First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply What kind of Government would you have?
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

ryedog1995 wrote:

democracy isnt realistic a republic is.


And democratic republics? How do they fare?
23037 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 5/2/15 , edited 5/2/15

PurpleDjango wrote:

If you could choose from any Government known to man, which would you choose?

Or would you make your own? And if you did what would it be like?


If I had my own government, it would not be like many other people would have. It would be a Government where everything is free, but in order for this to work everyone that was able would have to work towards it. It wouldn't be as much of a Government as a 'Civil Society', everything you could need would be free but there is a limit to how much you can take. You could get a certain amount of electronics per year (Unless some break), you would get a certain amount of food per week per person (Based on metabolism). Healthcare would be free as well.

There are some 'chinks' in my preferred 'Government' but I'm sure it could be 'Ironed out'.

Please obey all Crunchyroll rules.



Your government looks very similar to the programme of the Socialist Party of Great Britain (they also have a sister American party and some others around the world).

They emphasise that under socialism there will be no money. So no wages, no markets or buying and selling. People produce and then take as they please.

That is actually the ultimate result of all socialist theory. The difference with the other socialist groups is that they would do gradual change. The SPGP advocate complete socialism immediately! The other difference with the others is where you acknowledge that everyone will have to work towards it. You can't force people to be free (e.g. USSR, China, etc.). The SPGB is therefore entirely propagandist (i.e. tries to convince people of the merits of socialism) and does none of what the other parties get up to: planning coups, fighting fascists, making demands for higher wages, etc.

While the core tenet of the SPGB is good, there are peripheral issues I disagree with them on, which I won't bore you with.

I disagree with you on the need for rationing (especially food). I refer you to an article by Sylvia Pankhurst from 1923: https://www.marxists.org/archive/pankhurst-sylvia/1923/socialism.htm. In particular the statement:

We do not call for limitation of births, for penurious thrift, and self-denial. We call for a great production that will supply all, and more than all the people can consume. Such a great production is already possible, with the knowledge already possessed by mankind.
Xeemix 
106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/2/15
Despotism or Military Junta.
5064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 5/2/15



Your government looks very similar to the programme of the Socialist Party of Great Britain (they also have a sister American party and some others around the world).

They emphasise that under socialism there will be no money. So no wages, no markets or buying and selling. People produce and then take as they please.

That is actually the ultimate result of all socialist theory. The difference with the other socialist groups is that they would do gradual change. The SPGP advocate complete socialism immediately! The other difference with the others is where you acknowledge that everyone will have to work towards it. You can't force people to be free (e.g. USSR, China, etc.). The SPGB is therefore entirely propagandist (i.e. tries to convince people of the merits of socialism) and does none of what the other parties get up to: planning coups, fighting fascists, making demands for higher wages, etc.

While the core tenet of the SPGB is good, there are peripheral issues I disagree with them on, which I won't bore you with.

I disagree with you on the need for rationing (especially food). I refer you to an article by Sylvia Pankhurst from 1923: https://www.marxists.org/archive/pankhurst-sylvia/1923/socialism.htm. In particular the statement:

We do not call for limitation of births, for penurious thrift, and self-denial. We call for a great production that will supply all, and more than all the people can consume. Such a great production is already possible, with the knowledge already possessed by mankind.


I did not mean rationing of food like what most country's do, mine would have it based on your metabolism, 3 meals a day and a snack. In order for a true Socialism to work everyone would have to be of the mind to work hard so everyone benefits. They must not be forced to do this because that is slavery, one way to ensure they are 'of a mind' to work hard is to raise them to be like that.

When I was a child my mother told me "If you work hard at something the better the result". That has been what I tried to do all my life, and if everyone was raised with a similar mentality, then the world would be a more productive place.

This is not a perfect system, because no two people are the same, even if raised under the same conditions. And in my 'government' it would be run by the people, with laws set in place to guard against corruption and usurping power.
48409 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / AZ
Offline
Posted 5/2/15 , edited 5/2/15

pirththee wrote:


HuastecoOtaku wrote:

In my hardcore conservative days I would have said a combination between an absolute monarchy and a Catholic theocracy.


Do you mean like Divine Right Monarchs?


Yes, but the Church would be above the monarch, like in medieval Europe.
I left these ideas behind after realizing that it would be too similar to ISIS. Some of the traditional Catholics who believe in this sort of stuff beleive in the inprisonment of gays and other backward ideas.
Posted 5/2/15 , edited 5/2/15
All of it is replaced with cats.
23037 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 5/2/15 , edited 5/2/15


I did not mean rationing of food like what most country's do, mine would have it based on your metabolism, 3 meals a day and a snack. In order for a true Socialism to work everyone would have to be of the mind to work hard so everyone benefits. They must not be forced to do this because that is slavery, one way to ensure they are 'of a mind' to work hard is to raise them to be like that.

When I was a child my mother told me "If you work hard at something the better the result". That has been what I tried to do all my life, and if everyone was raised with a similar mentality, then the world would be a more productive place.

This is not a perfect system, because no two people are the same, even if raised under the same conditions. And in my 'government' it would be run by the people, with laws set in place to guard against corruption and usurping power.


It's a job persuading people though! The closet I've got is where they'll agree with me, but say it can only happen hundreds of years in the future. But why not now?

As you say, the upbringing would be a big help, before school sets people in their ways.
1126 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / A Long Way From H...
Offline
Posted 5/2/15
Pretty much the United States Government as it is now, except I'd be removing most of the Ring Wing.
Perfect system.
85255 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Louisville, KY
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

GayAsianBoy wrote:

Idealistically, I would want some sort of government that is focused on individuals and individual's needs and goals. After people finish high school, they have the choice of going into 3 jobs of their choosing for 1 year, considering they've passed the aptitude tests for those 3 particular subjects. Then on the 2nd year, they get to pick the one that they enjoyed the most. And learn the extra theories and skills on the job.
This would allow people to get a feel of what they like doing and what they don't like doing, and which boss they get along with etc. Without wasting time studying for a degree, only to not be able to find a job for that field or... worse... found out they no longer enjoy that subject.
It would also add productivity to the workforce in general. And decrease unemployment after high school.

After 3 years of learning on the job, they would get a qualification and they would go to a higher income and start to pay more tax. And if they want to change jobs, then they would have to start from minimal wage again. But they would be able to get into a job immediately, and they don't need to have a "qualification" beforehand.


Unemployment mainly comes from people being either (a) too lazy to work because the government will pay them to not work more than they would make if they worked, or (b) not taking a job because it is "beneath" them because they feel entitled to everything. Giving someone the choice you go into wouldn't solve unemployment at all. The government just needs to stop paying for people being too lazy and maybe they will get jobs. Then I don't have to be stuck paying 40% of my paycheck on people sitting at home watching TV.

My view is the government needs to step out of the work-force payroll and employees will get paid what they feel is worth it to them. Minus government aid and people WILL take low pay jobs, but they will quickly want to look for work elsewhere to make more and more all while getting more skills to get paid even more.
5064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

josef_k wrote:



I did not mean rationing of food like what most country's do, mine would have it based on your metabolism, 3 meals a day and a snack. In order for a true Socialism to work everyone would have to be of the mind to work hard so everyone benefits. They must not be forced to do this because that is slavery, one way to ensure they are 'of a mind' to work hard is to raise them to be like that.

When I was a child my mother told me "If you work hard at something the better the result". That has been what I tried to do all my life, and if everyone was raised with a similar mentality, then the world would be a more productive place.

This is not a perfect system, because no two people are the same, even if raised under the same conditions. And in my 'government' it would be run by the people, with laws set in place to guard against corruption and usurping power.


It's a job persuading people though? The closet I've got is where they'll agree with me, but say it can only happen hundreds of years in the future. But why not now?

As you say, the upbringing would be a big help, before school sets people in their ways.


Yea persuading people is often hard, but that is why you start a country with a few dozen family's of similar ideals, and start from there. Might take a few century's but you eventually would become a nation, then you would have children all brought up the same way instead of starting with thousands/millions of people who don't care to work if they get things for free anyways.

5064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

Khaltazar wrote:


GayAsianBoy wrote:

Idealistically, I would want some sort of government that is focused on individuals and individual's needs and goals. After people finish high school, they have the choice of going into 3 jobs of their choosing for 1 year, considering they've passed the aptitude tests for those 3 particular subjects. Then on the 2nd year, they get to pick the one that they enjoyed the most. And learn the extra theories and skills on the job.
This would allow people to get a feel of what they like doing and what they don't like doing, and which boss they get along with etc. Without wasting time studying for a degree, only to not be able to find a job for that field or... worse... found out they no longer enjoy that subject.
It would also add productivity to the workforce in general. And decrease unemployment after high school.

