If you were in charge of your country..... page 2

59 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

no, no, that’s absolutely not what i mean. i mean public control over institutes, rather than private or government control.

Perhaps democratize or communize depending on what exactly you mean.

i’ll consider them. unfortunately they all already have developed a more narrowly defined meaning, like nationalise and socialise. thanks for suggestions. i’m also considering grassrootsify, consumer-syndicalise, inclusively democratise, self-manage communalise. egh.

Split the teacher’s job into two positions: One person to maintain discipline in the class, the other to teach.

interesting. never considered that. i could see horrible scenarios with that, but it’s worth contemplating.

Mandate surveilance cameras on police helmets, to watch for violations from both sides

difficult solution. neither side is going to like that. police tend to show up at peoples least proud moments, so some care must be taken that the footage can’t be looked into unless so ordained, but so that that also won’t be exploited to filter what gets exposed.

but it could be a great and very necessary solution.

 
Flag Post

Fuck it, just drain their banks!

 
Flag Post

Step down and have a kangaroo take over the country.

 
Flag Post

First possibility- I might not want to rule a country

Second possibility- I would fix our economy, get rid of Justin Bieber, and change our education system to something reasonable for a change.

Third possibility- Stop wasting shitloads of precious money on the US Military

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by DmageGore:

Third possibility- Stop wasting shitloads of precious money on the US Military foreign wars, missions, and aid for countries that probably don’t like us anyway.

Fixed.

 
Flag Post

No ones going to read this because it’s gigantic, but I already typed it just now. Didn’t even take 30minutes.

I’d install a website that requires a visa or something of that such for you to sign in on, and then it would be used for voting.
Anyone around the world could use the site, even people who weren’t actually officially part of the country previously.

So a Chinese military official could vote there for example.
Or just some Arabic school teacher.
I’d have to find something that would let this happen, but lets just assume I could use peoples visas for this.

With this it would give everyone a voice.
Such as it having a topic about, having a war in Syria.

It’d give a little description, and then have some choices for everyone to vote from.
The bundle of votes would be sorted automatically by where they live/lived and just tons of different things. So for example It’d have a race, Region, Country and all those different things so we could see how everyone is actually siding.

On this site it’d have multiple other things.
That includes suggestions or threats, or anything of that such.
If someone wants to tell us something, they could do it there. If it’s that there will be a attack on your country on your soil if you attack ____ or you enact ___.
I doubt many would use it at first, but once people trusted us they might. All tips/threats or anything received would be considered as if it was relayed.
So if someone said something would happen if we kept doing this, or followed through with it the person who said it would be treated as someone who heard it from someone else from someone else.


I’d provide free internet, electricity, water, gas, phone service and all those nice things to everyone in the country.
Internet and cell phone service is pretty much free once you have the first equipment. The companies that own them make pure profit every time someone signs up for it.

Everything would have a cap though. A reasonable one.
Such as you couldn’t spend $1,000 of electricity in a month.

This would lead into the government, me, taking over the businesses slowly but surely if possible if everything worked out as planned.

In other words, I’d treat the government kind of like a business.
Businesses make profits, they have to sell to others which the others need profits, as well as the others selling for profits, and lets not forget the workers. They all have to pay taxes ect ect…

What would happen if you take out some of this?

A bread factory for example.
Workers get $9.50 an hour. Every hour each worker works, they produce $45.00 in bread.
The company then sells this $45.00 of bread for $95.00 to the second company that will sell it to consumers (the “others”). Netting $50.00 profit for the original company per worker, per hour.
The others then sell that $95.00 of bread for $179.00 in their stores to consumers. Netting them $83.00 profit.
Netting a total of $134.00 total more than the bread actually should of costed.
Keep in mind one thing, the original bread factory owner, it didn’t cost him $45.00 to make that bread, it only costed him the workers pay plus a couple dimes for the materials. For that $45.00 of bread it really costed him less than 50% of that to make the bread.

Yes, I’m leaving out taxes and paying the workers, but you get the point.

