REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

If you were in charge...

POSTED BY: SOUPCATCHER
UPDATED: Monday, May 2, 2005 22:30
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 11726
PAGE 2 of 2

Friday, April 15, 2005 9:50 PM

SOUPCATCHER


Finn: It's a definite bonus to have at least one person on a team who's always thinking about the big picture but I could see how having the entire team composed of big picture people could be problematic. Some portions of the design process we understand better than others - although we've definitely gotten our own back from the ass-kicking we took in the seventies from the Japanese automobile manufacturers (Concurrent engineering. Who knew?). But every time I listen to a conference talk where someone presents their very own brand new boxes-and-arrows model of the design process without any empirical basis I just feel like screaming.

Signym: I'll hold off until next weekend. Gives me a chance to come up with some more myself .

Kirikoli: No inconvenience at all. I'll just try to pull out some descriptive sentences from what you've posted.

---------------------
Next up: Early "Nutcrusher" Jubal and the Firebuggers

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 16, 2005 6:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Thanks, Soup!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, April 18, 2005 5:15 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


TAXATION

The Estate Tax will be repealed.

Current income tax law will be completely round-filed, in favor of a flat tax for individuals, businesses and corporations. All corporations will be taxed at 20%. All individuals will be taxed at 15%.

The Social Security cap will be reduced to $50,000/year. All Social Security will be completely privatized. A Social Security emergency law will be established to come into effect at the onset of the any economic Depressions.

Lazy people will not be eligible for welfare. Individuals on welfare must demonstrate an ability to be self supporting. Welfare is not a right; it is privilege granted to people who can use it get through hard times.


-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, April 18, 2005 5:18 PM

DANFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I would make gun ownership contingent on reading comprehension!



Good start. I would make gun ownership contingent upon 3 additional things:

1) Being a legal adult

2) Being a law-abiding citizen (i.e., not a convicted felon... non-violent misdemeanors don't count)

3) Attending a course in gun operation/safety and passing both a written and a practical test.

Personally, I have no problem with private gun ownership. I own a few myself. We require people to be trained in the use of motor vehicles because of the potential for injury and abuse. It makes perfect sense to require the same thing for gun ownership... for the same reasons.

Beyond that, the gov't specifically (and society in general) should have no skin in the game until the gun owner uses the gun improperly. We trust trained people with cars until they abuse them... should be the the same for gun owners.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2005 3:39 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I agree. (I owned a few guns myself and used to be pretty good at plinking until my eyes went bad. Old age... sigh... it's everything it was cracked up to be, and more.)

To continue:

I would put pretty stringent CAFE standards in place (fuel efficiency standards). We burn up 60% of our oil just moving things from place to place.

I would require that ALL state voting procedures be 100% auditable, and require that the process of voting not be performed by for-profit corporations.

I would require that the airwaves (television, radio) provide at least an hour of free per month time for each valid Presidential, Vice-Presidential, Senatorial and gubenatorial candidate for three months before the election. And maybe we could impose a moratorium on advertising one week before the election, which is usually when political races get plain hysterical.

Any entity that has gathered more than a threshold of information ("X" GB) on individuals in a database must inform said individuals of the database, provide each individual with a list of the information- updated yearly- and provide said individuals with opportunity to correct/ annotate the information. This will prevent DBs from being constructed for trivial reasons. Also, entities that maintain such DBs are required to keep them secure with a unix-like firewall, and ensure physical security of drives, backup tapes etc.

I would REQUIRE that every member of Congress read- by themselves- every single word of every bill that they vote on. Not only would this have eliminated the Patriot Act- which most members didn't get a chance to read before they voted- it would also eliminate unecessary bills and overcomplex "omnibus" bills.

I would renegotiate our international trade agreements to exempt non-signatories like states/provinces, cities etc. from their provisions.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2005 6:28 PM

MONTANAGIRL


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I would REQUIRE that every member of Congress read- by themselves- every single word of every bill that they vote on.


You're assuming that they can read.

