Welfare Recepients Should Not Be Allowed to Vote

It is economic welfare and counts within it. The government itself calls them that and if you see the link it is counted under it which is why family benefits rate are so high. It does not apply to all people within the UK. It just applies to people who have children exactly the same as people who're disabled receive benefits. That is partially incorrect welfare benefits are to help people they're not always just for people who cannot work at all. And it is considered as such by all authorities in Britain it is fact that families that have babies receive benefits thus they're welfare recipients. This is just how it works here. It may work differently in the USA but not in Britain. It is estimated currently through investigations carried out that "Under 1% of workless households might have two generations who have never worked " about 15,000 households in the UK. Families with three such generations will therefore be even fewer." http://www.theguardian.com... Both our evidence may be true as we live in different countries. But it still shows that welfare recipients should vote as just a negligible minority take advantage of the system. "Now, as candidates and parties seeking to win elections will always appeal to the base most likely to vote for them, then this will betray the very values upon which all post-Revolutionary Era democracies are built upon" Doesn't make any sense. Every party makes policies. These policies will appeal to a group/groups. These groups will be more likely to vote for them. This does not betray any values. These groups can still refuse to vote for them and no matter what a party does its policies will still appeal to groups even if they didn't mean them. " So for example, if a candidate running for office runs on a platform of waging unnecessary wars, or has a previous record of trying to remove liberties from the people, this candidate can be sure of the greater portion of welfare voters votes simply by promising them an increase. Those poor individuals who vote out of necessity may very well despise the candidate they vote for, but to vote otherwise is to bring harm upon themselves." This happens with every single group. Black people, working class, gay people, upper class etc etc. They may all vote out of necessity and still despise the person they vote for as to vote for the opposite may bring ruin upon them. That does not mean we should ban them for voting. Your logic does not make much sense in this regard. "By not allowing the recipients of public assistance to vote, society prevents candidates from peddling expensive increases to them. " Again a complete lack of logic. You could say the same for working class "ban working class because they vote for people who raise minimum wage" and also "ban upper class because they want to get rid of mansion tax and inheritance tax". "However, by allowing welfare recipients to vote, they will (as a collective bloc, not necessarily individually) swing towards whichever candidate promises them an increase, regardless of his/her other platforms." Same with every other group and I also explained this before. As a countermeasure for this more right wing people will vote for the party that does it. You're not asking to ban them are you?