Prime Minister Dotcom?

[bogan]

First thing I would do would be to make donations to parties illegal - all campaign funding must be done on a set budget, yes this would mean that tax payer money had to go to a party, but the alternative is a legal form of corruption

Next we need some form of weighting system that means an Educated hard working, law abiding citizen has more weight behind his vote than a semi illiterate dole bludging criminal

Then we need some form of performance review for a politician, one that provides incentives to do things as requested by their constituents/keeping to their campaign promises and failure to meet these results in consequences.

The other issue I am not too sure how to fix them, but the above should certainly make some changes happen

Budget for each party, or budget proportional to party size? I mean I don't fancy giving that white supremacist party plonker as much money as the parties who actually have a shot.

Weighting system is too removed from the individuals aptitude if all you base it on is public standing. Should be weighted on voter aptitude, nothing else. Which of course is currently impossible to measure with only one vote every 3 years.
Overhaul this shit to a true democracy, where politicians are the voice to the people, not of the people. Everyone is able to vote on any issue (the tech is pretty much there), it is the politicians job to put the correct information out there in order to get votes. People who vote on smarter policies (retrospective analysis of previous votes) are given more voting weight than those who vote on popularity alone. etc, etc.

[TheDemonLord]

"My" NOW will give you all of the above... apart from the old boys club being put to fire. Obviously you could do that, but then you;d be up on a murder charge.




1. The only real reason that happens is because things are done for political reasons and not because it's the right thing to do. Akzle's "I want the disestablishment of central government" and bringing decision making locally would give more visibility of that.

2. You can't stop people seeking power. You can only sack them should you be upset about it. This should not take 3 years. "My" NOW will treat positions of power as just another job. You can remove them should you have enough votes.

3. "My" NOW removes the financial system, therefore removing the incentives and mechanisms that are associated with corruption and expedient policy.

4. See 1 & 3. (especially doing things for the right reasons)

5. See 2.

As for how you would combat the above:

Why let money get in the way of real progress. Remove the financial system and there are no donations, the tax payer doesn't have to pay, and minimal corruption will exist.

Weighting human beings: that's exactly what happens and is directly responsible for class systems, poverty, the under privileged etc... What you perceive as a dumb person may well be an absolute fuckin genius, but they may not be at the point where they wish to apply themselves in a manner that you see fit. What you mentions has been tried, tested and failed and is not successful policy imho.

Incentives will open politicians up to the highest bidder... which is exactly what happens now. Holding politicians to account? That hasn't worked thus far. Much better to get rid of them and put a job in the place where the politicians would have been?

Other issues: Try looking at them without a financial system in place. You'd be surprised at how much more effective that would be in regards to your "wishes".

To respond to your points:

1: Local decision making is inherently ineffective and tends to lead to incompatibility with other systems/solutions - the age old 'left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing'

2: Funnily enough, I don't have a problem with people seeking power, my critique is more along the lines of this:

If you were intereviewing for a chief engineer - and you had 2 candidates - one with 20 years engineering experiance, solid work record, Engineering degree from MIT, the other has none of these yet is extremely popular with everyone - who would you choose?

Yet in politics - we are in effect choosing the later option (I concede here that currently there is no way to accuratel gauge someone in the same way as candidate 1 in the above example)

3: I heard this alot - especially from the Occupy Idiots - the problem with removing the Financial system is that it breaks just about every facet of our current society - sure this can be implied as a critique of the Financial system and this is not to say that the Financial system is above criticism or cannot be improved.

Think on this - without the Generation of Credit (so not removing the Financial system, just one part of it) think of all the things you couldn't do - you couldn't buy a house, you couldn't get startup for a business, most of us wouldn't be able to get the nice bikes we rather enjoy etc. etc.

Even if the Current financial system was removed, Corruption would still exist as whatever takes it place would be susceptible to the same abuse as money is currently. Money and the financial system isn't the problem - Human Nature is and whatever replaces Money (something would have to take some or all of its place) would be manipulated just as money is now.