(Sorry, I'm just a little bit irritated with almost all elected officials at the moment.)

If you can be an idiot, I can be an idiot. - D'Argo

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 9:57 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Just a bit of musing here....

One of the things that annoys the heck out of me is our laws. If you look at them, they're so very complicated! It seems as if the very first thing that happens when there is a problem is that somebody decides to write a law. Polly's law. Megan's law. The Brady Gun Control Bill. The Energy Bill. Aggravated assault v manslaughter v murder v murder with special circumstance v murder and mayhem. I guess that's to be expected when 99% of our legislators are... well... lawyers. If all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

But there are issues where yet another law... or another refinement to an existing law... is not the best solution. I've been involved in our agency's rule-writing process, and I can tell you from experience that laws, rules, and regulations are blunt instruments of change.

Got problems with drug addiction and addict-related crime? Well, we could write YET ANOTHER LAW, or we could invest in research on breaking addiction, effective education, and many many more treatment beds. Do we have a pollution problem? Perhaps contracts, technical guidance, infrastructural investment and land-use policies would get better results.

Another source of unecessary complexity is that laws are often enacted piecemeal, without much consideration without how they affect- or are affected by- other laws. On the other hand, when a BIG problem is addressed, it often turns into a monolithic nightmare- look at the Energy Bill. The Energy Bill is like Microsoft software- everything is built into one giant program. What a mess. Perhaps good law-making could be like good software- everything is modularized, and the interfaces between modules all have to meet some technical specification.

'Nough wild-hair musing.

---------------------

Oh, and I would eliminate the death penalty. DNA is showing that many convictions are erroneous. what do you say if you've taken someone's life in error- oops?? Sorry??

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 10:45 AM

CONNORFLYNN


I agree to a degree Signym on the Death Penalty Issue. Someone SHOULD get the death penalty if they are proven beyond any doubt to have been guilty of a capital crime. I.e. Mass Murder, murder of a child etc..etc..

In other words..if the person admits guilt or is caught with the proverbial smoking gun. Light em up.

DNA evidence is bit more tricky IMHO and much easier to plant or manipulate.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 11:32 AM

CHRISISALL


Connorflynn, I'll go ya one better, if the evidence in a capital crime case is inconclusive, and the suspect says he done it, grant his wish! Then continue investigatin' in case he was lyin' 'cause he was nuts. Anyone doesn't want to be here should be allowed to leave (permanently). And hopefully before they take one, or more, with them.

The stern Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 12:01 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Oddly, I happen to know someone who was charged with murder. "Don" happened to be a first-class jerk: stealing the family rent money for drugs, dragging his wife and kids thru h*ll, being hounded and beaten up by drug dealers who were just a wee but pissed off at not being paid. A charming (or sometimes not-so-charming) self-centered liar.

I got an eyeful of how the system works since I was in touch with his wife. The detective had an idee fixe- I really don't know why- that "Don" was the criminal. He wanted to solve the case. The DA wanted successful conviction to rbing up their stats. Somewhere along the line, all kinds of contradictory evidence was trashed- the fact that the scene of the crime was 60 miles away from where "Don" lived, that his wife said he was with her at the time, that it was a homosexual murder and that "Don" may have been a lot of things but gay wa definitely not one of them. So "Don" was yanked from a decent-paying job and cooled his heels in jail for six months while the lab worked down their backlog of DNA. It made me realize how driven the system is to convict someone- ANYONE- regardless of the evidence.

But even if the evidence is incontrovertable, I don't think the death penalty works. It doesn't deter crime, because the people who commit themost serious crimes are generally not in their right minds anyway. Most death-row prisoners are brain-damaged in some way. These are NOT people who consider the consequences before they act.

Now, where the death penalty would REALLY deter crime in white-collar crime. THOSE people think things through. Ken Lay might have not been os cavlaier with people's penions if he knew he might swing at the end of a rope because of his malfeasance!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 5:24 PM

DANFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Just a bit of musing here....

Perhaps good law-making could be like good software- everything is modularized, and the interfaces between modules all have to meet some technical specification.



