How would YOU change the US

[davemata]

If you had the power to implement change, what would you change and how would you do it?

Disband the executive branch and put them individually on trial for treason.

Restore the laws to what is outlined in the constitution, but abolish the republican, installing myself as fearless leader. I would also change my name to Kim Long duc Dong Illin'.

Everyone would be on a government sponsored Ol' Yeller medical plan. People who maintained less than a marksman competency with firearms would be shipped out of the country after having their citizenship stripped from them.

Everyone would eat brussels sprouts.

I would put the Kardashians on trial for making America dumber.

I would be assassinated, but what a ride it would be.

 

[davemata]

In my America v. 2.0:
- Drug testing and means testing for all government aid
- Flat federal sales tax on all non food purchases; states may create their own sales tax
- Mandatory federal government budget not to exceed 12% of GDP
- Cap all federal salaries at 2x national average income
- Cap all government benefits for individuals at 2x national poverty level (exception of military service 2x national average income)
- Cap liability damages for litigation and create penalties for 'nuisance suits'
- If military force is to be used, it will be used fully and harshly. Don't wake the sleeping dragon.
- Immigration should be done in a reasonable time and includes a 5 year probationary period where annual checks ensure the immigrant is a productive member of society. Job, tax paying etc before given a right to vote.
- Incentives for voting. 90+% voter participation should be the goal

I'm going to see you, and raise you a little. I think you're on to something good, but only taking a half measure.
In America v2.1:
- Drug and means testing for everything. (Aid, access to infrastructure, voting, even purchases at the market.)
- Third failed drug test earns the failing person a 230 grain nap.
- No sales tax.
- Mandatory Federal government budget not to exceed 6% of GDP, with the government running at a basic level required, but not engaging in infrastructure development, national defense beyond a small training corps to train the populace. This also means police and fire are no long "free" from the .gov.
- All federal salaries start at minimum wage, and max at 60k.
- All government benefits for non government workers are capped at 4 weeks total per calendar year, and the onus is on the community to care for anything beyond that.
- Nuisance suits will be granted a 230 grain nap. Failing parties in civil suits may face jail time in order to compensate the courts for time lost by trying the case.
- Military force will only be used in defense, and all citizens over the age of 14 are members of the defense force. Service in defense of the country is mandatory, and "conscientious objectors" will be tried for treason.
- Immigration will be fully reformed, and citizenship will no longer be a right for all, but a right earned through education and having a good career history. As such, any non-citizen will be subject to removal from the country at any time for any reason. Service in defense of the country in time of invasion may make gaining citizenship easier.
- If you do not vote, you face a minimum jail sentence of 1 month, and disqualification from the use of all government benefits for a period of at least 1 year.

 

[dmancornell]

Wouldn't have expected so many armchair fascists on a pro-2A forum, LOL.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

When tyranny rules it's necessary for the people to get a little extreme.. the worse the tyranny and abuses the harder the backlash

 

[davemata]

Heh, not so much fascism, just a strong desire to do it right.

C'mon, have a little fun with the idea.

 

[Jamie6.5]

I'm finding it REALLY odd that this thread is now 4.5 pages long, and nearly every suggestion results in giving the U.S. Government more power, not less.

I say, back off on government's power, allow for more Darwinian results out of life in the U.S., and put greater emphasis on "user determined outcome" in terms of human interactions.

And before we hears the howls of "That's not FAIR!" and "What about the less fortunate?" Please remember that the founders promised a land of opportunity, and never mentioned outcome.
If "fairness" is to be extended to ALL, and not just a few, then the dotgov needs to get thehelloutoftheway not intervene in every problem.
The "less fortunate" tend to become "more accomplished" through greater motivation and opportunity.

As an example, consider the "official" language issue. Before the dotgov became the ultimate arbiter, immigrants to the U.S. learned the language ASAP after arriving, so they could compete (see Darwin reference above).
Since then, the government has "leveled the playing field" by dictating that immigrants MUST be afforded accommodations even if they can't communicate effectively.

Thus giving rise to "diversity" that serves fewer and fewer people because of various language barriers.

Respect for one another, as well as for authority, must be earned, as it can't be legislated, despite how hard the statists have tried.
Authority is the first to lose respect when it over-applies itself.
In addition, (for example) the rapist sees no threat when the dotgov says a woman can't carry a gun, so he isn't required to respect the woman or the law, if he knows he can get away with rape.
He knows if he gets shot, the gov authority is on his side.
But if she's exercising her right to carry, and the dotgov places no restrictions on her right to self defense, he respects her, and leaves her alone.
It doesn't take too many urges before the problem no longer exists (READ: breathes).

Sorry if I disrupted you guys' little "luv-the-guv" fest, but that's how I see it.
One thing said multiple times that I do agree with, is the idea of kicking the U.N. off our soil.
It would be interesting to see how long it would last in,... Zimbabwe for instance, without adopting a completely fascist-militaristic posture in it's efforts to survive.


Carry on!

 

[davemata]

(Now, I grant that this may be a stupid comment, because I lack a grasp of their history, but...)

WTF the UN ever do for us?

 

[dmancornell]

Heh, not so much fascism, just a strong desire to do it right.

C'mon, have a little fun with the idea.

Dunno, murdering people because they enjoy a spliff or forcing people to serve the state sounds like fascism to me.

 

[davemata]

First sounds like a good shoot. Second, I'd rather have them serve me, but if I AM the state, then that's fine.

 

[dmancornell]

First sounds like a good shoot.

Fascist confirmed.

 

[davemata]

Yeah? your mom.

ETA - Before you get all uppity, and "blood of tyrants, feed the tree" blah blah. Ask yourself... could he really be serious, or is my sarcasm meter busted?

 

[dmancornell]

Yeah? your mom.

ETA - Before you get all uppity, and "blood of tyrants, feed the tree" blah blah. Ask yourself... could he really be serious, or is my sarcasm meter busted?

Hard to tell, since I have actually met people in real life who seriously propose the murder of drug users.

 

[davemata]

It's pot, without it, my industry probably wouldn't exist, and the same goes for most of the tech industry, and most science, and probably a good portion of law enforcement work as well.

Make it legal, and the whole "OMG it's taboo!" part goes away. Then, make it so businesses and business owners can make the choice to do business with the users, abusers, and junkies or not.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Hard to tell, since I have actually met people in real life who seriously propose the murder of drug users.

I believe in ending the life of some drug users.
Take that slimeball meth-head that stole my neighbor's outboard motor to support his habit for instance.
If my neighbor had shot him in the act of committing burglary it wouldn't have bothered me. My neighbor worked hard for the cash to buy that motor, (down payment) and hadn't even paid it off.
Instead, the dotgov slaps the meth-head on the wrist and enrolls him in a 12 step.
And he rips-off my stereo/outboard/chainsaw/hunting rifle next year, or the year after, and meth is still the problem, and we're still not allowed to shoot him without dire consequences in our lives.
That's as wrong as it gets.

But if someone wants to spend their life on the couch smoking spliffs and watching the world go past their window, that's okay.
Right up until they get behind the wheel, impaired due to smoking said spliff, and kill a car-load of kids out on a double date.
Then the kids' moms and dads should get the opportunity to exercise their right to retribution/restitution.
More advocacy for "user determined outcome," and less dotgov intervention is a good thing in my book.

If drug users end up dead because they screwed up due to impaired judgement, oh well!

 

[locobob]

I believe in ending the life of some drug users.
Take that slimeball meth-head that stole my neighbor's outboard motor to support his habit for instance.
If my neighbor had shot him in the act of committing burglary it wouldn't have bothered me. My neighbor worked hard for the cash to buy that motor, (down payment) and hadn't even paid it off.
Instead, the dotgov slaps the meth-head on the wrist and enrolls him in a 12 step.
And he rips-off my stereo/outboard/chainsaw/hunting rifle next year, or the year after, and meth is still the problem, and we're still not allowed to shoot him without dire consequences in our lives.
That's as wrong as it gets.

But if someone wants to spend their life on the couch smoking spliffs and watching the world go past their window, that's okay.
Right up until they get behind the wheel, impaired due to smoking said spliff, and kill a car-load of kids out on a double date.
Then the kids' moms and dads should get the opportunity to exercise their right to retribution/restitution.
More advocacy for "user determined outcome," and less dotgov intervention is a good thing in my book.

If drug users end up dead because they screwed up due to impaired judgement, oh well!

You should read J.S. Mill's "On Liberty". Mill spends an entire chapter struggling to find the balance between the idea of rights ending at the tip of someone else's nose and the societal dangers of drunkenness. Great book.

 

[mkwerx]

Hm. Interesting topic.

#1 change - remove the stipulation in the constitution that TREATIES are the highest law of the land. A treaty with foreign bodies over-rides anything else codified in the constitution or set of laws. That means that we citizens could be stripped of our rights by treaty. Unlikely right now, but still possible.

#2 a constitutional amendment requiring congress to maintain a balanced budget with no deficit spending. Since citizens must live within their means - the government should too.

#3 axe the US Department of Education, US Department of Transportation, and other agencies which are all bureaucratic nightmares and don't actually "do" what their name implies. Make states responsible for educating their children, funding/building highways, etc. Shift these agencies functions to the states, where they belong.

#4 dissolve the Department of Homeland Security. Consolidate the various federal law enforcement agencies into a single, streamlined agency.

#5 dissolve the BATFE. Repeal the NFA, CGA, and executive orders limiting manufacture and possession of weapons.

#6 legalize MJ and tax the **** out of it

#7 term limits for all federal justices, including supreme. 2 terms of 6 years max and you're out.

#8 term limits for all senators and representatives - two terms and you're done.

#9 end all federal welfare programs and leave it up to individual states and private charities.

#10 consolidate individual intelligence gathering agencies into a single agency.

#11 repeal the Patriot Acts

#12 leave the UN and order their headquarters be moved out of US territorial bounds

#13 mandatory vote-in-person for all Federal elections, except for active duty military personnel deployed overseas. Require that voters must show valid state issued ID to vote.

#14 constitutional amendment to mandate a 60% minimum majority to enact laws

#15 constitutional amendment limiting proposed bills to 100 pages or less in length, and requiring the leaders of the House of Reps and Senate to read into record the exact wording of any proposed bills before they may be voted upon. (no more 800 page Obamacare bills with god-knows-what buried inside them that never get read by the people voting on them)

#16 eliminate personal income tax and replace it with a national 5% to 10% consumer sales tax on all items except for raw food and petroleum fuels - which would have no federal tax. constitutional cap at 10% on the sales tax to avoid over burdening the tax payers.

#17 Suspend all foreign aid

#18 Deportation of all "undocumented workers" aka illegal immigrants, unconditionally, including those currently housed in prisons. Streamline legal immigration - a background check + finger printing to get a visa. Citizenship would require becoming fluent in English, and a clean background check.


These are just a few things I'd change - mostly intended to limit Federal government bloat and intrusion into the affairs of states and individual citizens.

 

[Father of four]

"#7 term limits for all federal justices, including supreme. 2 terms of 6 years max and you're out. "

I love that one!

 

[Father of four]

Another great one would be to end Property Taxes.

It just isn't right for a person to pay off their property and home but have to continue to pay taxes on it for many years later.

 

[Sincere]

I say, back off on government's power, allow for more Darwinian results out of life in the U.S., and put greater emphasis on "user determined outcome" in terms of human interactions.

And before we hears the howls of "That's not FAIR!" and "What about the less fortunate?" Please remember that the founders promised a land of opportunity, and never mentioned outcome.
If "fairness" is to be extended to ALL, and not just a few, then the dotgov needs to get thehelloutoftheway not intervene in every problem.
The "less fortunate" tend to become "more accomplished" through greater motivation and opportunity.

I generally agree with what you're getting at here.... I wonder how you feel about estate taxing?

This "social Darwinism" scheme gets skewed when children of largely hard-working, rich people get a free pass from their ancestors success. What does a meritocracy mean when your rich parents can afford you tutors, private schools, opportunities and social/professional networking that other individuals aren't privy to due to their parents level of success or failure?

In other words, in your fantasy, would the children of the rich get rewarded for their birth? Or would they have to "earn it"?

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Another great one would be to end Property Taxes.

It just isn't right for a person to pay off their property and home but have to continue to pay taxes on it for many years later.

Agreed, it is one of the worst taxes and very anti freedom, but that is a state level issue. The nice thing about the old America is if one state was onerous you could relocate.. the bankster conspirators running the show today want all states leveled so there is no escape/retreat left