24 replies to this topic

[Georgina]

We all rant and rave about the current economic climate, lack of jobs, high tax, etc etc. But I'm sure its not as easy as we all think to make decisions that will almost all ways have a negative impact on some part of the population..

So if you had the ability to make decisions in your country what would you change and why?

What is a few of the biggest problems in your country and what would you do to rectify them?

I imagine all arguments brought forward here will have a counter argument but I'm sure with the singular and combined intellectual opinions within this forum we can come up with some interesting ideas, but please lets try and keep it amicable, no flame wars etc, heated debate and discussion is fine





Personally my biggest changes would be within some of the following:

Crime and Punishment;
My first change would be within the prisons and reprimanding law breakers. In my opinion the lack of severe punishment for crime does neither act as a deterrent or as retribution. For example, paedophiles, they frequently come out of prison, and are given a whole new life, new name, brand new house, and new lease of life, asked maybe to go and sign in at a police station once a month, how is that punishment for mental and physically abusing a minor? I mean prison itself is hardly a "prison" itself. With inmates often having a higher standard of living than outside, with their TVs, games rooms, education facilities and other options all included. Some may argue the fact that they have to be imprisoned with people who put their lives at risk or make their times inside a living hell, but with guards, secure cells and other security measures the truth of the matter is they are probably safer locked up than being free in many parts of the UK. I wouldn't ask for death penalty, or anything extreme, but seriously, all those benefits for people who should be stuffing in some form is ridiculous. A harsher punishment would act as more of a deterrent and lower the crime rate.


Immigration;
I can imagine this being a sore point for many with opposite opinions to mine but Its how I feel. The immigration into the United Kingdom is extremely high, with little done to deflect Illegals coming into the country, many are given asylum, benefits, free accommodation and not expected to work. This quote from a British Diplomat;

Quote

Britain; 3.2 million immigrants, including a quarter of a million in their last year alone. Over half a million students in one year with no interviews before arrival and no checks on departure and a Points Based System that has increased immigration, not reduced it. This is what Labour called "managed migration".

Here's the statistical document that the quote gives reference to. http://www.statistic...ir/mig0211.pdf.

I'm not blaming any single political party, in fact they all seem to be as bad as each other with money usually being the sole motivator to the jobs of power but the figures are ridiculous. It needs to be better managed.


Foreign Aid;
I'm all for giving aid to the needy, I'm not heartless, but the fact is when giving bulk monetary payments to governments the likelihood of the majority of that being spent in Aid for that countries needy is slim to none. In fact with the millions and billions given to help I'm sure it could be better spent on employing individual aid groups of actual people to travel to the areas that require the aid with the materials needed to help and give the support directly to the people.
Also it seems that some countries are receiving aid when they clearly don't need it.

Quote

Looking at the figures I discover that, over the last five years for which data are available, Britain has given £8.7 million in development aid to Singapore, whose gross domestic product per capita is the fourth highest in the world, and 46 per cent higher than our own.

See article below;

http://www.telegraph...-Singapore.html



I hope I don't come across as some Right wing hard bitch but its just how i feel about some current issues within the UK.

[Nunc]

I'd just take the ol' Hitler route. You know, nationalise the economy, establish myself as dictator-for-life (though, of course, with a snappier title, like 'eternal voivode') and set up a closed society where dissent is NOT TOLERATED. Then place all the dissidents, muzzies, illegals, etc. in work camps. Problem solved.

[esilim]

How is it that this thread only got one reply?

On the issues that you mentioned...

Crime/punishment: I think that the idea of restitution and debtor's servitude needs to be explored. We talk about people "paying their debt" to society... by what? By costing society time and money? Put em to work. Really make them make it up.

Immigration: People don't have a right to just go wherever they want and do whatever they want. A government has a first duty to those who are already its citizens, and this duty supersedes any perceived duty to do good to the world at large. Allowing too much of a flow into established and free nations will not only reduce the freedom and prosperity of those nations but will retard other nations from developing, as the pressure for freedom is decreased. Better, rather, to export ideals of freedom, rather than import people while other nations remain less free.

Foreign aid: the best foreign aid is education--sending people to train them in how to do for themselves... modern farming, assessing and using natural resources, building local infrastructure. These are the kinds of things that national prosperity and national infrastructure must be built upon. Whenever aid comes from the top down, especially in an undeveloped nation, you are just inviting abuse and violence. If a leader learns that he can get paid to keep his people needy, what do you think he is going to do with them? When others see that being the leader of a needy people can get you paid, what do you think they will do to try to become the leader? These factors often exacerbate what are often already explosive local ethnic tensions.

On economics in general, I would recommend the Austrian school as a place to start. mises.org is a good place to begin with it. The fact of the matter is that the entire world scheme, and particularly the monetary system(s) is broken, and is currently counter to productivity as a whole. This is significantly muting human flourishing, and I think that unless people can be convinced through education, there will be a long, difficult decaying of prosperity before we recognize that it doesn't work. The Austrian school is ahead of the curve on this, so hopefully enough people can be reeducated to make a difference.

One of the problems becomes statist education. With the governments in the various developed countries in charge of education, there is a built-in bias toward whatever the current economic policy is. Prejudices established in the first two decades of life are more difficult to overcome with reeducation. Free education, in which the government neither subsidizes nor governs education, would be superior to our current systems. In such a model, private enterprises would compete with one another to produce the most profitable education at the lowest cost to the consumer. Many families would realize that they can do better at home than what is costing an extraordinary amount of money in the current system. Monies that are currently being confiscated from the populous to finance a poorly managed monopoly could be re-injected into the private sector.

There's more, of course. These are big problems, and true solutions will require painful transitions. The problem with that is that we live in a world of instantaneous politics. Although true leadership must always include the ability to inspire and direct people to endure painful transitions for long-term benefits, no politician in his right mind would take this tack in the current milieu. Before anyone had the ability to benefit from his policies, he would be replaced by someone who is, ironically, less of a true leader. More ironically still, some of the benefits of the true leader's policy might be enjoyed during that of the replacement politician, and we would attribute it to his poorer policies. In this way, our current climate of instant politics is something of a shell game in which the pea of prosperity never appears to be under the shell of the policy that actually produced it.

so, G, if u were convinced that u appeared to be a right-wing hard bitch, at least i've made you look more centrist! lol

[Georgina]

quogarasrevenge, on 18 March 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

How is it that this thread only got one reply?

Thank you! lol maybe I overestimated the interest some of the more intellectual forum members have in political debate.

quogarasrevenge, on 18 March 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

On the issues that you mentioned...

Crime/punishment: I think that the idea of restitution and debtor's servitude needs to be explored. We talk about people "paying their debt" to society... by what? By costing society time and money? Put em to work. Really make them make it up.

Yes, spot on. Human rights activists have forced far to many "basic" needs rights on prisoners in the UK and half the time these criminals are having access to more facilities and activities than they would outside the prisons. I was reading this article recently;

http://www.belfastte...s-15120244.html

Its disgusting, not only are murderers, child molesters, rapists etc. experiencing many things that law abiding citizens would have interest in perusing, they are getting it for free, and we are footing the bill!!!!!


Why don't we have a say in this? How can this teach people not to break the law?

quogarasrevenge, on 18 March 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

Immigration: People don't have a right to just go wherever they want and do whatever they want. A government has a first duty to those who are already its citizens, and this duty supersedes any perceived duty to do good to the world at large. Allowing too much of a flow into established and free nations will not only reduce the freedom and prosperity of those nations but will retard other nations from developing, as the pressure for freedom is decreased. Better, rather, to export ideals of freedom, rather than import people while other nations remain less free.

I'm glad I'm not alone on this, I do understand people wanting to better their life and securing a safe home for their family but there only so much a country can do before we suffer ourselves...which we are already doing.

quogarasrevenge, on 18 March 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

Foreign aid: the best foreign aid is education--sending people to train them in how to do for themselves... modern farming, assessing and using natural resources, building local infrastructure. These are the kinds of things that national prosperity and national infrastructure must be built upon. Whenever aid comes from the top down, especially in an undeveloped nation, you are just inviting abuse and violence. If a leader learns that he can get paid to keep his people needy, what do you think he is going to do with them? When others see that being the leader of a needy people can get you paid, what do you think they will do to try to become the leader? These factors often exacerbate what are often already explosive local ethnic tensions.

On economics in general, I would recommend the Austrian school as a place to start. mises.org is a good place to begin with it. The fact of the matter is that the entire world scheme, and particularly the monetary system(s) is broken, and is currently counter to productivity as a whole. This is significantly muting human flourishing, and I think that unless people can be convinced through education, there will be a long, difficult decaying of prosperity before we recognize that it doesn't work. The Austrian school is ahead of the curve on this, so hopefully enough people can be reeducated to make a difference.

