For the purposes of determining the weighting of votes, the sum of all taxes paid should be considered. As the new system comes into effect, I am sure that taxation systems would be revised, and overall taxation would be reapportioned. Tax “avoidance” would not be as a attractive as previously. Obviously, the people who pay the most taxes, will get to design the new collections systems. I doubt that many would choose to pay zero taxes and have no vote, but for those who so choose, at least they won’t have any say about how other people’s taxes are spent.

As Samantamantha said, “No representation without taxation.”

They pay payroll taxes. The economic burden of property and sales taxes is distributed between vendor and consumer, with varying shares falling on the latter. The latter would be anyone who buys a taxable commodity or rents an apartment.

No. the language of the Amendment allows states to put the voting age where they please as long as the threshold does not exceed 18. However, apportionment rules are unaltered, so the effect might be to change the composition of a state’s congressional delegation or the probability a state’s electoral votes go one way or another, but not the weight of the state in federal elections.

You are correct in that that part of my concept is half-baked. I don’t really know how this could work. I just know that I don’t think that the vote by proportion of tax burden only would result in the government that I want to live with. I think that the corporate model must be tempered with another element to make the result more humane.

Associated thought: Could this modeled using Game Theory to test and optimize the system prior to trying it in real life?

[the kids won’t] “make it to the voting booth.”

Have you read about “vote harvesting” in CA? They don’t need you to vote, they just need to have you receive a ballot, which they can then fill out and return for you.

Suppose that some artificial ranking of citizens were created based on the criteria important to the communities. This is the meritocracy model. The higher the citizen ranking, the more that citizens vote would be weighted.

Just combine both systems. Merit is certainly a factor in corporation shares as well. The CEO is usually given quite a number of shares in the company he manages. Gives him a stake.

The system should start by disallowing votes for those on welfare. Then focus on how much vote can be amplified by those with meritorious conduct in the direct electronic democracy.

16 year olds won’t even clean their bedrooms. None of them will ever make it to the voting booth.

They don’t have to make it to the voting booth given that Leftists will be their proxy voters. Roll call for corporations allows proxy voting by share holders.

Related: Last week NPR’s Science Friday had a glowing report on #FridaysForFuture, the “global youth climate strike” started by a 16 year old in Sweden. The children interviewed want a Green New Deal to “rapidly overhaul every part of our economy and society.” The host asked if they would be satisfied if congress passed the GND. Their answer—absolutely not! I fear that we are not just moving towards disaster but accelerating.