A fascinating concept... applying the currently popular modular engineering technique would result in "object-oriented lawmaking." Major classes of law. Subclasses as children of each class. A method call (in object oriented speak) is equivalent to taking a specific case (with its unique parameters) to the appropriate law class and seeing how it is interpreted within that law class.

Advantages: forces clear concise definition of the important parameters for any given violoation of a law with a clear interpretation of the consequence of violating that law with the given parameters of that violation... (e.g., things like premeditation, number of victims, suffering of victims during/after the crime, etc.).

Disadvantage: potential for truly blind justice... less of the "human touch" in interpreting law.

Just some blue sky thinking of my own...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 21, 2005 2:44 AM

PIRATEJENNY


Quote:

Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Quote:

Originally posted by piratejenny:
Quote:

Just out of curiosity what would that "Basic Standard of Living" mean exactly?


a basic standard of living would simply be that even the poorest would have decent housing, food, and healthcare

the standard wouldn't be homelessnes or third world living conditions..everyone would be gauranteed at least a decent safe clean place to live, food, and healthcare!!


the quality of a persons life, would actually mean something!!!



Okies..sounds good:) A few questions first:

1) What constitutes Decent housing and food though? After all each person has their own definition of decent food and housing. If Bill Gates or Bill Clinton had to eat the food I eat and Live in the House I live in..they would both commit suicide. If I had to eat the food and live in the House that Richard Simmons lives in, I would probably commit suicide.

2) How much space will EACH housing unit take up? Will we have to clear forests to build these decent houses? Who exactly gets to build these houses? Will there be grass? Do we get to have pets too? Can we say no to having pets?

3) Does each person get their own room AND bathroom in this decent housing? What do we get in these rooms?

4) What amenities are we all entitled to? Big Screen TV WITH Digital Cable? Surround Sound?

5) Washer and Dryer? Big or economy?

6) Computers in each room? Dell, Gateway or Alienware?

7) Dish Washer? Human washed or electronic?

8) Do we also each get a Decent vehicle to drive? My 2005 Grand Prix GTP is pretty decent , Though I could really really get into one of those new Ford GT's

9) What do I have to do and how often, to get this decent Housing and Food? The less the better my Papa always says..

10) What can I have that noone else is entitled to? What do I have to pay to have this entitlement?

PS.. Nachos with Beef and peppers hopefully shows up on your list of decent food?! *begs and pleads




where do people live now, No you wouldn't necessarily have to clear any forest new housing could easily be built, or taken over....not everyone would have to live in basic housing units or in a basic housing unit program...its simply that as a country we would have a standard of what is exceptable living and everyone would at the least be garunteed that standard!!

Germany has a simular program!!!

as for space, I believe we already have a standard for how much space is exceptable per person, that same standard would apply.for example 4 people are allowed to a two bed room dwelling!!!

amenities would not necessarily be included,computers, washers and dryers things like that..no not included!!

I didn't say anything about getting vehicles!!

I didn't say it would be free, I said it would be garunteed, and payment would be based upon income

for those who earned good money, they wouldn't even have to give the program a thought, but if they ever found themselves in hard times they would know that there was a basic standard of living that they could count on...

and that it would be safe clean decent housing, food , and healthcare, certainly not homelessness or thirdworld living conditions!!



Also as long as we are doing if I were in charge

I would build the 1rst modern futuristic city in the united states it would be a cross between something out of the LOTR, like Rivendale and an alliance city in Fifefly

I think America is ugly...not the natural beauty of America..but our buildings and such there just isn't anything breath taking or inspiring, we don't have any castles or cathedrals or manors ..mostly everything is just boring and ugly..so I would definetly do something like that if I were in charge!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 21, 2005 6:16 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Pirate- you have a good point. In fact, you have several good points. Our cities are butt-ugly.

The one city that seem to have gotten around the whole problem of ever-expanding waistlines of suburbs and decayed inner city is Portland, which has essentially drawn a line around the city perimter and said- "Beyond this we will not build". The land values within that perimeter are high, the city has become a master at infill and renovation. You will find very little underutlized space in the city, which is beautiful pretty much throughout, and intra-city mass transit is do-able because of the limited geography it has to serve. Living as I do in el Lay, I can't help but marvel at the suburbs that are developing 100 miles away from the city, while buildings in the city go empty. High gas prices and gridlock will blunt that trend, but it would be nice to see some proactive planning on the part of SCAG (Southern California Assn of Governments)

So, I guess if I were in chareg, I would require all metropolitan areas of a million to come up with regional (multicounty, if necessary) development plans.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2005 3:58 AM

CONNORFLYNN


Quote:

Originally posted by piratejenny:

where do people live now, No you wouldn't necessarily have to clear any forest new housing could easily be built, or taken over....not everyone would have to live in basic housing units or in a basic housing unit program...its simply that as a country we would have a standard of what is exceptable living and everyone would at the least be garunteed that standard!!

Germany has a simular program!!!

as for space, I believe we already have a standard for how much space is exceptable per person, that same standard would apply.for example 4 people are allowed to a two bed room dwelling!!!

amenities would not necessarily be included,computers, washers and dryers things like that..no not included!!

I didn't say anything about getting vehicles!!



It wouldn't be fair if everyone didn't have a decent vehicle.

Quote:


I didn't say it would be free, I said it would be garunteed, and payment would be based upon income.



So If I choose not to work, because the pay doesn't meet my personal minimum requirements $250,000 a year, I'm GUARANTEED free "Decent" housing and board?! Sweet!! Sign me up!

Quote:

for those who earned good money, they wouldn't even have to give the program a thought, but if they ever found themselves in hard times they would know that there was a basic standard of living that they could count on...


But what if my house isn't as nice as somebody who doesn't work for a living but has that GUARANTEED housing? I want nice living conditions too!

Quote:

and that it would be safe clean decent housing, food , and healthcare, certainly not homelessness or thirdworld living conditions!!


Who will do this cleaning? Who will be the doctors who give out this healthcare and will they be paid well or will they be required to work for free?


Quote:


Also as long as we are doing if I were in charge

I would build the 1rst modern futuristic city in the united states it would be a cross between something out of the LOTR, like Rivendale and an alliance city in Fifefly

I think America is ugly...not the natural beauty of America..but our buildings and such there just isn't anything breath taking or inspiring, we don't have any castles or cathedrals or manors ..mostly everything is just boring and ugly..so I would definetly do something like that if I were in charge!!



There's nothing like living in a rural community. The people are grounded and much friendlier. There are things like animals,trees, grass, flowers and water bodies free of pollution (except for the occasional cow poo).

I've lived in big cities and hated it. The level of consumerism and angst is unsettling. Not to mention the filth LOL. The cost of housing in big cities is downright ridiculous as well. $1000/month for a 600 sq ft studio apartment in a big city. For $1000/month you can get a house in a rural community.

At any rate PJ, it's a good thought and an honorable one, but completely unrealistic.

SOMEONE will have to pay for these things and someone will ALWAYS be unhappy and declare that living conditions are horrific, whether they are or not. Our welfare system has been abused horrifically and those who could and should benefit from it, don't. I live in NY a.k.a. The Welfare Capital of the world. We have people collecting welfare, that are millionaires. Ever heard of O.D.B.? He collected welfare for months while he was collecting payroll checks, until he got caught. He's just one example.

Then we have those who are referred to as generational Welfare cases.

I come from a Welfare background, born and raised on welfare. My step father was a generational welfare case. We lived for the 1st and 16th of every month, when foodstamps and a small monetary stipend would come. I got my first job when I was 16 and had to turn my paycheck over to my parents, because our welfare checks were pro-rated to account for my income. I had to quit my job because the deductions for working were more then what I made. It is a system that keeps people down and there is really no way to fix it, without education and job creation. Raising the stipend or giving more doesn't change the fact that people AREN'T working and AREN'T required to work.