One of the problems becomes statist education. With the governments in the various developed countries in charge of education, there is a built-in bias toward whatever the current economic policy is. Prejudices established in the first two decades of life are more difficult to overcome with reeducation. Free education, in which the government neither subsidizes nor governs education, would be superior to our current systems. In such a model, private enterprises would compete with one another to produce the most profitable education at the lowest cost to the consumer. Many families would realize that they can do better at home than what is costing an extraordinary amount of money in the current system. Monies that are currently being confiscated from the populous to finance a poorly managed monopoly could be re-injected into the private sector.

There's more, of course. These are big problems, and true solutions will require painful transitions. The problem with that is that we live in a world of instantaneous politics. Although true leadership must always include the ability to inspire and direct people to endure painful transitions for long-term benefits, no politician in his right mind would take this tack in the current milieu. Before anyone had the ability to benefit from his policies, he would be replaced by someone who is, ironically, less of a true leader. More ironically still, some of the benefits of the true leader's policy might be enjoyed during that of the replacement politician, and we would attribute it to his poorer policies. In this way, our current climate of instant politics is something of a shell game in which the pea of prosperity never appears to be under the shell of the policy that actually produced it.

so, G, if u were convinced that u appeared to be a right-wing hard bitch, at least i've made you look more centrist! lol

Please tell me if you''re in politics, as it seems you have more of an idea on what our country needs than 90% of the current MPs!

[Persuasion]

Going along with Crime and Punishment; (And Government Taxes) I think that the Death Penalty should be used more often. For one; it will definitely prevent some from doing the crimes... But it will also give a chance for our tax money to go somewhere else where it will be more appreciated. Rather than supporting a cerial killer in thier own solitary confinement with a breakfast (and lunch and dinner) and bed, we could be doing so many more useful things with that money. It may sound harsh, but a life penalty is just a waste of tax money.

And moving on to immigration, many, many illegal immagrants come to the US and reap off benefits of the government. Though I know it would be incredably hard to stop this, as we've come up with a ton of ideas that have all failed, ... I would just find a way to reduce the number of immigrants x.x Lol, that was half of a though that I couldn't finish, not very insightful

As for foriegn aid; I disagree (for the US) Especially in a time like this in which the US owes a HUGE debt to countries like china; I think the calculations were like a debt of 35k $ per person.. If anything, we should keep the money for ourselves and we have negative money compared to nothing Though I think if you are a flourishing country with a bright future, NOT aiding other third world countries would be pretty selfish

[esilim]

Georgina, on 21 March 2011 - 09:33 AM, said:

Please tell me if you''re in politics, as it seems you have more of an idea on what our country needs than 90% of the current MPs!

That's kind of you to say. I live in the U.S., so my being in politics wouldn't help you very much . It is encouraging, however, to see someone thinking sanely and not just mindlessly receiving and repeating the socialistic fantasies of our current generation.

[WharfRat]

Sorry G, I never had stumbled into this thread yet! It's unfortunate that I'm not as familiar with the problems that the U.K. is facing. But when it comes to the United States....

Prisons: Our current prison system here is incredibly flawed... I believe we house a higher % of our population in prisons then any other country in the world... and although our prisons are largely safe, they don't include all of those lovely things you mentioned in the prisons in your country. (Unless you count places like Gitmo or other federal prisons). I believe that prisons should not only be a place to punish someone, but more importantly, to rehabilitate them. The prisons here seriously lack that and (I'm too lazy to look up the exact number, but be my guest. ) the recidivism rate of criminals is astonishing over here.

General Reforms: I think we need to legalize drugs. I see the restriction of a person from ingesting what they desire into their own bodies as a civil liberties violation of the highest order! After all, who owns your body?; You or the government? I support legalization over decriminalization for a number of reasons... but to keep it brief,

1) Finance: We can stop spending the billions on the failed "War on Drugs" and instead begin taxing the sale of drugs. I think that the money saved/generated should go into drug education and rehabilitation programs. Instead of treating the issue as a criminal one, it should be treated as a medical issue. (The issue of addiction that is) (Also, we can stop paying the enormous amount of money to house the prisoners who were locked up for a victimless crime.)

