:08 pm |

      Dispossession, how the fuck does it work? Ignorant fuckstick.

  2. Liam_McGonagle | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:21 am |

    This is like the guy in a fire fight who puts his hat on the end of a stick and pokes it around the corner.

  3. Gjallarbru | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:27 am |

    Personnally, I would think intelligence would be a better criteria. If you’re dumb as rock, a justified thought out vote is precluded. Same for eligibility of a public office of any significance. There should be some scrutiny about what kind of morons are getting those seats.

    I we are going to discriminate, let’s discriminate against idiots. Some of which are lucky enough to be a bit too rich for their own good.

    • The idea looks nice at first but the question of “how do we judge intelligence” always arises. Standardized tests? Social ladder climbing and certificates? … emmy awards?

      Where do artists, disabled, the downtrodden, the wise, and the ignorant geniuses belong in this design?

      • Gjallarbru | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:59 pm |

        I fully agree with your position. What I wrote should be more perceived as a comment than an actual viable suggestion. My use of the word “discriminate” was an invitation to understand the mockery I was making of the idea in the article. As soon as you start such discriminations, you are on a dangerous path.

        It is widely undertstood that IQ test are notoriously incomplete and only mesure limited segments of what constitutes intelligence. Therefore I see no real way of implementing this either.

        That being said, I have once stood in line a poll center, with a very objectively obvious idiot. That man could not have a valid opinion that he reached himself. I’m more than conviced his is told what to vote. Such things should not happen.

        Perhaps I should have put a ” 😛 ” after my text?

    • One problem, at least according to my theory of intelligence:

      I believe that EVERYONE of the same age has the same level of intelligence. The difference between everyone is that the intelligence is expressed differently and is based on personal experience. The football player in the pros (to use an example) has the same level of intelligence as the math genius, only the football player’s knowledge is held within his muscles as well as within his head.

      • Gjallarbru | Feb 15, 2014 at 7:54 am |

        We might not have a reliable method of evaluating intellingence, but I’m very sure that your concept isn’t reflected in reality. We are not all created equal.

        Throughout my schooling, in my professionnal life, and private life, I have seen some pretty limited people, both of body and mind. They were objectively and obviously gifted with much less means than others. I often wonder how they survive, and arrive at the conclusion that society, as it is, permits the existence of such weaklings. For myself, I saw how lucky I was that my genes afforded me a strong body with a functionnal brain.

        I have also seen some scrawny geniuses and big dumb brutes. I never saw the brutes express any substantial intellingence, their strength usually applied at punching others, and not much else. The geniuses had a big brain, but lacked the body to assert themselves.

        Yes experience allows for different levels of relfections on subjects that were experienced. Certainly the math wiz that never touched a wrench will a harder time fixing a car than the dumber but more experienced mechanic. But that still doesn’t put them both on equal footing in intellect. The intellectual range of both is very different, as the Math whiz can learn the knowledge of the mechanic if he wishes it, but not so for the mechanic in most cases.

        Experience and intellect are not the same thing. They do not equate to each other, nor influence each other. Experience is knowledge, intelligence is a mesure of what you can do with knowledge.

  4. There are certain tactical mistakes that your enemy can make, for which the negative repercussions are far in excess of any possible benefit.

    The principle of the “False Flag” operation is to make such mistakes for and as your enemy.

    The “Rich” have apparently either bred themselves into stupidity or pissed off a brilliant tactician.

    • Liam_McGonagle | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:26 pm |

      To be fair, though, up till this point nobody’s offered them even token resistance.

      It’s like how the Brown Tree Snake destroyed all the native wildlife on Guam. Until the white man brought that snake in after WWII, none of the native species had faced a real predator.

  5. American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:48 am |

    1) The Rich already buy all the votes they need to win elections, so doing this formally doesn’t matter anyway.
    2) Tony should quit wishing for more control & suffering of the poor because History:

  6. BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:54 am |

    the rich already own the homeland congress
    where the majority of members are rich

    dèr homeland has the smallest elected legislature
    of all the major democratic kuntries in the free whirled

  7. I’m convinced that protecting the individual plantation owner’s control over a number of votes equal to three-fifths of the number of slaves he owned was the real reason why the American south seceded and started the American Civil War.

    It’s interesting to hear someone argue that we should go back to the days when one’s representation in the democracy scaled upward with one’s wealth. I’m sure a lot of his peers think it, but it’s rare to hear it said aloud.

    The rich aren’t becoming more brazen out of desperation, of course, but because they’re getting more confident in their degree of control.

    • Agreed. He’s just trolling for sympathy. It looks easy to the 99.9%ers, but it’s a lot of work rigging elections and dodging taxes. That’s time spent that he could be devoting to grooming his wealth.

      • Calypso_1 | Feb 14, 2014 at 2:38 pm |

        Isn’t martyrdom an excellent road to sympathy?

        • Simon Valentine | Feb 14, 2014 at 2:55 pm |

          charismatically conditional sympathy or ? 🙂
          i realize i just asked the obvious rhetorical question corresponding to your point, but hey, i can’t think for only me 😉

        • This is the guy who was comparing the plight of the wealthly to holocaust victims. I’d say he’s ripe for some martyrdom.

      • Anarchy Pony | Feb 15, 2014 at 1:32 am |

        They do actually do a lot of work. Unfortunately non of it is really constructive.

  8. Thurlow Weed | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:04 pm |

    We already tried and dispensed with the Tom Perkins’ system in the Middle Ages.

  9. > billionaire investor Tom Perkins
    > venture capitalist

    Get back to me when you actually work for a living, parasite.

  10. Anarchy Pony | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:10 pm |

    Needz moar nooses on lampposts.

  11. Extra votes for the ultra-wealthy?

    Shades of the proposal espoused by some fiscal conservatives that the United States should return to the good, ol’ days of the Founding Fathers, when only (male, white) property owners were deemed worthy of voting rights.

  12. I’ve always felt this was an obvious result of “Citizens” United.

    After all, if Money is Speech, then at what point would society decide that people below a certain earning point shouldn’t vote to begin with? Taking from welfare (Silence means a full belly?), even if one works? Lower than 50th percentile of earnings? Unable to save money/must spend what you have (Move the voting booths to Chase Bank and Edward Jones investment offices?)? Votes measured by how many people work under you (unemployed get no vote, wage slaves get one vote, middle management gets the votes of people below them, CEOs get millions spread out over the nation by dint of their CEOhood)?

  13. How innovative… continue the political system that has been in effect for thousands of years.

Comments are closed.