But it is easier to point the finger at Money as opposed to pointing the finger at ourselves

As to your points on Class based systems - I am sorry but you are entirely wrong on this point - Class based systems (as they have existed in the real world) are entirely arbitrary and to do with where and to whom you were born. I am talking about a system that judges the individual on their own merits. To use your analogy of someone who could be a genius - if they actively choose not to apply themselves - are they any better than the idiots they are bunched with? if they take issue with this, then let them apply a little effort and reap the rewards. Also on an aside - Generally most genius level people will be able to score well in a test, even if outside of the test situation they are lazy

Finally - If the highest (and only) bidder is the people, then this may alter the behaviours - I agree holding Politicians to account hasn't worked so far - but that is because the people that try and hold them accountable are other politicians (glass houses, throwing stones)

[Akzle]

Why don,t you put your money where your mouth is Rob and form an Anarchy party?
Oh yeah. Cos no-one who supports you will vote! Catch 22 eh

i think you missed the salient point, of NOT having an adversarial party farce-tym.

[TheDemonLord]

Budget for each party, or budget proportional to party size? I mean I don't fancy giving that white supremacist party plonker as much money as the parties who actually have a shot.

Weighting system is too removed from the individuals aptitude if all you base it on is public standing. Should be weighted on voter aptitude, nothing else. Which of course is currently impossible to measure with only one vote every 3 years.
Overhaul this shit to a true democracy, where politicians are the voice to the people, not of the people. Everyone is able to vote on any issue (the tech is pretty much there), it is the politicians job to put the correct information out there in order to get votes. People who vote on smarter policies (retrospective analysis of previous votes) are given more voting weight than those who vote on popularity alone. etc, etc.

Set budget for each party - let them compete on a level playing field and on the merits of their campaign instead how fancy their TV ad is.

unfortnately - smarter policies are subjective, sure most policies that have been smart have been succesful, but this is not always the case. The idea is that a smarter person is able to use their smarts to determine which policies are smarter - I grant you that it will not be bullet proof (and smart people might vote for stupid policies if it benefits them) but it should be better than what we currently have

[Akzle]

1: Local decision making is inherently ineffective and tends to lead to incompatibility with other systems/solutions - the age old 'left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing'

the problem with removing the Financial system is that it breaks just about every facet of our current society

Think on this - without the Generation of Credit

But it is easier to point the finger at Money as opposed to pointing the finger at ourselves

fuck me.
1) who gives a fuck what the hand is doing, as long as it isnt fucking my day up?
Having small, local groups, making decisions FOR local areas removes about 30 layers of beauracracy from the current m.o. Gets relevant shit done quick.

2) you clearly havent read, thought on, or discussed the NOW.

3)generation of debt*
all 'money' is debt (legal tender) an ursurious system where private corporations print capital but not interest and sell to/indebt 'nations'...
Tell me how to balance the books on that one.

[bogan]

Set budget for each party - let them compete on a level playing field and on the merits of their campaign instead how fancy their TV ad is.

unfortnately - smarter policies are subjective, sure most policies that have been smart have been succesful, but this is not always the case. The idea is that a smarter person is able to use their smarts to determine which policies are smarter - I grant you that it will not be bullet proof (and smart people might vote for stupid policies if it benefits them) but it should be better than what we currently have

Some are subjective, some are not. And, this way would encourage proposed policies to have a measurable outcome established. Like voting on the speeding tolerance, a measureable outcome would be graded on lives saved and accidents reduced, and those promoting it would have to name an expectation, 15% drop or whatever. If you voted for that, and there was no measurable drop, then bad voting, lose some voting weight. Party's rep is tied to that as well. Whereas now, nobody votes on it, and numptys just blither on about how it must be effective cos if you can stop shorter when doing 104 instead of 109... And look what we get, more ineffective policies and no option to change them.

[TheDemonLord]

fuck me.
1) who gives a fuck what the hand is doing, as long as it isnt fucking my day up?
Having small, local groups, making decisions FOR local areas removes about 30 layers of beauracracy from the current m.o. Gets relevant shit done quick.

2) you clearly havent read, thought on, or discussed the NOW.

3)generation of debt*
all 'money' is debt (legal tender) an ursurious system where private corporations print capital but not interest and sell to/indebt 'nations'...
Tell me how to balance the books on that one.

