CDZ How to abolish bad government?

[grbb]

Thinking Way Outside The Box

Create better ones. And the rest will follow whichever works.

That's the libertarian ways.

Now if only people can move to different countries as easily as they switch shops. Some restrictions may or may not be appropriate. I don't know. Just see which one works.

It's getting there. People can incorporate anywhere. Money can flow anywhere. Some currencies are already libertarian de facto.

It's unstopable.

 

[midcan5]

Libertarian is the new communism for the spoiled well to do in America. It is a fantasy belief that if you say freedom ten times, nirvana will magically appear. Lots below, I have seen the same baloney so often.

Why is libertarianism wrong?
Why I Am Not a Libertarian
Rust Belt Philosophy: Okay, seriously, what the fuck is a "statist"

"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke 'The American Conservative' Marxism of the Right

On this site:

Libertarianism in a Nutshell II
Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Good Books on Libertarianism?

 

[task0778]

Thinking Way Outside The Box

Create better ones. And the rest will follow whichever works.

That's the libertarian ways.

Now if only people can move to different countries as easily as they switch shops. Some restrictions may or may not be appropriate. I don't know. Just see which one works.

It's getting there. People can incorporate anywhere. Money can flow anywhere. Some currencies are already libertarian de facto.

It's unstopable.

Gov'ts are only as good or bad as the people who run them, and the people who elect those people. There's no such thing as a perfect form of gov't; the one we have now is about as good as it gets but we aren't doing a good enough job making it work as effectively and efficiently as it could be.

 

[grbb]

I am not saying that libertarian is perfect. It's one of a good thing to aim. I would settle for taxed drugs instead of totally free no market distortion stuff. I would settle for land tax and luxury tax instead of income tax.

Basically we would exchange freedom we can afford to lose, if that really makes other citizens happy, for freedoms I think more worthy for me.

That shops are called governments.

 

[gipper]

There is no such as GOOD government. Government is an antiquated idea. We are well past the need for big centralized government, but the ruling class is making too much money and garnering too much power, for big centralized government to end.

 

[Mac1958]

If We The People were serious about this - unfortunately we're more concerned about the shoes Kim Kardashian is wearing today - it wouldn't be terribly difficult to put much tighter restrictions on politicians and have more controls. Ideas such as:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. End pensions and benefits after leaving office
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

Those four measures alone would completely change the face of Washington DC. They would immediately decrease the influence of big money and special interest lobbyists. They would immediately change the behaviors and motivations of our "leaders". They would immediately force these people to justify their taxing & spending agendas.

But look at Kim's shoes! I wonder where she got them!
.

 

[gipper]

If We The People were serious about this - unfortunately we're more concerned about the shoes Kim Kardashian is wearing today - it wouldn't be terribly difficult to put much tighter restrictions on politicians and have more controls. Ideas such as:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. End pensions and benefits after leaving office
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

Those four measures alone would completely change the face of Washington DC. They would immediately decrease the influence of big money and special interest lobbyists. They would immediately change the behaviors and motivations of our "leaders". They would immediately force these people to justify their taxing & spending agendas.

But look at Kim's shoes! I wonder where she got them!
.

Anyone who demands those ideas be enacted, would be labeled a racist and right wing whacko by the establishment and their media. Duping millions of dumb Americans.

 

[Mac1958]

If We The People were serious about this - unfortunately we're more concerned about the shoes Kim Kardashian is wearing today - it wouldn't be terribly difficult to put much tighter restrictions on politicians and have more controls. Ideas such as:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. End pensions and benefits after leaving office
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

Those four measures alone would completely change the face of Washington DC. They would immediately decrease the influence of big money and special interest lobbyists. They would immediately change the behaviors and motivations of our "leaders". They would immediately force these people to justify their taxing & spending agendas.

But look at Kim's shoes! I wonder where she got them!
.

Anyone who demands those ideas be enacted, would be labeled a racist and right wing whacko by the establishment and their media. Duping millions of dumb Americans.

I wonder. I'd like to see what Bernie's supporters would say about them. I'm pretty sure he's for publicly-funded elections, at least.
.