So what would happen if you took it over? You’d make shitty cheap bread?
No no no!
That’s all wrong, that’s a lie. Ignore the propaganda you’ve been fed!

If you take out the profits that are a must for the company, what happens?
The worker would now get paid over a hundred dollars more than he does now, a over 1000% percent increase.

But that doesn’t need to happen like that.
The government gets the profits.

So lets see the system of your bread factory, this is crazy talk!

The government makes the bread, hiring the workers.
Each worker produces $45.00 of bread an hour. Each worker gets paid $9.50 an hour.

$45.00 of bread gets distributed directly to the public or to a store owned by the government which has more workers.
$45.00 of bread gets sold for $45.00 of bread. The public has dirt cheap bread, that is the exact same as the previous bread and made by the same people.

The public saves hundreds of dollars to the greedy merchants companies.

OR

The government makes the bread, hiring the workers.
Each worker produces $45.00 of bread an hour. Each worker gets paid $9.50 an hour.

$45.00 of bread gets distributed directly to the public or to a store owned by the government which has more workers.
$45.00 of bread gets sold for $179.00 of bread. The public has the same bread as before, but now the government gets the profit instead of the greedy merchants companies.

Show me one flaw in this system, you can’t.
If the people get dirt cheap, same quality bread what is wrong?
If the government takes the extra money and sells it for the same price, what’s so wrong?

Both ways are better than the current system.
If the people get the same bread for cheaper, they have more money.
If the government gets the extra money while continuing to rip off the population, they can expand the process and improve on the country more.


This is just the start, I have a gigantic plan thought up.
I might come back later with the education.

I went a bit off-track with the bread thing, but it was related.
The internet/phone service would be used like this, eliminating the profit from the companies/giving it to the government.
It would need to be eased into it because I can’t just steal all of the companies things, but I could slowly buy them out or push them out.


EDIT: Oh, and sorry if I messed up the math a little bit, I didn’t proof-read any of this and I edited a few numbers, so I might of broke the once perfect math.

 
Flag Post

So basically you would give Joe Public around the world a say in how to run your country, and you would nationalise every industry.

Good party last night, was it? I don’t know where to start really, but here seems as good a place as any.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:


I’d provide free internet, electricity, water, gas, phone service and all those nice things to everyone in the country.
Internet and cell phone service is pretty much free once you have the first equipment. The companies that own them make pure profit every time someone signs up for it.

Untrue. The internt uses electricity at every switching station and to power the data travellinbg across the cales whether that data be electrical or optical in nature. Radio broadcasts take power. All requires maintenance. The more it is used, the more maintenance it requires. This of course also means paying wages and fuel for people to maintain it. The companies do make large profits, but it is not all pure profit.

Everything would have a cap though. A reasonable one.

‘Reasonable’ has different meanings to different parties.

Eg, a data center can easily spend $20,000 of electricity in a month. IT accounts for 2% of all human energy use.

 
Flag Post

I’ll put more thought into it. I don’t intend on revising my post, just posting whatever comes to head and posting.
Since I’m still a kid, I’ll fix whatever I see is wrong within my limited realm.



1) Education
Elevate teachers to a higher status by cutting out the trashy teachers (by weakening the union), increased pay for competitive teaching, and incremental paying based on merit rather than time spent teaching. Completely wipe out tenure. To protect teacher’s jobs though — provide alternative training programs, however, these are limited and if failed: BAM. Fired.
I’ve had too much experience with horrible teachers. I’m in the most advanced programs and they still aren’t reaching the quality they could.

Change the organization of the educational system. It’s like a factory. Go to one class, get fed information, bell rings and you move on; repeat. Over and over and over.
Merge the courses and concepts that you learn; separating into “Math” and “Science” is silly. You aren’t going into a career where you just do “Math,” there’s a good chance you’re going to be writing and calculating using scientific principles.
If we split them up for kids, they’re going to have things split up that aren’t really split up in the real world.
We need to prepare them for the real world.

Remove testing based systems and “No Child Left Behind.” Teaching to the test is overly common and I can’t explain to you how many kids are forgetting all information immediately after the test. It’s essentially going to school to memorize and forget. What good does it do to teach kids to memorize, then forget? Surely there are exceptions, but generally, it has hurt more than helped.

Teach critical life skills. Can’t cook? Idiot, you’re going to have to cook for yourself. Know how to derive? Idiot, you can’t do your bills. Know how to fill out a worksheet as the teacher puts a copy of a filled worksheet on the projector or powerpoint? Have fun taking notes to understand what you have to in real life. Know how to retain information and take a multiple choice test? Congratulations — get a job where you take multiple choice tests all day and then can forget whatever it was about. And so on.
I’d like to see more classes such as “Logical Thinking” (SO MANY KIDS I SWEAR: This happened and then that happened, how do I figure it out?), "Individual Thinking (CAN I COPY YOUR ANSWERS OR CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT TO WRITE OR LET’S WORK IN A GROUP), “Creativity” (LET’S ALL DO THE SAME THING EVERY ONE ELSE DID), “Open-Mindedness” (I HAVE MY VIEWS AND YOU’RE WRONG), “Morality and Culture” (LET’S DO DRUGS BECAUSE IT’S PORTRAYED IN THE MEDIA), “Media” (teach people how the system works), etc etc…

Furthermore, we’ve given enough aid to the lower-level kids. With all the supplementary aid we’ve given them: If they’re truly hard working and have the capabilities to rise; they will. Start pushing forward our top kids. We’ve got AP classes, but those are ridiculously mundane. If they are an accurate representation of college; I’m going to be so annoyed. All we’ve done is lowered the standards for what is “good” and then said “Wow, more people are good! We’ve done a good job!” Meanwhile, we’re falling behind significantly in education in the world.

Reduce college tuition. College degrees are not worth that much. A hard-working individual could gather that information on their own, but it won’t be worth much, because they don’t have an official piece of paper declaring that they spent many years on it.

Specifically, a shift to free, self-paced, individual-learning online courses. Social functions and social development can be obtained by required extracurriculars and such.



…now that I think about it…
That’s all I’ve really become passionate about….
give me a few years as I head off to college and my career and love life…
Then I’ll come back with more (=

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:


I’d provide free internet, electricity, water, gas, phone service and all those nice things to everyone in the country.
Internet and cell phone service is pretty much free once you have the first equipment. The companies that own them make pure profit every time someone signs up for it.

Untrue. The internt uses electricity at every switching station and to power the data travellinbg across the cales whether that data be electrical or optical in nature. Radio broadcasts take power. All requires maintenance. The more it is used, the more maintenance it requires. This of course also means paying wages and fuel for people to maintain it. The companies do make large profits, but it is not all pure profit.

Everything would have a cap though. A reasonable one.

‘Reasonable’ has different meanings to different parties.

Eg, a data center can easily spend $20,000 of electricity in a month. IT accounts for 2% of all human energy use.

LOL, vika….while what ya’re saying is based on “truth”,,,
ya’re still kinda being a weeebit “hard” on him.

Cuz, I see what he is goin’ for is: Reduced costs due to consolidation-of-effort and elimination of redundancy. Ya know, the same “logic” huge mega corps use to bullshit their way into having monopolies “for the betterment of the business community”. This is the “downside”, ugly part of capitalism. If there isn’t COMPETETION…there really isn’t capitalism.

Also, his analogy about “non-capita-based” production is mostly true.
Making a car for a person (or family, etc.) takes the same per ratio of said production regardless of if it is in one or more factories by one or more companies.

BUT, while a radio broadcast or cellphone network does involve all those things ya mention,,,,
any one of them will require nearly the same investment for 10,000 users as 100,000,000.
It’s a simple factor of “paydown” on the original setup investment. The more users, the faster the paydown and then, the greater the profit.

