How would you rule?

[Kurgg]

Let's think that you have a full control of your country. You may do anything. Now, without thinking what will other people or countries, tell how would you would rule your country and what changes will you make.

Here's what I would do:
-I will make working in any ways according to abilities compulsary. If one doesn't work even if he coukd, he will get no welfare. As they say "He who doesn't work shall not eat"
-I will give workers more rights, and make an universal minimum vage(here in Finland minimum vage depends on occupation)
-I will also make welfare system less bureaucratic, and more helpful to the poor
-I would nationalize food, energy, oil, drug and water industries and use the profits of them to lower the national debt
-I would make school uniforms compulsary, and free for scholars
-I would raise the sentences and change the "life sentence" maximum from 21 years to infinite. Would also make forced labor to be an possibilty
-I will separate the church from the state, but still keep Christianity as state religion
-I would separate my country from EU, and change the currency back to Marks
-I would, with addition to welfare, make free soup kitchens to the poor
-I will promote families to make more children
-I will make the national service less selective
-I will expel everyone who comes from another country to live on welfare and doesn't work
-I would make Swedish not to be an official languages, but instead give Swedish-speakers same rights as Sami people has.

[Miserabilia]

Let's just say I could not rule a country.
Seriously, I wouldn't be able to.
I'm not organized enough and I suck at taking charge.

[Stronk Serb]

Ummm, if I ever took full control over Serbia, it would probably be good at the start, but would evolve into fascism. Too much power was given to me.

[Miserabilia]

Ummm, if I ever took full control over Serbia, it would probably be good at the start, but would evolve into fascism. Too much power was given to me.

I feel the same way, I should never be given that amoutn of power
:lol:

[Harry Smith]

If I was Prime Minister tomorrow I'd
-Scrap our nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers
-Re-divert funding from the above into the NHS
-Stop the privatization of the NHS
-Give DeVO max to Scotland,Wales and NI.
-Refrom GHQ and stop mass surveillance
-Remove the church from the house of lords
-Nationalize the railways
-Put a price cap on energy prices
-50% tax rate on those earning more than 5,000
-'Stop and Search' would be scrapped
-Carbon tax on big business
-Increase the minimum wage
-legalize marijuana

[Stronk Serb]

I feel the same way, I should never be given that amoutn of power
:lol:

This thread reminded me of a song. Vlast (power) by Feud. The translation is kinda complicated but it shows what power can do to a man.

If I was in power... Da imam vlast

[Cygnus]

Well I might or might not plan to have full control over Venezuela in the future, but that's another story.

Now what I would do is the following:
-Break alliances with Cuba
-Legalize the parallel dollar
-Sell a good amount of military equipment and put that funding into education
-Make a huge touristic reform
-Bring back several news channels shut down by the PSUV
-Bring in foreign companies for the oil business as well
-Attend to the judicial part, making sure everyone has a trial.
-Bring back trade with Colombia
-Increase banana/plantain production as well as cacao production
-Stop giving out money to other latin american countries, cause we really need that.

[Typhlosion]

I... would...

Um.........

.....


Legalize gay marriage....?
Yeah, I'm already pro at this politician stuff. :D

[Vlerchan]

I'm writing this list in no particular order - i.e., as it comes into my head:

- Legalize soft drugs. Decriminalize hard drugs.
- Legalize Euthanasia.
- Legalize for abortion in all cases.
- Remove governments controls from marriages between consenting adults.
- Re-Define adult as those over the age of sixteen; reduce the drinking, smoking & voting age to 16.
- Reintroduce free-speech; eliminate anti-'hate' speech laws.
- Abolish the Seanaid; Reduce numbers in Dáil; further empower county councils & decentralize governance.
- Introduce third-tier of taxation: 48% on all income earned over 100,000; reduce taxation on income between 28,000 and 100,000 to 40%.
- Retain favorable 12.5% corporation tax rate but close all loop-holes
- Introduce smaller tax-breaks to Irish-owned business; promote Irish-business.
- Introduce larger tax-breaks for worker's co-operatives; promote workers-democracy.
- Give trade-union officials spots on government administrative boards; promote the re-growth or trade-unionism.
- Increase carbon-tax rate.
- Lobby for reformation of EU 'democracy'.
- Introduce shared maternity and paternity leave.
- Require the boardrooms of companies to have at least 40% female membership.
- Limit the size that banks may grow to; introduce strict regulation. Amend the constitution so that we may never legally bail them out again.

... I may add more when I think of more.

[Gamma Male]

-Make 17 the adult age, for voting drinking working... etc
-legalize all drugs
-Stop the governments involvement in marraige altogether
-increase taxes for the rich, decrease them for the poor
-pull all of our troops out of the middle east
- stop drone strikes
-shut down Guantanamo Bay
-Legalize and regulate prostitution
-Pass anti-discrimination bills for LGBT similar to those for minorities
-make physical harassment in middle/high schools a crime punishable by prison
Legalize abortion in all cases
-create stricter animal rights laws and regulations
-decrease the military budget
-increase funding for NASA and other scientific/ medical research institutes
-Provide free internet to everyone
-Increase funding for solar, wind, and nuclear energy
-give people of at least 1/4 native american decent free land
-pass stricter regulations on who can own a gun, but not on what types of guns can be owned.
-make student loans easier to get and to pay back
-reform the education system
-make it easier for people to immigrate legally
-increase environmental regulations for businesses


That's all I can think of right now.

[Lovecraft]

First and foremost, I would ensure that entry into my colony/empire was very selective. Intensive and very invasive screening would take place to ensure that people allowed into my society would be intelligent enough to thrive in the unconventional structure, cooperative (aka. no criminal record,) and capable of working in a way that would be genuinely helpful. This process would take place over the course of about a week, and would require a great deal of effort on the applicant's side. This would be the only invasive aspect, and would be partly to make up for the fact that I would have no state control or means of coercion (eg. no military, police force.) My ideal number would be anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 people, after which entrance would only open for a limited time every few years.

I would instate the closest thing to a perfect anarchist society that could be. The people would govern themselves, and in that a true democracy would be achieved. I would only intervene when it comes to infrastructure/aesthetics of the city, allocation of resources (for there would be no currency, but I'll get to that later,) and education. This education would include universal military training to compensate for the lack of a formal military, and would be freely available to all adults. Free health care would be available for those in need, for the society's backbone would be the people's ability to work and be productive.

Allocation of resources would be very important, and as aforementioned, is one of the only things I would actually hold power over "my people" with. I along with a small team of other trusted and qualified individuals would ensure that all people who contribute to society in some way (which includes the arts) would be given comfortable living arrangements, healthy food and the means to communicate (computers.) If someone is unable to work for medical (including mental health) reasons, they will be cared for. Getting food and other resources will require display of some form of verification that their annual "work threshold" is being met. This method also means that if someone does a great deal of work in a short amount of time by making a scientific discovery or writing a book that moves the population, they don't have to work as hard for the rest of the year and can take a break. Regular exercise by the able-bodied is also necessary to ensure that my people would be able to contribute.

Education would be free and highly prioritized. I would reform the current "treat you all the same and make you study general, broad concepts until age 18" system and encourage free thought. Teaching jobs, unlike in today's society, would be highly prestigious and would result in a great deal of privilege. Small classrooms of a minimum 1:10 teacher:student ratio would exist for all children. Adults would be encouraged to study later in life, because in becoming more knowledgeable they are being productive within our society.

Of course, this might all seem like it would be difficult to put into place. If people are given food, water, shelter, and luxuries for free, couldn't they just refuse to work and be lazy? If there's no police force or military, couldn't crime become rampant? Well, I'm of the "you don't work, you don't eat" mindset; for the able, working would result in comfortable living. Because currency wouldn't exist, one wouldn't be able to earn privilege in underhanded ways, because all privilege comes from me and my team directly. This would, of course, take a lot of hard work on our parts, but a lack of automation is necessary, because a computer can not (yet) discern what is "useful" and what isn't. Unconventional "career choices" would be encouraged.

While there would be no formal police force or military, nothing is stopping my people from making community/volunteer-based groups of particularly interested people who want to help out around the city or generally as safety ensurers.

All drugs would be legal, as would prostitution, because regulation is the only way to ensure a lack of a submarket as well as a lack of contamination. Organizations would be provided by the "government" filled with qualified people where citizens could safely use and could be provided the means to wean off substances. So long as the people are still being productive, they can use drugs as much as they want. Said drugs will be provided, of course, only to those who are upstanding, because like all else it is a privilege.

The motto of my society is that of Rapture: No Gods, No Kings, Only Man. No one man or woman could judge another or hold legal/governmental power above someone else's head. Poverty would be eliminated and a very special community feeling only available when everyone is truly equal would be achieved. If the people decide to make the society go in one direction, that's fine, regardless of said direction, because that's true democracy. If they want to have a trash city and collectively agree on this, that's up to them. Those who are behaving badly would not be imprisoned, but would be restricted resources like food and shelter and ultimately would be forced to leave the utopia.

I've thought about this a lot; great question! I recognize that this is probably too long and uninteresting to expect many people to read it in its entirety. I hope someone does, though, and if you disagree/agree, I'd love to talk about it. The implementation of anarchy is one of my favourite topics of discussion.

[AlexOnToast]

- Remove any religious influence from government
- Remove any Gov. control over marriage between consenting adults
- Legalise abortion in fit cases
- Greater funding into education
- Much Greater funding into environmental protection
- Ban the keeping of unsuitable pets (caged birds, wild animals that do not take to captivity)
- Stricter animal rights
- legalise and regulate soft drugs (weed, lsd, psilocybin fungi etc)
- Decriminalise all drugs
- Bad the public advertisement of drugs and alcohol
- Greater funding into youth activities
- Completely ban routine neonatal genital mutilation
- Greater funding into the prevention of bullying in schools
- Richer would be taxed more than the poor
- Move all funding from privatised healthcare and put it into public healthcare
- Free internet access for everyone
- Put greater funding into drug awareness


There are countless other things I would do, that just gives an idea of the lines along which I would run.

[phuckphace]

hooooooo boy. I'd be the most badass dictator in the history of ever.

anyway, here's what I'd do. This is for 'Murrica by the way.


deport all illegal immigrants and close the borders to new immigrants for 25 years
make it a crime for a business to knowingly hire someone who is an illegal immigrant
make English our official language and require fluency in it to obtain any type of job
reform the food stamp program and allow only health food and fresh produce to be purchased
raise the minimum wage to $15.00 per hour
introduce universal healthcare for all citizens
ban infant circumcision
centralize and standardize the public school system, fund them wholly and directly, and set strict performance standards that they must all meet
eliminate corporate taxes and income tax on citizens making less than $50,000 per year, and raise income tax to 60% on millionaires. I would also raise capital gains tax and tax "conspicuous consumption"
cap the interest rate that credit card companies can charge their customers at a maximum of 5%
make payday loan businesses illegal
build lots and lots of public housing
build a publicly funded and national system of public transportation (buses, etc)
nationalize the energy companies (oil, power, etc.) build more nuclear power plants and subsidize energy costs for consumers.
cut down our defense budget significantly, and close all overseas military bases. no more interfering with the politics of other countries
legalize marijuana, LSD, shrooms and mescaline, but make it a capital crime to possess, manufacture or distribute any of the hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, meth, PCP, etc. anyone caught with hard drugs would be executed. all people currently in jail for weed, acid or shrooms would be pardoned and released
break up Walmart into regions (by state) and force them to sell off all their assets. from this, new local retailers would emerge and grow
shut down Monsanto, shoot their lobbyists and void all their patents
ban all tobacco products (cigarettes, dip and snus). shut down Phillip-Morris, seize their assets and shoot their lobbyists.
ban high fructose corn syrup and BPA from all foods and food supplies
nationalize Planned Parenthood
purge Wall Street of all corrupt moneylenders and speculators, and hang them from the tops of their own palaces with long ass ropes. tax the fuck out of high-speed trading.
ban casinos everywhere except within the city limits of Las Vegas
shut down Indian reservations and absorb them into the general welfare system.
lots of other stuff that I can't think of but needs to be done.

