• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What's Wrong, What needs to be fixed

X

X13

As we all know, no forms of government are well designed. They all are somehow flawed, and of course, it is impossible to make anything perfect.
The American government is based off of Democracy, where all of the people have a voice in the choices the nation makes.
As an American, I know that the American government is becoming a Kleptocracy, a type of government where the government takes advantage of corruption to extend personal wealth or power. This is because of Capitalism.
Another known form of flawed government is Communism, which is also corrupted, and is known for suppressing the working class, and not granting any freedoms.

Capitalism is a form of economy where private businesses work for profit by supply and demand. Capitalism was a great idea, and perfect for the time of industrialism, but unfortunately it has become obsolete because of 2 MAJOR problems. One, it is easily exploitable, an economy that is run by capitalism can be corrupted so much because of two problems, bribery, and theft. Another, problem is that it isn't very stable. One day the economy could be booming, everyone in the nation rich, the next day, everyone is poor.
Socialism is a form of economy where wealth is spread out by how much one contributes to society. Socialists believe that Capitalism is an unfair type of economy that is too easily exploitable.
Many Americans are fighting for a Socialist economy in America, which is a generally good idea, but at the same time, many disagree because of the possibly becoming Communist. Socialism also is difficult to maintain as strong of an economy as capitalism, normally.

What we need is a new type of economic system, and maybe a new type of government.

Everyone has their own opinions on what should be included in a good government. Understandably, the government needs to be able to change as the world does, just like the American government. The normal person in western culture believes in equality, and that all people should have what they need, and no one person deserves more than another (Ironically contradicting Capitalism). Another thing that must be included are personal rights, this is included in the bill of rights in the American constitution, they are normally all agreed upon. Also, the government shouldn't rest too much power on one person/group of people; If this happens, it will for sure be exploited or corrupted. This is the major problem with the current problems with the current governments; the normal human mind will do anything for wealth and power. It is just what we genetically want.

Technocracy is an idea that professional is fields like science, health, engineering, make the decisions for their respective field. The thought behind this is that people with no experience in a certain field shouldn't be able to make decisions about it. It makes sense, but the major problem is that it, like all other governmental ideas, is that it is corruptible.
So, If we were to include this in a new government we should have something to stop it from being corrupted. My idea is that during a vote, all voters should have a say in it, but specialists should have more voting power than the normal person(In votes relating to their specialty). Another solution is that there will be a vote where everyone is equal, and another vote where the specialists have all of the power. These two polls will be averaged out for the solution. Either of these two will allow the vote to be more fair, this way the specialists can't be too powerful, and they can still voice their professional opinions. Other ways this can be incorporated, in the congress, If one state were to have X% of the Y professionals, then their vote in congress should reflect that.

The next thing that needs to be fixed is the economic setup. I already said how capitalism and socialism are broken, so what we should do is mix the good parts of each. It should be a basic capitalist economy, but what we need to do is have the state control it way more. We need the workers for these corporations to be making around as much as the management. People who invest in businesses also shouldn't be able to invest and immediately make a ton of money. To fix this, there should be a cap on how many shares one may hold on a business, proportionately to a certain ratio that is fair. As an example, Tom may own a private business in his home town of 600, because it is only worth a couple thousand dollars. But Tom shouldn't be able to own a several million dollar corporation all by himself.

Also, the State itself needs to be remade.
Unfortunately we can't have a government where the people vote for every decision. There will be too many decisions to be made for everyone to participate. So what we need are representatives. Our American society's system for voting for representatives is broken. Currently, we vote for a representative of a political party to fill the position. Political parties are ruining our current government, George Washington was right. They control what all of their followers will do when in office.
In order to be voted into office, the candidate will have to run a campaign to get votes. In order to run this campaign, they will need money. In the current situation, they get money from people who believe similar things that they do. The parties of current America will only fund a campaign for people who will do exactly what they want. People who have different opinions, even if only slight, must change them to fit into their party and be able to have a campaign. What this is causing is minorities getting completely controlled, and not being able to voice their opinions.
So what we need is a new system for electing representatives. We can't have campaigns run by people who believe similar ideas, we can't have it funded by the media. What does this mean? Campaigns either need to be funded by the state, funded by corporations, or funded by the people(Taxpayers).
We shouldn't have campaigns funded by corporations because they could just fund people that will make them richer. We shouldn't have campaigns be funded by the state because the state would just continuously fund people that have the same people who are already in the government. A slightly better idea is if the taxpayers were to fund an evenly distributed amount of money between each candidate, it would be more fair, unfortunately there are difficulties with this, because people will not like their money going to this idea. Along with that, there could be an infinite amount of people who run for an election.
Honestly, this is where I draw a blank. The best I have come up with is that the taxpayers have to pay for either a telecast or letter that goes to each person, this will list everyone who is running and what they want to do individually. This way the money will be distributed evenly between each candidate.
Of course this could be easily revised by other people, as I am writing this by myself.

