if you are 17 and in the army you cant vote either
Tu Stultus Es
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- New try to let non-citizens vote in San Francisco
I assume that taking the time to become a citizen is a good minimum standard to measure dedication for immigrants.mikkel wrote:
No level of dedication beyond doing everything that you have done yourself, short of (by choice or by limitation) assuming citizenship? Do you consider your only dedication to your country to be your citizenship?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Because I don't want someone that has shown no level of dedication whatsoever to the country to be trusted to vote in its best interest.mikkel wrote:
Yes, why? What is the reason for citizenship to play a role in these matters, rather than some other distinction? Why should the opinion of an ex-pat citizen who contributes nothing to the country carry weight, whereas a legal immigrant who pays taxes and maintains a continuous presence in the country carry none? It's an arbitrary distinction. I can see the reason for it being the chosen arbitrary distinction, but I do not agree with it.
If it's a public school and you're not a citizen then no. Go to a private school if you don't like it. I was surprised hearing non-citizens can enroll their kids in public schools =/ I know in Aus you have to pay extra and in Canada you have to wait a long ass time or some shit along the lines.mikkel wrote:
You are signed up for selective service, if eligible, when you petition for permanent residence, be it conditional or not. You can be called up to die for the country, but you don't get a say in how your child's school is run?Cybargs wrote:
You can't join the armed forces without being at least a PR with intent of citizenship.mikkel wrote:
No level of dedication beyond doing everything that you have done yourself, short of (by choice or by limitation) assuming citizenship? Do you consider your only dedication to your country to be your citizenship?
That depends. If you have dual citizenship, the rules are a bit tricky regarding taxation, but in general, you typically only pay taxes where you make the money itself. If you renounce your citizenship for the country you left, then you no longer pay taxes to that country other than for any property you have there or any money you make there. Most of your taxation will involve paying the country you are a citizen of.Cybargs wrote:
You mean ex-pat americans? You do realize they all have to pay federal income taxes... And pay the host countries taxes as well. Lose lose situation lol.mikkel wrote:
Yes, why? What is the reason for citizenship to play a role in these matters, rather than some other distinction? Why should the opinion of an ex-pat citizen who contributes nothing to the country carry weight, whereas a legal immigrant who pays taxes and maintains a continuous presence in the country carry none? It's an arbitrary distinction. I can see the reason for it being the chosen arbitrary distinction, but I do not agree with it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Because one person is a citizen and the other isn't. How does citizenship not play a role? Why should one person who pays taxes get to vote for the president and not another person who also pays taxes?
I know for sure (loads of expats at my school) that Americans living abroad still have to pay US federal taxes... Aussie expats (like my dad) do not have to pay income taxes to the aus gov, but everyone has to pay the Taiwanese gov regardless... But yeah loads of Dual citizens who work abroad usually renounce their American citizenship due to taxation.Turquoise wrote:
That depends. If you have dual citizenship, the rules are a bit tricky regarding taxation, but in general, you typically only pay taxes where you make the money itself. If you renounce your citizenship for the country you left, then you no longer pay taxes to that country other than for any property you have there or any money you make there. Most of your taxation will involve paying the country you are a citizen of.Cybargs wrote:
You mean ex-pat americans? You do realize they all have to pay federal income taxes... And pay the host countries taxes as well. Lose lose situation lol.mikkel wrote:
Yes, why? What is the reason for citizenship to play a role in these matters, rather than some other distinction? Why should the opinion of an ex-pat citizen who contributes nothing to the country carry weight, whereas a legal immigrant who pays taxes and maintains a continuous presence in the country carry none? It's an arbitrary distinction. I can see the reason for it being the chosen arbitrary distinction, but I do not agree with it.
Well then I guess we're going to disagree here.Cybargs wrote:
If it's a public school and you're not a citizen then no.mikkel wrote:
You are signed up for selective service, if eligible, when you petition for permanent residence, be it conditional or not. You can be called up to die for the country, but you don't get a say in how your child's school is run?Cybargs wrote:
You can't join the armed forces without being at least a PR with intent of citizenship.
Huh? Were you also surprised to hear that non-citizens also pay the taxes that fund the public schools?Cybargs wrote:
I was surprised hearing non-citizens can enroll their kids in public schools =/ I know in Aus you have to pay extra and in Canada you have to wait a long ass time or some shit along the lines.
That really, really depends on a whole lot of factors. Pay a visit to the IRS website for more information.Cybargs wrote:
You mean ex-pat americans? You do realize they all have to pay federal income taxes... And pay the host countries taxes as well. Lose lose situation lol.mikkel wrote:
Yes, why? What is the reason for citizenship to play a role in these matters, rather than some other distinction? Why should the opinion of an ex-pat citizen who contributes nothing to the country carry weight, whereas a legal immigrant who pays taxes and maintains a continuous presence in the country carry none? It's an arbitrary distinction. I can see the reason for it being the chosen arbitrary distinction, but I do not agree with it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Because one person is a citizen and the other isn't. How does citizenship not play a role? Why should one person who pays taxes get to vote for the president and not another person who also pays taxes?
