Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
Lexikon

Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #1 
Socialism OR Syndicalism?

Single Payer UHC (Like in U.K.) OR Multi Payer UHC (Like in Germany)?

Progressive Income Tax OR Repeal 16th Amendment and gain taxes through sales tax, tariffs, property tax, capital gains tax, and fines? (Google fairtaxfraud)

Decriminalizing OR Enforcing OR getting rid of traffic laws?

Welfare for all in poverty OR Welfare for people only going into a certain job that is useful?

Let Congress decide how to spend our taxes OR put it to popular vote (everyone puts a % of what they want to spend in 20 categories, and it is all added together.)?

Senate elected by popular vote OR repeal 17th amendment

I will have more, just answer what you can.

__________________
"The legitimacy of a state rests upon its claim to do justice"- ALAN RYAN

"In my view, all that is necessary for faith is the belief that by doing our best we shall come nearer to success and that success in our aims (the improvement of the lot of mankind, present and future) is worth attaining."- ROSALIND FRANKLIN

I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community, and as long as I live it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can- GEORGE BERNARD SHAW
social democrat

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #2 
Social Democracy/Democratic Socialism (though we should explain what it actually means)
Probably single payer, but I can't say for sure.  (Don't know all that much on the subject).  
A VERY progressive income tax 
Don't know enough about the subject
Welfare for all in poverty, though not if they are offered a well-paying job which they are perfectly capable of doing but refuse to take.
Congress should decide, because a referendum on every single project or initiative the government spends money on will become very annoying to most people very fast, not to mention the cost.  However, Congress must be elected democratically, meaning not just campaign finance reform, but also some type of Proportional Representation (Mixed member might actually work with our constitution without repealing anything, as long as there's an amendment-no easy task, I realize).  




atibamanii

Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #3 
How about the "size" and reach of the federal government? Does Rocky agree with the following statement:  "...believes power should be decentralized, communities should have authority to regulate their own affairs and the role of the federal government should be reduced..."
JoshuaBudden

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 89
Reply with quote  #4 
1)Not pure socialism.  I like the idea in social democracy. I think syndicalism could be introduced and operate side by side with free enterprise.

2)Multi-payer.  I think an income based public option with private insurance available.

3)Progressive income tax.  Treat capital gains the same as other income.  The standard deduction should be set to match the poverty level.  Taxes should come excess, not from what people need to live.  Increase tariffs on countries who don't meet environmental and human rights standards to help keep job in the US.

4)Each traffic law should be assessed. Some enforced. Some decriminalized. 

5)Most welfare and unemployment insurance should be eliminated and replaced with a right to work. Being unemployed leads to being unemployable.  Not working and receiving money creates shame, helplessness and dependence.  As a society we have a responsibility to provide what people need to thrive.  What they need is jobs. Government should provide them when necessary, not just hand out checks and cross their fingers hoping the "job creators" will take care of it.

6)Let congress decide. But election reform should be in place to help ensure a congress that serves the people is in place.

7)Popular Vote. Though I think states should be able to determine how they select their representation.  I'd also like to see multi-winner elections.  I think state parties should really promote multi-winner systems for state legislatures and for the House in states with a high number of districts.




social democrat

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #5 
Joshua, most people who are unemployed are looking for jobs.  I've known many people who used to be right-wing Republicans who saw people on Social Security as a bunch of lazy freeloaders, but now they're unemployed, trying desperately to find a job, and have realized just how wrong they were.  Others are single moms of young children who can't work because there is no time for them to do so, and they don't have the money to send the child to day care.  Furthermore, many kids will just get out of high school and not be able to find work at all nowadays.  And imagine what would happen if someone lost their job, and you had removed all welfare that could prevent them struggling to put food on the table until they find another job.  And our welfare benefits are very primitive compared to most European countries, and they don't have huge classes of lazy people.  Quite the contrary.  So yes, we should provide jobs.  But don't take the welfare benefits.  And IF they are provided with a job which they are perfectly capable of doing, and they refuse to take it, THEN that individual's benefits should be removed.  
Robert

Registered:
Posts: 114
Reply with quote  #6 
Carbon tax or Cap and trade?
Aaron Rosenbaum

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #7 

Both have there pros and cons. In a perfect world Cap and trade would be best sense it sets a limit for how much carbon emissions can be released per year and it makes it more profitable for companies to go greener but a politician could just set an insanly high limit to the emissions produced per year and that would make the whole program pointless. On the other hand a tax can be more profitable for the government but it doesnt have a cap to the amount of emissions produced so in theory a company can still continue producing a huge amount of green house gasses. In addition unless the tax is rather high it will not give businesses a insentive to really reduce there emissions and might just give them another reason to outsource to someplace like China or India if they can.

