Should they charge you $10 for your ID at he DMV?

I mean, you're gonna pay it anyway in sales tax, right?

no, because then you are creating a financial barrier to voting

No, the financial barrier is there no matter where you put it.

That's a pretty basic economic principle.

When politicians say they're going to reduce the cost of healthcare, they don't really mean that.

It's not possible at actually reduce the cost of the healthcare without actually making the service less valuable.

of course

You can only relocate the cost.

im making a special case for things which are actual rights

like voting

i think financial barriers are infringement

what if the state decided to charge $10,000 for ID's? whats stopping them?

then only the super rich would vote.

this is obviously an extreme case

What I'm saying is you literally cannot eliminate the cost. It has to go somewhere.

likewise infringing on the second amendment by requiring permits, stamps etc which are prohibitively expensive

Otherwise the system breaks down.

i get that

i don't mind being taxed for a system I don't use so long as that system is still available to me

for instance the public school system

Let me ask this question, why should everyone have the right to vote? Why is voting a right for all legal adult citizens?

voting isn't intrinsicly a right but you have a right to self-determination and casting your vote is part of that

Voting means defining the extent to which government can use force.

Government being defined as the body which has a monopoly on the justified use of force.

So you could say that voting is exerting force or restraining force.

This is quite different from self-determination.

So for example, someone who's commited a serious enough crime can no longer legally purcahase a firearm. Similarly, it might be reasonable to limit that person's ability to contribute to decisions on when firearms should be used, or perhaps what restrictions there should be on the purchase of firearms.

did I do a smart, Dan? I hope so because I don't think the proper conclusions on this subject are quite so obvious, and I'm still trying to figure out what I think

i think its fair

i think the only other point that could be made is if a felon gets his rights taken away you dont get to pick and choose which ones you get back

so if you want to give a felon the right to vote back

you better give them the right to firearm ownership as well

i think a better question comes into the idea of positive and negative rights

and why being forced to pay into a positive rights system is immoral

Haven't heard this distinction before.

just the idea being Taxation is theft

if you choose to pay into a system like Social Security or you have a choice to opt out it removes the monopoly of force from the equation

and the system could only get better

but if it is forced the system only devolves because non net contributers to the system will be the majority and they will vote for more

but it removes force only for that particular right, no?