Yeah, dual citizenship is not usually the way to go. I guess I was using the term expatriate incorrectly. I didn't realize it implies that the person has to remain a citizen of the country they leave.Cybargs wrote:
I know for sure (loads of expats at my school) that Americans living abroad still have to pay US federal taxes... Aussie expats (like my dad) do not have to pay income taxes to the aus gov, but everyone has to pay the Taiwanese gov regardless... But yeah loads of Dual citizens who work abroad usually renounce their American citizenship due to taxation.Turquoise wrote:
That depends. If you have dual citizenship, the rules are a bit tricky regarding taxation, but in general, you typically only pay taxes where you make the money itself. If you renounce your citizenship for the country you left, then you no longer pay taxes to that country other than for any property you have there or any money you make there. Most of your taxation will involve paying the country you are a citizen of.Cybargs wrote:
You mean ex-pat americans? You do realize they all have to pay federal income taxes... And pay the host countries taxes as well. Lose lose situation lol.
Good point. I don't think I'll ever understand how we've set up our minimum age requirements for voting, drinking, and serving in the military.eleven bravo wrote:
if you are 17 and in the army you cant vote either
It's pretty ridiculous.
You're still right to a degree. The U.S. taxation of income for expatriates depends on the tax treaties in effect between the U.S. and the country of residence. In almost all cases, the standard foreign income exemption (which I believe is $86,000 for an individual filing) will have to be exhausted before the ex-pat will be eligible for any U.S. income taxation.Turquoise wrote:
Yeah, dual citizenship is not usually the way to go. I guess I was using the term expatriate incorrectly. I didn't realize it implies that the person has to remain a citizen of the country they leave.Cybargs wrote:
I know for sure (loads of expats at my school) that Americans living abroad still have to pay US federal taxes... Aussie expats (like my dad) do not have to pay income taxes to the aus gov, but everyone has to pay the Taiwanese gov regardless... But yeah loads of Dual citizens who work abroad usually renounce their American citizenship due to taxation.Turquoise wrote:
That depends. If you have dual citizenship, the rules are a bit tricky regarding taxation, but in general, you typically only pay taxes where you make the money itself. If you renounce your citizenship for the country you left, then you no longer pay taxes to that country other than for any property you have there or any money you make there. Most of your taxation will involve paying the country you are a citizen of.
That sounds about right. I remember seeing something about that in my 1040 booklet when I was doing my taxes this year.mikkel wrote:
You're still right to a degree. The U.S. taxation of income for expatriates depends on the tax treaties in effect between the U.S. and the country of residence. In almost all cases, the standard foreign income exemption (which I believe is $86,000 for an individual filing) will have to be exhausted before the ex-pat will be eligible for any U.S. income taxation.Turquoise wrote:
Yeah, dual citizenship is not usually the way to go. I guess I was using the term expatriate incorrectly. I didn't realize it implies that the person has to remain a citizen of the country they leave.Cybargs wrote:
I know for sure (loads of expats at my school) that Americans living abroad still have to pay US federal taxes... Aussie expats (like my dad) do not have to pay income taxes to the aus gov, but everyone has to pay the Taiwanese gov regardless... But yeah loads of Dual citizens who work abroad usually renounce their American citizenship due to taxation.
I say no to that. Because they aren't Citizens, it's horrible to think of the consequences.
We have them start voting, we cater to them. Our economy drops and they go home to there country of origin. We end up with the rules and laws they set up for our children.
Doesn't seem right, just saying.
We have them start voting, we cater to them. Our economy drops and they go home to there country of origin. We end up with the rules and laws they set up for our children.
Doesn't seem right, just saying.
could bait and trapem
little booth at the end for " non-citizens " .... they enter and then cuffem
little booth at the end for " non-citizens " .... they enter and then cuffem
I'm pretty sure as a permanent resident I can do almost anything a citizen can except vote and get security clearances and hold office and work for the feds.
Not a bad gig although considering I pay state and federal income taxes and contribute to medicare and social security like everyone else, I guess it'd be nice to have all the benefits. I plan on applying for citizenship as soon as I'm eligible... which is like 3 years from now I've lived here for almost 16 years why can't I just get citizenship now?!
Not a bad gig although considering I pay state and federal income taxes and contribute to medicare and social security like everyone else, I guess it'd be nice to have all the benefits. I plan on applying for citizenship as soon as I'm eligible... which is like 3 years from now I've lived here for almost 16 years why can't I just get citizenship now?!
its only acceptable when fruity liberal cities like san fran do this. no "zomg neo cons!"
My GF just came back from SF. She said it was full of faggits and hipsters. God SF should fucking die.11 Bravo wrote:
its only acceptable when fruity liberal cities like san fran do this. no "zomg neo cons!"
youre a non citizen immigrant here for the free ride.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I'm pretty sure as a permanent resident I can do almost anything a citizen can except vote and get security clearances and hold office and work for the feds.
