It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Redefining the American landscape

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:23 PM
Many of our social issues in America involve a corruption in the political landscape. Laws are passed for reasons other then the stated reason, and even if there are two valid directions to take, the law will usually lean toward the favor of the powerful while seemingly appeasing the masses. Analyze laws currently on the books and it will not take long for a person to come to the conclusion that they are geared to create jobs in a slave class society and to tax the wealthy to redistribute the wealth in order to compensate for what is a system designed to oppress citizens therein while letting the most powerful in society to run rampant.

So what would the American landscape look like if we followed the Constitution?

All corporate formations could be tailor made to any type of structure conceivable to the human mind that is agreed upon by consenting and contracting parties. This means if you so chose, you could form businesses with others limiting or expanding your rights to property, dividends, or other payments within the organization as you chose to partake in. There would be no government mandate to produce profit year over year for your investors if your particular group decided it was not necessary to do so. This type of corporate structure would allow both venture capitalists and private social associations to organize their wishes and desires to a common objective. Groups would be able to freely associated for common gain, be it social, monetary, or fraternization without any government mandate of how the company should be organized.

Regulations of corporations would be limited to matters which affect health/safety of critical parts of human necessity. Such things as food, water, housing, transportation, medical care, would be the most regulated. Luxury products and inventions would receive nearly no regulation allowing all manners of free enterprise to be tried and tested in the free market.

No caps on lawsuits. Those industries that operated outside the scope of regulation would be subjected to full civil liability for not taking appropriate precautions. The current limitation of $250,000 cap on punitive damages only benefits the big businesses. A small company that gets hit with a $250,000 punitive damage award goes out of business or put into receivership. A big business can take calculated risks and never suffer any real harm paying out the largest award.

Education would be freely obtained. Not for free, but no group could be allowed to set up societal structures that limit the manner in which a person may learn to enter into any profession. If you can read a book and obtain a level of skill needed to enter a profession then this would be acceptable. If you can learn as an apprentice, this too would be acceptable. You could freely learn at your leisure any skill needed to enter any profession and not a single group could set standards for admittance into that profession. This means a doctor could become a doctor by learned study, perhaps taking a serious of tests. A lawyer could become a lawyer without spending years in law school learning subject areas in which s/he would never practice anyway. An accountant could show knowledge of mathematics and be qualified to provide services to others. Essentially, not a single occupation would be out of reach to a mind willing to learn. No institution of higher learning ran for-profit would be needed to obtain an occupation providing one can obtain the required level of skill needed for entry into such a profession. This would eliminate billions of student loans, allow for group study (for free or low cost) and encourage a system of sharing ideas to advance us all.

Medical care would look nothing like Obama care. If we allowed our government to regulate commerce for the betterment of all of us it would not create such a scheme. What it could do is set a minimum standard of coverage that an insurer must make available to all, things that we all are likely to encounter throughout our life time. Broken bones, cuts, common sicknesses, diagnosis for diseases, obtaining doctors notes could all be covered at low costs things we could all use. Outside of common usages or treatments that affect a majority of the population all other coverage should be voluntary and risk based personal assessments.

There would be little to no entitlement that produces profits for private interests. Think of the billions in food stamps that Walmart gets via the government. Think of the gouging of employers and states that occurs when people get put on unemployment. Obviously a different system can be envisioned that takes care of our collective needs when disaster strikes our personal lives. Perhaps we as the government can set aside jobs for those unemployed in times of crisis, instead of giving money to find work, we give them work be it enlisted service to the country or some other concept to get people working for the money they receive.

Crimes that are victimless crimes would no longer be criminal. Crimes that are non violent would be treated as correctable as a debt to society and no prison time would occur. Only crimes which place people in danger or that are violent would require prison. Everyone who completes their sentences would have full rights restored.

Utopian society? Or simply a society which respects the individual human existence to live empowered and free from controlling structures that have the ability to imprison our minds and behaviors.

posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:35 PM
I like your ideas.

However, the government would never allow it.

This type of government would give liberals/progressives/socialists/Democrats a total heart attack and send them into attack mode.

Expect to be called every kind of "ism" in the book for just writing this.

Expect to be called all kinds of nasty things by liberals, they are going to tear you to shreds

Why? Because the overriding meme of the libs/progress/soc/Dems is:
Most people are too dumb to know what is good for them or how to run their lives
Government must step in and tell everyone how to run their lives down to the smallest bit of food people put in their mouths.
Because only liberals/progressives/socialists/Democrats are smart enough to know what is best for everyone else.

edit on 3Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:36:49 -0500pm90809pmk081 by grandmakdw because: addition

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 06:04 PM
a reply to: ExPostFacto

I like your ideas.. a nice logical no-nonsense concept.

Corporate profiteering seems to me to be a malignant cancer creeping throughout all our societies.

I live in New Zealand.. Since the mid eighties I have observed this "CANCER" permeate our country.
Slowly at first.. but with a snowballing effectiveness.
It seems that with every "Terrifying incident" (overseas i may add) a new "totalit-arion" law is enacted.

One has to wonder.. Will the people wake before this world is turned into George Orwells (prophetic?) "1984".

Thankyou for still having the ability and gumption to think aloud.


log in