The current American government is well designed otherwise, every branch is evenly checked and balanced by the other branches. But there are some other things that needs to be changed.
The current way bills are made, is that a politician makes a bill, and everyone votes on it. This is unbalanced because politicians may not understand exactly what the people or professionals want. A way this can be fixed is a simple idea. Anyone can make a bill. Unfortunately one problem with this is there could be way too many bills. So, what should happen is that it should go through committees just like the bills politicians currently make. These committees should contain professionals and other peers, at a 1:1 ratio. If the bills are turned down, they are revised and voted upon again. If they pass, they move up in the congress. These smaller committees should be more local than the capital, also.

With these ideas incorporated into the government, it would become much more fair, and less corruptible.

-X13
 
I

INRI

The next thing that needs to be fixed is the economic setup. I already said how capitalism and socialism are broken, so what we should do is mix the good parts of each. It should be a basic capitalist economy, but what we need to do is have the state control it way more. We need the workers for these corporations to be making around as much as the management.
-X13
This is the only part the I disagree with. The problem with the workers making as much as the management is that the workers have no drive to become managers. Why work hard for that upper job if you're going to be payed relatively the same and receive no benefit? What drives American economy is luxury. Without incentives, all businesses will collapse because of lack of management.
 

Goshin

Burned Out Ex-Mod
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,586
Reaction score
50,204
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Lawd, not technocracy again.

It isn't a political system, from what I've seen, so much as a vague collection of philosophies and wishful thinking... no offense. If you can give me a better explanation of how technocracy would actually work than the last advocate did...
 

Goshin

Burned Out Ex-Mod
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,586
Reaction score
50,204
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Driveby poster? Sir Spamalot?
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,619
Reaction score
29,308
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The major problem of professionals being the sole decision makers for a field is that it can result in tunnel vision. I think the latest example of this is the Fed's activities during the financial meltdown and the idea that what is good for wall street is good for everyone.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I didn't read the entire OP, but Capitalism itself has nothing to do with the boom and bust cycle.
 

OhIsee.Then

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
1,581
Reaction score
277
Location
MI and AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
My mother shared her pov w/ me about 50 years ago. Her analysis was that
"People get the government that they deserve."She may have read Thomas Jefferson.
To elaborate:
Government type is driven bottom up,
i.e. by the capabilities of the organism and culture that follows.
So we come with a lot of baggage, good and bad.
Therefore, Human cultures allow a limited set of governments to develop.
Note that the feedback time delay is typically a long one, a short one is the Egypt thing.
A top down design may never be implemented since the culture has to be ready.
Our founding fathers were (mostly) individually ready,
found themselves in a culture that was ready and set up a subculture that worked.
We were very lucky.

So the simple question "What's Wrong?" turns out to difficult to address.
This is especially true when the shared part of American culture is kind of small.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
As we all know, no forms of government are well designed. They all are somehow flawed, and of course, it is impossible to make anything perfect.

Of course no government is well designed and flawed. It is made by humans, which are naturally flawed creatures. Doesn't mean that we can't attempt to make it as near pefect as we can get.

The American government is based off of Democracy, where all of the people have a voice in the choices the nation makes.

Incorrect. The American government is not based off of Democracy. It is based off of a Republic. Many of our Constitutions writers called democracy "mob rule" and didn't like it. Being an American you should know this. ;)

As an American, I know that the American government is becoming a Kleptocracy, a type of government where the government takes advantage of corruption to extend personal wealth or power. This is because of Capitalism.

This is not the governments fault as the government is not a person. The government is a thing. Blame the individuals, not the institution.

Another known form of flawed government is Communism, which is also corrupted, and is known for suppressing the working class, and not granting any freedoms.

This is only thought of this way because of Hitler. Communism is actually a doctrine based off of Karl Marx socialism and is more about the government owning all production capabilities. So while it might be about suppresion of some freedoms it is not about suppression of all freedoms.