2) Reduction of crime: Another reason I support legalization over decriminalization is ultimately the availability of the drugs/information. Sure you would still have people growing their own pot instead, but when it came to other drugs (and even cannabis in a lot of cases), people are still going to be looking for a supply. Through legalization, the government will be able to license and regulate the sale of drugs within the country. This will eliminate all of the drug violence along the border and put a large portion of the cartels out of work while generating revenue for our nation.

3) Health issues: One being addiction... but another is the spread of HIV, hepatitis, etc. through the sharing of needles. (In many states they are already doing this but...) We could set up needle exchanges where you trade your dirty needles for new ones. New needles could readily be bought along with your drugs. You could also virtually eliminate overdoses related to drugs. The primary reason for overdoses on drugs such as heroin is due to varying potency or another drug that is being sold as heroin (such as fentanyl). It is through regulation that we can have a constant potency so that the addict will know exactly how much they are taking into their bodies.

I could go on and on... but that's the summarized version.

Military: I would remove our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and lead through a policy of isolationism. I think that it is our constant involvement in the middle east that fuels the hatred for America.

Economics: I agree with the somethingsomethingsomething-revenge above on the Austrian school of economics. We seriously need to get back to the gold standard instead of being able to base currency off of... well... currency.

Immigration/etc. - I know that I have a very strange view on the matter... but I think that borders are kind of bullshit when it comes down to it. IMO, people should be able to freely travel and live wherever they would like. (I realize this gets sticky when you have some countries with nationalized healthcare, etc.) But in the U.S., I think that anyone should be able to immigrate at any time. I mean... most of the people in the U.S. are immigrants/descendants of immigrants anyways... Why the hypocrisy?

Taxes: From my libertarian stance, I think the only valid tax is property tax as you are using a commodity (land) that belongs to everyone for your personal use... so it is only fair that you pay a tax towards the community for the use of that land. From a more realistic stand point, I think we need to do away with the income tax and simply institute a national sales tax that excludes items essential to daily life. (food, water, etc.) Texas currently uses this system... we do not have a state income tax but a sales tax on non-essential items. This way, poor people will still not be paying any taxes as all they can afford is the bare essentials while the wealthy, who buy the most non-essential goods, will still be paying the majority of the tax income.

Some may argue that this system is flawed as people will simply start importing all their non-essential goods. I suggest that we institute a higher tariff on all imported goods. Primarily to stimulate the economy of the United States. Yes, we won't be getting all that shit soooo cheap any more... but we can help beat down on the unemployment rates as things are made in the USA again!

I'm sorry but I've gotten four long phone calls since I've started writing this and my brain is scattered... that's all I've got for now.

[esilim]

Nice to see that there are plenty of liberterian-minded thinkers out there.

Since you don't want the government regulating drugs, and almost certainly don't want it regulating sexuality, why would you hold the government responsible for addictions or HIV? If the cost of escaping these things was high enough, or people just died of them, that would have its own curbing effect. Perhaps that's a hard way to learn the lesson, but at least hopefully it would get learned. If we're not funding a war on drugs or sexual looseness, then why should we fund a war on addictions or std's?

And if we don't fund a war on drugs, I think that we should at least fund a war on Mexican warlords... it's a defensive war, and we are already and constantly attacked!

[WharfRat]

quogarasrevenge, on 23 March 2011 - 03:12 PM, said:

Nice to see that there are plenty of liberterian-minded thinkers out there.

Since you don't want the government regulating drugs, and almost certainly don't want it regulating sexuality, why would you hold the government responsible for addictions or HIV? If the cost of escaping these things was high enough, or people just died of them, that would have its own curbing effect. Perhaps that's a hard way to learn the lesson, but at least hopefully it would get learned. If we're not funding a war on drugs or sexual looseness, then why should we fund a war on addictions or std's?

And if we don't fund a war on drugs, I think that we should at least fund a war on Mexican warlords... it's a defensive war, and we are already and constantly attacked!

While I would tend to agree with you that the government should be the smallest possible, I also recognize that this kind of change cannot happen overnight and that this minimal state is largely unrealistic. (At least at this moment) I suggest that we use the generated income to fight off diseases as it is something that society as a whole will benefit from. (Especially HIV)

As to the Mexican warlords, they would all be out of work if the U.S. government started being the supplier for these drugs and not the cartels.