[Harry Smith]

hooooooo boy. I'd be the most badass dictator in the history of ever.

anyway, here's what I'd do. This is for 'Murrica by the way.


deport all illegal immigrants and close the borders to new immigrants for 25 years
make it a crime for a business to knowingly hire someone who is an illegal immigrant
make English our official language and require fluency in it to obtain any type of job
reform the food stamp program and allow only health food and fresh produce to be purchased
raise the minimum wage to $15.00 per hour
introduce universal healthcare for all citizens
ban infant circumcision
centralize and standardize the public school system, fund them wholly and directly, and set strict performance standards that they must all meet
eliminate corporate taxes and income tax on citizens making less than $50,000 per year, and raise income tax to 60% on millionaires. I would also raise capital gains tax and tax "conspicuous consumption"
cap the interest rate that credit card companies can charge their customers at a maximum of 5%
make payday loan businesses illegal
build lots and lots of public housing
build a publicly funded and national system of public transportation (buses, etc)
nationalize the energy companies (oil, power, etc.) build more nuclear power plants and subsidize energy costs for consumers.
cut down our defense budget significantly, and close all overseas military bases. no more interfering with the politics of other countries
legalize marijuana, LSD, shrooms and mescaline, but make it a capital crime to possess, manufacture or distribute any of the hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, meth, PCP, etc. anyone caught with hard drugs would be executed. all people currently in jail for weed, acid or shrooms would be pardoned and released
break up Walmart into regions (by state) and force them to sell off all their assets. from this, new local retailers would emerge and grow
shut down Monsanto, shoot their lobbyists and void all their patents
ban all tobacco products (cigarettes, dip and snus). shut down Phillip-Morris, seize their assets and shoot their lobbyists.
ban high fructose corn syrup and BPA from all foods and food supplies
nationalize Planned Parenthood
purge Wall Street of all corrupt moneylenders and speculators, and hang them from the tops of their own palaces with long ass ropes. tax the fuck out of high-speed trading.
ban casinos everywhere except within the city limits of Las Vegas
shut down Indian reservations and absorb them into the general welfare system.
lots of other stuff that I can't think of but needs to be done.


Close the borders for 25 years-that would crush California's economy in about 10 minutes.

[phuckphace]

Close the borders for 25 years-that would crush California's economy in about 10 minutes.

sounds like just desserts for traitorous capitalists who would rather hire an illiterate foreigner over an American citizen just to save a few bucks

[Harry Smith]

sounds like just desserts for traitorous capitalists who would rather hire an illiterate foreigner over an American citizen just to save a few bucks

Not really-the US economy relies on legal immigration as well to build it's economy. If you stopped legal immigration it would crush businesses across the whole of the US. I'm by no means a dedicated capitalist but you can't stop immigration just to piss on big business-it's cutting off your nose to annoy your face

[phuckphace]

Not really-the US economy relies on legal immigration as well to build it's economy. If you stopped legal immigration it would crush businesses across the whole of the US. I'm by no means a dedicated capitalist but you can't stop immigration just to piss on big business-it's cutting off your nose to annoy your face

actually the economy would merely shrink back down to a healthy pre-globalized level like it was back in the 1950s and prior. the economy we have now is morbidly obese, fed by the doctrine of unlimited growth. but it can only continue to grow fatter for so long until it has a coronary and collapses. economists always bitch about the smaller economy and lower profit margins while failing to acknowledge that a fuckhuge aggregate GNP translates to less individual wealth. they just look at the bigger number at the end of the Excel spreadsheet and shout "BIGGER NUMBER = GOOD, SMALLER NUMBER = BAD HURP DURP."

prior to 1965 we had very strict immigration quotas in order to protect domestic jobs. I want to bring that shit back and I don't see it as a bad thing if it means cutting into the profit margins of a few megacorporations.

[Harry Smith]

I don't see it as a bad thing if it means cutting into the profit margins of a few megacorporations.

As I said before you shouldn't implement policy just to hurt big business profits-you might as well just increase tax rates because stopping immigration would cause the US to grind to a halt. Prices would skyrocket as the price of labour increases, along with inflation. This nationalistic idea of having an 'American' workforce is pretty weak on several levels.

Immigrants hold 35% of the unskilled jobs

How would you refill these jobs? Americans aren't going to want to do them-that's just the nature of our progress.

If you want to focus on workers right,increase the minimum wage (something you've outlined) give trade unions more democratic power and provide universal healthcare and lift people out of poverty. Don't simply stop immigration because you'll stop the US

[phuckphace]

As I said before you shouldn't implement policy just to hurt big business profits-

that's not the point of economic protectionism. as the name implies, it's more to protect domestic jobs and industry. it just so happens that it steps on the toes of greedy corporations who would skin a flea for its hide and tallow

you might as well just increase tax rates because stopping immigration would cause the US to grind to a halt. Prices would skyrocket as the price of labour increases, along with inflation.

that's a load of horseshit, quit reading neoliberal propaganda from Forbes and the Wall Street Journal. back several decades ago when we had protectionist policies, our economy was booming and the unemployment rate was around 3%. anyone who wanted a job could get one, and prices of most consumer goods were about the same as they are now even taking inflation into account.

This nationalistic idea of having an 'American' workforce is pretty weak on several levels. How would you refill these jobs? Americans aren't going to want to do them-that's just the nature of our progress.

more BS. prior to the point when we started letting grasping capitalists import cholos by the vanful to pick fruit and lay bricks, who the hell do you think did those jobs? poltergeists? no, Americans did them and were happy to, since you could actually earn an adequate living then. but dirt cheap immigrant labor suppressed wages, and this in turn drove away American citizens who need a higher wage that is more in line with the cost of living in their country. Pedro is happy to work for 2 dollars a day because that's like 10 billion pesos back in Mexico, which is where his earnings will end up as he wires them back to Monterrey to feed his 8 children.

you need to read up more on history and maybe you'll discover that this nationalistic "idea" was actually reality for quite a while until we let the interests of big business and globalization fuck everything up. all I'm doing here is advocating a return to the tried and true past when we actually knew how to run an economy.

Don't simply stop immigration because you'll stop the US

like I said, stop reading propaganda, your noggin will thank you

[Harry Smith]

that's not the point of economic protectionism. as the name implies, it's more to protect domestic jobs and industry. it just so happens that it steps on the toes of greedy corporations who would skin a flea for its hide and tallow



that's a load of horseshit, quit reading neoliberal propaganda from Forbes and the Wall Street Journal. back several decades ago when we had protectionist policies, our economy was booming and the unemployment rate was around 3%. anyone who wanted a job could get one, and prices of most consumer goods were about the same as they are now even taking inflation into account.



more BS. prior to the point when we started letting grasping capitalists import cholos by the vanful to pick fruit and lay bricks, who the hell do you think did those jobs? poltergeists? no, Americans did them and were happy to, since you could actually earn an adequate living then. but dirt cheap immigrant labor suppressed wages, and this in turn drove away American citizens who need a higher wage that is more in line with the cost of living in their country. Pedro is happy to work for 2 dollars a day because that's like 10 billion pesos back in Mexico, which is where his earnings will end up as he wires them back to Monterrey to feed his 8 children.

you need to read up more on history and maybe you'll discover that this nationalistic "idea" was actually reality for quite a while until we let the interests of big business and globalization fuck everything up. all I'm doing here is advocating a return to the tried and true past when we actually knew how to run an economy.



like I said, stop reading propaganda, your noggin will thank you

Neoliberal? I may be a lot of things. You've simply just had a bit of a tantrum over my argument. I'm going to ignore the disgusting racial stereotypes as well-they make you look very bad mate.

You do realize that the nature of the economy has changed since the 1950's, your using economic policies from the 30's to fix the problems of the 21st century.

Your argument is a very scary blend of nationalism and socialism-I'll happily endorse the second but I don't think a US citizen should have more rights than someone living south of the border just because they were born on a certain piece of rock. Your ideas about globalization seem very bad, you do realize that the US has to trade goods and services with other nations right? You can't just survive on a domestic workforce that is overqualified

Please tell me how are you going to fill the jobs in hotels? Or on the farms? Do you really think American kids with college degrees are going to want to work in the fields for 9 hours.

It would be interesting to see how you'd force people to work in these jobs? Would you cut off their benefits? Force them into it?

Immigration brings investment, tax dollars and labour to the US economy-all your idea offers is ideas that were out of date in the 1950's. The US needs to focus on the future- green industries and the services. The clarke fisher model shows that the US economy can't survive on some sort of wacko nationalistic vibe, it's got a declining birth rate and an ageing population-that means you'll need a lot of labour. Countries such as Germany need 200,000 foreign workers a year to survive

http://www.geographyinthenews.rgs.org/resources/images/Clark-Fisher_news_en.gif

[phuckphace]

Neoliberal? I may be a lot of things. You've simply just had a bit of a tantrum over my argument. I'm going to ignore the disgusting racial stereotypes as well-they make you look very bad mate.

you need a thicker skin m8

You do realize that the nature of the economy has changed since the 1950's, your using economic policies from the 30's to fix the problems of the 21st century.

riddle me this, what forces or interests brought about these sorts of changes, and what were the justifications for doing so? believe it or not, there isn't always a need to change something just for the sake of changing it when it works fine as is. and that's exactly what happened. you're acting as though the shift from nationalism to globalism occurred as if by some divine destiny, when in fact it came about because we succumbed to greed and the lure of short-term gain. we got the short-term gains, but are now also having to suffer the long-term consequences.

Your argument is a very scary blend of nationalism and socialism-I'll happily endorse the second but I don't think a US citizen should have more rights than someone living south of the border just because they were born on a certain piece of rock.

this is a cute sounding rationalization that I often hear from Carebear-cosmopolitans much like yourself, those who have absolutely no sense of belonging or allegiance to their own nation and culture. I wonder if you'll still be in denial after the UK lets in 200 million more third-worlders and everything starts to come apart at the seams. but I'm sure you won't mind letting 20 or 30 of them move in with you though, we're all one big happy family right?

Your ideas about globalization seem very bad, you do realize that the US has to trade goods and services with other nations right? You can't just survive on a domestic workforce that is overqualified

who says we can't import and export goods? that's where tariffs come into play.

Please tell me how are you going to fill the jobs in hotels? Or on the farms? Do you really think American kids with college degrees are going to want to work in the fields for 9 hours.

