If you were in charge...
POSTED BY: SoupCatcher
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 3, 2005 08:30
VIEWED: 14890
PAGE 7 of 8
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 peop
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME