The Government should take a cue from the implementation of the Political Mud-Pit

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
I wasn't sure where to put this thread, but since it is discussing the Political Mud-Pit forum, I thought I'd put it in that very forum. But maybe it should go in Political Madness, not sure. Mods if you feel differently then I, feel free to move it for me.

Ok as you the reader are aware, ATS has recently created the Political Mud-Pit forum to sling mud at each other and devolve political discussions down to silly name calling contests. At first I was mad that ATS would stoop low enough to letting such low brow debate take place on these forums, but then I got to thinking. These discussions are already happening on the forums, I and others have been complaining about it for a while. The only thing the mods could do was remove the posts, suspend members or ban them. In other words forced compliance. Argue our way or don't argue here at all.

As I am not a moderator, I cannot speak to what was going on behind the scenes, but I can make some guesses and I'm willing to bet that this attitude towards these types of arguments wasn't working. The problem was still apparent enough that regular users were still complaining about these kind of topics. So now tptb on ATS (ha using conspiracy lingo to talk about the moderators
no offense guys) have decided to stop fighting this tide and limitedly sanction it. Instead of forcing compliance, the moderators are trying to compromise and push these discussions to one forum so that they don't so heavily pollute other forums.

Now at this point you may be asking, "Hey Krazy, what does this have to do with the government?" Well I'm glad you asked internal monologue that I am projecting onto my readers. The government tries this forced compliance thing with EVERYTHING it disagrees with. Drugs are bad? Make it illegal. Prostitution is bad? Make it illegal. Guns are bad? Gotta be illegal. Not enough people with health insurance? Make it illegal not to have it. But as can be seen from this mentality, forced compliance automatically creates push back. I understand that Newton's third law shouldn't apply socially, but I think it is a good example here. You push us, we'll push back, even if the thing that you are mandating is going to be overall good for us like health care.

This brings me to my ultimate point, the government should take a cue from ATS and stop trying to force everyone to comply. Instead, it should try to create positive incentives to comply. Give the people an incentive to NOT do drugs. Give the people an incentive to get their own healthcare. These incentives don't have to be monetary benefits either. Raising the cost of government is the last thing I want to do, but with many of these things that we aren't allowed to do, legalizing them would cut down on MANY of the costs to run government. But for instance, got an addict? Instead of throwing them in jail because they stuck a needle in their arm and some passerby was disgusted with what he saw, how about a designated place to just let the addicts be addicts (think third season of the Wire for anyone who's seen that show)? You could also implement programs that help treat these addictions and set them up in these areas. This compromise accomplishes two goals. It gets the addicts out of sight and mind of people who want nothing to do with that lifestyle while at the same time allowing the government to monitor that activity for safety issues and such (obviously you still want to keep these people safe from theft, murder and other harmful actions).

Understand that this isn't a thread to attack Republican policies or Democrat policies, or really any political party's policies, but to admonish the system as a whole. The government is so obsessed with telling us what we cannot do that it continually creates more and more bureaucracy to try to keep on top of all these can'ts. But you know, instead of telling a business that we will impose strict fines for failing to fix their industrial waste dumping, how about we give a tax credit to companies that lead the way in environmentally friendly actions? Instead of throwing a prostitute that cannot do anything else in jail for whoring herself out, how about we create official places where they can be that require cleanliness and regular STD testing? Then we can even provide a tax credit for paying their prostitutes a fair, livable wage. Now obviously some of these solutions are very rough and rudimentary, but they are steps in a different direction then the government wants to walk down. Well the current path isn't working and is making everything worse by the day. Let's stop doing something that isn't working and try something new. Instead of negative reinforcement, we try positive reinforcement. It can't make things any worse off than they are now.
edit on 9-4-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
No takers on this? I know it's a rather long read, but I was hoping some of you guys would weigh in on my views on how government should change the way it legislates.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


For one, that makes too much sense. And if something makes sense, you can bet the Govt. is going to do the opposite.

Two, and this is going to tie into my third point. Prisons are profitable, maybe not for me and you, the average tax payer. But for everyone else involved, sending people to prison for every little thing makes lots of money for the people running the prisons.

And my last point, the Govt. does not exist for the people any longer, if it ever did. The govt. and all the laws it passes, now exists to generate profit for itself, the politicians, and all the corporations that are lining their pockets.

Corruption has completely gutted this nation, From the President all the way down to the smallest town councils.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


OK,..........


This brings me to my ultimate point, the government should take a cue from ATS and stop trying to force everyone to comply. Instead, it should try to create positive incentives to comply. Give the people an incentive to NOT do drugs. Give the people an incentive to get their own healthcare. These incentives don't have to be monetary benefits either.


If the incentives aren't monetary; what are they?



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


I'll bite. Much of what you are saying makes sense and some has already been implemented either in the US or outside of the country (think Vegas and Amsterdam.) My only issue is that much of what you're talking about shouldn't be illegal anyway and maybe we should push to overcome government stupidity instead of just letting them continue to oppress people. Like Washington and Colorado just did.

Also there is a big assumption in this plan the TPTB actually want to make positive changes in the US. From everything I see it's just the opposite. How will they maintain the prison for profit industry or keep boosting the militarized police state?



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by olaru12
 


How about relaxed enforcement of existing regulations for continued excellence in upholding them? Instead of yearly visits by the FDA to make sure the company is up to code, if a company is consistently on par, start increasing the time span between visits. Of course if the company is found to be in major violation, you would immediately start the regular visits again. It's thinking outside the box. Not every problem needs money thrown at it to fix it.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Yes, that would be much better then a "free speech zone"
god, what an oxy contin..opps... moron that phrase is

can you imagine Obama trying to read his telleprompter in a mud pit...?
on national TV...while putin is getting all oiled up to get in the wring...

I'd pay for a ticket to see that show live...

sandf

im thinkin' that this thread is going to have a difficult time falling into the mud pit though

you made to much sense OP



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 


reply to post by watchitburn
 


I'm responding to both of you since you both said similar things. Yes, I understand if you look at things conspiratorially then yes my solutions would go against tptb's evil plan to control the masses, but I was just trying to operate under an assumed premise that the government actually wants to fix these problems. Though in the end, who cares what the government wants? It all starts with us. If we had enough people to voice concerns and solutions like this, our officials would either have to start implementing them or get voted out.

And Bassago, I understand that some of those things shouldn't be illegal at all, but I'm trying to compromise here for the bleeding hearts who care about how other people treat their own bodies. They won't be happy unless something is being done, and in a healthy, functioning democracy, compromise is necessary to run the show well. This, I feel would be a nice compromise to please both sides of the issue.
edit on 9-4-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   

olaru12
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


OK,..........


This brings me to my ultimate point, the government should take a cue from ATS and stop trying to force everyone to comply. Instead, it should try to create positive incentives to comply. Give the people an incentive to NOT do drugs. Give the people an incentive to get their own healthcare. These incentives don't have to be monetary benefits either.


If the incentives aren't monetary; what are they?


a gift of drugs, real health care, and a nice gun would be a good incentive
and maybe some beer for top preformers



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Yeah I know... That's why I wasn't sure which forum to put it in. Ah well, maybe the mods will move or something.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


For every law they legislate, they should be required to take 20 off the books!!!

It would make them think before they pass more draconian laws!

Also, how about laws *cough cough* that are created with out the over site of elected officials don't count?

Maybe I don't understand the OP, but those example are my two cents of a Federal government that has went from being a referee to being a technocratic dictatorship!



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Danbones

olaru12
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


OK,..........


This brings me to my ultimate point, the government should take a cue from ATS and stop trying to force everyone to comply. Instead, it should try to create positive incentives to comply. Give the people an incentive to NOT do drugs. Give the people an incentive to get their own healthcare. These incentives don't have to be monetary benefits either.


If the incentives aren't monetary; what are they?


a gift of drugs, real health care, and a nice gun would be a good incentive
and maybe some beer for top preformers


What kinda beer? Throw in a couple of topless dancers and you got a deal!



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Maybe our government should create a "law free zone". Anything goes -- ANYTHING. Enter at your own risk, and fear no consequences. I bet we'd thin out the herd...



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


I agree with you {please avoid fainting} at least 60-85% about that.

I'm glad there's a mandate for folks to stop at red lights.

And to avoid casual recreational murder.

And for fast food staff to avoid spitting in customer's food.

And for 'normal injection method sperm donors' to be financially responsible for their off spring if they are stupid enough to go that route.