JoshuaBudden

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 89
Reply with quote  #8 
Social D, 

"I've known many people who used to be right-wing Republicans who saw people on Social Security as a bunch of lazy freeloaders, but now they're unemployed, trying desperately to find a job, and have realized just how wrong they were. "

I think no such thing, and made no such statement.  Regarding the negative effects of welfare/unemployment, I refer to real life effects I've seen directly.  I've worked in acute mental health for 9 years.  I see how hard it is for people to find work after being out of the work force. I've seen how people struggle with feelings of worthlessness and depression when not able to work.  People need work. This is not calling anyone lazy.  It's quite the opposite.  

"Furthermore, many kids will just get out of high school and not be able to find work at all nowadays. And imagine what would happen if someone lost their job, and you had removed all welfare that could prevent them struggling to put food on the table until they find another job."

I absolutely do not think all welfare should be eliminated. I said "most".  Also the not being able to find a job would not be an issue with what I'm talking about.  The government would be responsible to provide them with a job if they can't find one.

"Others are single moms of young children who can't work because there is no time for them to do so, and they don't have the money to send the child to day care."

As I said, not "all", but "most".  I even think we can go further and help pay for or provide healthcare for mothers that want to work or go to school. 

"And IF they are provided with a job which they are perfectly capable of doing, and they refuse to take it, THEN that individual's benefits should be removed."

Absolutely.
Randall Burns
Reply with quote  #9 
I would suggest that JP take the stand that _no_ position should be taken in the platform without support of at least 70% of voters in a nationwide poll-and that NO law should _EVER_ be passed by congress when opposed by 70% of americans selected at random from the voter rolls.

I say 70% because that is about as close as you can get to consensus in a large group.
There are important issues(i.e. citzens united) where there is _clearly_ that level of national consensus-and that is where the JP should focus its efforts.
barefooting west coast

Registered:
Posts: 23
Reply with quote  #10 
The positions we should take is freedom and justice for all

sounds familiar right!!!!!!!!!!!1
MizFurball

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #11 
Socialism OR Syndicalism?

 

**Social Democracy

 

Single Payer UHC (Like in U.K.) OR Multi Payer UHC (Like in Germany)?

 

**Single payer

 

Progressive Income Tax OR Repeal 16th Amendment and gain taxes through sales tax, tariffs, property tax, capital gains tax, and fines? (Google fairtaxfraud)

 

**Progressive tax

 

Decriminalizing OR Enforcing OR getting rid of traffic laws?

 

**I don't see any point to eliminating traffic laws.

 

Welfare for all in poverty OR Welfare for people only going into a certain job that is useful?

 

**Welfare for people who are training for a job (along with childcare) and those those who are unable to work.

 

Let Congress decide how to spend our taxes OR put it to popular vote (everyone puts a % of what they want to spend in 20 categories, and it is all added together.)?

 

**Popular vote!

 

Senate elected by popular vote OR repeal 17th amendment

 

**Popular vote and include the presidency

 

No Difference

Registered:
Posts: 155
Reply with quote  #12 
1.   Allow people to drive on either side of the road.

2.   Legalize division by zero.

3.   Repeal the law of gravity.



__________________
Cooperation, coordination, and clarity are essential to creating a political party based on equality. Cliches and equivocations will not move this or any other party forward.
No Difference

Registered:
Posts: 155
Reply with quote  #13 
Sorry, I accidentally copy-and-pasted the Republican Party platform.  I hope no one here is offended.

If anyone is curious, the Democratic Party platform can be found on the Republican Party website.

__________________
Cooperation, coordination, and clarity are essential to creating a political party based on equality. Cliches and equivocations will not move this or any other party forward.
MizFurball

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #14 
It was a waste of our time.

Lifeguard of love

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #15 
Get rid of the old way of thinking. No one has a real ideas.

Too many old coots who still think we are living in the stone ages!!!!

Were are the young ideas? This is 2012 almost 2013. Therefore, we can't stick 1980's style of politics in a 2012 way of life.

I do like 80's music ha ha




Mike


leave footprints for life

"protect our oceans"
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!