Capitalism is a form of economy where private businesses work for profit by supply and demand. Capitalism was a great idea, and perfect for the time of industrialism, but unfortunately it has become obsolete because of 2 MAJOR problems. One, it is easily exploitable, an economy that is run by capitalism can be corrupted so much because of two problems, bribery, and theft. Another, problem is that it isn't very stable. One day the economy could be booming, everyone in the nation rich, the next day, everyone is poor.

So fix the problems. Granted it is easier said than done. But you don't throw out the baby just because the towel is wet do you? You just get a dry towel.

Socialism is a form of economy where wealth is spread out by how much one contributes to society. Socialists believe that Capitalism is an unfair type of economy that is too easily exploitable.

While Capitalism's problems can be the problems with socialism is not so easily fixed...if it can be fixed at all. The major problem with socialism is that it leads to apathy. After all, why try to achieve something if all of your work is just going to be spread out to every one else? It would be like everyone getting credit for Shakesphear's Romeo & Juliet instead of just Shakesphear. Of course the next problem is that socialism can actually more easily turn into tyranny than capitalism.

Many Americans are fighting for a Socialist economy in America, which is a generally good idea, but at the same time, many disagree because of the possibly becoming Communist. Socialism also is difficult to maintain as strong of an economy as capitalism, normally.

Nothing to argue with here really.

What we need is a new type of economic system, and maybe a new type of government.

Or we can just fix the problems with the current systems.

Everyone has their own opinions on what should be included in a good government. Understandably, the government needs to be able to change as the world does, just like the American government. The normal person in western culture believes in equality, and that all people should have what they need, and no one person deserves more than another (Ironically contradicting Capitalism). Another thing that must be included are personal rights, this is included in the bill of rights in the American constitution, they are normally all agreed upon. Also, the government shouldn't rest too much power on one person/group of people; If this happens, it will for sure be exploited or corrupted. This is the major problem with the current problems with the current governments; the normal human mind will do anything for wealth and power. It is just what we genetically want.

The "normal person"??? Perhaps under your definition that you have outlined here of what a normal person believes in then your paragraph here would apply. However your definition is HIGHLY debateable.

Technocracy is an idea that professional is fields like science, health, engineering, make the decisions for their respective field. The thought behind this is that people with no experience in a certain field shouldn't be able to make decisions about it. It makes sense, but the major problem is that it, like all other governmental ideas, is that it is corruptible.

Fairly accurate here. Wasn't really worth mentioning though imo.

So, If we were to include this in a new government we should have something to stop it from being corrupted. My idea is that during a vote, all voters should have a say in it, but specialists should have more voting power than the normal person(In votes relating to their specialty). Another solution is that there will be a vote where everyone is equal, and another vote where the specialists have all of the power. These two polls will be averaged out for the solution. Either of these two will allow the vote to be more fair, this way the specialists can't be too powerful, and they can still voice their professional opinions. Other ways this can be incorporated, in the congress, If one state were to have X% of the Y professionals, then their vote in congress should reflect that.

Basically a bastardized version of Democracy as we currently know it.

The next thing that needs to be fixed is the economic setup. I already said how capitalism and socialism are broken, so what we should do is mix the good parts of each. It should be a basic capitalist economy, but what we need to do is have the state control it way more. We need the workers for these corporations to be making around as much as the management. People who invest in businesses also shouldn't be able to invest and immediately make a ton of money. To fix this, there should be a cap on how many shares one may hold on a business, proportionately to a certain ratio that is fair. As an example, Tom may own a private business in his home town of 600, because it is only worth a couple thousand dollars. But Tom shouldn't be able to own a several million dollar corporation all by himself.

Basically a weak form of socialism pure and simple. No thanks.

Also, the State itself needs to be remade.

Nope, just fixed.

Unfortunately we can't have a government where the people vote for every decision. There will be too many decisions to be made for everyone to participate. So what we need are representatives. Our American society's system for voting for representatives is broken. Currently, we vote for a representative of a political party to fill the position. Political parties are ruining our current government, George Washington was right. They control what all of their followers will do when in office.

While I will admit our voting system needs a good looking at and a fix...it isn't broken by a long shot.