[Mr. Hobo]

Fix Taxes:
Reduce tax code from a bloated document to a simple double sided form. No tax breaks/write-offs/government subsidies
Make penalties for tax evasion much stiffer based on how much you're trying to avoid paying the government (ex: a waiter not writing down tips as part of their income shouldn't be punished as much as a corporation like GE paying 0$ in taxes)

Current Income Taxes:
* 15% on the first $41,544 of taxable income, +
* 22% on the next $41,544 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $41,544 and $83,088), +
* 26% on the next $45,712 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $83,088 and $128,800), +
* 29% of taxable income over $128,800.

New Taxes:
0% income tax on income >25k
10% income tax next 10k
25% income tax next 20k
35% income tax next 50k
45% income tax anything over 105k


Pros: Fairer
Cons: Pisses off rich people

Current Corporate Taxes:
11% small business, 16% everything else (afaik

New:
5% 'mom and pop' tax bracket (>200k corporate income)
10% small/emerging business income (>1 corporate income million)
20% big business tax bracket (>1 million corporate income)

Pros: Encourages smaller business
Cons: Discourages big business

Prison Reform:
More severe punishments for violent crimes (rape, murder etc)
No one should get arrested for drug use, only fined
All prisons should let their inmates work (paying them minimum wage, doing reasonable work like making license plates, in good conditions) or learn a trade or let them work towards a high school/post-secondary diploma. Inmates that refuse to do so should not be eligible for parole.

Education Reform:
More money from increased taxes on rich people should go towards
A) Scholarships/tax-free loans for people trying to get 'practical' degrees that will actually contribute to getting a job (none of these degrees that look pretty but don't end up doing anything)
B) More School Funding
C) Increased teacher pay
Listed in order of importance

Healthcare Reform:
Have an opt-out option for people who want to go the route of private insurance. Opting out would decrease income tax by 4k. Not available for people for people who are under the 25% income tax brackets
More money from increased taxes on rich people should go towards paying for the training/reimbursements of health-care specialists if they sign a contract for 'x' years

Misc:
Stop all the prioritizing minorities stuff. Doesn't do anything productive
ex:
Asian dude with 90s applies to school to be a radiologist
Native dude with 70s applies to school to be a radiologist
Native dude with 70s gets in because schools want him so they receive government money
End result is a pissed off Asian dude who deserves to get in but didn't and a second rate radiologist and encouraging mediocrity from Natives because why get 90s when you can get in with 70s
Race shouldn't be a factor

[everyonedoesit]

zlpqlz, on 21 March 2011 - 09:58 AM, said:

Rather than supporting a cerial killer in thier own solitary confinement with a breakfast

Hahahahaha, oh man that tickled me in all the right places =')

[Frank12]

First off, I live in the U.S.. I find myslef in the 99th percentile in most standardized tests. I will admit, I was born a tad lucky. my family pulls in a decent income, and I gained alot of natural ability to comprehend subject material because my parents are smart. No I don't do all those private school things, my parents feel that if im smart, i should get into college anyways. I am currently accepting a full scholarship, so i guess it worked out. But the fact that i have an outstanding memory or greats study habits is not what brought me to the front of my class....this is where i shall begin my reform.
Education:
Let's face it. Education is the most important aspect in modern society. Unfortunately, the things we learn in there rank down next to "How to assemble a machine gun" and "How to fix your ceiling fan" in importance. I mean honestly, who could give a flying fuck whether or not Uranium needs to be enriched to use in a plant? Unless im planning on assembling a bomb or a main power grid for the city, its about as helpful as your appendix. But what happens is, society is becoming more standardized. Educational systems are supposed to teach us the fundamental tools we need to use in life. Instead, the federal gov't figured that they needed a way to make sure teachers and schools were up to par.Great idea, horrendous result. What ended up happening was they figured schools needed incentive to take these test seriously. So they offered funding. Schools, needed all the funding they can get because economical struggles have put politicians in a bind, so they pull from the education budget, among others. Anyways, the school shapes its curriculum around a wide variety of key subjects covered in the test, yet nothing on what many kids need to learn, such as the fundamental concepts of business, trades, etc. Instead, the school does nothing to truly push the gifted students, and pools all its resources into those who constantly fail, with or without funding and extra attention. These children are either uncontrolled delinquents, mental ill, or suffering from some drug or personal struggle, that can't be controlled on school grounds, because it happens elsewhere. So why do we push to bring up the weakest among us? The rest of the world won't. Believe me, the top students should not be pampered either, because through struggle they will succeed, but cutting AP classes for MORE special ed. funding boils my blood. Those people will end up failing regardless.