After 3 years of learning on the job, they would get a qualification and they would go to a higher income and start to pay more tax. And if they want to change jobs, then they would have to start from minimal wage again. But they would be able to get into a job immediately, and they don't need to have a "qualification" beforehand.


Unemployment mainly comes from people being either (a) too lazy to work because the government will pay them to not work more than they would make if they worked, or (b) not taking a job because it is "beneath" them because they feel entitled to everything. Giving someone the choice you go into wouldn't solve unemployment at all. The government just needs to stop paying for people being too lazy and maybe they will get jobs. Then I don't have to be stuck paying 40% of my paycheck on people sitting at home watching TV.

My view is the government needs to step out of the work-force payroll and employees will get paid what they feel is worth it to them. Minus government aid and people WILL take low pay jobs, but they will quickly want to look for work elsewhere to make more and more all while getting more skills to get paid even more.

Yea I agree somewhat, some people are unemployed due to other reasons. A lot of it is from lazyness but sometimes there is some technicality like a mistake they did in the past or a disability, or maybe they have some sort of social anxiety.
Report to Moderator

85255 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Louisville, KY
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

PurpleDjango wrote:


Khaltazar wrote:


GayAsianBoy wrote:

Idealistically, I would want some sort of government that is focused on individuals and individual's needs and goals. After people finish high school, they have the choice of going into 3 jobs of their choosing for 1 year, considering they've passed the aptitude tests for those 3 particular subjects. Then on the 2nd year, they get to pick the one that they enjoyed the most. And learn the extra theories and skills on the job.
This would allow people to get a feel of what they like doing and what they don't like doing, and which boss they get along with etc. Without wasting time studying for a degree, only to not be able to find a job for that field or... worse... found out they no longer enjoy that subject.
It would also add productivity to the workforce in general. And decrease unemployment after high school.

After 3 years of learning on the job, they would get a qualification and they would go to a higher income and start to pay more tax. And if they want to change jobs, then they would have to start from minimal wage again. But they would be able to get into a job immediately, and they don't need to have a "qualification" beforehand.


Unemployment mainly comes from people being either (a) too lazy to work because the government will pay them to not work more than they would make if they worked, or (b) not taking a job because it is "beneath" them because they feel entitled to everything. Giving someone the choice you go into wouldn't solve unemployment at all. The government just needs to stop paying for people being too lazy and maybe they will get jobs. Then I don't have to be stuck paying 40% of my paycheck on people sitting at home watching TV.

My view is the government needs to step out of the work-force payroll and employees will get paid what they feel is worth it to them. Minus government aid and people WILL take low pay jobs, but they will quickly want to look for work elsewhere to make more and more all while getting more skills to get paid even more.

Yea I agree somewhat, some people are unemployed due to other reasons. A lot of it is from lazyness but sometimes there is some technicality like a mistake they did in the past or a disability, or maybe they have some sort of social anxiety.
Report to Moderator



Report to Moderator eh? My Post? My post didn't break any rules at all.

I understand people with disability, but I believe Social Security taxes covers them. Social Anxiety is a load of crap. I don't want to pay for people who claim to fear being around others as an excuse as you can be a stocker or dish washer, etc. Now, with the internet they can even contract work from home. There is zero excuse for anyone with "social anxiety" to freeload.
5064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

Khaltazar wrote:


PurpleDjango wrote:


Khaltazar wrote:


GayAsianBoy wrote:

Idealistically, I would want some sort of government that is focused on individuals and individual's needs and goals. After people finish high school, they have the choice of going into 3 jobs of their choosing for 1 year, considering they've passed the aptitude tests for those 3 particular subjects. Then on the 2nd year, they get to pick the one that they enjoyed the most. And learn the extra theories and skills on the job.
This would allow people to get a feel of what they like doing and what they don't like doing, and which boss they get along with etc. Without wasting time studying for a degree, only to not be able to find a job for that field or... worse... found out they no longer enjoy that subject.
It would also add productivity to the workforce in general. And decrease unemployment after high school.

After 3 years of learning on the job, they would get a qualification and they would go to a higher income and start to pay more tax. And if they want to change jobs, then they would have to start from minimal wage again. But they would be able to get into a job immediately, and they don't need to have a "qualification" beforehand.


Unemployment mainly comes from people being either (a) too lazy to work because the government will pay them to not work more than they would make if they worked, or (b) not taking a job because it is "beneath" them because they feel entitled to everything. Giving someone the choice you go into wouldn't solve unemployment at all. The government just needs to stop paying for people being too lazy and maybe they will get jobs. Then I don't have to be stuck paying 40% of my paycheck on people sitting at home watching TV.

My view is the government needs to step out of the work-force payroll and employees will get paid what they feel is worth it to them. Minus government aid and people WILL take low pay jobs, but they will quickly want to look for work elsewhere to make more and more all while getting more skills to get paid even more.

Yea I agree somewhat, some people are unemployed due to other reasons. A lot of it is from lazyness but sometimes there is some technicality like a mistake they did in the past or a disability, or maybe they have some sort of social anxiety.
Report to Moderator



Report to Moderator eh? My Post? My post didn't break any rules at all.

I understand people with disability, but I believe Social Security taxes covers them. Social Anxiety is a load of crap. I don't want to pay for people who claim to fear being around others as an excuse as you can be a stocker or dish washer, etc. Now, with the internet they can even contract work from home. There is zero excuse for anyone with "social anxiety" to freeload.

I copied the "Report to moderator button" by accident lol

Also when I mentioned Social Anxiety, there is no way to Freeload off it. I meant it as it making it harder to work or find work, but I see your point it is something you should get over.
23037 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

PurpleDjango wrote:


josef_k wrote:



I did not mean rationing of food like what most country's do, mine would have it based on your metabolism, 3 meals a day and a snack. In order for a true Socialism to work everyone would have to be of the mind to work hard so everyone benefits. They must not be forced to do this because that is slavery, one way to ensure they are 'of a mind' to work hard is to raise them to be like that.

When I was a child my mother told me "If you work hard at something the better the result". That has been what I tried to do all my life, and if everyone was raised with a similar mentality, then the world would be a more productive place.

This is not a perfect system, because no two people are the same, even if raised under the same conditions. And in my 'government' it would be run by the people, with laws set in place to guard against corruption and usurping power.


It's a job persuading people though? The closet I've got is where they'll agree with me, but say it can only happen hundreds of years in the future. But why not now?

As you say, the upbringing would be a big help, before school sets people in their ways.


Yea persuading people is often hard, but that is why you start a country with a few dozen family's of similar ideals, and start from there. Might take a few century's but you eventually would become a nation, then you would have children all brought up the same way instead of starting with thousands/millions of people who don't care to work if they get things for free anyways.



That's an interesting idea. It's reminded me of the Kibbutz in Israel. I only know of them, and don't anything about them. I think I'll have a read up on them.
5064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 5/2/15

josef_k wrote:


PurpleDjango wrote:


josef_k wrote:



I did not mean rationing of food like what most country's do, mine would have it based on your metabolism, 3 meals a day and a snack. In order for a true Socialism to work everyone would have to be of the mind to work hard so everyone benefits. They must not be forced to do this because that is slavery, one way to ensure they are 'of a mind' to work hard is to raise them to be like that.

When I was a child my mother told me "If you work hard at something the better the result". That has been what I tried to do all my life, and if everyone was raised with a similar mentality, then the world would be a more productive place.

This is not a perfect system, because no two people are the same, even if raised under the same conditions. And in my 'government' it would be run by the people, with laws set in place to guard against corruption and usurping power.


It's a job persuading people though? The closet I've got is where they'll agree with me, but say it can only happen hundreds of years in the future. But why not now?

As you say, the upbringing would be a big help, before school sets people in their ways.


Yea persuading people is often hard, but that is why you start a country with a few dozen family's of similar ideals, and start from there. Might take a few century's but you eventually would become a nation, then you would have children all brought up the same way instead of starting with thousands/millions of people who don't care to work if they get things for free anyways.



That's an interesting idea. It's reminded me of the Kibbutz in Israel. I only know of them, and don't anything about them. I think I'll have a read up on them.


I searched it on the Wiki, it is a combination of Socialism and Zionism(The restablisment of the jewish homeland). Anyways I based my 'Government' off of the ways of the Native Americans. They shared everything with each other, and all worked for the betterment of their tribe.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.