In order to be voted into office, the candidate will have to run a campaign to get votes. In order to run this campaign, they will need money. In the current situation, they get money from people who believe similar things that they do. The parties of current America will only fund a campaign for people who will do exactly what they want. People who have different opinions, even if only slight, must change them to fit into their party and be able to have a campaign. What this is causing is minorities getting completely controlled, and not being able to voice their opinions.

Really? Then what was the Civil Rights Movement all about? Womens lib? There are a ton of ways to get your voice heard. You just have to go out and do them instead of sitting on your behind thinking that some how, magically, politicians will know exactly what you want and go for it no matter what.

Hell at present minorities actually have more rights than I do. I don't see an amendment in the Constitution that gives me a better than 50/50 chance of getting a job. There is one however for minorities.

So what we need is a new system for electing representatives. We can't have campaigns run by people who believe similar ideas,....

Why can't we have campaigns run by people who believe similar ideas? You can't seperate people just because they happen to agree ya know. That would be taking away the fundemental right of association. IE the right to be around whoever you want to be around.

We shouldn't have campaigns funded by corporations because they could just fund people that will make them richer. We......

Lots of violations to a persons right of association here. Beyond that the only thing worth commenting about is the use of the word "infinite". No there could not be an infinite amount of people who run for an election. There will NEVER be that many humans for as long as time proceeds along its stately course.

Honestly, this is where I draw a blank. The best I have come up with is that the taxpayers have to pay for either a telecast.....

Or how about start requiring candidates to be only able to spend X amount of money per campaign? No matter who/how they get the money. This would actually have the benefit of showing that they can spend with in a budget instead of just trying to get more money any way that they can.

Of course this could be easily revised by other people, as I am writing this by myself.

And it will easily be "revised" by many many people.

The current American government is well designed otherwise, every branch is evenly checked and balanced by the other branches. But there are some other things that needs to be changed.

The current way bills are made, is that a politician makes a bill, and everyone votes on it. This is unbalanced because politicians may not understand exactly what the people or professionals want. A way this can be fixed is a simple idea. Anyone can make a bill. Unfortunately one problem with this is there could be way too many bills. So, what should happen is that it should go through committees just like the bills politicians currently make. These committees should contain professionals and other peers, at a 1:1 ratio. If the bills are turned down, they are revised and voted upon again. If they pass, they move up in the congress. These smaller committees should be more local than the capital, also.

Way too complicated and way too easy to bribe someone along the route....even easier than it is now I should say. Not to mention highly unfeasible. You could theoritically have hundreds of millions of bills going through Congress. Much of the bills would be simply lost in the mountain high stack of papers that would be delivered on Monday...and by Tuesday it wouldn't even be a memory in that stack of papers after they got done unloading the next mountain high stack of papers. All I can say is...poor trees.

(psst...there is a reason that the US has states and is not actually one LARGE country but is in reality a bunch of states joined together for a common cause...too many people forget this simple little fact.)

With these ideas incorporated into the government, it would become much more fair, and less corruptible.

The more people in a process the easier it is to get way laid, side tracked, forgotten, bribed out of being, etc etc. Trust me, your ideas in your last paragraph would end up just causing chaos at best.

PS: I shortend some of the quotes due to the post being too long.
 

American

Beer Lover Extraordinaire
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
90,644
Reaction score
29,133
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
As we all know, no forms of government are well designed. They all are somehow flawed, and of course, it is impossible to make anything perfect.
The American government is based off of Democracy, where all of the people have a voice in the choices the nation makes.
As an American, I know that the American government is becoming a Kleptocracy, a type of government where the government takes advantage of corruption to extend personal wealth or power. This is because of Capitalism.
Another known form of flawed government is Communism, which is also corrupted, and is known for suppressing the working class, and not granting any freedoms.

Capitalism is a form of economy where private businesses work for profit by supply and demand. Capitalism was a great idea, and perfect for the time of industrialism, but unfortunately it has become obsolete because of 2 MAJOR problems. One, it is easily exploitable, an economy that is run by capitalism can be corrupted so much because of two problems, bribery, and theft. Another, problem is that it isn't very stable. One day the economy could be booming, everyone in the nation rich, the next day, everyone is poor.
Socialism is a form of economy where wealth is spread out by how much one contributes to society. Socialists believe that Capitalism is an unfair type of economy that is too easily exploitable.
Many Americans are fighting for a Socialist economy in America, which is a generally good idea, but at the same time, many disagree because of the possibly becoming Communist. Socialism also is difficult to maintain as strong of an economy as capitalism, normally.