Personally, i lived without the funding. Instead of sitting there mumbling about it, i went out, worked night shifts, and paid for extra schooling. Not too difficult, I might add. Regardless, our schools also do another thing that gets me annoyed: we give credit to those who don't earn it. im going to quote Bill Gates, because he sums up what im thinking.

Whether you like Bill Gates or not...this is pretty
cool. Here's some advice Bill Gates recently dished out
at a high school speech about 11 things they did not
learn in school. He talks about how feel-good,
politically correct teaching has created a full
generation of kids with no concept of reality and how
this concept sets them up for failure in the real
world.

RULE 1
Life is not fair - get used to it.
RULE 2
The world won't care about your self-esteem. The world
will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel
good about yourself.
RULE 3
You will NOT make 40 thousand dollars a year right out
of high school. You won't be a vice president with
car phone, until you earn both.
RULE 4
If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a
boss. He doesn't have tenure.
RULE 5
Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your
grandparents had a different word for burger flipping
they
called it Opportunity.
RULE 6
If you mess up,it's not your parents' fault, so don't
whine about your mistakes, learn from them.
RULE 7
Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as
they are now. They got that way from paying your bills,
cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about
how cool you are. So before you save the rain forest
from the parasites of your parent's generation, try
delousing the closet in your own room.
RULE 8
Your school may have done away with winners and losers,
but life has not. In some schools they have abolished
failing grades and they'll give you as many times as
you want to get the right answer. This doesn't bear the
slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
RULE 9
Life is not divided into semesters. You don't get
summers off and very few employers are interested in
helping you find yourself. Do that on your own time.
RULE 10
Television is NOT real life. In real life people
actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.
RULE 11
Be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up working for
one.
Solution: First, we need an educational reform. Tenure should be re-written. Teachers are becoming too comfortable, and it is because their jobs are safe, while hardworking younger teachers are cut because they were there for less time. Second, students need to be taught real life things. If you want to go into molecular science, by all means, be my guest. But programs specific to that field should take up the majority of your time. Why the fuck should a Chemist know Shakespeare? Does the empirical formula for the poison Juliet kills herself with matter? I didn't think so. Specialization should matter. Next, Failure results in punishment. In real life, if you fail, you may find yourself on the streets. Drug use shouldn't be tolerated. Period. Students who can't comply get two steps. First major offense - 1 week In school suspension. 2nd major offense - Summer vacation taken away, Spent in rigorous summer school. 3rd breach of discipline - Expulsion. School and State no longer responsible for student. Beyond that, race should make no difference in the matter of who passes and who fails. Same with gender. Benefits and Detriments associated with race are gone.

Next: War Policy
Personally, I am sick of playing by the rules with war. This is not chess, where if you take my pawn I could give a fuck. No, we are talking about the lives of men and women who are separated from their family to protect us. You know that the enemies that we fight are not going to play fair. They have one goal in mind - to exterminate us. They will kill anyone in their way, innocent or not. By playing fairly, we condone their actions as just, because we are unwilling to kill these terrorist before they kill us, just because of some political standing. I will stand by my reasoning that we should have leveled Al-Queda early on. Same with Mexican Drug Cartels. Hit them fast, hit them hard. Scare the shit out of anyone thinking to harm us. Save lives of the soldiers. Same goes for internal crime in the U.S. They need to know that their punishment will be brutal. They should not want to go to jail. They need to fear it. That will deter most minor crimes.

Economics: In a capitalistic society, we are doing pretty good. I truthfully didn't like the bailout idea though. I don't think that Government should intervene on behalf of personally owned business. They people who make the laws cannot favor one over another. In the past, minimal aid created crashes and rebirth. Bailouts slowed this down to a progressive agony.

Anything Else?

[AyoForYayo]

Legalize weed, marriage, and actually ENFORCE

separation of church and state. Fuck, that doesn't exist

[mjcm]

RE: DEBTOR'S Servitude

The Constitution expressly provide that no person shall be imprisoned for non payment of debts. To do such will result to forced labor or involuntary servitude. Such has its roots during the times of african and black slavery which clearly undermines human rights. Hence, the logic why the constitution, and why most constitutions do not allow this is that we may as well go back to slavery. There are two forms of involuntary servitude, one is slavery, the other is peonage. Slavery, as we all know puts forced labor. The laborer does something in which he is not compensated. The other, peonage, is working to pay a debt. Other than these two, there are also exceptions. The most familiar is retribution for a crime committed. Another is posse commitatus. And another one is a return to work order from the court.

[giraffe]

Frank12, on 01 April 2011 - 08:41 PM, said:

Solution: First, we need an educational reform. Tenure should be re-written. Teachers are becoming too comfortable, and it is because their jobs are safe, while hardworking younger teachers are cut because they were there for less time. Second, students need to be taught real life things. If you want to go into molecular science, by all means, be my guest. But programs specific to that field should take up the majority of your time. Why the fuck should a Chemist know Shakespeare? Does the empirical formula for the poison Juliet kills herself with matter? I didn't think so. Specialization should matter. Next, Failure results in punishment. In real life, if you fail, you may find yourself on the streets. Drug use shouldn't be tolerated. Period. Students who can't comply get two steps. First major offense - 1 week In school suspension. 2nd major offense - Summer vacation taken away, Spent in rigorous summer school. 3rd breach of discipline - Expulsion. School and State no longer responsible for student. Beyond that, race should make no difference in the matter of who passes and who fails. Same with gender. Benefits and Detriments associated with race are gone.

Two things:
One) That is basically the system my university imposes
Two) Why? Why should it not be tolerated, period? I'm a responsible recreational pot user. I've never left my apartment while smoking. I've never driven while smoking. I've never hurt anyone in any way while smoking. I'm graduating this week with a 3.97 GPA and honors because I'm responsible and never smoke/eat when I have something else to do. If I had ever been caught, even ONCE, national policy means that I could lose ALL OF MY SCHOLARSHIPS. There is absolutely no reason for this when I've known other people in the dorm that got so drunk that they had to call an ambulance and get their stomach pumped. But I'm the one who was at risk. Nice

[frostz]

giraffe, on 08 May 2011 - 09:46 AM, said:

Two things:
One) That is basically the system my university imposes
Two) Why? Why should it not be tolerated, period? I'm a responsible recreational pot user. I've never left my apartment while smoking. I've never driven while smoking. I've never hurt anyone in any way while smoking. I'm graduating this week with a 3.97 GPA and honors because I'm responsible and never smoke/eat when I have something else to do. If I had ever been caught, even ONCE, national policy means that I could lose ALL OF MY SCHOLARSHIPS. There is absolutely no reason for this when I've known other people in the dorm that got so drunk that they had to call an ambulance and get their stomach pumped. But I'm the one who was at risk. Nice

because even though you are responsible that does not mean everyone else is. Arguably the use of drugs when its against the law is pretty much an act of losing self control to begin with... Nevermind the people who get drunk because alcohol is legal, and so a different set of standards apply

[giraffe]

frostz, on 16 May 2011 - 07:31 PM, said:

because even though you are responsible that does not mean everyone else is. Arguably the use of drugs when its against the law is pretty much an act of losing self control to begin with... Nevermind the people who get drunk because alcohol is legal, and so a different set of standards apply

My point was basically "why should this be illegal when alcohol isn't?"

[frostz]

giraffe, on 17 May 2011 - 09:55 AM, said:

My point was basically "why should this be illegal when alcohol isn't?"

because alcohol was legal from the beginning of time, you cant make it illegal remember what happened during prohibition? We dont need to legalize drugs for the same reason as alcohol, and many drugs have a significantly worse effect than alcohol can ever have.

[giraffe]

frostz, on 17 May 2011 - 10:01 AM, said:

because alcohol was legal from the beginning of time, you cant make it illegal remember what happened during prohibition? We dont need to legalize drugs for the same reason as alcohol, and many drugs have a significantly worse effect than alcohol can ever have.

Tradition for the sake of tradition is a horrible reason to do/not to do anything. And prohibition is a horrible example because WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE EXACT SAME THING RIGHT NOW WITH DRUGS. The only difference is that this prohibition has failed to really do anything to curtail drug use for DECADES. They're exactly the same thing. We have drug lords (like Al Capone was for booze). We have home grows (like moonshine). We have an inefficient policing system. The only real difference is that we gave up on prohibiting alcohol after 10 years.

Also, most drugs weren't illegal until the 20th century, so using your argument, "you can't make it illegal".

And alcohol has significantly worse effects than some drugs can ever have, too. It works both ways if you're going to make a broad generalization about "drugs" as a category.