But on the whole . . . coercion is at best very problematic to out-right destructive to the body politic and the social fabric.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   





posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Well I didn't mean to imply all forced measures should be dropped from the books. If the outcome of your action harms another person then it should still be illegal. And see those are easier debates to have because in order to show harm, you have to have an injured party.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


Sorry I didn't mean to imply that I wanted more government. I actually feel my solutions would require less government. It would definitely require a complete rewrite of the tax code. Also it's a lot easier to take a benefit away then to ruin their life. All it can take is JUST the implication of wrong doing by the justice department and your life could be ruined forever, let alone going to jail. My solution would STOP putting people in jail unless they absolutely deserved it



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


WOW. Is one of us ill? I mostly agree again within 24 hours! Shock!

While the "if your actions cause injury to another, it should still be illegal"

is probably as reasonable a criteria as any . . . . it could be construed that the corporate/Communist oligarchy entrenched in the halls of power in and out of government

does wholesale genocidal injury to millions of people and HAS BEEN DOING SO FOR MANY DECADES.

Yet, there's no ILLEGALITY-WITH-EFFECTIVE-PENALTY ever touching significant numbers of the ruling elite in any significant or lasting way.

In other words . . . where does one draw the line

as to precisely what "injury to another, is?"

Physical, medical, financial, geographical, property injuries are reasonably clear . . . at least . . . more likely to be clear in more contexts.

Relationship injury . . . father with his children--those sorts of injuries are rampant with little to no recourse on the part of the fathers . . .

The herbicides e.g. ROUNDUP polluting ground waters virtually far and wide and damaging children's DNA and now in breast milk . . . will be injuring millions for evidently a very long time to come--unless God cleansing it from the planet after Armageddon.

The GMO injuries to countless millions are another case in point.

Then there's the depleted uranium spread over so much of the Middle East.

There's the injuries of the increasingly pervasive RF {radio frequency} pollution from cell phone towers and other sources damaging lots of sensitive organs in millions of people.

And, I'm still more than suspicious of the whole CHEMTRAIL stuff . . . I don't for a minute believe it's benign.

And there's fluoride in tap waters and showers far and wide.

Mercury poisoning is overly plentiful as well.

on and on and on the list could go.

So, clearly illegalities don't seem to bother the elite much regardless of how Draconian the results of their corporate and FEDeral evils are.

Would your proposal give such evil jerks more of a green light? Probably.

I'm still in favor of less coercion. Heavy handed coercion just has far more chances of either starting out evil to begin with--and/or resulting in horrific evil before it gets very far.

I think the evils of the elite will not be moderated or punished this side of Armageddon--except by God in His diverse ways . . . that can be very specific and very tailored to the individual evil doers quite incredibly thoroughly and extremely justly . . . even though very delayed from the human standpoint.

Still . . . championing less coercion is a worthy thing to do. I cheer the effort wholeheartedly.
.
edit on 9/4/2014 by BO XIAN because: grammar



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   

olaru12

Danbones

olaru12
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


OK,..........


This brings me to my ultimate point, the government should take a cue from ATS and stop trying to force everyone to comply. Instead, it should try to create positive incentives to comply. Give the people an incentive to NOT do drugs. Give the people an incentive to get their own healthcare. These incentives don't have to be monetary benefits either.


If the incentives aren't monetary; what are they?


a gift of drugs, real health care, and a nice gun would be a good incentive
and maybe some beer for top preformers


What kinda beer? Throw in a couple of topless dancers and you got a deal!

COLD BEER



posted on Apr, 10 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


There is no way we could completely fix bad behavior. It is impossible to shoot for this goal. One must be realistic when applying solutions. Again this is a failing of our government. Too often our elected leaders try to placate literally everyone at once. Well if two different groups are disagreeing, placate them both results in stuff like the ACA. By trying to give everyone affordable health care yet at the same time trying to prop up the very industry that doing something like that would destroy creates a HUGE contradiction and we end up with the convoluted mess that we have now.

To be honest, I really have no idea how to root out the corruption, I'm just trying to offer solutions to the problems that I see before my eyes. I saddens me to know that a layman such as I can see the answer before my eyes, which means that the people in charge see the same answers yet disregard them.





top topics
 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join