chuck kottke Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 The Root causes of economic distress and market roller-coaster I'm pretty sure are mostly the result of the corrupting influence of big money in politics, as the big money buys results that often hurt us all in the end. So to fix it - I've added a few request to the letters I'm writing to Congressmen here in the US: >> No negative campaign ads. Campaign ads intended to be defamatory or intentionally misleading should not be allowed to air. To assure that campaign ads are honest, a body comprised of 12 ordinary citizens chosen at random, and selected in a manner similar to choosing jurists for jury duty, shall examine each ad in a rapid manner before it is allowed to air, and decide based on it's validity (honesty) if it should or should not be allowed to air. Given the inability of the courts to act in a timely manner concerning libelous or slanderous political speech & print, this seems essential. << >> In order to assure a free press, and a return to an open public square, media consolidation must come to an end, and anti-trust laws enforced to break up the current media consolidation. It is essential to our nation's trusted liberties and governance to have have a press that can operate independently enough from ownership, so that the news is as factual and unbiased in its content & presentation as is possible. << Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Trying to eradicate bias either in campaign advertising or media isn't a good goal, because it causes people to not think for themselves - they just assume a source is right, and they stick with it. What we need to do instead is abolish the public school system and allow for "round voting". Getting rid of any campaign finance laws should also become a top priority. Here's why: 1. The Public school system preaches the gospel of statism, which teaches children that the government deserves credit for all sorts of things - from the freeing of the slaves, to the ending of the Depression, to the progressive movement... children are taught that if only they elect the right leaders, they'll be fine. Absurd! Government should be viewed with maximum skepticism, because at its root is the application of force, which entails violence. Anything else isn't "liberal" education. 2. Round voting allows you to vote FOR a candidate, rather than against a candidate (ie "lesser of two evils" problem is ended). Let's say your ballot looks like this: Adolf Hitler ® Darth Vader (D) Thomas Jefferson (L) Currently Hitler and Vader are neck-and-neck in your state, which is a swing state. So you are afraid that by voting for Jefferson, you are "throwing away" your vote. Round voting means you can choose Jefferson as your first choice. If Jefferson doesn't win, your ballot can still count because you chose Hitler as your second choice. Ideally this would let people vote third-party without having to worry about helping another candidate by not contributing to his opponent. Jefferson has a shot at winning, but if Hitler is elected only the continent is destroyed, instead of the planet. 3. Campaign finance laws require massive hurdles for average citizens to overcome in order to run for an office. Non-compliance with any of these laws means huge fines or forfeiting your campaign. The rich and well-connected will always find ways around them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMagpie Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Socialism is the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Socialism is the answer. Care to elaborate? How do you define socialism? I would argue that socialism is the cause of the problem. It's strange to me that collectivists think that if we just have the right combination of rules and leaders, a society will function properly. That's naivete of the highest order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Cadet Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 ^I'm guessing he was being sarcastic...? The problem with any system is that it is a system and it involves people. Therefore it is automatically flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMagpie Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 ^I'm guessing he was being sarcastic...? The problem with any system is that it is a system and it involves people. Therefore it is automatically flawed. Yeah I was joking. There are elements of socialism and capitalism I like and disslike. I however am not a big fan of the greed that surround capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I don't get why Capitalism is considered a "greed-based" system. Aren't socialists more greedy than Capitalists? After all, they take peoples' money at gunpoint, whereas capitalists make money through the free exchange of value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMagpie Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I just find that capitlism is so filled with consumerism and is detrimental to the environment. Something like the atmosphere is just viewed as a place for pollution to be dumped without any economic consequence. If something doesn't have value to humans and cant be used for profit it has no value under capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I disagree, I think capitalism can place value on environmental factors. Look at the current situation where a government owns land, and a business wants to strip-mine it for a mineral. The government will then sell the "mining rights" to that company, and they will disregard the environment while they extract the mineral. But under a capitalist system, the land would be owned by either an individual or another company. Here, there is incentive for the land owner to maintain its value even after it has been mined, because it can later be sold for another purpose - for instance, as a place to build homes. Nobody likes pollution even in a capitalist society because it causes the value of property to drop. People would buy insurance against it, and the insurance companies would be incentivized to prevent polluters from entering the area by buying surrounding land, or at least moderate their pollution output with financial incentives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 I have a easy fix for our economic mess, arrest most of congress and Bush for treason....Elect new politicians into office not affiliated with the two main parties and their money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMagpie Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 ^ I like that idea too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffire Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 I have a easy fix for our economic mess, arrest most of congress and Bush for treason....Elect new politicians into office not affiliated with the two main parties and their money! Congress's approval rating is something like 13%, and we're getting ready to re-elect 95% of them. What's the definition of insanity again? Doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now