I think people who need a job would be more than happy to take whatever job they could find as long as it paid an adequate wage. sure you have the spoiled elitist fucks but you also have plenty of people who'd jump on it. I know I would.

It would be interesting to see how you'd force people to work in these jobs? Would you cut off their benefits? Force them into it?

This guy...

Immigration brings investment, tax dollars and labour to the US economy-all your idea offers is ideas that were out of date in the 1950's. The US needs to focus on the future- green industries and the services....[blah blah muh progress blah blah]

oh wow, a economist got paid to draw some lines on a graph and spew academic buzzwords about "progress", "the future" and "service sector", needless to say I don't particularly care about whatever way the elites are trying to justify their continued grasping at the moment. I'm still waiting for your explanation as to why the economy and nation was booming during our era of SCARY nationalism and immigration quotas. protip: if you say "war economy", you'll only be furthering my argument, because the war industry was entirely domestic.

Harry Smith status?
[ ] - not rekt
[X] - rekt

[Harry Smith]

you need a thicker skin m8



riddle me this, what forces or interests brought about these sorts of changes, and what were the justifications for doing so? believe it or not, there isn't always a need to change something just for the sake of changing it when it works fine as is. and that's exactly what happened. you're acting as though the shift from nationalism to globalism occurred as if by some divine destiny, when in fact it came about because we succumbed to greed and the lure of short-term gain. we got the short-term gains, but are now also having to suffer the long-term consequences.



this is a cute sounding rationalization that I often hear from Carebear-cosmopolitans much like yourself, those who have absolutely no sense of belonging or allegiance to their own nation and culture. I wonder if you'll still be in denial after the UK lets in 200 million more third-worlders and everything starts to come apart at the seams. but I'm sure you won't mind letting 20 or 30 of them move in with you though, we're all one big happy family right?



who says we can't import and export goods? that's where tariffs come into play.



I think people who need a job would be more than happy to take whatever job they could find as long as it paid an adequate wage. sure you have the spoiled elitist fucks but you also have plenty of people who'd jump on it. I know I would.



This guy...



oh wow, a economist got paid to draw some lines on a graph and spew academic buzzwords about "progress", "the future" and "service sector", needless to say I don't particularly care about whatever way the elites are trying to justify their continued grasping at the moment. I'm still waiting for your explanation as to why the economy and nation was booming during our era of SCARY nationalism and immigration quotas. protip: if you say "war economy", you'll only be furthering my argument, because the war industry was entirely domestic.

Harry Smith status?
[ ] - not rekt
[X] - rekt

The economy was completely different-I'm sure you can understand that economics have changed in the last 60 years. The US doesn't rely on industrial power any more,DE-Industrialization has already happened and it's about continuing on from that-look at the work that Germany have managed to do. By your logic Britain should re-embrace slavery and the empire because that 'worked for us'. Do you think Britain should reconquer the empire? It worked so well didn't it.

You quite clearly have no idea how immigration works in Britain-it's built up our country-it saved us after WW2 and it's the backbone of our economy for the last 20 years. Immigrants do the hard work that us Brits refuse to do-they work in the fields, the pick up rubbish but there's also immigrants who work in hospitals, run businesses and help make our country strong.

You can insulting me all you want but you need to focus on your extremely weak argument-you've completely ignored my point about the reliance on foreign labour and the declining birth rate in the US. I love how you ignored a very widely accepted modal of development but sure be a little hipster and fight the evil machine.

The 1950's were great though weren't they-sure blacks didn't have any rights, gays got beaten, natives got refused land, women got ignored at home and in the workplace. But yeah the 1950's were great if you were a white christian male married with kids.

I really don't understand your economic view-you want to make it for only Americans to increase wages-which then increases production costs-at the same time you want to return to the primary industry-so your going to compete with global markets using a workforce that demand about 1000 x higher pay. Have you heard of something called economics before?

[tovaris]

Hm if is soly rule a country...

I would...

RESTORE DEMOCRACY!!! Have you ever heard of DEMOS CRATEUM!!!

[Vlerchan]

snip.

Out of interest what exactly do you declare as politically? I have my money on National-Conservative though I'd go as far to say Third-Positionist.

[kanine]

This seems like fun :)
First thing's first, I would:
Purge our country (America) of any and all illegal immigrants by sending them back to their own countries by the boat load (However, I would leave all those who were conssidered citizens currently, be it by birth or gained citizenship).
- Fully severe the connection between the church and our goverment. (By which I mean that I would not alow its laws to influence my own decisions).
- Have all heavy drug users and killers who are above the eighteen year age mark. All below the mark would be provided an opportunity to rejoin society (provided they were not serial killers and had only killed one person). However they would have to undergo my new trining program for my millitary and then be automatically enlisted.
- Steralize sexual predators such as rapists and molestors in an effort to determine the prescence of a psychological gene, and hopefully destroy it. (To state my curiosity)
-Have child molestors executed or enlisted, depending on the age and psychological profile.
- Place a majority of my troops around our borders in order to keep out unwanted company. (I refer you to the first action I would take).
After I did that, I would proceed to shape our country by:
- Legalizing Gay marriage (while simultaniously banning any and all incestrous marriage/relationships. Punishable by enlistment. NOTE: fooling around is understandable, albeit strange. It won't be punished exactly, but looked down upon by all. Not unlike now.)
- Legalize abortion in all states should the mother be a victom of sex crimes or not.
- Make any form of harrassment, bullying, or physcial/mental abuse punishable by elistment to death (pertaining to the degree the new crime was preformed in)
- Make it required for students to achieve a highschool degree, or be enlisted in my growing army.
- Invoke a communist like state, which would depend soley on the amount of education received. (Highschool being the equivalent of minnimum wage whereas a PHD for example or masters in science would be paid in the fullest)
- Create a speacialization based school system. Meaning that should one seek a job in weilding, rather than study in all feilds they would study their own chosen branches subjects.
Now, that's enough of that for the moment (all though I have many more regulations regarding housing and the homeless) so let's move on to what I would do regarding the surrounding countries.
- First and formost, I would send part of my now massive army down to Korea and take both countries under american control.
- Increase nuclear production within america
- Increase trade with europe and asia
= Offer to bring third world countries such as africa under american control (providing housing and food as well as education) in exchange for millitary and agricultural work.
- Offer a treaty of peace to Russia and Germany.
- Take backCanada for the U.S by either force or diplomacy.
- Use my new Russian and German Allies (and possibly English ones) to dominate the other countries.
-Edventually impose my rules on the newer countries which lay under my control.
- Execute war criminals.
Now, off of that messy buissness, there is one more thing:
- Limit the amount of children allowed to three. After three children are recorded from one person, said person will be steralized.
And yeah, that pretty much sums it up :D

[Cpt_Cutter]

Execute war criminals.

The irony of doing what you just said, then doing this, is delicious. That being said, I wouldn't be much better.

[kanine]

The irony of doing what you just said, then doing this, is delicious. That being said, I wouldn't be much better.
Irony is always delicious.

[phuckphace]

Out of interest what exactly do you declare as politically? I have my money on National-Conservative though I'd go as far to say Third-Positionist.

I'm conservative on the social end but economically very socialist. I took a political quiz and it said I'm a "patriotic and authoritarian Socialist". I guess you could say I'm a national socialist, although I reject all-out fascism and der Führer.

The economy was completely different-I'm sure you can understand that economics have changed in the last 60 years. The US doesn't rely on industrial power any more,DE-Industrialization has already happened and it's about continuing on from that-look at the work that Germany have managed to do. By your logic Britain should re-embrace slavery and the empire because that 'worked for us'. Do you think Britain should reconquer the empire? It worked so well didn't it.

de-industrialization occurred because industry was allowed to relocate to Asia and central America to exploit cheap labor. why not just return to the pre-Thatcher era when there was plenty of domestic industry and unionized jobs? again with the mindset that de-industrialization was somehow inevitable and part of the march of progress. that simply isn't true, there was never a need to fix what wasn't broken, but the rootless globalists decided to "fix" it anyway.

You quite clearly have no idea how immigration works in Britain-it's built up our country-it saved us after WW2 and it's the backbone of our economy for the last 20 years. Immigrants do the hard work that us Brits refuse to do-they work in the fields, the pick up rubbish but there's also immigrants who work in hospitals, run businesses and help make our country strong.

oh look the tattered old "b-but kebab shops!!" argument again. yes I'm well aware that immigrants often set up a bunch of tiny and redundant service businesses that sell exotic foreign food and make you feel all cultured, now how about addressing the part where they import their third-world barbarism along with their luggage and suppress wages. for every assimilating immigrant there are 100 more who refuse to assimilate and insist that their host country change their customs and laws to suit them (Sharia, public services in their language, etc.) Ethnic Britons are slowly becoming a minority in their own country, similar to how Americans are being rapidly displaced by Mexicans and other nationalities. but you probably don't care because caring about that would be RACIST

You can insulting me all you want but you need to focus on your extremely weak argument-you've completely ignored my point about the reliance on foreign labour and the declining birth rate in the US. I love how you ignored a very widely accepted modal of development but sure be a little hipster and fight the evil machine.

economic models are just that - models, and economic theory is hardly more credible than astrology. you can't reduce complex human behavior and interactions (the foundation of the economy) down to a mathematical formula.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assume_a_can_opener

glib assurances from these people that Laffer's magic napkins will give us an economic utopia with kebab shops on every corner aren't reassuring at all.

The declining birth rate could be addressed with the right policies (tax incentives, etc.)

The 1950's were great though weren't they-sure blacks didn't have any rights, gays got beaten, natives got refused land, women got ignored at home and in the workplace. But yeah the 1950's were great if you were a white christian male married with kids.

this is a completely retarded non-argument. what does racism and evil white people have to do with why the 1950s were better from an economic standpoint? literally fuck all. so I'll ask you again: how was the economy in such excellent shape in the 40s, 50s and 60s when according to you it should have collapsed in 10 minutes without millions of immigrants willing to work for pennies? how was it that the unemployment rate averaged only about 3%? how was it that prices of most consumer goods (which were domestically manufactured) were comparable to today? please enlighten me, you're clearly the expert.

I really don't understand your economic view-you want to make it for only Americans to increase wages-which then increases production costs-at the same time you want to return to the primary industry-so your going to compete with global markets using a workforce that demand about 1000 x higher pay. Have you heard of something called economics before?

deny it as you wish. eventually the bloated globalized marketplace will reach peak growth followed by a plunge, and all that population growth that it fueled? it's completely unsustainable. here in the next century there will be massive death rates in the third world once resources run out. I would think that would be alarming to you, because it is very alarming to me. western nations will eventually be forced to return to having largely domestic economies anyway, but I for one would prefer that we did it before shit really hits the fan.

by the way Harry, you might as well stop calling yourself a socialist because you're essentially just a neoliberal capitalist cosmopolitan who adopted the socialist label because it's the hip thing to do at your uni to show that you care about minorities.

