Question to debate: Do you think you should be taxed in cities where you work and not be allowed to vote in that city, or do you believe you should be able to vote in the city because you are taxed and one reason the fore fathers fought was because of no taxtaion without representation.

I think that the current situation makes more sense than the alternatives which I foresee arising from your logic.

As far as I can tell, a literal interpretation of the "no taxation without representation" idea would lead to either having two votes, or losing the vote where you live, but not necessarily pay taxes.

Also, do you really think that I, as a UK citizen who travelled in March to nine US states should get nine votes at state level and umpteen more at town level simply because I paid the sales taxes everywhere I visited? If that's a silly example because I'm not American, what would happen to travelling salesmen or business consultants or anyone else whose place of work is flexible or transient that ARE American? Do they get multiple votes for everywhere they work?

No, I think ultimately in a one-person one-vote system, you should only get one vote no matter where you pay tax, or how much.

However, there is one category of legal entity that pays taxes and has no real representation - companies. They are separate entities in law, with their own legal personality that is distinct from the stockholders and staff, and they have to pay state and federal taxes in most places in the USA and around the world. Yet nowehere do they get a formal vote.

Instead, small companies have no control over their tax monies, and larger ones have disproportionate control, since they can afford lobbyists to persuade politicians to see things their way.

I would prefer to see corporate emancipation at the ballot box coupled to much harsher rules against lobbying and general pork-barrel politicking, than see business interests either ignored, punished, or placed higher than those of citizens) and in most cases, it does seem that corporate interests are at one of these extremes).

Companies are not people. We assign them property rights (which is wrong) and a certain amount of liability (used as a personal-liability shield by its officers) but you can't throw a company in jail. A company can't do jury duty, or serve in the military. The employees of a company can vote, but giving votes to the company itself would only further dilute the power of individual votes and hand over still more power to non-people. What about people who create dozens of companies? Do they get dozens of votes? Giving the vote to companies is almost as absurd as giving it to machines or puppies, and might have even worse effects.

Thanks Platypus, not least for demonstrating that either companies should not be taxed, or that "no taxation without representation" is not infinitely extensible. (No prizes for guessing which camp I am in :-) )

I've posted that idea a number of times on a number of different debate boards, and you're the first person to come up with an answer that makes any sense to me.

I subscribe to 1 vote where you live philosphy. When I worked in Manhattan and lived in Jersey City I used to have to pay a "non residence tax". It didn't bother me because that tax was used to support the services (for example local police) that I used. Then some time in the late 90's Mayor Giulliani removed the non resident tax which, naturally, made me happy, because my pay check became fatter. Since I don't work in Manhattan anymore I am not sure if the tax has been reinstated but I do remember there being talk about reinstituting it. I wouldn't oppose it if they did. I find it far more important to vote for the officials that run the neighborhood where I live.

When I was in college the big "political fight" that was going on was our student union said we should be able to vote in the town of the school since we lived there for 8 1/2 months of the year. At first the student union won the fight but we would give up our rights to vote in our home town. If I remember correctly that was over ruled in appeals. The out of town students had to be legal residents in order to vote in that town.

There are many types of taxes, which of them are we speaking? In the beginning of America only people who owned land and paid property tax could vote, so in this case taxation without representation was a fallacy anyway. It would seem, unless I missed something that you are not talking property tax but income tax (federal). Companies aside, there are a lot of people who do not pay income tax, those who make very little; students, children and a lot of the elderly do not pay tax. So shouldn’t we take their right to vote away? And State income tax is not covered under the constitution.

In any case the population of the country that this even affects is very small. One vote in the town you live should be enough.

Ok let me be more specific. I dont mean like sales tax, I mean like if you work in one city but pay taxes for the other just because you WORK THERE

If you commute from your home to work and say...it's a half-hour drive to a different locale. It isn't unconstitutional that you are taxed. The area in which you live taxes other people and the decisions to tax others was made through our republican form of city/local government. You have specific and general representation. While you don't have direct representation at where you work, you are generally represented because there are other citizens who are responsible for the said taxes.

Do you use the roads or other public utilities of the city in which you work? I honestly do not see too much of a problem with an income tax for larger commuter cities. The city of Denver has this type of tax, they also have a very large public transportation system, many hospitals and emergency services, and airport and a host of other city sponsored services but in all actuality very few people live IN the city limits, like myself I live outside Denver and commute to work.

The right to vote in an election is based on state rules of residency and location of domicile. Paying taxes have nothing to do with voting. If you don't like the taxes you pay vote out the party that represents you in the taxing body.

Actually cost the citys tax rate depends on what that city thinks about it. You if working in Nolmstead would have no representation in their city taxes. Therefor you would pay whatever rate they require. Taxes here are 10% for the city.

The city tax that most amazes me is the set of taxes used to pay for new stadiums. This are specifically targeted at, and paid for, by people who don't live there (hotels, rental cars)--and therefore have absolutely no right to vote on them. How these taxes ever pass constitutional muster is beyond me--isn't this the exact same thing that Britain was doing that led to the Boston Tea Party? Violates the very principle upon which this country was founded...