I want to start my own political party.

And it's called the common sense party.

The left and the right are turning issues that affect as all into a populist, marginalized tit for tat. The opposition parties do what they always do, oppose. But when it comes the crunch the staunch opponents somehow make amends and we end up with bipartisan support on issues that they never agreed upon in the first place!

The common sense party hopes to erase those borders. In the many nations that have not ratified same sex marriage, the CSP says 'if a homosexual relationship is not hurting anyone then why is it against the law?' and in those nations that vehemently discourage the shift towards alternative fuels and argue that it will hurt the economy, the CSP says ' we all share the same planet and need to acknowledge we are doing harm to the planet, and we should encourage the big polluters to invest in alternative energy sources.' And when someone is sitting in the electric chair after committing a crime, the CSP says' an eye for an eye is not justice; it is vengeance, and the perpetrator should live the rest of his days in Jail and lament on his misdeeds instead of escaping them through death.'

There is so little common sense in politics these days and I-and many others-want that corrected. To paraphrase Tyler Durden 'we were promised the world and we never got it, and now we are pi$$ed off.'

Can a common sense party change things or am I grasping at straws?

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Sounds good.
You're welcome to join the Cake Party if you like. We stand for all those things as well. But mostly the Cake Party is dedicated to rooting out corruption.

And it goes well with your user-name.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

What is your party's position on taxes?

a reply to: beezzer

Taxes are proportionate and dependent on income as it should be. However any company that tries to exploit any loopholes in said tax system has their assets frozen until an independent commission deems that they were working within the law and in the common interest of the economy and it's employees.

So your party thinks putting somebody to death for killing multiple people is wrong.

Does it also feel that way about 6 month old fetuses?

a reply to: Bluntone22

Our party does not condone the taking of any lives-whether it be voluntary or involuntary.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Have you read Common Sense by Thomas Payne? It's REALLY good!

Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.

Good Luck with your party! The two party system is a racket!

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: beezzer

Taxes are proportionate and dependent on income as it should be. However any company that tries to exploit any loopholes in said tax system has their assets frozen until an independent commission deems that they were working within the law and in the common interest of the economy and it's employees.

If you seize all assets how would employees be paid until it takes said commission the average x number of years it always takes to render a decision? If that's the solution a company will close shop, lose all business, throw all employees out the door, and maybe didn't even do anything wrong. May want to think on that one.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I can't say I have read it but that excerpt makes perfect sense.

The two party system is essentially voting for the lesser evil, but it's evident that nobody wants to vote for a third 'evil'

Nobody is a saint on the campaign trail unfortunately.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: beezzer

Taxes are proportionate and dependent on income as it should be. However any company that tries to exploit any loopholes in said tax system has their assets frozen until an independent commission deems that they were working within the law and in the common interest of the economy and it's employees.

If you seize all assets how would employees be paid until it takes said commission the average x number of years it always takes to render a decision? If that's the solution a company will close shop, lose all business, throw all employees out the door, and maybe didn't even do anything wrong. May want to think on that one.

Good point.

Business would resume as normal and employees would go to work as always but any investments, brokering or anything that revolves around expansion would be suspended until said company can provide evidence that they haven't wriggled their way around the rules. If their is no sufficient evidence then they carry on and get the seal of approval from the commission which could send a message to the world that a corporation has had the magnifying glass treatment and can be trusted and would increase confidence in said company instead of trusting more dubious operations.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: beezzer

Taxes are proportionate and dependent on income as it should be. However any company that tries to exploit any loopholes in said tax system has their assets frozen until an independent commission deems that they were working within the law and in the common interest of the economy and it's employees.

If you seize all assets how would employees be paid until it takes said commission the average x number of years it always takes to render a decision? If that's the solution a company will close shop, lose all business, throw all employees out the door, and maybe didn't even do anything wrong. May want to think on that one.

Good point.

Business would resume as normal and employees would go to work as always but any investments, brokering or anything that revolves around expansion would be suspended until said company can provide evidence that they haven't wriggled their way around the rules. If their is no sufficient evidence then they carry on and get the seal of approval from the commission which could send a message to the world that a corporation has had the magnifying glass treatment and can be trusted and would increase confidence in said company instead of trusting more dubious operations.

But in order to continue on as normal you aren't in fact seizing all assets. Just some of them? What if those investments are used to pay for benefits? What if you stop an expansion to bring a thousand new jobs and they did nothing wrong? People to employed now suffered? There needs to be some serious microscopes placed on business and government with serious penalties and consequences. This one needs to be thought about those so the wrong people aren't being punished in the process.

a reply to: Reallyfolks

My first Hiccup as a politician lol.

I shouldn't have said 'seizing of assets' I should've said 'reassignment'. Of course employees should be able to work or receive benefits but perhaps they could be allocated by an independent commission instead of a corporation while a trial is taking place.

Business as usual but the paychecks come from a different source.

There is/was a Common Sense Party in the UK.

en.wikipedia.org...(UK)

and,

www.commonsenseparty.org.uk...

And when someone is sitting in the electric chair after committing a crime, the CSP says' an eye for an eye is not justice; it is vengeance, and the perpetrator should live the rest of his days in Jail and lament on his misdeeds instead of escaping them through death.'

And there in lies the problem with your establishing a common sense party, after all who determines what is common sense? I don't think that position follows common sense and logic and is far more a position of emotional based vengeance then justice.

From a common sense prospective it would be more logical to execute lifers, because keeping them alive to lament about their misdeeds is right in the wheelhouse of vengeance. You want them to suffer rather then "escape through death" and if they are never getting out of prison for the rest of their life, what is the point of imprisonment, rehabilitation?, which they can never obtain because they will never be released, or pure punishment, which is an act of retribution and vengeance.

Furthermore, imprisoning people for the rest of their like allows them to continue to be a danger to others, of course it may only be guards and other prisoners, but they are still a danger.

And finally, imprisoning people for the rest of their life would be a waste of resources, money, food, clothing, shelter, etc, which could be better used for others, especially since lifers give no value in return.

Doesn't seem much like common sense to me. But then that is the problem with "common sense" it is really just personal opinion in the end.

Good luck with your fledgling party though.