[britishboy]

1) Reduce minimum wage.
2) Ignore environmentalists.
3) Have the ability to sack workers if they go on strike.
4) Lower redundancy pay.
5) Cut taxes for businesses and the rich (The highest personal tax is 45%!)
6) Encourage skilled immigration.
7) Make it easier to kick illegal immigrants out.
8) End unskilled labour immigrants completely.
9) Tough justice system.
10) Increase after care for ex military workers.
11) Increase military power.
12) Privatise everything.
13) Reduce benefits a lot.
14) Major public school reform.
15) Legalise gay marriage, it's a debate I am neutral in but am sick of hearing about it.
16) Remove restrictions on animal research.
17) Increase police and immigration officers powers.
18) Give all police tasers.

[phuckphace]

1) Reduce minimum wage.
2) Ignore environmentalists.
3) Have the ability to sack workers if they go on strike.
5) Cut taxes for businesses and the rich (The highest personal tax is 45%!)

so in other words, take away workers' rights, cut their pay and give a break to people who already have too much money as it is. someone has been reading too much Ayn Rand

[Harry Smith]

I'm conservative on the social end but economically very socialist. I took a political quiz and it said I'm a "patriotic and authoritarian Socialist". I guess you could say I'm a national socialist, although I reject all-out fascism and der Führer.



de-industrialization occurred because industry was allowed to relocate to Asia and central America to exploit cheap labor. why not just return to the pre-Thatcher era when there was plenty of domestic industry and unionized jobs? again with the mindset that de-industrialization was somehow inevitable and part of the march of progress. that simply isn't true, there was never a need to fix what wasn't broken, but the rootless globalists decided to "fix" it anyway.



oh look the tattered old "b-but kebab shops!!" argument again. yes I'm well aware that immigrants often set up a bunch of tiny and redundant service businesses that sell exotic foreign food and make you feel all cultured, now how about addressing the part where they import their third-world barbarism along with their luggage and suppress wages. for every assimilating immigrant there are 100 more who refuse to assimilate and insist that their host country change their customs and laws to suit them (Sharia, public services in their language, etc.) Ethnic Britons are slowly becoming a minority in their own country, similar to how Americans are being rapidly displaced by Mexicans and other nationalities. but you probably don't care because caring about that would be RACIST



economic models are just that - models, and economic theory is hardly more credible than astrology. you can't reduce complex human behavior and interactions (the foundation of the economy) down to a mathematical formula.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assume_a_can_opener

glib assurances from these people that Laffer's magic napkins will give us an economic utopia with kebab shops on every corner aren't reassuring at all.

The declining birth rate could be addressed with the right policies (tax incentives, etc.)



this is a completely retarded non-argument. what does racism and evil white people have to do with why the 1950s were better from an economic standpoint? literally fuck all. so I'll ask you again: how was the economy in such excellent shape in the 40s, 50s and 60s when according to you it should have collapsed in 10 minutes without millions of immigrants willing to work for pennies? how was it that the unemployment rate averaged only about 3%? how was it that prices of most consumer goods (which were domestically manufactured) were comparable to today? please enlighten me, you're clearly the expert.



deny it as you wish. eventually the bloated globalized marketplace will reach peak growth followed by a plunge, and all that population growth that it fueled? it's completely unsustainable. here in the next century there will be massive death rates in the third world once resources run out. I would think that would be alarming to you, because it is very alarming to me. western nations will eventually be forced to return to having largely domestic economies anyway, but I for one would prefer that we did it before shit really hits the fan.

by the way Harry, you might as well stop calling yourself a socialist because you're essentially just a neoliberal capitalist cosmopolitan who adopted the socialist label because it's the hip thing to do at your uni to show that you care about minorities.

I'm certainty not a fan of Thatcher-she should have ensured that the mining areas had a change to diversify their industry and offer education,support and welfare towards the industrial areas rather than simply pulling the blanket.

I'm also going to completely reject your ideas about immigration-it's pretty offensive to describe them as barbaric etc. It's funny you bring up Sharia law because you've quite clearly being brainwashed by the anti-muslim wing of the media-the so called sharia laws in England have absolutely no legal power at all so no they haven't adjusted our justice system to suit their own needs. Ethnic Britain? How do you denfine that? Is it Anglo-Saxon? Norman? Georgian? Breton? Roman?

I'll give you a very brief history of immigration in Britain-during world war 2 we were fighting for our very lives. Our country was about to be invaded so we got pilots from India, Poland, South Africa, Australia, New Zeland, Pakistan heck from nearly across the whole world to fight for us-these people fought bravely alongside the British forces and without these terrible immigrants we probably would have lost the war. After it was over our country needed rebuilding, unlike the US our country had been fucked over for 6 years. Guess who came and worked hard, payed taxes and helped rebuild our country-immigrants.

or every assimilating immigrant there are 100 more who refuse to assimilate

Do you have any evidence to back that up?

The US economy has always been reliant on seasonal immigration-how would the farms manage in California without it? Even in the 50's the US was very reliant on immigration whether that be from Ireland or Mexico. There millions of immigrants in the 1950's and 60's, you know that right? The US have always relied on immigration-how do you reckon your family ended up getting to the US?

I'd also stress for the third time that the nature of the economy was very different-can you accept that the global market has changed in the last 50 years?

You had events like the 1973 oil crisis,1974 stock market crash and several other events that meant that you simply couldn't continue with outdated. I strongly disagree with your Malthus esque ideas that the world is going to collapse. We need to back changes to our systems to help strengthen our recovery but we don't need to close ourselves off to the world. I'll happily admit I'm by no means a strong socialist- I veer more towards the Third Way with elements of old labour in it

1) Reduce minimum wage.
2) Ignore environmentalists.
3) Have the ability to sack workers if they go on strike.
4) Lower redundancy pay.
5) Cut taxes for businesses and the rich (The highest personal tax is 45%!)
6) Encourage skilled immigration.
7) Make it easier to kick illegal immigrants out.
8) End unskilled labour immigrants completely.
9) Tough justice system.
10) Increase after care for ex military workers.
11) Increase military power.
12) Privatise everything.
13) Reduce benefits a lot.
14) Major public school reform.
15) Legalise gay marriage, it's a debate I am neutral in but am sick of hearing about it.
16) Remove restrictions on animal research.
17) Increase police and immigration officers powers.
18) Give all police tasers.

1)Why? What does that achieve apart from increasing poverty and make children go hungry
2)Sure-forget the recent floods and other signs of global warming.
3)That's illegal under every law in Britain and Europe-that would mean 70% of our teachers would of been sacked.
4)That's often privately done.
5)Bush tried that-it failed. We're in a recession you know?
6)Agree with that, encourage it further though
7)What more do you want? The Tories have tried everything,
8)That's illegal.
9)How so? It's already pretty tough
10) How would you afford that after a tax cut to the rich?
11)Really not that simple, we can't even afford to feed our own people
12)Including the Army and the NHS?
13)Poverty,Poverty and more Poverty
14)Do you mean state schools?
15)Already done.
16)What would that achieve?
17)Doesn't reduce crime, only furthers ethnic tensions, have you heard about our police?
18)Great-that would not only cost more but it would led to many more people dying http://educate-yourself.org/cn/taserslethal10jan05.shtml http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/jul/14/police-tasers-cardiac-arrest-warnings

[britishboy]

so in other words, take away workers' rights, cut their pay and give a break to people who already have too much money as it is. someone has been reading too much Ayn Rand

Who are you to judge how much is too much? That money will be spent or invested and when a worker goes on strike it bullies the employer and is a inconvenience for those that use the service.

[phuckphace]

Who are you to judge how much is too much? That money will be spent or invested and when a worker goes on strike it bullies the employer and is a inconvenience for those that use the service.

yeah, spent on stupid shit like stretch limos and $8000 Gucci handbags, or "invested" into a lobbying firm that will pass laws beneficial to themselves. the wealthy are wasteful degenerates who use their money to game the system, and the last thing on earth we should be doing is cutting their taxes.

I also like how you put an exclamation mark after 45% as though that's oppression or something. for someone making 20 million a year, yeah I can't imagine how the poor guy will ever get by with only 11 million. might as well just work at ASDA as a janitor :rolleyes: /sarcasm

[Harry Smith]

when a worker goes on strike it bullies the employer and is a inconvenience for those that use the service.

That's why people go on strike.

For example with Teachers there pensions are being cut, they're getting rid of staff rooms, they're decreasing their pay, forcing them to meet stupid OFSTED targets, devaluing them and treating them like crap.

What else are they suppose to do apart from Strike?

[britishboy]

yeah, spent on stupid shit like stretch limos and $8000 Gucci handbags, or "invested" into a lobbying firm that will pass laws beneficial to themselves. the wealthy are wasteful degenerates who use their money to game the system, and the last thing on earth we should be doing is cutting their taxes.

I also like how you put an exclamation mark after 45% as though that's oppression or something. for someone making 20 million a year, yeah I can't imagine how the poor guy will ever get by with only 11 million. might as well just work at ASDA as a janitor :rolleyes: /sarcasm
The wealthy give the poor jobs, the money they spend on decent clothes supporters industries that are taxed and provide jobs.


1)Why? What does that achieve apart from increasing poverty and make children go hungry
2)Sure-forget the recent floods and other signs of global warming.
3)That's illegal under every law in Britain and Europe-that would mean 70% of our teachers would of been sacked.
4)That's often privately done.
5)Bush tried that-it failed. We're in a recession you know?
6)Agree with that, encourage it further though
7)What more do you want? The Tories have tried everything,
8)That's illegal.
9)How so? It's already pretty tough
10) How would you afford that after a tax cut to the rich?
11)Really not that simple, we can't even afford to feed our own people
12)Including the Army and the NHS?
13)Poverty,Poverty and more Poverty
14)Do you mean state schools?
15)Already done.
16)What would that achieve?
17)Doesn't reduce crime, only furthers ethnic tensions, have you heard about our police?
18)Great-that would not only cost more but it would led to many more people dying http://educate-yourself.org/cn/taserslethal10jan05.shtml http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/jul/14/police-tasers-cardiac-arrest-warnings
Firstly all this is what I would do if I was head of the country. Most of that is political suicide I know that and you saying you will fail isn't an argument because I know I would, the list is what I would do if I had the power.

1) It would help businesses; allow them to deliver the service or product for; employ more people and attract investment into the UK.
2) I didn't say ignore environmental concerns but will get all the gas and oil out of the ground ASAP.
3) Nobody would be sacked because you go on strike to improve you work... Not get sacked from it.
4) There are minimum requirements.
5) Cutting the highest taxes will help the economy.
6) Yeah I would identify skills we need and send people abroad to get them, nurses for example.
7) They should be imprisoned until send out because when an immigrant has to check in, he often doesn't. Ignore the EU over illegal immigrants ( Abu Qatada)
8) Under EU law it is yes, as I said at the beginning it is what I would do if I was leader.
9) Is it really tough? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567496/Pictured-Shocking-moment-doting-son-killed-single-punch-head-row-cycling-pavement-killer-jailed-just-four-half-years.html
10) My cuts to benefits and the benefits to the economy it will create.
11) It is that simple build more ships, buy more jets etc. We can afford to feed our own people, the poor sit at home happily living off of our tax.
12) No the army belongs to the Queen and should stay like that as the the NHS it would definitely benefit from being privatised but one look at the US puts me off of that idea. The only other thing that should remain state owned is the justice system.
13) Enough for them to eat but little enough for them to get a job.
14) I call them public schools but yes, state schools.
15) Correct.
16) Scientists are currently restricted and under pressure from activists. Remove this and their research would be of better quality.
17) It will reduce crime and how does it create ethnic tensions?
18) I know they can kill but I have little sympathy, you are tazered for a reason and are warned, think of it like this.