When you give something to someone that they don't have to earn..it has no value. When you take MORE away from someone when they are earning it..earning it has no value, why bother.

I spent my gradeschool years and highschool years ridiculed because I got "Lunch Tickets" and paid for my food at the grocery store with Food Stamps. I got into fist fights because I didn't dress in the latest fad clothing or couldn't afford to go on trips or participate in sports, because it "cost" money to get the required clothing and gear. My self worth was at an all time low, until I consciously made a choice to break the cycle and moved out of my house and got a real job and worked my ass off to move up. Nothing ever comes for free..ever.

Just as a side note. I spent 12 years working in over 40 different factories because my town had 4 temporary employment companies. I couldn't find a job that would hire permanently. It ended up working out, because I eventually landed an Engineering Position (I'm not a Stoopid person;) ) and worked my way up. I'm no longer with taht company and am in a completely different field, but I got the taste of what it is like to EARN a living wage and found I liked it.

IMHO, rather then GIVING everyone a free income and living, we should make them earn it. To get access to the "DECENT" housing and life, they need to work for it. Let them move in and then put them to work in fields that are appropriate to their intellect and skill level. Educate those who can be educated so that they can fulfill a function in the real world, rather then wasting away waiting for that welfare check to come.

We also need to determine pay scales and set a limit on "Profit Margins". Too many people feel that menial labor is beneath them and OBVIOUSLY the pay isn't good enough. It's against the law to force someone to work a job they don't want to work. Personally, I think the dirtier, less desirable the job, the more pay. The cushier, more desirable the job, the less pay. And work from there.

I'll think of more later LOL.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2005 5:38 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The only way to fairly eliminate benefits is to be able to guarantee a decent-paying full-time job for everyone who is able to work. When we were an agrarian society, finding work was as easy as grabbing a pitchfork. Now, we are dependent on multinational corporations- which crow LOUDLY about creating jobs and quietly take every step possible to create unemployment and reduce wages. Until our corporations can guarantee that, then the government will be forced to step in and protect the corporations *ass by cleaning up the mess.

Even in the situation of "100% employment" there will be people who are UNABLE to work (through temporary illness, disability, or care of family member) or those who are temporarily between jobs. If I were in charge, I would make sure that we have have a good disability insurance as well as temporary unemployment insurance that would not wllow people to fall below a minimum living standard (lower than being employed, so as not to induce people to be unemployed).

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2005 6:58 AM

BLACKOUTNIGHTS


Fun question. How would I make America better? Here goes:

1. The very first thing I'd do is find ways to eliminate the nation's dependance on foreign oil. Offer super tax break incentives to auto-makers, whether they're U.S.A. or foreign cars, to develop automobiles that do not use gasoline and run off energy or whatever. I'd also offer tax breaks for individuals who purchase fuel efficient vehicles.

2. Every Friday would be Firefly day and C-SPAN would broadcast an episode of the show with comments from those involved in the production in between commercials.

3. I'd drop the "sin tax" on beer and tobacco. I'd also make it federal law that restaurants in states where it's illegal to buy beer in stores on Sundays can't sell alcohol at their establishments. You want to sell alcohol on Sundays, then everyone gets that right — and those that buy it at stores can drink it at home and not have to drive.

4. I'd make it a law that Summer Glau and the rest of the Firefly actresses and actors get whatever they want.

5. The Firefly cast would always be subject to the whims of Joss Whedon.

"You're either in or you're out, and I'm playing to the in."—Greg Dulli

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2005 7:48 AM

CONNORFLYNN


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
The only way to fairly eliminate benefits is to be able to guarantee a decent-paying full-time job for everyone who is able to work. When we were an agrarian society, finding work was as easy as grabbing a pitchfork. Now, we are dependent on multinational corporations- which crow LOUDLY about creating jobs and quietly take every step possible to create unemployment and reduce wages. Until our corporations can guarantee that, then the government will be forced to step in and protect the corporations *ass by cleaning up the mess.