[frostz]

i didnt start this thread so the category is very general, the OP could be refering to meth which would of course be available over the counter under his scenario. Which is of course much worse than alcohol/

[WharfRat]

frostz, on 17 May 2011 - 10:01 AM, said:

because alcohol was legal from the beginning of time, you cant make it illegal remember what happened during prohibition? We dont need to legalize drugs for the same reason as alcohol, and many drugs have a significantly worse effect than alcohol can ever have.

umm... you do realize that marijuana was also legal since the beginning of time, right? In fact, one could argue because it is a naturally occurring plant, that it has actually be around for longer than alcohol. Marijuana also wasn't made illegal until AFTER alcohol was made illegal. Do YOU remember what happened during prohibition? Because it seems if you did you would understand that we currently are living in a time of prohibition of marijuana and millions of people are still smoking it. Gangs are rampant along the borders smuggling the marijuana into our cities. Fewer people aren't smoking marijuana than they were before it was made illegal... the policy is failed and it is inane to arrest someone for consuming a plant in the privacy of their own home.

Furthermore, who owns the rights to a persons body? The person or their government? If I am truly sovereign over my own body, then my government should have no right to tell me what I can or cannot do to my body.

Finally, if you'd like to make this a debate over drugs, there is another topic (read: at least 5 topics) for that.

[frostz]

WharfRat, on 17 May 2011 - 12:14 PM, said:

umm... you do realize that marijuana was also legal since the beginning of time, right? In fact, one could argue because it is a naturally occurring plant, that it has actually be around for longer than alcohol. Marijuana also wasn't made illegal until AFTER alcohol was made illegal. Do YOU remember what happened during prohibition? Because it seems if you did you would understand that we currently are living in a time of prohibition of marijuana and millions of people are still smoking it. Gangs are rampant along the borders smuggling the marijuana into our cities. Fewer people aren't smoking marijuana than they were before it was made illegal... the policy is failed and it is inane to arrest someone for consuming a plant in the privacy of their own home.

Furthermore, who owns the rights to a persons body? The person or their government? If I am truly sovereign over my own body, then my government should have no right to tell me what I can or cannot do to my body.

Finally, if you'd like to make this a debate over drugs, there is another topic (read: at least 5 topics) for that.

if you want to argue about whether or not you wont he rights to your body then you do not, you may have the right to life but we do not have the right to die in the united states and many other countries.

[WharfRat]

frostz, on 17 May 2011 - 12:16 PM, said:

if you want to argue about whether or not you wont he rights to your body then you do not, you may have the right to life but we do not have the right to die in the united states and many other countries.

Which is why If I was in charge... (as the title of the topic implied) we would live in a country that is actually free. It is your logic that runs counter to freedom and that will result in more and more civil liberties being taken from us. Doing drugs isn't a death sentence. It is not choosing to die. There is no magic option for death in which you can opt out. One day it will happen. If you are making the claim that using drugs leads to an earlier death, I ask you this; Should we also make McDonald's illegal? Don't you know that eating all of that saturated fat clogs your arteries leading to cardiac arrest?!?! Through your ideology, the government should clearly swoop in and ban all foods that they deem unhealthy. As they apparently own the right to your demise they should be able to regulate everything that you do, huh?

[frostz]

WharfRat, on 17 May 2011 - 12:31 PM, said:

Which is why If I was in charge... (as the title of the topic implied) we would live in a country that is actually free. It is your logic that runs counter to freedom and that will result in more and more civil liberties being taken from us. Doing drugs isn't a death sentence. It is not choosing to die. There is no magic option for death in which you can opt out. One day it will happen. If you are making the claim that using drugs leads to an earlier death, I ask you this; Should we also make McDonald's illegal? Don't you know that eating all of that saturated fat clogs your arteries leading to cardiac arrest?!?! Through your ideology, the government should clearly swoop in and ban all foods that they deem unhealthy. As they apparently own the right to your demise they should be able to regulate everything that you do, huh?

I wasnt answering to you specificially but rather in the direction in which the conversation is moving.

And as far as eating fatty foods, its not like many people who eat it want to, they have no choice. Most lower income families are forced to eat fatty foods because they are cheap and easy to get. The government can ban it, but they would have to provide an alternative food for the lower income population

[batryn]

I think the only thing wrong with the country is the corruption... and wasting tax money in some cases. Otherwise, it's almost as good as you can get it.