If a man is about to harm himself with a weapon (Suicidal) them being tasered will help them.

If you are being beaten up, the officer if he has a taser can warn the attacker to get on the ground or whatever they ask and if he doesn't taser him, protecting you.

If a unarmed policemen is confronted by a man with a weapon of some kind there is little the officer can do but try to physically subdue him or run. But if he had a taser he could easily arrest him.

Policemen are people themselves.

[Harry Smith]

18) , you are tazered for a reason and are warned, think of it like this.

Is it a crime to be blind? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-23914417

The rest of your post was pretty basic economics which were just assumptions from a GCSE textbook- a tax cut doesn't always generate business growth or increase output. Bush tried it in America-it didn't work. If you cut tax then you have less money to spend on stuff like defense. Saying that your defence policy is crap-why do we need more ships? This isn't the 1800's

Cutting benefits? Do you remeber the talk we had about benefits? What benefits would you cut? Pensions make up 47% of our welfare bill-if you cut that then old people will no doubt freeze in their home, children will go to school hungry and like MRS T had in the 90's you'll get kicked out.

I thought you said you loved the NHS? But sure sell it to corporation that only care about profit-who cares about saving lives?

When the police are given more power it only leads to abuse-have you heard of the Brixton riots?

Your point about the sentencing is wrong-we have safeguards like this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/attorney-general-to-review-sentence-given-to-a-man-who-killed-innocent-pedestrian-with-a-single-punch-after-cycling-row-9154528.html
the poor sit at home happily living off of our tax.

If that was true then they wouldn't be going hungry

[phuckphace]

The wealthy give the poor jobs

so what? that doesn't mean we should kiss their asses and transfer the tax burden to the lower class. besides you already said you wanted to lower the minimum wage and sack strikers. what good is it to even have a job if you get paid very little and can't strike for better pay? it's either good pay at work or going on the dole, but it sounds like you want to take the safety net away too.

Thatcher is dead and her policies need to die too for good. please don't try to resurrect her

[Vlerchan]

I'm conservative on the social end but economically very socialist. I took a political quiz and it said I'm a "patriotic and authoritarian Socialist". I guess you could say I'm a national socialist, although I reject all-out fascism and der Führer.

You're a Third-Positionist.

@BritishBoy: I thought you studied economics at some level?

[tovaris]

1) Reduce minimum wage.
2) Ignore environmentalists.
3) Have the ability to sack workers if they go on strike.
4) Lower redundancy pay.
5) Cut taxes for businesses and the rich (The highest personal tax is 45%!)
6) Encourage skilled immigration.
7) Make it easier to kick illegal immigrants out.
8) End unskilled labour immigrants completely.
9) Tough justice system.
10) Increase after care for ex military workers.
11) Increase military power.
12) Privatise everything.
13) Reduce benefits a lot.
14) Major public school reform.
15) Legalise gay marriage, it's a debate I am neutral in but am sick of hearing about it.
16) Remove restrictions on animal research.
17) Increase police and immigration officers powers.
18) Give all police tasers.

You know that crow in anime that goes acros the screan leaving bihind a dotted line?
Whel that
................................................................................ ..
Your crazy! Not only did you accept the position of a dictator, you have also done everething posibke againced The people!
You would esentaly make a police state!!!! (Khm khm Hitler khm Stalin khm Hoover...)

Tell me something... where do you get your ideas from? Do you come to them by your own deduction and logic or do jou just pick them up from people around Thee?

[Southside]

-Legalize marijuana
-Rebuild failing infrastructure such as bridges and roads
-Raise minimum wage to 10 or 11 dollars
- Shut down all overseas bases
-Quit NATO
-Universal Healthcare system
- More funding and better educators for inner city schools
- Make everyone in Congress and the higher ranks of government take a pay cut
- ELMINATE THE DEBT CEILING
- Have magazine capacity limits on rifles(Id say 15 bullets, that's it)
- Secure our borders
- Legalize gay marriage
- Make physical education a federal requirement in elementary school
- Get rid of all chemical and nuclear weapons
- Tax the fuck out of big corporations that are screwing the people..

[phuckphace]

- Have magazine capacity limits on rifles(Id say 15 bullets, that's it)

I agree with most of what you said but this one is pretty dumb

[Harry Smith]

7) They should be imprisoned until send out because when an immigrant has to check in, he often doesn't. Ignore the EU over illegal immigrants ( Abu Qatada)
.

We already to that...

It's nothing to do with the EU-stop reading right wing press about the EU-it's all hot air.

The Abu Qatada came from the European court from Strasbourg

These are all the countries who follow the europeon court in Strasborg-it's nothing do with ignoring the EU. The map below shows all the nations that are bound by the court-25% of them aren't in the EU

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Council_of_Europe_%28blue%29.svg/713px-Council_of_Europe_%28blue%29.svg.png

[NickCollins]

gays would be free to do as they please
welfare would be given to those who earn it
separation of church and state and i mean actual separation
drinking age 25
marijuana legal
any other drug isn't except those given by doctors
age of consent 15
free condoms to teens no questions asked
clean energy projects yes nuclear
no nuclear bombs

but i would probably screw it up so i would get in fix what i needed to and get out and give power to someone i trust to follow my ideas

[Southside]

I agree with most of what you said but this one is pretty dumb

Sorry for the late reply but why would you need over 15 bullets for?

Self Defense? It only takes 2-3 shots from a assault rifle to kill someone

Hunting? Ok..Maybe 20 rounds

Its no other good reason for someone to have a 50 round drum magazine..

[phuckphace]

Sorry for the late reply but why would you need over 15 bullets for?

Self Defense? It only takes 2-3 shots from a assault rifle to kill someone

Hunting? Ok..Maybe 20 rounds

Its no other good reason for someone to have a 50 round drum magazine..

if your goal here is to prevent mass shootings such as at schools it's not going to work. even assuming the shooter wouldn't obtain an illegal high capacity magazine and use it anyway, it's also easy enough to put a couple extra low capacity magazines in one's pocket and still have the same number of total rounds available. it doesn't take that long to reload

[Ethe14]

If I could take control of the U.S and have congress in full control I would do the following

~revamp the whole U.S infrastructure
~high speed bullet trains coast to coast through all major cities
~reform food stamps
~take hike to 25% to those with income over 1,000,000 dollars
~make English our offcial language
~high speed fiber rollout quicker with governemnt subsidies
~raise teacher salary and pension
~make business in the U.S more favorable again
~standardized testing only in 10,11,12th grade
~minimum wage increase to 10 dollars per hour
~bonuses to teacher performance
~deport illegal immigrants with a history of crime (if your peaceful you can stay)
~increase military power
~give discharged soldiers even better health care
~mandatory 1 year term in military when you turn 19
~other stuff that if probably think of later.

[jayce_xt]

First and foremost, I would ensure that entry into my colony/empire was very selective... The implementation of anarchy is one of my favourite topics of discussion.

^^^ I absolutely loved this particular post. We should converse on this topic sometime, definitely!

My idea of reshaping the world would be fairly simple.

-First, I would remove all laws
-Next, I would remove all governance positions
-I would criminalize any acts that actually cause harm (physical or otherwise) without informed consent
-Any further laws would require discussion, then democratic vote (that is, each citizen votes on it)
-Any major collective action would require discussion, then democratic vote
-Any criminalized act would not have a set sentence, but instead be punished according to the degree of harm inflicted
-All public spaces would be monitored, video and audio, streamed onto a public net and saved into localized databases
-These streams and recordings will always be publicly accessible and maintained by the public
-All citizens are effectively peace keeping officers; if a citizen is suspected of having committed, the evidence must be presented to the public and the suspect at time of restraint
-Children's education begins as soon as a child is capable of focusing on academics, and consists of whatever the child may be interested in
-Scholars, technicians, and field experts lead discussions in laws and actions concerning their respective fields
-Commerce conducted on a TRUE supply and demand basis, with necessities taking precedence (i.e. if 10 million people request houses/potatoes/medicine, then enough of these are produced to meet the demand)
-Punishments can NEVER be meted out for an act, even a criminalized act, if no harm was inflicted and all parties involved were informed and consenting (such punishments are, in and of themselves, crimes)

[Southside]

if your goal here is to prevent mass shootings such as at schools it's not going to work. even assuming the shooter wouldn't obtain an illegal high capacity magazine and use it anyway, it's also easy enough to put a couple extra low capacity magazines in one's pocket and still have the same number of total rounds available. it doesn't take that long to reload


Im not trying to prevent mass shootings..Chicago has some of the toughest gun laws in the country and 415 people died from shootings last year, 2012 had 500+ dead from shootings. People will still find a way to carry out those horrific acts no matter how many restrictions and limits you have on guns.

[Yonkers]

abcd

[ImAurora]

I think it would be smart to not put me in charge of anything ever.

[KansasNavy]

I don't really know what I would do. I would try and make conditions livable for all. Edit or repeal the Rules of Engagement for SOF.

[Croconaw]

I honestly don't think I could. It's not something that I could do.

[Hanson]

hooooooo boy. I'd be the most badass dictator in the history of ever.

anyway, here's what I'd do. This is for 'Murrica by the way.


deport all illegal immigrants and close the borders to new immigrants for 25 years
make it a crime for a business to knowingly hire someone who is an illegal immigrant
make English our official language and require fluency in it to obtain any type of job
reform the food stamp program and allow only health food and fresh produce to be purchased
raise the minimum wage to $15.00 per hour
introduce universal healthcare for all citizens
ban infant circumcision
centralize and standardize the public school system, fund them wholly and directly, and set strict performance standards that they must all meet
eliminate corporate taxes and income tax on citizens making less than $50,000 per year, and raise income tax to 60% on millionaires. I would also raise capital gains tax and tax "conspicuous consumption"
cap the interest rate that credit card companies can charge their customers at a maximum of 5%
make payday loan businesses illegal
build lots and lots of public housing
build a publicly funded and national system of public transportation (buses, etc)
nationalize the energy companies (oil, power, etc.) build more nuclear power plants and subsidize energy costs for consumers.
cut down our defense budget significantly, and close all overseas military bases. no more interfering with the politics of other countries
legalize marijuana, LSD, shrooms and mescaline, but make it a capital crime to possess, manufacture or distribute any of the hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, meth, PCP, etc. anyone caught with hard drugs would be executed. all people currently in jail for weed, acid or shrooms would be pardoned and released
break up Walmart into regions (by state) and force them to sell off all their assets. from this, new local retailers would emerge and grow
shut down Monsanto, shoot their lobbyists and void all their patents
ban all tobacco products (cigarettes, dip and snus). shut down Phillip-Morris, seize their assets and shoot their lobbyists.
ban high fructose corn syrup and BPA from all foods and food supplies
nationalize Planned Parenthood
purge Wall Street of all corrupt moneylenders and speculators, and hang them from the tops of their own palaces with long ass ropes. tax the fuck out of high-speed trading.
ban casinos everywhere except within the city limits of Las Vegas
shut down Indian reservations and absorb them into the general welfare system.
lots of other stuff that I can't think of but needs to be done.

