MEMBER & GUEST INTERACTION SECTION > THE COFFEE HOUSE ((( SOCIAL - ROOM )))

What I would change in the government

(1/14) > >>

Michael Bush:
Some of these (most) would require a constitutional amendment (or several depending on how it was written) but here are some changes I would like to see:

o  None of the above should always be a choice on the ballot.
o  With multiple choices (more than two) the voter should be allowed to rank the choices.  This allows more than two parties but hopefully is more consensus than majority.
o  All votes of legislatures should be 2/3 majority.  3/4 majority to override a veto.  This forces both sides to sit down and come to a consensus instead of imposing their views on a scant minority when they are lucky enough to get control of the house or senate.  Laws would be things that both sides believe in and if they don't talk to each other they won't get anything done.  And usually that is best anyway.
o  All laws should automatically sunset in 10 years.  Legislators should be allowed to set longer sunsets but no longer than 20 years.  This keeps laws from accumulating. 
o  All existing laws should sunset in 10 years. "If you want good laws, burn those you have and make new ones."--Voltaire
o  Laws should always have a preamble that states the purpose of the law.  This preamble should always be considered when applying the law.  e.g. a 15 year old girl sending risqu? pictures to her boyfriend should not be charged with making child pornography.  Maybe a misdemeanor charge of some kind, but the intent of the law was not to put 15 year olds in jail.
o  Bureaucratic organizations should not have the force of law and their decisions should be allowed to be contested.
o  Anyone running for office who promises something outside of the scope of that office should be jailed immediately for fraud.
o  Anyone who ran for office and got elected and failed to keep any promise should be jailed for fraud as soon as it becomes obvious that the promise was not kept.
o  The government should NEVER fund research.  They should find things worth accomplishing and offer prizes.  e.g. if you think breast cancer is the major issue then offer a billion dollar prize to anyone who can cure it.  Never fund treatments.  Only cures.
  Some examples of how this has worked in history:
  o  1418 Brunelleschi solved the problem of domes and arches (he figured out that a catenary arch is what actually holds up all arches and domes which is why a dome had to get thicker as it got wider.  What was actually happening was that you were enlarging the thickness enough for a catenary arch to fall within the structure, so if the arch or dome simply followed the catenary shape it could be as thin as you like) to collect the prize of 200 gold florins. 
  o  John Harrison won the prize for solving Longitude in 1714.  He collected 20,000 British Pounds. 
  o  In the late 1700's Napoleon offered a 12,000 franc prize for a practical method of preserving food for his army.  Nicolas Appert collected the prize for inventing canning as preservation for food. 
o  The government should not be allowed to spend more than they take in.
o  The government should not be allowed to tax more than 10%.  Prioritize.  You should not be taking from your neighbor anything you don't want taken at gunpoint.  Taxes are gunpoint in the end.
o  The federal government should standardize tests to grant Bachelor, Master and Doctorate degrees in basic fields as they already do with the GED.  They could even provide a curriculum list of YouTube videos that would help prepare people for the test.  This is a doable method to allow people a free education without costing the taxpayers any significant amount of money.  Of course you can still go to Harvard, if you can afford the bribe to get in and the bribe to stay in...
o  Government imposed monopolies should be eliminated.  Anytime there are licenses the government is imposing a monopoly.

sawdstmakr:
Those are great ideas.
The problem with the laws about politicians is that we don?t have enough jails to house of them. 🤗
The other problem is that those same politicians will never let us enacted them.
Jim Altmiller

Michael Bush:
>The other problem is that those same politicians will never let us enacted them.

That is a fact.  They have a monopoly and they don't want to endanger it.

Dallasbeek:
I would tax all property, regardless of who owns it or the use made of it.  This would extend taxation to real and "personal" property owned by religious organizations.   I realize this squeezes churches and chafes religious people's feelings, but megachurches are the result of churches becoming huge businesses that we see now.  Likewise, income should all be taxed.  Nonprofits should be truly nonprofits.  Preachers and heads of "nonprofit" corporations that knock down a million bucks a year and fly around in private jets are, to me, an abomination.

I would end the civil forfeiture bonanza that has resulted in governments seizing money and property on suspicion that it has been illegally gained and forcing a person to go before stacked coirts to try to recover seized property.  Unless a criminal conviction of some sort related to the property is involved, then property would have to be returned to the claimant forthwith -- meaning immediately. 

Eminent domain could be used to take property only for legitimate governmental purposes.  In the New London, CT, seizure of homes to benefit a drug company, the company was promising to build facilities that would create a number of jobs.  New London took people's homes and caused them to be leveled.  The company then decided not to locate in New London after all, but the people still lost their homes.  So far as I know, the land remains undeveloped.  The SCOTUS ruled against the home owners, as I recall, but I think it was a terrible decision and the seizure was unconstitutional under the "Takings Clause" of the Fifth Amendment.  Unfortunately, I do not have a vote on the SCOTUS.

kathyp:

--- Quote ---I would tax all property, regardless of who owns it or the use made of it.  This would extend taxation to real and "personal" property owned by religious organizations.   I realize this squeezes churches and chafes religious people's feelings, but megachurches are the result of churches becoming huge businesses that we see now.  Likewise, income should all be taxed.  Nonprofits should be truly nonprofits.  Preachers and heads of "nonprofit" corporations that knock down a million bucks a year and fly around in private jets are, to me, an abomination.
--- End quote ---

While I agree that Mega-Churches are an abomination in most cases, they are the minority.  Taxing all churches because of the few might be a step too far.  I have two churches on my block and both are small and poor.  The pastors have other jobs to make ends meet.  Even so, both churches are very community involved with feeding, clothing, and other services offered at no charge.  In all the disasters I have done, the churches have been doing the work to help people long before the NGOs are set up and going.

People who work for non-profits and are paid, pay taxes on income.  The question of how much they are paid is a different thing.  Most NGOs have boards that determine these things.  They pay top people what they think they need to pay to get qualified applicants.  To get a CEO with the experience and qualifications to run a large organization, you have to pay for them.  That person is not going to volunteer their services.

On the above, I understand the sentiment, but I think the reality would be more damaging than helpful.

On your last two, I agree completely.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version