What we need is a new type of economic system, and maybe a new type of government.

Everyone has their own opinions on what should be included in a good government. Understandably, the government needs to be able to change as the world does, just like the American government. The normal person in western culture believes in equality, and that all people should have what they need, and no one person deserves more than another (Ironically contradicting Capitalism). Another thing that must be included are personal rights, this is included in the bill of rights in the American constitution, they are normally all agreed upon. Also, the government shouldn't rest too much power on one person/group of people; If this happens, it will for sure be exploited or corrupted. This is the major problem with the current problems with the current governments; the normal human mind will do anything for wealth and power. It is just what we genetically want.

Technocracy is an idea that professional is fields like science, health, engineering, make the decisions for their respective field. The thought behind this is that people with no experience in a certain field shouldn't be able to make decisions about it. It makes sense, but the major problem is that it, like all other governmental ideas, is that it is corruptible.
So, If we were to include this in a new government we should have something to stop it from being corrupted. My idea is that during a vote, all voters should have a say in it, but specialists should have more voting power than the normal person(In votes relating to their specialty). Another solution is that there will be a vote where everyone is equal, and another vote where the specialists have all of the power. These two polls will be averaged out for the solution. Either of these two will allow the vote to be more fair, this way the specialists can't be too powerful, and they can still voice their professional opinions. Other ways this can be incorporated, in the congress, If one state were to have X% of the Y professionals, then their vote in congress should reflect that.

The next thing that needs to be fixed is the economic setup. I already said how capitalism and socialism are broken, so what we should do is mix the good parts of each. It should be a basic capitalist economy, but what we need to do is have the state control it way more. We need the workers for these corporations to be making around as much as the management. People who invest in businesses also shouldn't be able to invest and immediately make a ton of money. To fix this, there should be a cap on how many shares one may hold on a business, proportionately to a certain ratio that is fair. As an example, Tom may own a private business in his home town of 600, because it is only worth a couple thousand dollars. But Tom shouldn't be able to own a several million dollar corporation all by himself.

Also, the State itself needs to be remade.
Unfortunately we can't have a government where the people vote for every decision. There will be too many decisions to be made for everyone to participate. So what we need are representatives. Our American society's system for voting for representatives is broken. Currently, we vote for a representative of a political party to fill the position. Political parties are ruining our current government, George Washington was right. They control what all of their followers will do when in office.
In order to be voted into office, the candidate will have to run a campaign to get votes. In order to run this campaign, they will need money. In the current situation, they get money from people who believe similar things that they do. The parties of current America will only fund a campaign for people who will do exactly what they want. People who have different opinions, even if only slight, must change them to fit into their party and be able to have a campaign. What this is causing is minorities getting completely controlled, and not being able to voice their opinions.
So what we need is a new system for electing representatives. We can't have campaigns run by people who believe similar ideas, we can't have it funded by the media. What does this mean? Campaigns either need to be funded by the state, funded by corporations, or funded by the people(Taxpayers).
We shouldn't have campaigns funded by corporations because they could just fund people that will make them richer. We shouldn't have campaigns be funded by the state because the state would just continuously fund people that have the same people who are already in the government. A slightly better idea is if the taxpayers were to fund an evenly distributed amount of money between each candidate, it would be more fair, unfortunately there are difficulties with this, because people will not like their money going to this idea. Along with that, there could be an infinite amount of people who run for an election.
Honestly, this is where I draw a blank. The best I have come up with is that the taxpayers have to pay for either a telecast or letter that goes to each person, this will list everyone who is running and what they want to do individually. This way the money will be distributed evenly between each candidate.
Of course this could be easily revised by other people, as I am writing this by myself.

The current American government is well designed otherwise, every branch is evenly checked and balanced by the other branches. But there are some other things that needs to be changed.
The current way bills are made, is that a politician makes a bill, and everyone votes on it. This is unbalanced because politicians may not understand exactly what the people or professionals want. A way this can be fixed is a simple idea. Anyone can make a bill. Unfortunately one problem with this is there could be way too many bills. So, what should happen is that it should go through committees just like the bills politicians currently make. These committees should contain professionals and other peers, at a 1:1 ratio. If the bills are turned down, they are revised and voted upon again. If they pass, they move up in the congress. These smaller committees should be more local than the capital, also.

With these ideas incorporated into the government, it would become much more fair, and less corruptible.

-X13

^^^^^ :roll: Bloviating bull****!
 

RichardElderton

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"As an American, I know that the American government is becoming a Kleptocracy, a type of government where the government takes advantage of corruption to extend personal wealth or power."

I do completely agree with this particular point; America has been severely reduced to an empire of lust-filled aristocracy. Running for political office ought to limited to a select few, and in order for this to be possible, political parties must be eliminated. This is, of course, quite reasonable, and as you yourself have stated, Washington help such institutions in contempt.

The right to run for political office would have to be attained through a strict series of psychological tests, in addition to looking at the background of the potential candidate. While we are testing these people, we may as well ensure that they are indeed capable of fulfilling the duties that such positions entail, thus ensuring that no charismatic imbeciles are put in office.

No doubt some person or another would view this as an unconstitutional violation of rights, but laws can be changed if it for the common good, and I happen that the common good involves replacing corrupt, idiotic oligarchs with intelligent, honest servants of the Constitution.
 

American

Beer Lover Extraordinaire
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
90,644
Reaction score
29,133
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
"As an American, I know that the American government is becoming a Kleptocracy, a type of government where the government takes advantage of corruption to extend personal wealth or power."

I do completely agree with this particular point; America has been severely reduced to an empire of lust-filled aristocracy. Running for political office ought to limited to a select few, and in order for this to be possible, political parties must be eliminated. This is, of course, quite reasonable, and as you yourself have stated, Washington help such institutions in contempt.

The right to run for political office would have to be attained through a strict series of psychological tests, in addition to looking at the background of the potential candidate. While we are testing these people, we may as well ensure that they are indeed capable of fulfilling the duties that such positions entail, thus ensuring that no charismatic imbeciles are put in office.

No doubt some person or another would view this as an unconstitutional violation of rights, but laws can be changed if it for the common good, and I happen that the common good involves replacing corrupt, idiotic oligarchs with intelligent, honest servants of the Constitution.

Sounds great, why don't you take the initiative and get the ball rolling.
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
67,661
Reaction score
34,365
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
repeal the 17th Amendment, and make States honest competitors to the power of the Federal government again.
 

mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
22,499
Reaction score
4,266
Location
DC Metro
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Running for political office ought to limited to a select few,

This is antithetical to the American way and democracy.


The right to run for political office would have to be attained through a strict series of psychological tests, in addition to looking at the background of the potential candidate.

So you would create a ruling class?
 

RichardElderton

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is antithetical to the American way and democracy.




So you would create a ruling class?

In response to your first statement, yes, I agree wholeheartedly that that is not how American democracy works. However, it seems that we disagree as to which would take precedence, and I for one am in favor of what supports the common good, not what for what has been forced upon us by mindless tradition alone.

As for your second response, it just so happens that I despise oligarchies, which have time and time again proven to be a most inefficient form of leadership. The proposed method would simply eliminate the fools, the corrupt, and the easily manipulated from consideration so that we are not forced to deal with another Hoover or Nixon on any level of government.
 

sameerkale

New member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
17
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
First post, so I know its ambitious of me to be saying this much, but this is how I see it:

Before we as individuals can talk about what the government needs to do and needs to be, we should take a good look at ourselves, and ask ourselves what we can do to be better citizens and people. This seems off-topic but it isnt. Ill explain how in a moment.

First, you mention that Capitalism is easily exploitable. Everything in government, as well as any other system involving people, is vulnerable to exploitation of some sort by anyone who has the means and lacks the scruples to do it. Keep in mind that both forms of exploitation you mention, bribery and theft, are both illegal. So the problem is not Capitalism itself, but its implementation. And nobody disagrees with you that the US government needs improvements. But at least in Capitalism, you have some control over how much YOU earn, how hard YOU work, and for most people that is enough. In a Socialist-style economy you as a voting citizen have more control over what other people do, but then less control over what you as a worker do. Im only talking about democracies here.

As I understand it, a man in your idealization of Western culture believes that you ought to earn as much as you are willing to work for. I know that this may seem unfair, as some are more able to work than others. We have welfare, we have social security, we have medicare/medicaid. None of those systems are perfect, and you could argue all day on how imperfect they are, but they do exist, and their purpose is good. To make it fair, if not equal, the focus should be on retaining and improving these institutions, and not on radically changing the way we work and live.