Even in the situation of "100% employment" there will be people who are UNABLE to work (through temporary illness, disability, or care of family member) or those who are temporarily between jobs. If I were in charge, I would make sure that we have have a good disability insurance as well as temporary unemployment insurance that would not wllow people to fall below a minimum living standard (lower than being employed, so as not to induce people to be unemployed).



You know I've thought about this a little bit. What constitutes "decent-pay"? Everytime they increase the minimum wage, what happens? The price on consumer items etc..etc.. goes up as well to cover the cost of the wage increase and tack on a little more profit along with some more taxes, after all the higher prices require more taxes to be paid.

I think the issue is - when is enough profit enough? I read somewhere that Oil Companies made BILLIONS of dollars in NET profit last year, yet the cost of fuel (Not just gasoline , but anything Oil related) continues to skyrocket. When the cost of oil goes up, the cost of manufactured items go up and it just snowballs from there.

I have no problem with someone making a profit and with that acquiring wealth. What I have a problem with, is the flagrant abuse and gouging and greed that is developed. I know, its Econ101..Supply VS. Demand blah blah blah. However, when the Demand is normal and a "Fictitious" Supply problem is claimed as the basis for gouging, I'm not sure how we as a people can allow it.

Got off on a little tangent..but the Oil Industry is a good example of how a "Living" wage can go from substantial to no longer a "Living" wage, when everything you purchase to survive goes up in cost by 20% or more and all you get per year is a measily 3% cost of living raise if you are lucky.

I don't think the issue ultimately, is how much people are paid. It's how much items cost..driven by profit hungry corporations.

For instance, I worked as a shift-manager for a Pizza Hut in the early 90's. It cost approximately $1.00 to make a large pan pizza (That was with labor, materials etc..etc.. Pizza Hut supposedly owned the majority of it's suppliers LOL). Each Pizza took approximately 7 mins to cook and 3 mins to put together. A grand Total of 10 mins..with the majority of the work being done by the Oven. Now for this pizza in the early 90's it cost about $12.00..thats 1100% margin per pizza.

Holy Shnikeys and thats not even remotely the worst case scenario for muggings. 2 weeks ago My wife tried to order 2 medium pizzas (different makes each 1 a meat-lover and the other a veggie-lover), they were OUT OF medium pizza pies and offered me larges. It cost me $43.00!!!!! for 2 Large Pizzas with some extra toppings. I immediately called the manager and gave him about 30 seconds to explain the mistake. He said he didnt realize that we had originally wanted 2 mediums and had charged us FULL price. Needless to say, he gave us a $20 credit, but some poor sap might actually pay that price.

We need to put a limit on how much a company can gouge percentage wise period. Then we will find that it is easier to afford to live, if we aren't paying for the 13th yacht for some knucklehead's kid (who will never work a day in their life) to patrol South Beach in.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2005 11:37 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


You bring up an interesting point. Keynes essentially "solved" that problem by introducing the monetary policy of inflation. Busy now, more talk later....

------------------

Oh, I would push for dissolution of the UN Security Council, which resembles the "Polish veto"... which resembles the Polish firing squad (circle).

I can say this bc I'm Polish American. I've heard ALL the Polish jokes!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 23, 2005 9:30 PM

SOUPCATCHER


Hmmm. Doing the categorizing might take longer than I thought. So far there's almost 40 pages at 10 pt font. I'll let you all know how much I get through tomorrow. During the week is pretty packed with that whole real world thing this month.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 24, 2005 6:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Would it help if there were MORE suggestions??? Because I have LOTS more!




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 24, 2005 11:43 PM

SOUPCATCHER


Keep them coming . We're over 100 and counting.

And, since I'm feeling a bit goofy, here's some less serious ones...

1. Filibusters can be stopped by administering a wedgie or bra snap to the person conducting the filibuster - but you have to get to them first. Let's see that minority party play some defense! (I'm talking about you, Senator Byrd. And no foreign objects allowed, Representative Preston Brooks.)

2. Gross offenders of the new MLB drug policy will be traded to the All-Steriod Wiffle Ball League.

3. One White House Press Conference a week will be conducted through the art of mime.

4. All campaigning for national office will be conducted from the sidecar of a motorcycle - which is the only mode of transportation allowed.

5. Every time Microsoft releases a Critical Security Update, Bill Gates gets a spanking.

6. Captured feral cats will be released inside the Fox Executives Office building.

7. One cigarette in each pack will be a joint - cunningly disguised of course.

8. Our foreign policy will be run by Dan Aykroyd and Chevy Chase the same way they did at the end of Spies Like Us . (Yeah, I know Dan's Canadian but we'll make an exception ).

9. Everyone gets to select one person to be temporarily taken out of the gene pool (five year minimum - unisex Norplant gun). But you only get to do this once in your life, so choose wisely.

10. Repeat drunk driving offenders will have to drive a bumper car in the padded drunks-only lane.

11. If your child accidentally shoots anyone with your firearm you lose both index fingers, Yakuza-style.

Okay. I'm winding down now. I feel like I should say, "I'll be here all week" or something like that. But I'm afraid the Sandman is coming, or the hook, or the gong warming up. .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, April 25, 2005 10:25 AM

MONTANAGIRL


Quote:

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
3. One White House Press Conference a week will be conducted through the art of mime.


Or charades. Now that would be fun, having the press corps having to yell out what they think the word or phrase is.

If you can be an idiot, I can be an idiot. - D'Argo

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, April 25, 2005 9:19 PM

SOUPCATCHER


Quote:

Originally posted by montanagirl:
Or charades. Now that would be fun, having the press corps having to yell out what they think the word or phrase is.


Ooh. That's even better .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 2, 2005 10:30 PM

PIRATEJENNY


Quote:

Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Quote:

Originally posted by piratejenny:

where do people live now, No you wouldn't necessarily have to clear any forest new housing could easily be built, or taken over....not everyone would have to live in basic housing units or in a basic housing unit program...its simply that as a country we would have a standard of what is exceptable living and everyone would at the least be garunteed that standard!!

Germany has a simular program!!!

as for space, I believe we already have a standard for how much space is exceptable per person, that same standard would apply.for example 4 people are allowed to a two bed room dwelling!!!

amenities would not necessarily be included,computers, washers and dryers things like that..no not included!!

I didn't say anything about getting vehicles!!



It wouldn't be fair if everyone didn't have a decent vehicle.

Quote:


I didn't say it would be free, I said it would be garunteed, and payment would be based upon income.



So If I choose not to work, because the pay doesn't meet my personal minimum requirements $250,000 a year, I'm GUARANTEED free "Decent" housing and board?! Sweet!! Sign me up!

Quote:

for those who earned good money, they wouldn't even have to give the program a thought, but if they ever found themselves in hard times they would know that there was a basic standard of living that they could count on...


But what if my house isn't as nice as somebody who doesn't work for a living but has that GUARANTEED housing? I want nice living conditions too!

Quote:

and that it would be safe clean decent housing, food , and healthcare, certainly not homelessness or thirdworld living conditions!!


Who will do this cleaning? Who will be the doctors who give out this healthcare and will they be paid well or will they be required to work for free?


Quote:


Also as long as we are doing if I were in charge

I would build the 1rst modern futuristic city in the united states it would be a cross between something out of the LOTR, like Rivendale and an alliance city in Fifefly

I think America is ugly...not the natural beauty of America..but our buildings and such there just isn't anything breath taking or inspiring, we don't have any castles or cathedrals or manors ..mostly everything is just boring and ugly..so I would definetly do something like that if I were in charge!!



There's nothing like living in a rural community. The people are grounded and much friendlier. There are things like animals,trees, grass, flowers and water bodies free of pollution (except for the occasional cow poo).

I've lived in big cities and hated it. The level of consumerism and angst is unsettling. Not to mention the filth LOL. The cost of housing in big cities is downright ridiculous as well. $1000/month for a 600 sq ft studio apartment in a big city. For $1000/month you can get a house in a rural community.

At any rate PJ, it's a good thought and an honorable one, but completely unrealistic.

SOMEONE will have to pay for these things and someone will ALWAYS be unhappy and declare that living conditions are horrific, whether they are or not. Our welfare system has been abused horrifically and those who could and should benefit from it, don't. I live in NY a.k.a. The Welfare Capital of the world. We have people collecting welfare, that are millionaires. Ever heard of O.D.B.? He collected welfare for months while he was collecting payroll checks, until he got caught. He's just one example.

Then we have those who are referred to as generational Welfare cases.

I come from a Welfare background, born and raised on welfare. My step father was a generational welfare case. We lived for the 1st and 16th of every month, when foodstamps and a small monetary stipend would come. I got my first job when I was 16 and had to turn my paycheck over to my parents, because our welfare checks were pro-rated to account for my income. I had to quit my job because the deductions for working were more then what I made. It is a system that keeps people down and there is really no way to fix it, without education and job creation. Raising the stipend or giving more doesn't change the fact that people AREN'T working and AREN'T required to work.

When you give something to someone that they don't have to earn..it has no value. When you take MORE away from someone when they are earning it..earning it has no value, why bother.

I spent my gradeschool years and highschool years ridiculed because I got "Lunch Tickets" and paid for my food at the grocery store with Food Stamps. I got into fist fights because I didn't dress in the latest fad clothing or couldn't afford to go on trips or participate in sports, because it "cost" money to get the required clothing and gear. My self worth was at an all time low, until I consciously made a choice to break the cycle and moved out of my house and got a real job and worked my ass off to move up. Nothing ever comes for free..ever.

Just as a side note. I spent 12 years working in over 40 different factories because my town had 4 temporary employment companies. I couldn't find a job that would hire permanently. It ended up working out, because I eventually landed an Engineering Position (I'm not a Stoopid person;) ) and worked my way up. I'm no longer with taht company and am in a completely different field, but I got the taste of what it is like to EARN a living wage and found I liked it.

IMHO, rather then GIVING everyone a free income and living, we should make them earn it. To get access to the "DECENT" housing and life, they need to work for it. Let them move in and then put them to work in fields that are appropriate to their intellect and skill level. Educate those who can be educated so that they can fulfill a function in the real world, rather then wasting away waiting for that welfare check to come.

We also need to determine pay scales and set a limit on "Profit Margins". Too many people feel that menial labor is beneath them and OBVIOUSLY the pay isn't good enough. It's against the law to force someone to work a job they don't want to work. Personally, I think the dirtier, less desirable the job, the more pay. The cushier, more desirable the job, the less pay. And work from there.

I'll think of more later LOL.




you just don't get it do you!!...
its about putting a value on human beings, not on material things.!!!

not that I have anything against material things , its just that I personally believe that the value of a human life should be placed higher!!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Where is the 25th ammendment when you need it?
Fri, November 22, 2024 00:07 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 21, 2024 23:55 - 7478 posts
Thread of Trump Appointments / Other Changes of Scenery...
Thu, November 21, 2024 22:03 - 40 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 21, 2024 22:03 - 4787 posts
1000 Asylum-seekers grope, rape, and steal in Cologne, Germany
Thu, November 21, 2024 21:46 - 53 posts
Music II
Thu, November 21, 2024 21:43 - 117 posts
Lying Piece of Shit is going to start WWIII
Thu, November 21, 2024 20:56 - 17 posts
Are we in WWIII yet?
Thu, November 21, 2024 20:31 - 18 posts
More Cope: "Donald Trump Has Not Won a Majority of the Votes Cast for President"
Thu, November 21, 2024 19:40 - 7 posts
Biden admin quietly loosening immigration policies before Trump takes office — including letting migrants skip ICE check-ins in NYC
Thu, November 21, 2024 18:18 - 2 posts
All things Space
Thu, November 21, 2024 18:11 - 267 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 21, 2024 17:56 - 4749 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL