Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
Poland allows it, partially as a nod to the emigrants who were forced one way or another to leave Poland during the communist regime, but I am not sure if this is a sound policy in an otherwise democratic country. Communism fell 20 years ago. People who wanted to could have come back by now, and more people left simply for financial reasons etc. I don't see why people who do not contribute to the wellbeing of my country (e.g. by paying taxes, working here etc.) should have a say in its governance.
What do you think?
I am a full citizen of the United Kingdom and Canada. In fact I became a UK citizen long before I set foot in that country :lol:
I am so detached from these two places that I don't feel people like me should vote. I don't think they allow it, anyway. Heck, even if I do live in one of these two places I'll never vote anyway. I refuse to register as a voter in HK :bowler:
I bet Poles living abroad a long time are more tolerant of gays and vote that way.
You would think that, wouldn't you?
At least judging from the Polish expat organizations in the US (and they are more likely to vote than people who go native), they are some of the most racist and antisemitic catholic troglodytes. They almost always vote for PiS and are convinced Jews from the EU and New York are taking over Poland.
Ahh, so this thread is gay after all :lol:
Quote from: Monoriu on April 09, 2010, 02:23:59 AM
Ahh, so this thread is gay after all :lol:
Nope. This is about people with no connection to the country and out of touch with its problems being allowed to vote.
Never really thought about it. They're such a small percentage of the electorate it doesn't really matter. I can see how it'd be seen as a problem in a country people are fleeing however. :P
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 01:42:54 AM
Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
No. Only citizens that are considered residents (maybe the same criteria as residency for tax purposes?) should be allowed to vote.
Some exceptions would be diplomats, soldiers and other government officials that are sent abroad for longer terms. I would also include German civil servants of the EU in that category. They should be allowed to vote as they serve Germany abroad and should not be excluded from political participation for that.
It is an issue over here as well, particulary in my region. Over here emigrants abroad and their descendants can vote in everything, from the national level down to the local level. There are talks at the moment to restrict that voting from abroad only to the Senate, while creating a new electoral circumscription for spaniards abroad (as Italy did).
I wholeheartedly support it, as my region is most probably the hardest hit by the current system. Thousands of people from my region emigrated during the XXth century, at first to Latin America (Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela and Argentina, mainly) and afterwards to Northern-Central Europe (mostly to Switzerland and Germany), and thanks to Spanish citizenship laws, their sons and grandsons can also get Spanish nationality and consequently vote in Spanish elections. The bottom line is that at the moment 12% of the census for my region does not live on it, and many of those (the sons and grandsons of the emigrants) might have never even set foot here, yet they can vote. Lots of elections here have to wait for the votes from abroad before being able to proclaim a winner, as victory margins are sometimes very thin, and a few thousand votes can change the colour of a regional MP or a council member.
I'm currently getting a lot of flak for defending such a measure by some friends who live abroad, but I really feel that the current situation had to be changed.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 09, 2010, 02:49:56 AM
Never really thought about it. They're such a small percentage of the electorate it doesn't really matter. I can see how it'd be seen as a problem in a country people are fleeing however. :P
It's a problem as it is virtually impossible to assign them to a constituency.
Citizens should be allowed to vote. You can change the citizenship laws to not allow dual citizenship.
Quote from: Zanza on April 09, 2010, 03:36:05 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 09, 2010, 02:49:56 AM
Never really thought about it. They're such a small percentage of the electorate it doesn't really matter. I can see how it'd be seen as a problem in a country people are fleeing however. :P
It's a problem as it is virtually impossible to assign them to a constituency.
How so? Over here people abroad count as living in the constituency they lived in when they were here. So, the guy that, back in the 20s, emigrated from Bumfuck, Ourense, to Buenos Aires still votes as if he was living in Bumfuck for all purposes. I guess that his sons and grandsons would also count toward living in Bumfuck as well, but I'm not that sure.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 09, 2010, 03:39:55 AM
Citizens should be allowed to vote. You can change the citizenship laws to not allow dual citizenship.
This seems a better solution to me as well.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 01:42:54 AM
Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
Yes. A citizen is a citizen. Depriving someone of their right to vote simply because they move abroad (for example, retirees moving to a warmer clime in their old age) effectively creates a "first class citizen" and "second class citizen" status. The case for second or third generation emigrees is less clear, but while the rules allow dual citizenship I'd have to come down on the side of allowing them to vote.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 09, 2010, 02:49:56 AM
Never really thought about it. They're such a small percentage of the electorate it doesn't really matter. I can see how it'd be seen as a problem in a country people are fleeing however. :P
Nice troll but it is more of a citizenship law issue (law of blood vs. law of soil) than what you are saying.