Few are cold-hearted enough deny people unable to work a decent life. But the real question we should ask ourselves is, are we doing the best we can with the gifts that we have? I know so many intelligent people who do nothing and so many average people working hard, and in the end people are satisfied, not when they make the same money as someone else, but when they have reached their earning potential. I am not jealous of people

like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet, who have and most likely will always have more than I ever will. But I am not satisfied with myself if I am not doing the best I can do, in college right now, to give myself a good future. And I wont be satisfied with myself if, when I join the workforce in a few years, I do not work to my potential.

When you talk about a technocracy, what you describe already exists, though not directly. When you are sick, do you guess what you are sick with or do you go to a doctor ask for his advice, and do as he says? Same thing with voting. I dont know too much about, say, economics, so I tend to trust an expert on the subject. Economists tend to agree with a capitalist economy, and thats how I vote. Economists already have, indirectly, through their influence on the votes of laymen, more weight in the political process. What makes this better, is thatI may withdraw my trust at any time, if I choose. What we should do, again, is learn some economics. As I said before, I know very little economics, but I intend to do some reading when I have the time. I can be a better judge of others opinion, instead of blindly following what an expert believes. An expert is one with knowledge. And knowledge is something that anyone can get. Anyone can learn to be an expert if they want to.

You talk about how workers need to make as much as management. Thats up to the company. You get paid as much as your company is willing to part with to have your services. Management is paid more because while everyone can do hourly labor, fewer people have the capability to manage labor effectively. I know that this is not always the case, you have bad managers and good managers, but good people management is a skill, a special skill that not everyone has, and the company is willing to part with more money to have that skill. Again, the question is, have you taken time to work on your people skills? Have you gotten your MBA? Have you demonstrated leadership, that you can be trusted to manage other people in a work setting, and know what you are doing and do it successfully? As a baby, you really have no skills at all. Every skill you have is one you have learned. If you want to be a manager, learn to be a manager. If you dont, you cannot complain if someone who has taken the time and put in the effort to acquire that skill is rewarded for it.

As to the state having control over a capitalist economy, the issue isnt how much control the state has, but what it controls. If someone wants to pour millions of dollars into a company, its their money and their decision. Abusive labor practices, tax evasion, etc. are already illegal. Extravagant campaign donations should be. Fairness when it comes to employees in that company should be mandated. But not ownership.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that campaign finance reform is necessary, and every minute spent in the status quo is hurting our country. How to do it is another debate. I like your idea. However, I disagree with its implementation. Should the government give anyone who wishes to run for office the same "letter and telecast"? Thats inviting a lot of junk, and it will be overwhelming for anyone to choose a candidate, and maybe impossible for groups of voters with similar views to unite under a single candidate. But I do think some sanity needs to return to campaigning. The mudslinging and extravagant spending needs to go. The election process should be honest and positive, and be over the issues, not things like religion and family etc. that seems to be the case today. Saying that Obama is unfit for office because he is a Muslim (which he is not) is the same as saying that Palin is unfit for office because her daughter had an illegitimate child (which isnt our buisiness). Neither of these are relevant. As voters, the best thing we can do is ignore all of it, and focus on the issues. This sort of negative irrelevant campaigning exists only because we the people listen to it.

The point Im trying to make, is that we are blessed to be living in a country where the problems with our country are not because of the system but because of ourselves. And to make it better we have to make ourselves better citizens. I cannot change others, but I can change myself, make myself better. And the best way to lead is to lead by example.

Thanks for reading, and I am glad to be a part of this forum.
 

Mayor Snorkum

Banned
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
1,631
Reaction score
317
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
As an American, I know that the American government is becoming a Kleptocracy, a type of government where the government takes advantage of corruption to extend personal wealth or power. This is because of Capitalism.

Well, that's utter nonsense. The US government is corrupt because the people are corrupt. They don't care that Clinton committed a felony, they wanted him to stay in office. No greater corruption than that. The media lied incessantly about Bush and the Republicans, the people didn't care. Then this marxist comes along and simply trashes the Constitution, and there are still people defending the passage of a bill which no one was allowed to know what was in it unless it passed.

So, the people are corrupt. What corrupted the people? Was it capitalism, a philosophy that says "if you didn't earn it, you don't get it"? No, it couldn't have been capitalism. It was the never ending evil of collectivism that corrupted the people, continually providing them with goods and services they never paid for. Far too many of them had no problem whatsoever with passing the bills for their free lunch onto their kids and grand kids.