I’m sure this is something YOU deal w/ on a daily basis in your line of “work”.
I well imagine the devices ya use can be quite costly…..esp. if “custom-fit” work is needed.
Same applies to “hand-built” Italian sport cars as opposed to assembly-line built ones. Huge differences in prices.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

Untrue. The internt uses electricity at every switching station and to power the data travellinbg across the cales whether that data be electrical or optical in nature. Radio broadcasts take power. All requires maintenance. The more it is used, the more maintenance it requires. This of course also means paying wages and fuel for people to maintain it. The companies do make large profits, but it is not all pure profit.

It’s not pure profit, but after it gets started and there are many people using the service, it almost becomes pure profit because of how there’s a constant stream of cash enough to higher multiple times more workers than what you are paying without losing money.

Why yes, we’d have to have to hire people to repair it and we’d have to supply electricity and gas or whatever it takes to run the service.
But as you said, companies do make large profits. Don’t they do all those things?

The companies pay for electricity that is marked up, the companies have to pay workers and maintenance people.
But they still make profit, even when they have to pay for marked up electricity and the maintenance people have to pay for more expensive marked up equipment which gets thrown onto the company.

‘Reasonable’ has different meanings to different parties.
Eg, a data center can easily spend $20,000 of electricity in a month. IT accounts for 2% of all human energy use.

The data center isn’t in someones house and would be part of the government, so it wouldn’t have a issue.
But because I’m not sure exactly sure how they would be run and all that, they could still be exempted just because they are providing a needed service.

The reasonable cap would only apply to certain things such as houses/apartments or something of that such.
If someone who lives there has some kind of medical condition that requires special things, then their cap would be raised.
The cap would be fairly high around $500-600 a month worth of electricity before you’d have to pay for extra without a good reason. It’d really depend on the place it is, how many people live there, how big it is and all those things so people couldn’t just collect energy.

There wouldn’t need to be a cap if I didn’t fear someone abusing it too much. But with how people are currently we’d need a cap for the first part at least till everything was more stable and people weren’t as likely to abuse it.

The cap doesn’t really need to exist in the first place because we could just monitor to make sure no one house/area is using way too much for no logical reason.
But I just feel it’d be best to have it around first till we could set that part up and get it running.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:

Lets talk Education now.

The current education system seems to be fairly disgusting in my opinion.
It holds people back, it doesn’t teach everything it should, and it’s forced.

I’d re-do the education system completely, it’d be completely different.
I’ll explain.

GRADE LEVELS, why is it kinder-12th then followed by College?
Why is it like this?
Every single grade level has different subjects, which have different subgrades in them.
In a year you learn multiple different “grades” of math.

So why is it just all bulked together?
Lets change that.

So this is how the new education system would work.
Every subject is different, they each have different grade levels and different numbers of grades.
So instead of them all being grouped together as one, they are spread out nearly as much as possible. Instead of 12 grades with restricted material for each subject, the grades are in the hundreds.

So there are hundreds of grades.

Why would you do this, it just makes it more complicated!
Why no no it doesn’t.
What subject where you good in?
What subject did you never get?

So lets say you failed 5th grade because you didn’t pass a writing test, but you passed math perfectly.
You now get held back, for all subjects.
No, you don’t advance in math, you get thrown back till you get writing right.

Awful isn’t it?
A wasted year of potential in math, just because you failed a little writing test.

How would this change?
Because of the amount of grade levels and how each subject is completely separate from the others this is what would happen.

So lets say you failed Grade level 87 in writing and you couldn’t write a good enough story for what used to be 5th grade work.
You fail the grade, and you get held back and remain in grade 87.

But wait, you got a perfect score on your math test.
You’re so advanced you get shot up a grade.

So, all this does is let you advance is subjects you’re good at?
Yes, but it also keeps you learning as you would of if you were held back.
All it does it let you have your full potential.

But what about the teachers? Wouldn’t you be losing money with this system, who would pay for it?
The teachers can teach whatever grades they qualify for and would get fully supplied and would be payed more than the average worker.
The teachers chose how their class is and must accept their students as the students must accept the teacher.

