What if 1 Taxpayer vote = 10 non-taxpayer vote

Review |

shivamthkr247 11d ago

Since we know, the 3% taxpayers are the backbone of the country. There money is spent in "infra", freebies, managements and funding our ministers' foreign trips. And what is provided in return, is heavily unsatisfactory. So, lets take a hypothetical situation, What if, any govt. decides to implement this law, that 1 Taxpayer vote will be equal to 10 non-taxpayer votes.

Clauses :

If a person is paying taxes, his spouse and kids (only if within the age range of 18-21) will be allowed to enjoy this right.
If the number of kids is more than 2, then the kids cannot enjoy this right, but the person and spouse are still eligible.
Votes will be treated as points, where 1 non-taxpayer vote = 1 point, and 1 taxpayer (with spouse and kids if any) vote = 10 points
Only people paying Direct taxes will be included.

Now, what will change ? The POV of the ministers.

A Taxpayer is never seen as a vote-bank, but a cow that can be milked for profits, even if its scrawny. When the taxpayer vote value will increase, their demands will be listened too. They will be brought new policies, and better infra and facilities for their "appeasement". The current appeasement is clearly communal, from both sides. BJP MLAs want to work for HINDUS (that too, just for speech), and Congress says "Muslim means congress". This communal appeasement will still exist, but Taxpayer appeasement will be more. Since 3% of current population pays Direct taxes, it'll definitely work.

Your opinions ? (Please be respectful, I'm open to amends and constructive criticism)

Comments (12)

aakash 2026-06-09

1 reply

I thought this platform is open. But seems like this platform is just Cockroach 2... Just protest, just blame...

0

Report Reply
EidTru02 2026-06-09

Not sure what you mean. An open platform doesn't mean everyone agrees. It means different views can be expressed without being forced into a left vs right camp.

0

Report Reply
ProvDil 2026-06-08

Good discussion, guys. Added a new petition on this topic [give-citizens-more-control-over-public-spending](https://fukroach.org/petitions/15/give-citizens-more-control-over-public-spending)

0

Report Reply
ProvDil 2026-06-08

lol!!! Not feasible what happens if somebody loses a job just before the election. Not tax, no vote Also, how will you decide who is tax paying voter - you have to pay tax every year, once in a lifetime, every election cycle But, yes agree with the other comment. Citizens should have more control on budget and how it is spent. 50-100 years back, it made sense to elect MPs and let them decide on your behalf. But now, we have technology to vote more often/more regularly. So, we should have online voting for all critical decisions

0

Report Reply
CricDa 2026-06-08

1 reply

No one can seriously deny that freebie politics is becoming a major problem. In many ways, it's even more dangerous than caste or religious politics because the economic consequences can last for decades. That said, the solution is not to create another division by separating citizens into taxpayers and non-taxpayers. Democracy works best when rights are equal, even if responsibilities are not. I don't have the perfect solution either, but constantly inventing new categories to divide people is probably not it.

0

Report Reply
shivamthkr247 2026-06-08

"The only way to relieve yourself off a distraction, is by creating a new productive one" Freebie politics is bad, we both agree, but you saying that this voting system will create another division in society is 90% wrong. For instance, have we ever heard two rich businessmen cancel a deal due to difference in identity like religion/caste/race or anything (if any, then Extremely Rare). So, why not create a division that brings people together. Classism is already there, you know it too, what I'm making is not a new category, but I'm bringing out the benefits of a division that isn't discriminatory to the extent of communal discrimination. Personally, what I inferred was attempts of removing inequality have created more hatred. I know a guy who doesn't like SC/ST category students, solely due to RESERVATIONS. He didn't had this hatred, until it came to entrance examinations and admissions in institutes. And there are many more like him.

0

Report Reply
EidTru02 2026-06-08

1 reply

That's the slippery slope. If paying tax gives you more voting power, the next argument will be that paying more tax should give you even more voting power. Then before you know it, a handful of billionaires are deciding who becomes PM. That's why I'd keep "1 person = 1 vote" intact and instead look at ways to give taxpayers more oversight over budgets and spending.

0

Report Reply
shivamthkr247 2026-06-08

1 reply

Well, that's something that'll ONLY happen on further amends. Which atleast I wouldn't agree for. It'd be fixed for the people that fall under the current (or if in future, the fixed) tax slabs

0

Report Reply
EidTru02 2026-06-08

1 reply

I can think of a thousand reasons why we shouldn't even consider this. Whether someone pays tax or not, every citizen should have an equal vote. Otherwise, what's the point of democracy? Personally, I'm even in favor of allowing prisoners to vote, unless they've been convicted of particularly heinous crimes. Rights should not depend on income. Having said that, I can imagine a future where citizens are directly involved in deciding how government budgets are allocated. There could be advisory votes or citizen panels where expertise matters. Why shouldn't someone with a degree in finance or economics, who also pays taxes, have a greater say on budget priorities than politicians who may have neither?

0

Report Reply
shivamthkr247 2026-06-08

Okay, I get your point. But, every outcome you listed is an extreme case. Going from TAXPAYER VOTE VALUES MORE -> HIGHER TAX EQUALS HIGHER VALUE -> DEGREE MEANS MORE COVERAGE TO STATEMENTS -> ECONOMICS EXPERT MEANS MORE SAY IN BUDGET -> PEOPLE CONTROLLING BUDGET ; it's a long chain. And also, Democracy is not a perfect system, there are flaws, and any country must follow the system that promises it's progress with minimal challenges, instead of being hellbent on one system. And this is one of the biggest flaws. "When a fool and a wise man hold the same amount of power, the society is bound to face hardships" - Greek philosophers. Which is true.

0

Report Reply
Life2090 2026-06-08

1 reply

Nice idea, but in a democracy, 1 voter = 1 vote. Giving taxpayers more voting power would never be politically acceptable. What may be more realistic is allowing taxpayers to directly vote on budgets, major welfare schemes, and tax-related spending. If you're paying the bill, you should at least get a say in how the money is spent. Parliament would still pass the budget, but taxpayer approval could be required for large spending increases, new freebies, or major borrowing. That would create far more accountability than simply electing representatives every five years.

1

Report Reply
shivamthkr247 2026-06-08

Yup, definitely agree. Any big policy when reviewed by the real educated people, would benefit the decision making as well as stability of relations bw people and government.

0

Report Reply