It's human nature to be greedy like that, but, here's the rub: The most perfect of the imperfect governments ever formed specifically denied the US federal government the power to do the things the collectivists wanted. Only by ignoring and flat out lying about the Constitution was it possible to get around the prohibitions, so the collectivists ignored and lied, as they still do, today. And their biggest lie is that it's Capitalism that's the problem.

Do corporate presidents beg for handouts? Is the President of the United States on a first name basis with the CEO of GE? Yep. So what? Stealing money to pay off businesses to get kick backs in the form of campaign contributions isn't capitalism. It's corruption.

So, that's the first major flaw in the OP, the author either wants to spread the tired old lies about capitalism or he's ignorant and isn't aware they're lies.

Another known form of flawed government is Communism, which is also corrupted, and is known for suppressing the working class, and not granting any freedoms.

Just one of the many failed forms of socialism. All forms of socialism must repress freedom and therefore they are all failures.

Capitalism is a form of economy where private businesses work for profit by supply and demand. Capitalism was a great idea, and perfect for the time of industrialism, but unfortunately it has become obsolete because of 2 MAJOR problems. One, it is easily exploitable, an economy that is run by capitalism can be corrupted so much because of two problems, bribery, and theft.

Well, that's certainly true. Naturally Capitalism is the only form of economics in which the politicians accept bribes.

You will note, won't you, that capitalism is an economic system, not a theory of government, right?

But, sure, Mayor Snorkum will not dispute your claim that only under capitalism are the politician's for sale.

Another, problem is that it isn't very stable. One day the economy could be booming, everyone in the nation rich, the next day, everyone is poor.

Actually, that never happens under capitalism. It happens when the government exerts it's influence in too many sectors of society and by abuse of power and ignorance forces the entire nation to collapse because it's mismanaged a single sector, like when the Federal Reserve caused the Depression of 1929 and when the FHA enabled the mortgage crisis and banking collapses of the Depression of 2008.

In neither case could a purely capitalist system been able to wreak such far reaching and enduring damage to the nation.

Socialism is a form of economy where wealth is spread out by how much one contributes to society.

Seriously, that just isn't what "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" means. What it really means is "rob the rich, starve the poor". And the worst mass murders in history have happened in the name of socialism. Absolutely nothing good in a system that punishes people who perform and rewards the slothful.

Many Americans are fighting for a Socialist economy in America, which is a generally good idea,

A better idea would be for them to move to Cuba so they can enjoy socialism first hand and leave America to the people who understand the Constitution and want it restored so the benefits of a capitalist economy can flow once again.

What we need is a new type of economic system, and maybe a new type of government.

Nah.

What is needed is the restoration of the Constitution and the elimination of socialism in the US.

Understandably, the government needs to be able to change as the world does, just like the American government.

The American government can only lawfully change by ratified Amendments to the Constitution. The last Amendment said that Congress can't vote itself a pay raise but that an election has to happen before the raise takes effect. Significantly, the besides killing the Republic with the 17th Amendment, the nature of the US government hasn't changed since 1776. It's still embodies capitalism as it's only allowed economic scheme, it still opposes socialism.

Other nations, those which do not have the best form of government, they keep playing with themselves and never improve things, either.

The normal person in western culture believes in equality, and that all people should have what they need, and no one person deserves more than another (Ironically contradicting Capitalism).

The "normal" person doesn't have the diseased outlook you describe. The normal person is aware that people earn what they get, and no one "deserves" a living off the back of another.

Given that you have yet to say anything valid, Mayor Snorkum isn't going to respond to that silly Techocracy notion.
 

American

Beer Lover Extraordinaire
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
90,644
Reaction score
29,133
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In response to your first statement, yes, I agree wholeheartedly that that is not how American democracy works. However, it seems that we disagree as to which would take precedence, and I for one am in favor of what supports the common good, not what for what has been forced upon us by mindless tradition alone.

What do you call mindless tradition?

richardelderton said:
As for your second response, it just so happens that I despise oligarchies, which have time and time again proven to be a most inefficient form of leadership. The proposed method would simply eliminate the fools, the corrupt, and the easily manipulated from consideration so that we are not forced to deal with another Hoover or Nixon on any level of government.

And you've come with a method that thousand of years worth of men couldn't? Wow, let's hear about it.
 
Top Bottom