Not a bad gig although considering I pay state and federal income taxes and contribute to medicare and social security like everyone else, I guess it'd be nice to have all the benefits. I plan on applying for citizenship as soon as I'm eligible... which is like 3 years from now I've lived here for almost 16 years why can't I just get citizenship now?!
mexicunt
Tu Stultus Es
ayeCybargs wrote:
My GF just came back from SF. She said it was full of faggits and hipsters. God SF should fucking die.11 Bravo wrote:
its only acceptable when fruity liberal cities like san fran do this. no "zomg neo cons!"
inoriteeleven bravo wrote:
youre a non citizen immigrant here for the free ride.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I'm pretty sure as a permanent resident I can do almost anything a citizen can except vote and get security clearances and hold office and work for the feds.
Not a bad gig although considering I pay state and federal income taxes and contribute to medicare and social security like everyone else, I guess it'd be nice to have all the benefits. I plan on applying for citizenship as soon as I'm eligible... which is like 3 years from now I've lived here for almost 16 years why can't I just get citizenship now?!
mexicunt
@Cybargs San Francisco is awesome, wtf are you talking about? Yeah there are some nutty ultra-leftists there but whatever. Amazing restaurants and the weather is kickass (like the rest of the West Coast). Parts of it look pretty dumpy but other parts are beautiful. The Bay Area in general is
I almost got in a fight with some palestinian from SF who kept on mouthing off about how students in LA werent as smart or in tune with the world as they were in the bay (gay) area.
Tu Stultus Es
well duh majoring in queer studies is more intellectual than Taco Truck Scienceeleven bravo wrote:
I almost got in a fight with some palestinian from SF who kept on mouthing off about how students in LA werent as smart or in tune with the world as they were in the bay (gay) area.
wut?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
the weather is kickass
anywho....unless you are rich you cant live close to work. you have to live in some shit dump like hayward and try and drive across that shit ass bridge. add that to all the left loons and well...fuck that. there is good food everywhere....no matter the city.
Last edited by 11 Bravo (2010-05-19 08:27:52)
Well it's not for everyone, but personally I like the weather. It's never too hot and it doesn't seem to get below 40. Just wear a hoodie.11 Bravo wrote:
wut?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
the weather is kickass
anywho....unless you are rich you cant live close to work. you have to live in some shit dump like hayward and try and drive across that shit ass bridge. add that to all the left loons and well...fuck that. there is good food everywhere....no matter the city.
As for your second point, yeah same thing in DC. Hence why I wanna move out (amongst other reasons that all tend to tie in to the rich thing). As for the food, idk, I think SF has a higher concentration of good food compared to most places.
Because 'non-citizen immigrant' is a nice sounding catch-all phrase that also includes illegal immigrants. Basically anyone who is not a citizen of the US but is living here is a 'non-citizen immigrant'. Since most illegals don't pay taxes, why should they get a say in how government money is spent?mikkel wrote:
Yes, why? What is the reason for citizenship to play a role in these matters, rather than some other distinction? Why should the opinion of an ex-pat citizen who contributes nothing to the country carry weight, whereas a legal immigrant who pays taxes and maintains a continuous presence in the country carry none? It's an arbitrary distinction. I can see the reason for it being the chosen arbitrary distinction, but I do not agree with it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Because one person is a citizen and the other isn't. How does citizenship not play a role? Why should one person who pays taxes get to vote for the president and not another person who also pays taxes?mikkel wrote:
Which specific rationale are you citing as an argument against letting one taxpayer with a child enrolled in public schooling vote for school matters, and another taxpayer with a child in public schooling not vote for the same thing? As far as public school matters go, where is the distinction to merit this? I can't see how citizenship plays into it.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
If you'd be so kind as to read my post, specifically the following part of it:JohnG@lt wrote:
Because 'non-citizen immigrant' is a nice sounding catch-all phrase that also includes illegal immigrants. Basically anyone who is not a citizen of the US but is living here is a 'non-citizen immigrant'. Since most illegals don't pay taxes, why should they get a say in how government money is spent?mikkel wrote:
Yes, why? What is the reason for citizenship to play a role in these matters, rather than some other distinction? Why should the opinion of an ex-pat citizen who contributes nothing to the country carry weight, whereas a legal immigrant who pays taxes and maintains a continuous presence in the country carry none? It's an arbitrary distinction. I can see the reason for it being the chosen arbitrary distinction, but I do not agree with it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Because one person is a citizen and the other isn't. How does citizenship not play a role? Why should one person who pays taxes get to vote for the president and not another person who also pays taxes?
Then I'm sure that you'll conclude, like anyone else who read it, that I am in fact not arguing for voting rights for illegal aliens.Which specific rationale are you citing as an argument against letting one taxpayer with a child enrolled in public schooling vote for school matters, and another taxpayer with a child in public schooling not vote for the same thing?
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- New try to let non-citizens vote in San Francisco