Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think if you're a net negative in tax you shouldn't be able to vote?

959 replies

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:21

Trigger warning: strong political views / rant incoming. A shrinking group is expected to fund an expanding system. The system increasingly penalises work while rewarding dependency.

AIBU to think the modern state is a parasite, and that only those who are a net positive in taxes should be able to vote, rather than forcing working people to support an ever-growing dependent class?

Currently ~21% of working-age adults are economically inactive, meaning not working and not actively seeking work (according to a research brief from the House of Commons). Democracy is broken if voters can vote themselves benefits paid for by others. Representation should be weighted toward those with demonstrable responsibility and contribution.

Currently, the state is extractive and hollowing out the middle class. As anyone that has the eyes to see and ears to hear will know, dependency is rising and and demographics are changing at a rate not seen outside of wartime.

To address this simply, I think if you’re on benefits you should lose the right to vote until you’re a net positive. That would restore equilibrium.

This is essentially Chesterton’s test of a society.

"An honest man falls in love with an honest woman. He wishes, therefore, to marry her, to be the father of her children, to secure her and himself. All systems of government should be tested by whether he can do this.

If any system, feudal, servile, or barbaric, does in fact give him enough land, work, or security that he can do it, there is the essence of liberty and justice.

If any system, Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Green, Reform, or technocratic, does in fact give him wages so low and conditions so insecure that he cannot do it, there is the essence of tyranny and shame."

If the state could stop turning people into dependents that working people have to pay for, that would be great. The state is bloated, fixated on wealth redistribution rather than wealth creation, and actively working against the people it is meant to represent. It is incapable of creating the conditions for wealth, stability, and independence. This is managed decline, and we need some adults in the room who have read a book. AIBU?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
NImumconfused · 12/01/2026 13:47

What an incredibly narrow minded view of what it means to contribute to society. I suspect a significant chunk of those economically inactive people are women looking after small children, adult children with disabilities, or elderly relatives. Would you think they were contributing more if they dumped those responsibilities on the local council so they could go back to work and pay tax? It would inevitably cost a whole lot more.

bombastix · 12/01/2026 13:47

Ah, those useless eaters!

BlueJuniper94 · 12/01/2026 13:47

Ifailed · 12/01/2026 13:25

On your journey to the 19th century, I assume you'll also be denying women a vote as well?

The consequences of giving women the vote create the most compelling case for withdrawing the franchise. I am of course trolling (somewhat...)

Crazyfrog44 · 12/01/2026 13:47

ODFOD

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:47

Fearfulsaints · 12/01/2026 13:45

So at each election we have to present a total of all taxes paid and all services used in our kifetime and if it is plus £1 we can vote.

How are we qualntufying services like armed forces, police, the judiciary, prisons, firing office and so on. How do you want to quantify education. Is it my debt, my child's, who benefits? Do you have a debt from benefiting indirectly from a well educated workforce, or is it only direct benefits.

Education by the state should be a safety net to give people opportunity! However, yes, if you pay private then that's better for the state and likely means better education for our citizens.

OP posts:
LizzieSiddal · 12/01/2026 13:47

So if you’re a young working family but on a low income, always have been and you get tax credits.

You are seriously saying the adults shouldn’t get the vote?
Absolutely dystopian.

Printed1 · 12/01/2026 13:47

I see what you are saying however most people aren’t contributing more in tax but providing are working ft are creating westh for the company owners and their bosses etc.
i do think we have issues where it pays to he on UC get and council house and essentially give up work. And then the families are getting fsm free buses to school etc.
but then there are also sen parents unable to work. But other sen parents demanding private sen schooling without trying the local schools. Plus costs of transport.
And loads of kids with mild sen getting dla too.

Then the mps with mouths in the trough.

So i wouldnt say positive on tax but possibly working 35h a week maybe.

But fundamentally its unfair to the young generation where the pensioners are so numerous and expensive, but mainly they are able to control the voting. So they couldnt even take away the wonter fueñ payment. (I dont mean they should or not but they couldnt)

Anyway voting is pretty pointless because most people want the boats stopped but labour came in changed the plan from Africa (again not agreeing but at least it was a plan).
I hace hated having kids in the uk circumstances. Crap healthcare from birth to teen, crap schooling.
Though actually with both of those its not predominantly money that has been the problem its opinion (gps here who dont prescribe AB led to very unwell child). And schools i think that choose to do the minimum.

Though i guess maybe the issue is still the same that those in work are resentful and dont want to do anything. And the unemployed some are relatively lazy.

ItsPronouncedThroatwobblerMangrove · 12/01/2026 13:46

Fearfulsaints · 12/01/2026 13:45

So at each election we have to present a total of all taxes paid and all services used in our kifetime and if it is plus £1 we can vote.

How are we qualntufying services like armed forces, police, the judiciary, prisons, firing office and so on. How do you want to quantify education. Is it my debt, my child's, who benefits? Do you have a debt from benefiting indirectly from a well educated workforce, or is it only direct benefits.

Please stop asking sensible questions. It’s just not that sort of thread…

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:46

Growlybear83 · 12/01/2026 13:45

So should someone like my husband, who started work at the age of 15 and paid tax from then, and who worked until he was 67 without ever having had so much as a break in full time employment, now not be allowed to vote because he’s finally retired? Having left school at 15, he had probably paid income tax (at the higher rate for a number of years) and national insurance for longer than most people will be working nowadays. I’ve also been working since I was 16, and am still working at 68 and paying income tax - would the OP immediately withdraw my right to vote when I finally retire?