How much is the minimum wage in your home town currently ?

[ninja789]

pupetting could be fun haha

[phuckphace]

How much is the minimum wage in your home town currently ?

$7.25 per hour, with the cost of living it might as well be $0

[Capto]

I wouldn't take control of the US. It's too much of a headache.

I'd move to Sevastopol, make a glorious multi-ethnic Crimean Peoples' Republic, garner international support against Kiev and Moscow, make Crimea an island, claim the title of Khan of Crimea, bring all Crimean Tatars back to glorious Crimea, and start the glorious Crimean Imperial Age.

Joking, of course. But I would love a career in Crimea, political or not.

[Vlerchan]

I somehow managed to miss this post:/

This method also means that if someone does a great deal of work in a short amount of time by making a scientific discovery or writing a book that moves the population, they don't have to work as hard for the rest of the year and can take a break.

How do you calculate what constitutes a great deal of work and what doesn't constitute a great deal of work? (Note: I'm also assuming that great is synonymous with useful here). In capitalist-economies we have a market-system: supply-versus-demand - which doesn't work as efficiently as it used to without government-controls but it still exists and that allows us to get a good-idea of how much an item is worth to society. I suppose you could have the people democratically-elect the goods value, it wouldn't be exact - or close to exact, I'd argue - but it might give you a general indication.

If people are given food, water, shelter, and luxuries for free, couldn't they just refuse to work and be lazy? If there's no police force or military, couldn't crime become rampant? Well, I'm of the "you don't work, you don't eat" mindset; for the able, working would result in comfortable living.

Bad idea, IMO

Because a) your arbitrary system of valuation is frankly an atrocious way to place value on someones contribution to society - particularly in the service-sector, and b) private-property is inherently coercive - i.e., it involves the threat, and/or use of force, in order to maintain. This is why I've always favored the existence of gift-economies: economies that function about the community/collective/syndicate/commune/other, preferably a localized one, holding ownership over its own production and with each individual holding the free right to access such production. I don't feel that this would encourage laziness on the sole basis that there would be such a stigmatization against not working, and thus actively and deliberately leeching off society, that individuals would feel forced into work.

It helps that we now have much less actual work to do in todays world than ever before: eliminate marginal-employment (unproductive and therefor largely-unneded, low-wage service-sector employment: the fast-food sector, bin-collection, etc) and managerial employment and you've freed-up a large portion of the work-force. (Take into account the continuing automation of blue-collar work (see: Google) (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/google-teams-with-foxconn-to-build-robots-that-replace-human-workers/), and that's even more of the population freed up for other work - or preferably, the dividing up of the remaining, actually-needed employment so that individuals need only work a few hours a day and leave the rest for recreation.)

[JohnJack]

I've thought about this a lot, so here goes: (this is from a UK perspective by the way)

-Dissolve the Monarchy and introduce a Republican constitution, replace the Queen with a democratically elected president (who cannot be a member of a political party), and remove inherited seats in the House of Lords

-Dissolve the current examination system and instead have teachers replace them e.g. a teacher gives a report to a college or university who will make their choice based on that (plus interviews and their own entry tests)



Why would you want to end the monarchy, the only reason to do that would be to save money, and that would also do the UK a lot of harm. The monarchy is a significant centripetal force (it unites the country and gives a common tie). And on the university application requirements, believe A-levels make sense. I've moved quite few times and I know a few different systems so let me explain.

Here in Canada if you are going to a Canadian university you submit five or six marks from one term at the beginning of grade 12 (the last year of school). Different schools are better and worse of course, but marking fluctuates between them, a few private schools are known for giving really high marks for doing no work, and some universities know that, but they can't possibly look at every school. I pay more to go to my school than some of these kids do ($12000 a year vs. about $6000 -50% less) and that means I actually learn more, but in able to let me go to a good university our school has to also boost some marks in grade 12 to let us be competitive. As you can see it's very flawed.

In the U.S. you have to apply to universities with very lengthy applications. You would need three years of high school grades along with all of the stats on your transcript (class rank, GPA, etc.), then you have to show SAT or ACT scores which you'll have taken junior or senior requiring studying along with all school work. On top of that U.S. universities usually require at least one essay to be written, but many times there are multiple, and then they'll want to know pretty much everything you've done for the past three years (extra-curriculars, community service, special awards, etc.), and finally you'll need letters of recommendation. As you can see it's a very long process.

Sorry to be so long, but I just happen to have had this conversation with someone recently. The point is believe me A-levels may not be the perfect way, but no way really is.

[Cpt_Cutter]

People don't seem to get that nukes are a good thing on a political level.

[Yonkers]

abcd

[Snydergate]

I would rule as Emperor with an iron fist, but also very lenient. I would get rid of elections and choose who would be my next predecessor. I would get rid of poverty and allow any religion or way of life. I would let the public express their own ideas and beliefs in public and actually listen to what they have to say other than just sit there and let them protest and do nothing. The wealthy would be taxed while the poor aren't. People would have freedom and the ability to govern their lives, but always remember I am their Emperor. I would elect my own governors to control the provinces and would not change anything without coming to me first. There will be no useless congress of people talking for days and doing absolutely nothing in the end. Greed would not rule me.

[Harry Smith]

I would rule as Emperor with an iron fist, but also very lenient. I would get rid of elections and choose who would be my next predecessor. I would get rid of poverty and allow any religion or way of life. I would let the public express their own ideas and beliefs in public and actually listen to what they have to say other than just sit there and let them protest and do nothing.

What happens if the Public tell you to resign as emperor?

[Stronk Serb]

I would probably crown myself king based on a claim that's more then 700 years old and essentially has no value. I would probably run a leftist fascist monarchy. I would rebuild the army, enforce high national unity, copy the Soviet education system, very good education with party indoctrination from pre-school, nationalize every large company here, pass social reforms to make the people love me, allow only state-controlled press and television, start projects to make ourselves self-sufficient, meddle in the affairs of the church, make the Slavic Pagan religion the religion of the state with me as the high priest, just to make people think I have divine support and do a bit of expanding, I would garner international support and reconquer Bulgaria, Albania, Montenegro, Macedonia and large parts of Greece and attack Turkey. By invading Turkey, I would get rid of all the unneeded wannabe chetniks by sending them as cannon fodder against the Turks, while the actual troops do the flanking, essentially conquer the Anatolian and Balkan peninsulas and start working on a nuclear program as a deterent against foreign aggressions and on top of that, conquer Romania and the Caucasian region for oil, and make allies with Iran, China, Germany and North Korea if Kim-Jong-Un makes a statue of me next to his, essentially undermining his authority. I would also try to remove countries from the spheres of influence by the USA and Russia and put them in my sphere of influence. If any of my allies or countries under my influence tries to rebel, I would leave penal divisions, dismantle their industry and ship it to Serbia, all of that could work on every country except China or India and the NATO topdogs. Also I would change the anthem.
All in all, I would be ranked between Hitler and Mussolini on harsh rule, human rights violations, aggressive expansion and general infamy. I would get ranked higher then the USSR for being a police state, quality of education and political indoctrination. I would be a total badass with the Iron Guard, my own version of the Blackshirts, NKVD or the Waffen SS. That's essentially what my rule would come to. A fascist monarchy with nationalist elements as fuel for service. Moral of the post: I should never rule.

[Kurgg2]

I would not rule my country, but instead move to an island somewhere in the ocean. The island must be quite big and have resources to support decent human life.
Then, I would gather somewhere a nice amount of socialist volunteers, who will come to the island. The amount depends on the size and resources of island. Then, I will start there a genuine libertarian socialist society. There would be no money and no private production. Everything would be produced for the society by the residents. The rule: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." would apply. When society starts to work, I will resign and there will be elections.

[Body odah Man]

Let's think that you have a full control of your country. You may do anything. Now, without thinking what will other people or countries, tell how would you would rule your country and what changes will you make.

Here's what I would do:
-I will make working in any ways according to abilities compulsary. If one doesn't work even if he coukd, he will get no welfare. As they say "He who doesn't work shall not eat"
-I will give workers more rights, and make an universal minimum vage(here in Finland minimum vage depends on occupation)
-I will also make welfare system less bureaucratic, and more helpful to the poor
-I would nationalize food, energy, oil, drug and water industries and use the profits of them to lower the national debt
-I would make school uniforms compulsary, and free for scholars
-I would raise the sentences and change the "life sentence" maximum from 21 years to infinite. Would also make forced labor to be an possibilty
-I will separate the church from the state, but still keep Christianity as state religion
-I would separate my country from EU, and change the currency back to Marks
-I would, with addition to welfare, make free soup kitchens to the poor
-I will promote families to make more children
-I will make the national service less selective
-I will expel everyone who comes from another country to live on welfare and doesn't work
-I would make Swedish not to be an official languages, but instead give Swedish-speakers same rights as Sami people has.

Most of your points r valid save a few
a. Compulsory school uniforms but free for scholars? You realize that that not only would irritate students but would also annoy companies as they would amke no profit producing uniforms for scholars-only loss. No1 would like it
b. Seperating your country from the EU..might be a good thing, might be a bad thing. I don't really know at the moment so that one could stay
c. Emperor August tried to promote families to amke more children-never worked so think that plan is doomed to failure

The rest are all valid points

I feel the same way, I should never be given that amoutn of power
:lol:

Technically, if you feel you're not capable to rule then ur one of the best people to take charge. The real dangers are those whom believe it is their birthright to rule-they screw a lot of stuff up


merged posts, please use edit next time -TheVoiceWithin

[Vlerchan]

Okay, so some thoughts (all theoretical):

I would abolish jobseekers allowance, rent allowance, disability allowance, child benefits state-funded pensions, etc., and rather impose a one-size-fits-all basic minimum income of 12,000 a year (or 1000 per month). It would be granted to all Irish-born citizens over the age of twenty-five and all those with children over the age of twenty-one no-strings attached, regardless of whether is inside or outside of employment or what their income is. There's a number of reasons for this, primarily a) jobseekers allowance acts as a disincentive to work in that you lose your benefits after gaining employment, and b) bureaucracy costs would be eliminated.

I would abolish the minimum wage but also reduce the working week to (either) 30 or 35 hours per week. The first 5 hours over overtime paid thereafter would be paid at a minimum 1.5 times current wage and the next 5+ would be paid at a minimum 2.0 times. This is in a bid to restore full employment - something that most Western governments have all but given up on. I feel to abolish minimum wage would not come at so much a cost if a minimum basic income was instated.

I would set the Irish tax-regime to be: 25% on income between 15,000 and 32,000; 38% on income between 32,000 and 100,000; 48% on income between 100,000 and 1,000,000 and 55% thereafter. I would retain a corporation tax rate of 12.5% but close the loop-holes as so that major corporations aren't paying 2.5% instead (this really happens.) I would reduce VAT to 15% since it's regressive-as-fuck and hurts the working-class more-so that any other tax.