 

[Anathema]

The fix to bad Government is not just Good Government, but Government which cannot be revised or interpreted by The People. A system that is RUN by The People but not interpreted by the People.

 

[gipper]

The fix to bad Government is not just Good Government, but Government which cannot be revised or interpreted by The People. A system that is RUN by The People but not interpreted by the People.

Impossible. The Founders already tired that and clearly it has failed.

 

[gipper]

If We The People were serious about this - unfortunately we're more concerned about the shoes Kim Kardashian is wearing today - it wouldn't be terribly difficult to put much tighter restrictions on politicians and have more controls. Ideas such as:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. End pensions and benefits after leaving office
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

Those four measures alone would completely change the face of Washington DC. They would immediately decrease the influence of big money and special interest lobbyists. They would immediately change the behaviors and motivations of our "leaders". They would immediately force these people to justify their taxing & spending agendas.

But look at Kim's shoes! I wonder where she got them!
.

Anyone who demands those ideas be enacted, would be labeled a racist and right wing whacko by the establishment and their media. Duping millions of dumb Americans.

I wonder. I'd like to see what Bernie's supporters would say about them. I'm pretty sure he's for publicly-funded elections, at least.
.

My post did not refer to leftists, but yes some on the left would find those four ideas acceptable. My point is the ruling class establishment and the media would never go for it. They know where their bread is buttered.

 

[Anathema]

Impossible. The Founders already tired that and clearly it has failed.

No they didn't. They left untold opportunities for Interpretation and revision to the Founding Documents.

 

[Mac1958]

If We The People were serious about this - unfortunately we're more concerned about the shoes Kim Kardashian is wearing today - it wouldn't be terribly difficult to put much tighter restrictions on politicians and have more controls. Ideas such as:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. End pensions and benefits after leaving office
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

Those four measures alone would completely change the face of Washington DC. They would immediately decrease the influence of big money and special interest lobbyists. They would immediately change the behaviors and motivations of our "leaders". They would immediately force these people to justify their taxing & spending agendas.

But look at Kim's shoes! I wonder where she got them!
.

Anyone who demands those ideas be enacted, would be labeled a racist and right wing whacko by the establishment and their media. Duping millions of dumb Americans.

I wonder. I'd like to see what Bernie's supporters would say about them. I'm pretty sure he's for publicly-funded elections, at least.
.

My post did not refer to leftists, but yes some on the left would find those four ideas acceptable. My point is the ruling class establishment and the media would never go for it. They know where the bread is buttered.

Sure, they want to maintain things just the way they are, the rules protect them, and they have the influence to keep them that way.

Real change would take a real groundswell and a few brave politicians.

Not holding my breath.
.

 

[gipper]

Impossible. The Founders already tired that and clearly it has failed.

No they didn't. They left untold opportunities for Interpretation and revision to the Founding Documents.

I don't agree. They tried to prevent interpretation, but the ruling class figured ways around it as they always do. The Constitution is just a bunch of words the ruling class ignores, without consequence. For example, is anyone upset or demanding legal action for the federal government spying on all of us?

 

[Anathema]

I don't agree. They tried to prevent interpretation, but the ruling class figured away around it as they always do. The Constitution is just a bunch of words the ruling class ignores without consequence. For example, is anyone upset or demanding legal action for the federal government spying on all of us?

No. The vast majority of americans ignore the document, not just the elites. Though it would seem that with the number of people who voted for Trump, there are more citizens with growing Constitutional concerns than in the past.

As for the spying?.... that falls under National Security powers so far as I'm concerned.

 

[gipper]

I don't agree. They tried to prevent interpretation, but the ruling class figured away around it as they always do. The Constitution is just a bunch of words the ruling class ignores without consequence. For example, is anyone upset or demanding legal action for the federal government spying on all of us?

No. The vast majority of americans ignore the document, not just the elites. Though it would seem that with the number of people who voted for Trump, there are more citizens with growing Constitutional concerns than in the past.

As for the spying?.... that falls under National Security powers so far as I'm concerned.

No.

Read the Fourth Amendment...The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, [a]against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported ...