[jkeddo]

Is it really equality to perfectly equalize decision-making while completely slanting the resulting the burden-taking?

I realize how dangerous/potentially harmful a "taxpayer contribution === influence" is. But I think it doesn't have to be a binary. Perhaps a "three house" style system would be an improvement for representative democracy here:

One house for representatives of each state One house for representatives of vote by population One house for representatives of taxpayers by net tax burden carried

[rswail]

Given that a large number of those "states" are net tax beneficiaries, that first house needs to be reformed.

As for having reps of taxpayers by net tax burden, what the hell does "net tax burden" mean? Tesla is useless without roads. Boeing is useless without airports. How do we apportion the tax paid against benefits received?

It's nonsense that "taxpayers" are worthy of further representation than any other citizen. The fact that corporations pay tax should not give them rights to representation in the legislature. Unless you think of corporations as one way to "represent taxpayers by net tax burden" because they are a collection of taxpayers.

[ClumsyPilot]

> One house for representatives of taxpayers by net tax burden carried

Thats called aristocracy.

[avmich]

I think that was tried before and found not working.