[dimitrius]

I live in America and I would prefer to start a new country for a clean politico economic slate. I would have a relatively small island country with the only best and brightest In the world being allowed in for the first round of immigration; and then I would completely close the borders and have all further immigrants be invited by myself personally. We would have science be first and foremost with the country essentially acting as an R&D department for a corporation that is the back bone of the country and is owned by the government. The corporation will be in sell goods around the world and they own every business on the island allowing the government/corporation to adjust the prices of goods and services across the entire country dynamically. This would allow certain sectors to temporarily have negative income to deal with situations while not being negatively affected or laying off workers.

I would found a group called the D.N.R.M . (Department of national resource management.) They would be a small group that makes sure the money was spent reasonably, that people are allocated where beneficial, and anything else necessary.

We would have very few real laws but very strict adherence to the ones we do have. There would be cameras everywhere in the most literal sense. I would want to be able to easily create a fully 3D video of every single happening in the city, and I would back them up in several locations. If you break the law we would not only know absolutely every detail of how you did it when and how, but also be able to dispose of the majority of the legal system and dole out a sentence on the spot. If someone does something that isn't illegal but probably should have been I.E loopholes and exceptions; the D.N.R.M. saves the day again by fining you for something unrelated that would have been looked over otherwise. (Illegal lawn sales or something equally stupid).

Though I believe Douglas Adams hit the nail on the head by saying "The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."




merged posts, please use edit next time. -TheVoiceWithin

[britishboy]

I would get rid of all the populist policies, firstly, destroying the greedy trade unions. The unions to not understand that there are times where cuts must be made or changes to the business we reduce the number of employees. It is unfair to bully a company into doing something it does not want to do. look at the London Underground workers who are always on strike because their jobs are going.

[Harry Smith]

I would get rid of all the populist policies, firstly, destroying the greedy trade unions. The unions to not understand that there are times where cuts must be made or changes to the business we reduce the number of employees. It is unfair to bully a company into doing something it does not want to do. look at the London Underground workers who are always on strike because their jobs are going.

Trade unions aren't populist. So your going to cut the biggest democratic groups in Britain, I mean there's a reason that there are more members in the Unite union than there are in the Conservative or Labour Party-by destroying the unions you are in fact destroying democracy.

It's unfair to sack a member of Staff whilst the head is getting a pay increase, you do know that Unions aren't only for the terrible working classes, teachers have unions along with firefighters and your best friends the police. But sure let's go back to an 19th century industrial policy-do you want another revolution? I mean the use of language in your argument is above ironic-it's bad the bully the millionaire into paying a living wage but it's okay for him to treat his entire workforce like slaves

Your also incorrect about London underground-there striking because TFL are going to remove manned ticket stations which means if your someone who's going on the tube past 11 o clock your going to be fucked. Boris Johnson (London mayor) promised in his 2012 and 2008 election that he wouldn't do this. The trade unions are striking because the elected major broke his promise

[Vlerchan]

It is unfair to bully a company into doing something it does not want to do.
Do you feel that it is unfair to bully individual employees into accepting pay decreases on the threat of severe impoverishment (in a welfare state) or starvation (in a non-welfare state which I presume you'd love) if they resist?

[britishboy]

Trade unions aren't populist.

The policies that allow them are. The Labour party have got a little better but they're still terrified to touch them.


It's unfair to sack a member of Staff whilst the head is getting a pay increase,

No it is not. That head could be doing a great job where as the workers at the bottom rarely do anything noteworthy. It it is not up to the workers to decide their wages (They can leave if they dislike it) or their superiors wages.

Do you feel that it is unfair to bully individual employees into accepting pay decreases on the threat of severe impoverishment (in a welfare state) or starvation (in a non-welfare state which I presume you'd love) if they resist?

I'd love a state with fair welfare. Nobody wants to decrease a workers pay as to replace them you then have to find somebody appropriate and train them, not forgetting that every employer likes a happy workforce.

If however the business is in trouble it is common sense to reduce wages and reduce the number of workers.



merged posts please use edit next time -TheVoiceWithin

[Vlerchan]

The policies that allow them are. The Labour party have got a little better but they're still terrified to touch them.
I didn't know that freedom of speech and freedom to assembly were populist policies.

That head could be doing a great job where as the workers at the bottom rarely do anything noteworthy.
It's the bottom rungs that do most of the work.

The 'head's' wages comes through extracting the surplus' value of the 'bottom's' labour.

I'd love a state with fair welfare.[1]
What is a fair welfare state?

If however the business is in trouble it is common sense to reduce wages and reduce the number of workers.
There is a lot of other ways to cut costs in a business besides cutting wages and compounding the recession you find yourself in.

Though I'll agree that if smaller businesses need to do the above in order to stay afloat then I don't have a problem with it.

[britishboy]

It's the bottom rungs that do most of the work.

The 'head's' wages comes through extracting the surplus' value of the 'bottom's' labour.

NOPE. You go get a working class man to run a business, how do you think the business will run?

[Harry Smith]

The policies that allow them are. The Labour party have got a little better but they're still terrified to touch them.



No it is not. That head could be doing a great job where as the workers at the bottom rarely do anything noteworthy. It it is not up to the workers to decide their wages (They can leave if they dislike it) or their superiors wages.

Ha-have you heard of New Labour? The labour party have been fighting the unions for the last 20 years, look at one member one vote, clause V, Tony Blair's entire 10 years, Milibands own reforms last year, Unite cutting funding as a result. The labour party have been actually opposing the unions more than the tories but this right wing claim has some how popped up that they're afraid of them. The labour party have been changing their relationship with the unions for the last 20 years, and the 4 factors I said above show that.

No-I'll give you a very good example.

A Russell group university-Warwick for example. One of the top 10 in the country pays it's lectures on average 30,000 a year, these are highly skilled teachers yet they have their pay cut. The chancellor who turns up for one dinner a year and cuts some tap gets 250,000 a year.

The people teaching the course do a lot more work than one guy who sits in a office-that's a fact

NOPE. You go get a working class man to run a business, how do you think the business will run?

You make it too easy- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Sugar

[Vlerchan]

NOPE. You go get a working class man to run a business, how do you think the business will run?
Mondragon Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondrag%C3%B3n_Cooperative_Corporation) is a Spanish federation of worker's co-operatives that is run democratically by workers and it last had a revenue of 14.081 billion in 2012.

It's run by workers and it is one of the more successful corporations in the entire world.

[britishboy]

You make it too easy- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Sugar

A brilliant example of a hard worker. The fact if if workers could run businesses, they would!

By definition if you run a business then you are not working-class.

Though Mondragon Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondrag%C3%B3n_Cooperative_Corporation) is a Spanish federation of worker's co-operatives that is run democratically by workers and it last had a revenue of 14.081 billion in 2012. It's run by workers and it is one of the more successful corporations in the entire world.

I know there are exceptions, but go get a trucker or a labourer and ask him to explain private and public shares or ask them to run the company he works for, he couldn't!

There is untapped talent in the workforce but the average man is nothing special.


merged posts -TheVoiceWithin

[Harry Smith]

I know there are exceptions, but go get a trucker or a labourer and ask him to explain private and public shares or ask them to run the company he works for, he couldn't!

There is untapped talent in the workforce but the average man is nothing special.

Ask the CEO to drive the truck-he probably couldn't. It's fun making generalizations

[Vlerchan]

I know there are exceptions, but go get a trucker or a labourer and ask him to explain private and public shares or ask them to run the company he works for, he couldn't!
Do you think that the average working man might not know this because:

He's too stupid too learn?
He has no current intention of setting up a business and hasn't done any research?

There is untapped talent in the workforce but the average man is nothing special.

The Mondragon Corporation is run democratically by its 80,321 average men.

[britishboy]

Do you think that the average working man might not know this because:

He's too stupid too learn?
He has no current intention of setting up a business and hasn't done any research?


No most are too lazy or haven't been given the opportunities.

He might want to yes.

[Vlerchan]

[X]
Do you retract your claim that working-class people can't run a business?

I can link to Mondragon Corporation again.

No most are too lazy or haven't been given the opportunities.
I also don't appreciate your unfounded generalisations of working class people. Again.

[britishboy]

Do you retract your claim that working-class people can't run a business?

I can link to Mondragon Corporation again.


I also don't appreciate your unfounded generalisations of working class people. Again.

I withdraw nothing, with training and a lot investing in them some could.

[Vlerchan]

I withdraw nothing, with training and a lot investing in them some could.
If the 80,321 working-class people who together run the Mondragon Corporation and produced a combined revenue of 14.081 billion in 2012 didn't need specialised training then why would you believe that working-class people in general might?

[britishboy]

If the 80,321 working-class people who together run the Mondragon Corporation and produced a combined revenue of 14.081 billion in 2012 didn't need specialised training then why would you believe that working-class people in general might?

They vote on large agendas not the little thing, they won't understand have the skills needed. Do you think a working class trucker could run a bank?

[Vlerchan]

They vote on large agendas not the little thing, they won't understand have the skills needed.
You haven't looked into this, have you?

Do you think a working class trucker could run a bank?
I would presume a trucker would partake in running a trucking company.

And a banker would partake in running a banking corporation or as they are commonly labelled (edit) credit unions.

Why in the name of god might someone get involved in an area of expertise where they are not proficient?

[Harry Smith]

They vote on large agendas not the little thing, they won't understand have the skills needed. Do you think a working class trucker could run a bank?

Yes I do, do you understand that being working class isn't some sort of genetic condition that causes you to be stupid?

My Uncle left school at the age of 16 with one GCSE-his mum was unemployed and his father worked as a clerk. He then trained with the bank, and in 10 years he became a manager at a branch showing that a working class lad can work ina bank.

One of the teachers in my school use to be a mechanic and is proudly working class, yet he's still able to teach History at a very good level.

So yeah working class people are just as capable you know

[britishboy]

I would presume a trucker would partake in running a trucking company.

And a banker would partake in running a banking corporation or as they are commonly labelled (edit) credit unions.

Why in the name of god might someone get involved in an area of expertise where they are not proficient?

A banker would not be brilliant at running a bank but wouldn't be terrible, bad example they're middle class anyway.

A trucker would be good at certain aspects such at logistics and understanding the workforce but I doubt they could manage the finances.

With hard work and dedication the trucker could become very wealthy and happy however my point is you can not swap a worker with a leader.

Yes I do, do you understand that being working class isn't some sort of genetic condition that causes you to be stupid?

My Uncle left school at the age of 16 with one GCSE-his mum was unemployed and his father worked as a clerk. He then trained with the bank, and in 10 years he became a manager at a branch showing that a working class lad can work ina bank.

One of the teachers in my school use to be a mechanic and is proudly working class, yet he's still able to teach History at a very good level.

So yeah working class people are just as capable you know

Did you also know that I am the king of Jupiter, my uncle of Neptune and my biology teacher of Mercury.

[Vlerchan]

A banker would not be brilliant at running a bank but wouldn't be terrible, bad example they're middle class anyway.
In Ireland the credit unions (banks run by their members) were the only credit institutions that didn't go under - with the exception of Newbridge-Naas.

You'll also find that most bank clerks are also working class, good example.

A trucker would be good at certain aspects such at logistics and understanding the workforce but I doubt they could manage the finances.
I have no idea why you'd think that because (s)he's a trucker (s)he couldn't manage their finances. That's just a baseless assumption. Lots of self-employed people manage their own finances without degree in accounting or financial maths. Regardless, there's no reason why a truckers-collective couldn't outsource to an accountant if they didn't have basic numeracy skills. In collectives as large as Mondragon Corporation there's no reason why the collective might not: a) outsource to an accounting firm or b) open an accounting division within the collective.