And yes, we would lose money having education considering we haven’t established any form of taxes right now.
We would.
If not for our previous established businesses! Because we are making tons of money as well as saving money for the public, we would be gaining money that we could put to education funding.

But I want to homeschool my kids or keep them out of schooling!
Not a problem.
Remember that website? The one for Visas or something of that such?

There would be a section on there or a website also run by us for education.
There would be information, videos and lessons on there.

So if you wanted to homeschool them but use our material, then you can do that no matter where you are.

I don’t want to use yours though, I have my own
Then do that, that’s fine.

There may be some restrictions on this, or something making us need to approve it first or people being tested on just general things, but that’s for later.

But I don’t want any schooling for them!
If you don’t want them in school, simply keep them out.

There would also need to be some added things for this part. Although it’d be a option.

How much will it cost? How far does it go up?
It’s free.
We could pay for it with our profits/savings from out businesses, or we could find a way to collect money off online videos.

It goes up as far as the teachers in your area will go.
There would be places that has every level including college level education in every subject throughout, although they might not be as close as the normal education centers.
But remember, you can always take the online courses/get the courses and teach them yourself if you want to.

What about fun activities? I don’t want my kid having just boring old math and all that, they need woodshop or something! Oh and what about something they can use at home!
Cooking, cleaning, survival as well as many other common things would all be available classes as well as sports, gaming, singing, language classes.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Ya know, the same “logic” huge mega corps use to bullshit their way into having monopolies “for the betterment of the business community”. This is the “downside”, ugly part of capitalism. If there isn’t COMPETETION…there really isn’t capitalism.

I was not arguing in defense of capitalism, but rather pointing outthe inaccuracies in Knife’s beliefs regarding the costs involved in maintaining a telecomms infrastructure. They seem to believe that once it is built, it is free to run – that is not the case.

BUT, while a radio broadcast or cellphone network does involve all those things ya mention,,,,
any one of them will require nearly the same investment for 10,000 users as 100,000,000.
It’s a simple factor of “paydown” on the original setup investment. The more users, the faster the paydown and then, the greater the profit.

Actually, no. The analogy breaks for telecomms. Picture a freeway. Each user is one of those cars travelling down it. Each user pays. So each time you add another car you get more profit. At this point your analogy holds up fine. But let’s keep adding cars. Pile more and more cars onto the freeway. What happens?

This is why telecomms is different. Each line can only take so many users at full speed before everyone is forced to slow down. Eventually everyone is forced to a grinding halt, and still more wish to get on. So telecomms is forever trying to upgrade the network, with more and more and more lanes. In some places now, there is 100ply fibre in cables – a hundred fifty-lane freeways, side by-side for maximum traffic throughput. That’s still not enough. There are often two or three of these giant cables running parallel to one another now. If something happens to one, allthe cables break and it needs to be replaced – that is expensive, especially for the undersea cables.

There is a constant fight to improve the telecomms networks, as it is commonly accepted there is not enough capacity now, and its only going to get worse as users demand more and more bandwidth, faster and faster speeds – that means every user needs more bandwidth and higher speeds. Tht means new, denser transmission methods, and more cable capacity. Newer exchnges to route data more quickly and with far less noise.

There’s still a heck of a lot of profit to be made in the system, but it is an expensive network to maintain. On top of that, the transmissions for every user (the cars on the freeway) are taking electrical power continually, as they travel. This is also not free.

There are plenty of ways round it to reduce the costs, some of which are up to the end-user to implement, but to claim once the first cable is laid, everything after is pure profit – that one is simply misinformed.

 
Flag Post

Wouldn’t a more efficient taxation system be:all profits go directly to the government and the government then pays you back a reduced sum of money from the pool of collected money?

 
Flag Post

Older posters on here will now what I would do.

 
Flag Post

I run the damn country. Build a huge money printer powered by various renewable energy sources. Infinite money for the government to unf*ck the economy with.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darver:

I run the damn country. Build a huge money printer powered by various renewable energy sources. Infinite money for the government to unf*ck the economy with.

