At one time in the U.S. you had to own property to vote. That way people who had nothing to lose couldn't keep voting for politicians who were generous with other people's money.
Kent in SD
That made damned good sense.
We have several parties in the UK with that inclination: generosity with the money of others.
I'd go one further, and say that a minimum, measured level of education should be mandatory if you want to vote. It could both encourage people to pay attention in school and thus get the right to vote and, incidentally perhaps, a better chance at a better job. Win all round for the individual, and a worthwhile instance of carrot on stick.
Based on what logic would the vote of a guy with a straw hanging out of his ear and a match from his lips be as valuably valid as that of an architect or lawyer? (In my innocence, I assume neither of the latter two types are given to getting themselves rolled in the hay - at least not just before voting.) Perhaps another class of person that might justifiably be denied a vote would be the politician: he or she is the last group that I would trust with my wallet; I feel I'd have more chance of getting it back intact from our friend with the straw. Unfortunately for my thesis, there are as many over-educated nutters as of any other kind.
;-)