With hard work and dedication the trucker could become very wealthy and happy however my point is you can not swap a worker with a leader.
There's no reason why worker's cannot be leaders.

I've no idea where you are getting this logic from.

Did you also know that I am the king of Jupiter, my uncle of Neptune and my biology teacher of Mercury.
You're right, because they are working class then there's no way they could have educated themselves.

I also presume that by your complete non-reference to trade unions these last few posts you recognise and accept their importance.

[phuckphace]

Okay, so some thoughts (all theoretical):

I would abolish jobseekers allowance, rent allowance, disability allowance, child benefits state-funded pensions, etc., and rather impose a one-size-fits-all basic minimum income of 12,000 a year (or 1000 per month). It would be granted to all Irish-born citizens over the age of twenty-five and all those with children over the age of twenty-one no-strings attached, regardless of whether is inside or outside of employment or what their income is. There's a number of reasons for this, primarily a) jobseekers allowance acts as a disincentive to work in that you lose your benefits after gaining employment, and b) bureaucracy costs would be eliminated.

I would abolish the minimum wage but also reduce the working week to (either) 30 or 35 hours per week. The first 5 hours over overtime paid thereafter would be paid at a minimum 1.5 times current wage and the next 5+ would be paid at a minimum 2.0 times. This is in a bid to restore full employment - something that most Western governments have all but given up on. I feel to abolish minimum wage would not come at so much a cost if a minimum basic income was instated.

I would set the Irish tax-regime to be: 25% on income between 15,000 and 32,000; 38% on income between 32,000 and 100,000; 48% on income between 100,000 and 1,000,000 and 55% thereafter. I would retain a corporation tax rate of 12.5% but close the loop-holes as so that major corporations aren't paying 2.5% instead (this really happens.) I would reduce VAT to 15% since it's regressive-as-fuck and hurts the working-class more-so that any other tax.

lots of good stuff here. the guaranteed minimum income especially, that would be pretty sweet.

[Harry Smith]

A banker would not be brilliant at running a bank but wouldn't be terrible, bad example they're middle class anyway.

A trucker would be good at certain aspects such at logistics and understanding the workforce but I doubt they could manage the finances.

With hard work and dedication the trucker could become very wealthy and happy however my point is you can not swap a worker with a leader.



Did you also know that I am the king of Jupiter, my uncle of Neptune and my biology teacher of Mercury.

Whatever man, this just proves how out of your depth you are, you wanted examples how how working class people advance up the career ladder and I gave you two. But sure dismiss it because it disagrees with you.

You need to stop making sweeping generalizations because it makes your argument come across as arrogant-you have no evidence to show that trucker couldn't manage finances

[Vlerchan]

lots of good stuff here. the guaranteed minimum income especially, that would be pretty sweet.
Yeah. I've no idea how it might work in practice though. I've seen reports state that when applied in a localised setting it has little to no effect to ones incentive to work - and the people it did effect were working two jobs, etc. Switzerland are putting it to referendum later this year however so I suppose we'll see how a larger setting might deal with it if the bill passes (which hopefully it will).

[ArcticEagle]

How I would Rule in the U.S.:

Deport all illegal immigrants and stop amnesty and Fully Securing Borders
Make English Official Language
Legalize Gay Marriage
Abolish IRS, reform NSA, and end bailouts
Make Abortion illegal except for cases of Rape/Incest
Legalize Marijuana
Create a free market system
Create law to end outsourcing
Decrease Taxes across the board including the Rich.
Cut and reform Welfare so its short term and only certain items can be purchased same with unemployment benefits
Ignore environmentalists
Increase defense spending
Abolish Death Penalty
Maintain Minimal Gun Control
support rights of business to replace strikers and restrict unions
Make sure everyone who can work, work and not just live off of government.
Promote the private sector and support small business eventually Privatizing nearly everything
Fix U.S. infrastructure and build high-speed railways linking major cities creating jobs in the process
Increase benifits for vetrans and those who currently serve.
End increasing the debt ceiling and majorly cut spending if reached.
Overall Maintain American Tradition and enforce the constitution at all cost.


and whatever else i missed.

Pretty much, Promote individual liberty, low taxes for all classes, lower cost of living, create jobs, and eventually lower or abolish minimum wage if congress decides to comply (prob when hell freezes over with a republican and libertarian congress)

[Vlerchan]

It looks like phuckphace might have a free-market cousin.

Goodie.

Individual liberty.
Unfortunately individual liberty is incompatible with the wide-spread impoverishment you just imposed on your populace when you decided to effectively funnel all the wealth into the hands of a select few :c

[phuckphace]

RoyalMack, your plan is a hapless jumble of silliness with a few good bits mixed in.



Create a free market system
Create law to end outsourcing



in a free market there are no such limits. if a business wants to outsource and you actually want a free market, you'd have to let them do that. so these two proposals together make no sense.



Decrease Taxes across the board including the Rich.



sounds like a plan, now how will you be paying for these tax cuts exactly? I hope you've discovered a huge oil reserve that we can drill and export like Saudi Arabia does. otherwise LOL.



Ignore environmentalists



yeah man fuck them! I've always wanted to live near Lake Karachai (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Karachay), with you in charge my dream can finally become reality!



Increase defense spending



yes...yes this is the very first thing I'd do right after cutting taxes. great minds think alike!



support rights of business to replace strikers and restrict unions
Make sure everyone who can work, work and not just live off of government.



"hey guys, remember when I said I wouldn't let you live off the government anymore? well now I've made sure you won't be able to live off of your job either!" #LikeABoss



Fix U.S. infrastructure and build high-speed railways linking major cities creating jobs in the process



I hope they accept Chuck E. Cheese tokens because you're gonna need a load of them what with taxes being cut and all. or we could go the hip route and pay for it in Bitcoin!

final grade: F, apply yourself.

[Vlerchan]

sounds like a plan, now how will you be paying for these tax cuts exactly? I hope you've discovered a huge oil reserve that we can drill and export like Saudi Arabia does. otherwise LOL.
Well. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-12/u-s-nears-energy-independence-by-2035-on-shale-boom-iea-says.html)

[phuckphace]

Well. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-12/u-s-nears-energy-independence-by-2035-on-shale-boom-iea-says.html)

the jest behind this bit was the idea of Murrica ever having an oil surplus i.e. exporting more than it consumes, as Saudi Arabia does. but even assuming that were realistic, he'd have to either raise taxes in order to funnel oil revenue into his government, or nationalize the oil industry and derive revenue from it directly. neither scenario would fit into his dumb plan (can't raise taxes/SMALL GOVERNMENT).

[Vlerchan]

Yeah. That's how I see it happening in Free (!) America, too.

[RavleIncarnate]

Let's think that you have a full control of your country. You may do anything. Now, without thinking what will other people or countries, tell how would you would rule your country and what changes will you make.

Here's what I would do:
-I will make working in any ways according to abilities compulsary. If one doesn't work even if he coukd, he will get no welfare. As they say "He who doesn't work shall not eat"
-I will give workers more rights, and make an universal minimum vage(here in Finland minimum vage depends on occupation)
-I will also make welfare system less bureaucratic, and more helpful to the poor
-I would nationalize food, energy, oil, drug and water industries and use the profits of them to lower the national debt
-I would make school uniforms compulsary, and free for scholars
-I would raise the sentences and change the "life sentence" maximum from 21 years to infinite. Would also make forced labor to be an possibilty
-I will separate the church from the state, but still keep Christianity as state religion
-I would separate my country from EU, and change the currency back to Marks
-I would, with addition to welfare, make free soup kitchens to the poor
-I will promote families to make more children
-I will make the national service less selective
-I will expel everyone who comes from another country to live on welfare and doesn't work
-I would make Swedish not to be an official languages, but instead give Swedish-speakers same rights as Sami people has.

I would do largely the same, except the last one (I'm not Finnish) and the uniform one (it's an outrage where I live). I would also raise the sentences and bring back the DP for my country, and I will make a law that you have to work to be able to get welfare, but not on a statistical scale, I will give opportunities to everyone considering their abilities and talents. Also, I think the world doenst have enough psychics. I will get people to research a "Psychic Training Program" that, unlike the movies, will NOT be a place to be feared, but a place to celebrate. Then I will buy the weirdest Pizza/Chocolate/Ice Cream/Doughnut related edible item to enjoy my newfound laws.

[Capto]

I would rule with the ultimate iron fist.

[Gamma Male]

Legalize Soft Drugs.(most hallucinagenics, minimally addictive drugs, etc)
Legalize Prostitution.(But with strong regulations)
Decriminalize hard drugs. Sentence offenders to rehab instead of prison.
Abolish the death penalty
Abolish private prisons
Nationalize all oil companies
Nationalize all defense contracters/ manufacturers
Strongly reform the NSA. No more unnecessary spying.
Abolish Monsanto, put their biggest shareholders in prison.
Create strong animal rights laws, with the hopes of one day in the future leading the entire country toward veganism
End the fur trade, make selling or producing fur illegal.
Strongly reform the CIA.
Crack down on police brutality.
Outlaw all firearms.
Provide free education, healthcare, and basic living necessities to all citizens.
Make legal immigration easier.
Shut down the FCC. No more unnecessary censorship. You don't like something? Don fucking watch it.
Increase taxes for everyone, but especially the rich.
Get rid of government involvement in marriage altogether. Provide civil unions to any two people who ask.
Remove restrictions on when alcohol can be sold or bought.
Legalize abortion in all cases.
Make sex ed mandatory in high school and middle schools. Including LGBT sex ed.
Make all school lunches vegetarian.
Drastically reduce defense spending.
Drastically increase NASA's budget. I'll be damned if we don't have bases on the moon by 2025.
Make gambling legal everywhere.
Privately owned business would be able to refuse service to anyone they wanted for whatever reason, no questions asked.
Outlaw animal testing.
Outlaw circumcision.
Start taxing religious establishments.
Pass strict guidelines for private schools that ban religious indoctrination and require evolution and the big bang to be taught as fact.
Stop sugarcoating Americas atrocities in history books.
Get rid of that national pledge bullshit in schools.
Remove all references of God from public institutions and currency.
Increase the minimum wage to 13$ an hour.
Make classes in logic and philosophy mandatory in highschool.
Group students based on performance, not age.
Make masters degrees mandatory for all highschool students and double their pay.
Decrease our dependence on fossil fuels and instead put more funding into Nuclear Power.
Outlaw the use of GMO's.
Pass stricter environmental regulations.
Stop depending on Microsoft and require ALL government computers in schools, defense, the IRS,etc to run on linux. Teach Linux in public schools.
Increase funding for Libraries.
Make the use of animals as entertainment illegal in most cases.
Increase border security drastically. Make everyone who's already here a citizen, and make legal immigration much easier.
Shut down overseas military bases.
Making selling or producing hard drugs punishable by life in prison.
Make all of our foreign territories into states.
Make 15 the age of sexual consent.
Make drunk driving punishable by life in prison.


That's all I can think of for now.