We all have these ideas/ opinions at one time or another. Normally when we are annoyed at something we have heard or read. Sometimes from first hand experiences. I was wondering if anyone has any ideas they would like to share?
I don't think it can be anymore than a joke thread in a way.
One of the ideas I read long ago was from the author Robert Sheckley. In one of his books he imagined a government whose seal of office ( worn around their necks at all times) was also an explosive device linked to a biometric voting button in booths around the country. once a politician had enough votes registered against him, the device would explode.
I can think of an even easier idea though. I would install a law which allowed any citizen to punch a cheat hard in the face. The penalty for making a mistake would be a minimum of 5 years imprisonment, so they had better be sure they were being cheated by them.

The only decent way to govern is to hand over the decision making processes to those most qualified to make them. Politicians shouldn't decide on drug policy, for example, the medical establishment should. Laws built to serve people's best interests based on facts not lobbying power are the only kinds of laws worth having. Never going to happen though. Democracies continuously choose to be fucked up the arse by the colour of the badge that their representatives wear, autocracies don't even get that much choice.

TheGrinchSR wrote:The only decent way to govern is to hand over the decision making processes to those most qualified to make them. Politicians shouldn't decide on drug policy, for example, the medical establishment should. Laws built to serve people's best interests based on facts not lobbying power are the only kinds of laws worth having. Never going to happen though. Democracies continuously choose to be fucked up the arse by the colour of the badge that their representatives wear, autocracies don't even get that much choice.

Yup, Grinch got it.

I also think a total ban on the military or police ever entering government, a mix of socialism and controlled capitalism, abolition of multiple private land titles and free medical/education would go a long way to making the world a better place.

And hang Justin Bieber/K-Pop artists.

^^Agreed!!! About the Bieiber / K Pop part...

And free red wine and cheese for all.

A ban on street weddings/funerals, noise limits on same.

Patrolling fork-lifts for badly-parked SUVs

Man, JSP must get cheated a lot.

He's not alone.

Have you seen how your tax dollars get spent? Do you approve?

TheGrinchSR wrote:The only decent way to govern is to hand over the decision making processes to those most qualified to make them. Politicians shouldn't decide on drug policy, for example, the medical establishment should. Laws built to serve people's best interests based on facts not lobbying power are the only kinds of laws worth having. Never going to happen though. Democracies continuously choose to be fucked up the arse by the colour of the badge that their representatives wear, autocracies don't even get that much choice.

In theory government operates by employing experts in particular fields, termed policy advisers to inform government of the best course of action. This should be underpinned by a sound evidence base (evidence based policy) popularised by the Blair Government and supposedly used by the Australian Federal Government. Government then supposed to act on the best evidence.In reality popular opinion gets in the way, a government is elected on what people want, not what's best for the country as a whole. For example evidence may show that the best policy on illicit drugs is legalise and medicalise however if the government has got in on its tuff on drugs approach evidence is discarded in favour of pandering to the masses and keeping their jobs. The issue with the experts dictating policy directly and circumventing government is that the process becomes non democratic.

Here's the Australian Federal Governments Roundtable proceedings, Strengthening Evidence-based Policy in the Australian Federation.
Have a read on how it should be done, then think of Tony Abbott

http://www.pc.gov.au/research/completed ... g-evidence

TheGrinchSR wrote:The only decent way to govern is to hand over the decision making processes to those most qualified to make them. Politicians shouldn't decide on drug policy, for example, the medical establishment should.

Ultimately, drug policy is about what is right and what is wrong. Concerning what is right and what is wrong, the medical establishment is obviously no more qualified than the politicians.

TheGrinchSR wrote:Democracies continuously choose to be fucked up the arse by the colour of the badge that their representatives wear, autocracies don't even get that much choice.

In my impression, people end up fucked up the arse way less in an autocracy than in a democracy. Autocracies focus almost all their attention on their challengers. They have little time left for anybody else. Furthermore, the ability to enforce rules depends to an important extent on their perceived legitimacy. There is much more risk in a democracy that rotten rules acquire lots of perceived legitimacy than in an autocracy. In other words, an autocracy will much less be able to enforce the rules that it invents.

Winston Churchill's quote, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others", is most likely not true at all. As we can see, democracy ends up destroying itself. We can even see how. Women use sooner or later their right to vote to shut down reproduction, pushing down the birth rate exponentially to zero. With governments sticking their noses into the relationship between men and women, and the relationship between parents and children, democracy turns out to be not the best, but the most intrusive form of government ever. All other forms of government are not just more respectful of people's privacy but also last much longer.