Total lifetime contributions... as long as he's net positive he can vote. Once he becomes a dependent then he can't.

OP posts:
Mirrorxxx · 12/01/2026 13:46

missymousey · 12/01/2026 13:24

That's a lot of pensioners (aka voters) being disenfranchised then!

Which would result in better decision like remain in the referendum

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:45

Catza · 12/01/2026 13:45

Can we also do the opposite then? Those who don't have the right to vote also don't have to pay tax. I'll be up for that!

Sure. You got it.

OP posts:
Growlybear83 · 12/01/2026 13:45

So should someone like my husband, who started work at the age of 15 and paid tax from then, and who worked until he was 67 without ever having had so much as a break in full time employment, now not be allowed to vote because he’s finally retired? Having left school at 15, he had probably paid income tax (at the higher rate for a number of years) and national insurance for longer than most people will be working nowadays. I’ve also been working since I was 16, and am still working at 68 and paying income tax - would the OP immediately withdraw my right to vote when I finally retire?

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:45

ItsPronouncedThroatwobblerMangrove · 12/01/2026 13:35

Wouldn’t this also rule out working parents with children in state schools, who used the NHS for their births and their medical care? And all pensioners? And probably all standard rate taxpayers? So you’re advocating for the rich and very rich to be in charge of the country. There’s a word for that, and it’s not democracy.

If you think simply being a net positive is 'rich' then you're proving my point of view for me. Thanks.

OP posts:
HorsesForMorses · 12/01/2026 13:45

You're a doofus, OP.

caramac04 · 12/01/2026 13:45

OP gets more ridiculous with every post.

Catza · 12/01/2026 13:45

Can we also do the opposite then? Those who don't have the right to vote also don't have to pay tax. I'll be up for that!

Fearfulsaints · 12/01/2026 13:45

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:38

It's net positive over your lifetime. So, you get to keep voting as long as that's true. Ofc things happen to people where they need help with health or education or w/e so yes you can have it. Just in exchange for your vote if you're going to be a net negative.

So at each election we have to present a total of all taxes paid and all services used in our kifetime and if it is plus £1 we can vote.

How are we qualntufying services like armed forces, police, the judiciary, prisons, firing office and so on. How do you want to quantify education. Is it my debt, my child's, who benefits? Do you have a debt from benefiting indirectly from a well educated workforce, or is it only direct benefits.

RosesAndHellebores · 12/01/2026 13:45

PickAChew · 12/01/2026 13:43

Yet here you are with time to post shite on Mumsnet.

I contribute tons and yet have time to post on MNet. Some MNetters say i post Shite too.

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:44

Overtheatlantic · 12/01/2026 13:42

Right, so what you do is take that information, query the source and then find other corroborating sources. Is this information backed up by multiple credible sources?

Blockchain and DIDs could do it.

OP posts:
SpringBulbsPop · 12/01/2026 13:44

FFS

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:44

Tulipsriver · 12/01/2026 13:43

I struggle to believe that anyone is awful enough to genuinely believe this would be a good idea.

But, just in case you're serious- no I don't want to stop people who are out of work due to disability, long term health conditions, who are raising children (or can they vote based on their partner's contributions?), or those who have retired from voting.

I'm very much part of the squeezed middle. That doesn't mean I don't care about other people's wellbeing, or that I'd want to take any of their rights away.

It doesn't mean I don't care either. It means if you're a dependent then you've not yet earned the right to vote.

OP posts:
SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:43

ItsPronouncedThroatwobblerMangrove · 12/01/2026 13:42

I’ll play for a minute before I go back to work (net positive, I’m sure). How would you fund the necessary individual assessments every year to ensure continued eligibility before any election? We vote in local, district, county and national elections. Would you use the tax take to make those assessments every time?

We'll do it on a public ledger, blockchain with DIDs.

OP posts:
MidnightPatrol · 12/01/2026 13:43

So - I don’t agree with you.

But - it is an issue that the majority of the population are taking out more than they put in, and that due to the ever-growing number of these people the government find themselves at the behest of them to stay in power.

Case in point being that lower earners in the UK pay very little tax and can access a variety of benefits - while those earning fractionally above average seem to be hammered again and again (frozen thresholds, removal of benefits, student loans etc).

I don’t really know what the solution is - like it or not, the size and cost of the ageing and non-working population is unsustainable. Our demographics don’t support it - and the expectations of what is delivered vs the tax people actually pay are misaligned.

Tulipsriver · 12/01/2026 13:43

I struggle to believe that anyone is awful enough to genuinely believe this would be a good idea.

But, just in case you're serious- no I don't want to stop people who are out of work due to disability, long term health conditions, who are raising children (or can they vote based on their partner's contributions?), or those who have retired from voting.

I'm very much part of the squeezed middle. That doesn't mean I don't care about other people's wellbeing, or that I'd want to take any of their rights away.

PickAChew · 12/01/2026 13:43

SBGM247 · 12/01/2026 13:34

I pay about 55% tax and contribute a lot.

Yet here you are with time to post shite on Mumsnet.