Troll much?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by Darver:

I run the damn country. Build a huge money printer powered by various renewable energy sources. Infinite money for the government to unf*ck the economy with.

Troll much?

Surprisingly, no.

Why not do this? Plenty of money for the government, we can effectively abolish taxes or at least severely reduce them, and keep everything good.

Building the damn thing/things in the first place will at first mean a rather large rise in tax for the really well off (Nobody else, at worst the insanely rich could turn middle class, but it wouldn’t be that bad. Only complaints would be from the rich guys.) But then once it’s built, nobody’s income gets nicked, all is swell

I’d explain what I’d do with all this cash, if it weren’t midnight. I’ll do it tomorrow.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darver:

Surprisingly, no.

Why not do this? Plenty of money for the government, we can effectively abolish taxes or at least severely reduce them, and keep everything good.

Building the damn thing/things in the first place will at first mean a rather large rise in tax for the really well off (Nobody else, at worst the insanely rich could turn middle class, but it wouldn’t be that bad. Only complaints would be from the rich guys.) But then once it’s built, nobody’s income gets nicked, all is swell

I’d explain what I’d do with all this cash, if it weren’t midnight. I’ll do it tomorrow.

If you’re not trolling, go google inflation. Then rethink your idea.

 
Flag Post

Although I agree that education is terrible in the United States, there are so many free online alternatives that anyone can use.
I mean, God forbid you show some initiative and pursue some knowledge on your own time.

 
Flag Post

Actually bother to spend money on research for NASA, resulting in an intellectual golden age for space-flight from the renewed desire to reach the new frontier. This would result in investments, both economically, and by the genius minds from across the globe. This would exponentially increase job growth, opening up higher-quality jobs, in-turn opening up the job market, and create an outstanding desire to get a higher quality education. GDP would explode from innovation, as previously proven from the last time we actually payed attention to NASA, before we shoved it off to the side. We used to spend 4.41% of our federal budget on NASA back in 1966, but now we have only set off .48%. You guys do realize that this is space flight? The next age for human history. This is our renaissance, and we shoved it off because we brought ourselves to the conclusion that national security was more important than cultural progression. We earned so much more GDP from the technologies developed whenever NASA was a big deal. I’m a fiscally conservative person when it comes to most factors of the economy, but to ignore this one will cost us so much more in the future. We’re going to regret this, since it isn’t very likely our congress is going to do anything about this anytime soon. We can’t fix the problem because congress can’t realize this.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by Darver:

Surprisingly, no.

Why not do this? Plenty of money for the government, we can effectively abolish taxes or at least severely reduce them, and keep everything good.

Building the damn thing/things in the first place will at first mean a rather large rise in tax for the really well off (Nobody else, at worst the insanely rich could turn middle class, but it wouldn’t be that bad. Only complaints would be from the rich guys.) But then once it’s built, nobody’s income gets nicked, all is swell

I’d explain what I’d do with all this cash, if it weren’t midnight. I’ll do it tomorrow.

If you’re not trolling, go google inflation. Then rethink your idea.

Inflations where the value of money goes down to shit, basically.

How would this effect anything if all this money’s kept within government, replacing taxes? As it all in all replaces tax, the government’s money supply, the amount of money we have stays the same, but everybody else gets richer, due to lack of tax. As people have no money, if we do end up with inflation, people could afford it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darver:

How would this effect anything if all this money’s kept within government, replacing taxes?

How exactly would the government do anything if they kept all the money?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by Darver:

How would this effect anything if all this money’s kept within government, replacing taxes?

How exactly would the government do anything if they kept all the money?

What I mean is, if it replaces taxes, the money supply would stay roughly the same as it was before, thus no inflation, logically.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darver:

What I mean is, if it replaces taxes, the money supply would stay roughly the same as it was before, thus no inflation, logically.

If the money supply stays the same, what’s the reason for creating more money?