The thing is, most European countries award citizenship to people born of parents with these countries' citizenship, whether such people were born in such country or not. This means that after generations emigrants can still have citizenship of their country of origin.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 09, 2010, 03:39:55 AM
Citizens should be allowed to vote. You can change the citizenship laws to not allow dual citizenship.
One doesn't need to have dual citizenship to reside permanently in a country they are not a citizen of. :huh:
Quote from: Zanza on April 09, 2010, 03:36:05 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 09, 2010, 02:49:56 AM
Never really thought about it. They're such a small percentage of the electorate it doesn't really matter. I can see how it'd be seen as a problem in a country people are fleeing however. :P
It's a problem as it is virtually impossible to assign them to a constituency.
Here all emigrants are assigned to the Warsaw voting district (which as you can imagine can actually influence the results).
Obviously this is less of an issue in Presidential elections.
Unlike Spain, at least local elections are not affected, as you need to be a permanent resident of a relevant municipality/county/voivodship to be able to vote.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 04:29:17 AM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 09, 2010, 03:39:55 AM
Citizens should be allowed to vote. You can change the citizenship laws to not allow dual citizenship.
One doesn't need to have dual citizenship to reside permanently in a country they are not a citizen of. :huh:
Second or third generation emigrees would hold dual citizenship due to where they were born, wouldn't they? And besides, I think this was more aimed at the Larch's complaint since he brought up the multi-generational issue.
Gays shouldn't vote and that's a fact. Since a gay doesn't reproduce, he has no interest in the future of the nation so he's more likely to vote for immediate advantages that would burden future generations. In the same way as old people.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on April 09, 2010, 04:53:53 AM
Gays shouldn't vote and that's a fact. Since a gay doesn't reproduce, he has no interest in the future of the nation so he's more likely to vote for immediate advantages that would burden future generations. In the same way as old people.
Not to mention, any person of voting age is fast approaching old age in gay years. :hmm:
No.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 01:42:54 AM
Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
Citizens? Sure why not.
Americans pay taxes on income earned abroad, which is a total crock but there you go, so they have just as much right to vote in an election as I do. Furthermore tons of Americans get sent abroad by their government or company to do legitimate Yanqui Imperialist Pigdog business and shouldn't be punished for that.
Which is why I used the word "permanent". I thought it doesn't mean "temporary", Valmy.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 11:02:55 AM
Which is why I used the word "permanent". I thought it doesn't mean "temporary", Valmy.
I do not recall saying anything about people staying temporarily. We do have permanent expat communities throughout the world.
Here's an illustration of why letting emigre communities vote can be a bad idea:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg682.imageshack.us%2Fimg682%2F6240%2F68060180.jpg&hash=e0e9d9275c4a37ed5b4b52ffba68c71f4605ec3c)
Basically, Ivo Josipovic is a well educated moderate politician (who thankfully won). He got 60% of the vote overall.
Milan Bandic is a fucking douche bag. He had something like 12 corruption investigations over him at the time of the election.
When you live abroad, you tend to have an increasingly idealised vision of the homeland, to the point where you're more likely to vote for nationalist or patriotic parties as opposed to the moderate candidates with a more realistic vision.
No.
Only if you pay taxes in that nation.
Quote from: Josephus on April 09, 2010, 11:46:25 AM
No.
Only if you pay taxes in that nation.
Only a moron would pay their taxes in Sweden. Surely you don't want Sweden to be ruled by mo...
Quote from: Josephus on April 09, 2010, 11:46:25 AM
No.
Only if you pay taxes in that nation.
That is the primary reason I am in favor of American abroad voting. If you are an American citizen you pay taxes regardless of where you make your money. The great federal beast must be satiated.
Quote from: Warspite on April 09, 2010, 11:41:23 AM
Here's an illustration of why letting emigre communities vote can be a bad idea:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg682.imageshack.us%2Fimg682%2F6240%2F68060180.jpg&hash=e0e9d9275c4a37ed5b4b52ffba68c71f4605ec3c)
Basically, Ivo Josipovic is a well educated moderate politician (who thankfully won). He got 60% of the vote overall.