1) That is precisely the short sighted vision that cause half of the problems "Fuck everyone else, so long as I'm okay"
Sure I grant you that it gets shit done quickly.... only to find that then they have to either completely change what they are doing (because its incompatable with systems it needs to be compatable with) or everyone has to do a retarded work around when they go outside the local area

2) If you can provide some relevant links, will be happy to read - but I doubt it will change my opinion unless it is backed up by logic and things that will work in the real world

3) No where did I say the Financial system is perfect, but the same system that fucks over nations who over borrow, is the same system that allows you to have a roof over your head and a Bike between your legs - removal of Debt/Credit breaks so many facets of society which often I hear people calling for - but when you ask what they suggest they replace it with, they are curiously mute or suggest ideas that aren't practicle or completely ignore human nature

[TheDemonLord]

Some are subjective, some are not. And, this way would encourage proposed policies to have a measurable outcome established. Like voting on the speeding tolerance, a measureable outcome would be graded on lives saved and accidents reduced, and those promoting it would have to name an expectation, 15% drop or whatever. If you voted for that, and there was no measurable drop, then bad voting, lose some voting weight. Party's rep is tied to that as well. Whereas now, nobody votes on it, and numptys just blither on about how it must be effective cos if you can stop shorter when doing 104 instead of 109... And look what we get, more ineffective policies and no option to change them.

Hmmmm Interesting Ideas - basically KPI for Policies - so if you policy hits its target of intended effect, your voting power increases.

Could work - would be one hell of a Database to support it, but could work with current technology

[Akzle]

yadayadayada

so, money or sleep outside?
Good system. Bet your stoked to give 50% of your working life to keep that going.

Short sighted? No.
Youre framing your thoughts by what already is.
The akzlepocalypse comes with a few re-jigs.

When theres only two laws, there is fuckall you can fundamentally fuck up between districts to make it incompatible.

[Akzle]

Some are subjective, some are not. And, this way would encourage proposed policies to have a measurable outcome established. Like voting on the speeding tolerance, a measureable outcome would be graded on lives saved and accidents reduced, and those promoting it would have to name an expectation, 15% drop or whatever. If you voted for that, and there was no measurable drop, then bad voting, lose some voting weight. Party's rep is tied to that as well. Whereas now, nobody votes on it, and numptys just blither on about how it must be effective cos if you can stop shorter when doing 104 instead of 109... And look what we get, more ineffective policies and no option to change them.

that might work. If everything was empiracly repeatable.

As it is, how would you measure /define the happiness of the nation?

[Akzle]

3) No where did I say the Financial system is perfect, but...

you didnt answer the question. How do you repay a debt when the only way to meet the ursury is to borrow more, as capital?
How do you balance those books?

[Banditbandit]

I want whatever remains to aknowledge my previously stated rights.

Rights ?? There is no such thing - there is only what people are prepared to fight for ...

[mashman]

To respond to your points:

1: Local decision making is inherently ineffective and tends to lead to incompatibility with other systems/solutions - the age old 'left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing'

2: Funnily enough, I don't have a problem with people seeking power, my critique is more along the lines of this:

If you were intereviewing for a chief engineer - and you had 2 candidates - one with 20 years engineering experiance, solid work record, Engineering degree from MIT, the other has none of these yet is extremely popular with everyone - who would you choose?

Yet in politics - we are in effect choosing the later option (I concede here that currently there is no way to accuratel gauge someone in the same way as candidate 1 in the above example)

3: I heard this alot - especially from the Occupy Idiots - the problem with removing the Financial system is that it breaks just about every facet of our current society - sure this can be implied as a critique of the Financial system and this is not to say that the Financial system is above criticism or cannot be improved.

Think on this - without the Generation of Credit (so not removing the Financial system, just one part of it) think of all the things you couldn't do - you couldn't buy a house, you couldn't get startup for a business, most of us wouldn't be able to get the nice bikes we rather enjoy etc. etc.

Even if the Current financial system was removed, Corruption would still exist as whatever takes it place would be susceptible to the same abuse as money is currently. Money and the financial system isn't the problem - Human Nature is and whatever replaces Money (something would have to take some or all of its place) would be manipulated just as money is now.

