Author Topic: A new government? (Read 811 times)

Don Fischer · « **on:** April 02, 2005, 07:00:52 AM »

I have been thing that perhaps the best way to fix government is to take the money out of it. With the ability to raise their own wages and expense accounts, the people have no control. What if all terms were limited to say 8 yrs? What if there was no wages but instead that person be excused from all bills for his/her term? What if we decided what we were willing to pay for entertainment expenses? What if we told them that the only thing they could expect was a free ride for eight years? What if government pension excepting military were terminated? What if judges were not allowed to make any ruling but rather were to protect the rights of the lidigents and pass sentence and the jury to determine right from wrong? What if lawyers really could be held responsible for what they do? What if the state had to prove any and all accusations made at citizens?
What if government was required to police our borders with military rather than police actions in forigen countries, instead of having an un needed border patrol?

The only way any change will come for the good of the people will be by taking the money out of government and making government at all levels responsible to the people, not people responsible to government. But government controls thru fear of loss, and by keeping us fighting among ourselves. It thrives on the welfare state it created. Did it create that welfare state to help people or to control them?

Will you give up your social security, your medicare, your food stamps? If your not willing to give up the social programs, your not willing to be free!
We are constrained only by our fear of loss!

Nightrain52 · « **Reply #1 on:** April 02, 2005, 04:38:30 PM »

Are you willing to only make $5.00 per hour as that is all anyone from Burger Maker to Doctors would make? Do away with all labor unions. Would you give up your 2 to 4 weeks paid vacation? Would you be willing to be euthanized when you were no longer a productive worker or injured on the job and couldn't work any longer? Would you turn your back on little kids because their mom and dad were druggies? The whole thing is a giant can of worms. :shock: :eek:

Don Fischer · « **Reply #2 on:** April 02, 2005, 06:42:37 PM »

WOW! Where did you get that from?

williamlayton · « **Reply #3 on:** April 02, 2005, 11:03:20 PM »

FROM YOUR THOUGHTS DON.
Blessings

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #4 on:** April 03, 2005, 03:09:00 AM »

Hehe...new form of government...

Constitution says the people have the right to overthrow the government if there is a REALLY REALLY REALLY [/i] good reason for it. That was one of the amendments Thomas Jefferson demanded to be added to the constitution. Riot anyone? :roll:

Don Fischer · « **Reply #5 on:** April 03, 2005, 08:06:51 AM »

Williamlayton, I'm stunned. I still don't know where that came from. But, if I could make a living on $5 per hr, that would be alright with me, I did at one time.

Would I turn my back on the little kids whose mom and dad are druggies? I don't go out of my way for them now, but I don't turn them away if they ask for help. I'd also rather they ask individuals for help rather than have government decide who needs it then take it from me.

The only place I've ever worked and actually got to take vacation was the military, a government job , if you will. Better thought of by me as a commitment owed.I'm for re-instating the draft.

You don't get killed if your non-productive on your job. Used to be you got fired. If it was or is a government job, you got/get promoted.

Blessings

fe352v8 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 03, 2005, 08:31:12 AM »

Fishman,

Not to be contrary, but which amendment? Jefferson and Declaration of Independence, OK, constitution cannot find it. By the way after adoption of constitution, we never adopted the Declaration of Independence, thus it is not part of the legal syatem as provided in the constitution. Wonder why? Any suggestions for names for this new governments country?

life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

Don Fischer · « **Reply #7 on:** April 03, 2005, 08:37:07 AM »

Why would it need a new name? Who know's, maybe we don't even need a new constitution. Maybe just a government that supports the one we have, other than when it suits their purpose.

fe352v8 · « **Reply #8 on:** April 03, 2005, 09:50:20 AM »

Don,

True, we can be well served by our constitution, besides stationary costs would be enormous, if we changed the name. As citizens and members of the electorate we bear the ultimate blame for the state of our government, after all we elected the Bozos.

I am beginning to feel that the faith and values we heard so much about, were not so much a reference to the faith and values of the candidates, as much as it was an act of faith to believe these candidates had values. For some odd reason we seem to embrace those who talk the talk but do not require them to walk the walk.

I suppose it is just easier to think simplistically

Republican good, Democrat bad
Conservative good, Liberal bad
Right good, Left bad
Red good, Blue bad

When we label things it, we do not have to wonder what they are, or think about them.

Life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #9 on:** April 03, 2005, 11:42:42 AM »

Quote from: fe352v8

Fishman,

Not to be contrary, but which amendment? Jefferson and Declaration of Independence, OK, constitution cannot find it. By the way after adoption of constitution, we never adopted the Declaration of Independence, thus it is not part of the legal syatem as provided in the constitution. Wonder why? Any suggestions for names for this new governments country?

life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

I'm sorry Jon, I made a mistake. This statement was made in the preamble or in the conclusion (can't remember which one) of the constitution mandating that the government could be overthrown if need be. I'll have to dig around for it for the solid backbone.

Don Fischer · « **Reply #10 on:** April 03, 2005, 12:32:48 PM »

fe352v8 I'll go along with that alright. I think that our downfall was the establishment of the welefare state. When you make a people dependent on government, any government, rights are lost.

FWiedner · « **Reply #11 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:05:39 PM »

YE-GADS!

A Council of Elders?

Oaths of Loyalty?

Disagreement with state policy results in loss of rights?

A return to a gold standard?

Abolition of diplomatic embassies?

And this fellow thinks that this is the path to Liberty?

I have one to add to this fellows list of "Liberty Initiatives".

One free assassination per lifetime, no penalty.

I think I'd look this fellow up if he were in charge.

:shock:

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #12 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:42:25 PM »

Actually, upon taking the time to read it, there seems to be quite a few good points. There was one that rubbed me the wrong way, but I don't remember which one it was. I'm up for it. Are you?

fe352v8 · « **Reply #13 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:50:40 PM »

Boy howdy, a guy misses one lithium dose and no telling what it can lead to.

Life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

mjbgalt · « **Reply #14 on:** April 04, 2005, 05:35:37 PM »

well let me make myself unpopular again...heh

it sounds like that guy really was "writing" out of both sides of his mouth. to throw off an oppressive regime, he says for us to replace it with another oppressive regime.

from a communistic income tax to a situation where the government grants certain rights, we have a council of elders, a wealth of really expensive trinkets we used to get from the chinese, more farmers than farms to work, and a government that does things like MANDATE that there will be a certain amount of public channels. sorry but i think we should scrap that idea too.

how about simply making terms shorter and pay lower, and make legislators use the public systems of SSI and such, like we do.

and then we simply adopt Libertarian-like rules and laws- by which i mean, that we basically live by the idea that anything is ok until it infringes on someone else's rights. we would be back up and running.

-Matt

williamlayton · « **Reply #15 on:** April 05, 2005, 12:23:54 AM »

I read every word he wrote-I did not see much legitimate thought associated with the writing. Some folks just can't multi-task (think and write) at the same time and it is usually too much of a task to think beforehand, I digress.
I cannot find a starting point to discuss that piece except-NO!
Blessings

teamnelson · « **Reply #16 on:** April 05, 2005, 04:31:25 PM »

Mr. Fortman would replace one bloated inefficient system with another styled in his own image. Why are the solutions typically offered to counter overcomplexity more complex than the situation they are touted to resolve? One thing I admire of our Founding Fathers was their pursuit of simplicity. Imagine the dilemma in their minds as they struggled with spelling everything out in great detail exactly as they envisioned it, or simply leaving a framework for the next generations to fill in.

I've read a lot of good ideas on this forum, and I appreciate that there are some thoughtful souls out there wrestling with the future, instead of revelling in the past. What will the United States be for my grandchildren, I wonder?