Milan Bandic is a fucking douche bag. He had something like 12 corruption investigations over him at the time of the election.
When you live abroad, you tend to have an increasingly idealised vision of the homeland, to the point where you're more likely to vote for nationalist or patriotic parties as opposed to the moderate candidates with a more realistic vision.
Exactly the same thing happens in Poland, yeah.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2010, 01:05:33 PM
Quote from: Josephus on April 09, 2010, 11:46:25 AM
No.
Only if you pay taxes in that nation.
That is the primary reason I am in favor of American abroad voting. If you are an American citizen you pay taxes regardless of where you make your money. The great federal beast must be satiated.
You fucking Communist. Why don't you think that they shouldn't have to pay taxes instead?
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2010, 01:05:33 PM
That is the primary reason I am in favor of American abroad voting. If you are an American citizen you pay taxes regardless of where you make your money. The great federal beast must be satiated.
You deduct taxes you pay to the country in which your income is earned, though, so you don't pay a "full share" of US taxes (and often no taxes at all).
However, US citizens indefinitely resident overseas (other than diplomatic and military personnel and families) are generally not allowed to vote for local officials or ballot measures, so their impact will usually be pretty small.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2010, 01:25:14 PM
However, US citizens indefinitely resident overseas (other than diplomatic and military personnel and families) are generally not allowed to vote for local officials or ballot measures, so their impact will usually be pretty small.
Yep only in federal elections. You have to have residence to vote in local elections.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2010, 01:59:17 PM
Yep only in federal elections. You have to have residence to vote in local elections.
Well, you have to have residence in Federal elections as well (for the purposes of deciding which candidates/electors your vote goes to). It is just that federal rules for residence allow you to claim a residence in which you last dwelt, as opposed to the one in which you now dwell. States and localities are free to have different rules, and presumably they do.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 11:02:55 AM
Which is why I used the word "permanent". I thought it doesn't mean "temporary", Valmy.
What's "permanent" when it comes to residency, though? If you're an American who works for a multi-national company that transfers you to, say, Paris, France, then you're as much a permanent resident of Paris as you would be a permanent resident of Dallas, Texas, if the company had transferred you there instead (unless the tranfer was for a specific period of time, which isn't the norm).
Quote from: Josephus on April 09, 2010, 11:46:25 AM
No.
Only if you pay taxes in that nation.
That would disqualify about half of the Americans living in the USA from voting too.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 09, 2010, 05:45:07 PM
That would disqualify about half of the Americans living in the USA from voting too.
Everybody pays FICA and FUTA.
We should be yes. But with drastically less power than a proper seat at home would have.
e.g. just one or two seats for the whole of the British citizenry abroad (which actually numbers....something huge. Millions)
Though meh, I'm still registered as living at home and for postal voting. If I needed for vote I could have my mam do it for me.
Quote from: Tyr on April 10, 2010, 06:44:08 AM
We should be yes. But with drastically less power than a proper seat at home would have.
e.g. just one or two seats for the whole of the British citizenry abroad (which actually numbers....something huge. Millions)
This is actually what happens with the Portuguese system. During legislative elections the diaspora gets to elect 4 MPs (out of 310), two from the "European" circle and the other two from the rest of the world.
These guys don't tend to influence results as they are shared among the two major parties, although it seems they get to elect center-right MPs a little bit more than the residents.
They also vote in Presidential elections (their vote goes together with the others), but as I'm aware they don't vote on local elections, unless still registered there, wich leads to some of the books being filled with "ghost" voters.
I'm not going into the problem of their right to vote, but I guess since emigrants money always represented an important part on the national economy this is a non issue at the moment (or ever if my memory serves me well) in this country.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 01:42:54 AM
Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
Poland allows it, partially as a nod to the emigrants who were forced one way or another to leave Poland during the communist regime, but I am not sure if this is a sound policy in an otherwise democratic country. Communism fell 20 years ago. People who wanted to could have come back by now, and more people left simply for financial reasons etc. I don't see why people who do not contribute to the wellbeing of my country (e.g. by paying taxes, working here etc.) should have a say in its governance.
What do you think?
If you don't live in the country, you should not vote in it.
Exception being made of soldiers and various government employees who need to work outside the country, of course (embassies, consulate, etc).
Otherwise, if a private citizen decides to live elsewhere, he should not enjoy the various priviledges, like the right to vote, unless he has a permanent residence in the country.
Quote from: clandestino on April 10, 2010, 11:03:05 AM
This is actually what happens with the Portuguese system. During legislative elections the diaspora gets to elect 4 MPs (out of 310), two from the "European" circle and the other two from the rest of the world.
These guys don't tend to influence results as they are shared among the two major parties, although it seems they get to elect center-right MPs a little bit more than the residents.
They also vote in Presidential elections (their vote goes together with the others), but as I'm aware they don't vote on local elections, unless still registered there, wich leads to some of the books being filled with "ghost" voters.
I'm not going into the problem of their right to vote, but I guess since emigrants money always represented an important part on the national economy this is a non issue at the moment (or ever if my memory serves me well) in this country.
Doesn't one in every two Brazillians have dual-Portuguese nationality? (exageration but...yeah, theres a lot of non-Portuguese Portuguese)
My family could vote in Ukrainian elections until we got our US citizenship. I thought that was silly, given that we wanted nothing to do with Ukraine. People like us should have no business deciding on Ukrainian business.
Quote from: Tyr on April 10, 2010, 02:25:23 PM
Doesn't one in every two Brazillians have dual-Portuguese nationality? (exageration but...yeah, theres a lot of non-Portuguese Portuguese)
Well, I don't know where you get that idea. Certainly there are some cases of that as I would guess exists also between other European countries and their former colonial areas.
I'm not sure on the details of the law, but I guess it would be easier to get the nationality if you prove that you are descendent of Portuguese and since there were plenty of migrational movements between the two countries that may applie.
Are you refering to something in particular, like football players or Brazilian migrant workers in the UK?
Quote from: Zanza on April 09, 2010, 03:34:27 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 01:42:54 AM
Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
No. Only citizens that are considered residents (maybe the same criteria as residency for tax purposes?) should be allowed to vote.
Only a german could say something like this.
Quote from: clandestino on April 10, 2010, 11:03:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 10, 2010, 06:44:08 AM
We should be yes. But with drastically less power than a proper seat at home would have.
e.g. just one or two seats for the whole of the British citizenry abroad (which actually numbers....something huge. Millions)
This is actually what happens with the Portuguese system. During legislative elections the diaspora gets to elect 4 MPs (out of 310), two from the "European" circle and the other two from the rest of the world.
These guys don't tend to influence results as they are shared among the two major parties, although it seems they get to elect center-right MPs a little bit more than the residents.
They also vote in Presidential elections (their vote goes together with the others), but as I'm aware they don't vote on local elections, unless still registered there, wich leads to some of the books being filled with "ghost" voters.
I'm not going into the problem of their right to vote, but I guess since emigrants money always represented an important part on the national economy this is a non issue at the moment (or ever if my memory serves me well) in this country.
The Portuguese abroad also vote for the European elections. They are as a matter of fact in a better position than most Portuguese to really understand it the importance of Europe.
Actually, historically the Portuguese left has always been hostile to the emigrant/non-resident vote (cf. Salgado Zenha "dar o direito de voto aos emigrantes seria um autêntico golpe de estado") and regularly tries to curtail it cf. the prime minister Sócrates and his bill vetoed by the current president Cavaco Silva. It was only about forcing the people to vote at the consulates (after closing many of them) but the devil is in the details.
Voting for local elections would seem odd to me though.
Funny to see that the Left always rallies against the vote of citizens abroad who contribute to the economy (no IRS but property taxes) or did the draft. At the same time, they want to give voting rights to non-European foreigners without any reciprocation clause :lol:
It should be easy to guess position on this issue ;) I'll even say that living abroad gives you an hindsight that most local voters sorely lack.
Quote from: Siege on April 11, 2010, 07:36:30 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 09, 2010, 03:34:27 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2010, 01:42:54 AM
Do you think people with your country's nationality/citizenship, who have a permanent place of residence in a different country, be allowed to vote in national elections in your country?
No. Only citizens that are considered residents (maybe the same criteria as residency for tax purposes?) should be allowed to vote.
Only a german could say something like this.
A German who lives in China.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 11, 2010, 01:07:31 PM
I'll even say that living abroad gives you an hindsight that most local voters sorely lack.
Yes, I'm sure there is some truth in that. But since most measures and laws will apply to those living in the country and not abroad, I'm not so sure about the utility of that hindsight. ;)
Quote from: clandestino on April 11, 2010, 03:48:27 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 11, 2010, 01:07:31 PM
I'll even say that living abroad gives you an hindsight that most local voters sorely lack.
Yes, I'm sure there is some truth in that. But since most measures and laws will apply to those living in the country and not abroad, I'm not so sure about the utility of that hindsight. ;)
There is. A person who lives in modern day Russia might be genuinely confused why politicians in the home country say such mean things about Putin. All the the local sources indicate he's a glorious leader destroying illness and poverty and bringing honor and prosperity to the Russian people and the rest of the world. Well, when he's not tramping half-naked around Siberia subduing tigers with his bare hands.
Anyway, I'm sure living abroad gives important insight into where or not the county should raise the sales tax one cent to fund the new school gymnasium.
Quote from: Siege on April 11, 2010, 07:36:30 AMOnly a german could say something like this.
This thread shows that it is not just Germans that say such a thing but also Poles and Spanish.
Anyway, I guess you refer to the Germans that had to flee from Hitler. All of them are welcome to come back and vote here. But if they started a new life elsewhere, I don't see why they should continue to vote in Germany.
Quote from: clandestino on April 11, 2010, 03:48:27 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 11, 2010, 01:07:31 PM
I'll even say that living abroad gives you an hindsight that most local voters sorely lack.
Yes, I'm sure there is some truth in that. But since most measures and laws will apply to those living in the country and not abroad, I'm not so sure about the utility of that hindsight. ;)
That's not that simple. So many counter-examples... Those living abroad generally have relatives in their homeland ;) Not to mention that when you're living in Europe it's not that far (2 hours by plane) for instance.
I had to register for the draft even though I couldn't vote for the President till the second mandate of Sampaio so colour me skeptical on your argument. Not to mention the people abroad NOW who fought the colonial wars...
Even regionalisation and TGV lines/other public works (hello A4 to Bragança via Marão tunnel) are of interest and relevance to me.
I still cannot vote for referenda so I still get to enjoy your less than stellar reputation thanks to you (abortion not so long ago) ;) without having anything to do with it...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.motifake.com%2Fimage%2Fdemotivational-poster%2Fsmall%2F0808%2Ffake-americans-demotivational-poster-1217722442.jpg&hash=bcdf7392c6a3f8f42664fe698859f99bd871897d)
But you're a fake American Siege. :huh:
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2010, 01:57:37 PM
But you're a fake American Siege. :huh:
What? Racissst, Anti-semite, holograph denier!!11
Quoteholograph denier
Siege made me laugh there.
I'd like the opinion of clandestino and others on this one following this debate.
Should the plane fare expenses of a MP elected for Lisbon and currently living in Paris (probably not as a concierge...) be paid by the tax payer?
Inês de Medeiros, PS, a party opposed to the vote of citizens living abroad...
2500 euros per month since it's weekly.
I'd say she deserves making the weekly trip with Eurolines i.e by coach ;)
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 30, 2010, 02:45:52 PM
I'd like the opinion of clandestino and others on this one following this debate.
Should the plane fare expenses of a MP elected for Lisbon and currently living in Paris (probably not as a concierge...) be paid by the tax payer?
Inês de Medeiros, PS, a party opposed to the vote of citizens living abroad...
2500 euros per month since it's weekly.
I'd say she deserves making the weekly trip with Eurolines i.e by coach ;)
Well I've followed the debates about that without much interest. People were making the usual remarks about
them and their outrageous rights.
What I find odd is that PS needed to fetch someone in Paris to fill their Lisboa lists. Especially a political no one as Inês de Medeiros. All the time the issue was going around all I could think was what keeps Socrates from forcing her to abdicate? What can he gain with this? I've never eard Ms. Medeiros having a poltical opinion or making a speech at the parliament.
It seems the solution (that doesn't make a precedent acording to the Parliament President) is to treat it like a MP that lives on the islands, and with the same monetary support as them.
Personally I'm with you on this, let her take the bus if she can't pass a weekend without going back to Paris.
People were already talking about what would happen next: someone declaring their residence in French Polynesia and forcing the parliament to pay their traveling expenses each week.
Wich wouldn't surprise me that much... :P :(
By the way, apparently the US Congress thinks so, since in the recent Puerto Rico political status referendum that just got passed, stateside residents who were born in Puerto Rico will be able to vote. This was obviously done so that folks like my Dad who have been here 40 years and probably speaks better English than Spanish now will cause Statehood to win by a landslide.