But it is easier to point the finger at Money as opposed to pointing the finger at ourselves

As to your points on Class based systems - I am sorry but you are entirely wrong on this point - Class based systems (as they have existed in the real world) are entirely arbitrary and to do with where and to whom you were born. I am talking about a system that judges the individual on their own merits. To use your analogy of someone who could be a genius - if they actively choose not to apply themselves - are they any better than the idiots they are bunched with? if they take issue with this, then let them apply a little effort and reap the rewards. Also on an aside - Generally most genius level people will be able to score well in a test, even if outside of the test situation they are lazy

Finally - If the highest (and only) bidder is the people, then this may alter the behaviours - I agree holding Politicians to account hasn't worked so far - but that is because the people that try and hold them accountable are other politicians (glass houses, throwing stones)

1. Only is you assume that there is no resource management system. If there is, the left hand and the right hand will know exactly what they're doing... in fact cooperation will be a pre-requisite as we will want the best ofthe best in every area. Build it once, build it properly and upgradeable etc...

2. If I were interviewing, I would take both... that's if the likeable guy wants a job. then I'd stick them both together and the new kid will get an instant mentor. The politics won't be an issue then. There is a level of cronyism that fooks things up quite considerably, but the real problem is that there is no one to keep them honest. The oppositions don't and I fail to see how the people can, especially as they are "chosen" to do the job of managing the country whilst the rest of us manage what we're doing. Why should we be keeping an eye on them too?

3. You may have heard about it, but it also sounds like you dismissed it because of the messenger and decided to give it no further thought. The Occupy idiots, as you call them, all have very valid reasons for why they were/are protesting and very few of them, I never head of ONE, wanted to get rid of the financial system.

In regards to your Generation of Credit: You wouldn't need to buy a house, because there would still be people building houses, because people would need to be housed (there'd be less leaky houses too because they wouldn;t be built to the lowest spec using the worst materials, because they materials wouldn't cost. They would likely lasy a damned site longer too and have less "health" related issues driven by the lack of quality.). You wouldn't need anything to startup a business, just an idea that was of use to people, then it could just start (you wouldn't have to worry about the number of staff yoiu had either). Why wouldn't we be able to get nice bikes'n'stuff? etc... You're the one saying it would fail, I'd like a logical and reasonable explanation as to why please.

In regards to human nature, other than it really doesn't exist (people change, which means they have no set nature. It's all learned behaviour), I'd like to understand how these people could "rort" a system without the power of money having a hold over their "slaves"? Not saying people won't try to feather their own nests, but if there are people in their locale watching them, it's going to be much much much harder to rort. Replace money with nothing. You do your job, I'll do mine, we both rely on other to do theirs. Where's the problem?

So how do class's grow and shrink depending on how much money is available to that class? It has nothing to do with birth. Would you call John Key working class? Or Einstein? etc... born into working class family's, yet you'd hardly call them working class. If someone has the ability, then wait until they're ready to use it. They could turn out to be the next Einstein/Britten/Hawking/Gandhi etc... you just never know. So I ain't gonna leave them in squaller because they aren't applying themselves. It'll may well make them not want to try in the future. Generally isn't good enough. A test is nought much more than the retention of knowledge and if a person doesn't want to learn, what are the chances they're going to be labelled a dumb shit even though the opposite is true?

True that there's no one to hold politicians to account, but there never has beenand even if there were, do you think they're going to remain honest, or do you think those who seek power will corrupt those applying the oversight? Given what goes on, the latter seems more likely. As mentioned earlier, the politicians are there to serve the people, they don't, the likely never will because they are busy doing their job... just like the politicians are supposed to be doing... but they don't.

In regards to NOW, here's an example of how it could work. By all means read the rest and should you need to, just click on the link in my sig. The best thing about NOW (or an alternative Resource Based Economy), is that the people have never been asked if they would like to live under such a system. So saying that people wouldn't is dis-ingenious. So far, it's about 50 - 50 according to the great KB poll. Get it on the ballot and let's see eh

[Akzle]

Rights ?? There is no such thing - there is only what people are prepared to fight for ...

fight against __________________

(hint: those who infringe against your rights)
if it comes down to who fights the best... Ninjas will win whicg would be pretty badass, really.

[mashman]

fight against __________________

(hint: those who infringe against your rights)
if it comes down to who fights the best... Ninjas will win whicg would be pretty badass, really.

Rubbish... glasses wearing female child/pregnant midgets will fight best, coz no one will expect them... not even the spanish inquisition.