Your Word for Word!

I couldn't think of a better title. Since I'm ill at the movement. Let's say we're playing a game; like Sim Earth. You have the option to form your own government for yourself and the people. The game list all the forms of government you can use, explains what these forms are and you can blend them together as well.
Types of Government
Here's a list I found online.
My answer is that I would like a government who works with the people; but also can keep us inline. A great capitalist system and where the environment is taken care of and worker unions have a say in affairs. We would be required to study the issues better and have a better way in dealing with the issues. Taxes would provided for needs like police, hospitals and people in need would have a limited of time of welfare in order to get them on their feet. Unless the person can't never work again or other limits in their life. Government and the people would be able to communicate to one another better then what the news can cough up. Something like a website where people can submit questions and government officials answer the questions and post updates. The military I believe should be efficient. Our soldiers need proper training, clothes and health care.

Over all you can sum up my government by these titles. Capitalism, Commonwealth, Constitutional Democracy, Democracy, Federal Republic, Liberalism, Liberty Republic, and small amounts of Socialism.

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


RR, if you do not know me yet, here we go.

The best system ever developed was the US common law system.

I would like the system as represented by the US in the beginning.

Yes, they were a bunch of scardy cats when it came to the slavery issue, but everything else was right on track.

If you infringed on someone's rights, no matter how big or strong you were, you could be a defendant or a presenter of the complaint. It took a jury of one's peers to find fault. Instead of an elected or appointed official.

To me, a Constitutional Libertarian society enforced by common law courts is the society I would like most.

Everything else is controlled by an oligarchy or an elitist system so to speak.

I also forget about the separation of government and religion; as well scams!
BTW if you want to understand why I added socialism is because our workers need rights. Why allow all these large cooperation's run right over you? Of course I should of just said workers rights. :/ God I hate being sick.

Source

Communism is the third step of a three step plan – the first step is revolution (to remove the monarchy or government), the second step is the establishment of a ruling proletariat which is called “socialism” (a government of the people). When the socialist government attains its main goal – removal of all private property ownership, the government is meant to step down and the state becomes headless – this is communism. Accordingly, there has never been a true communist state as all socialist states end up retaining their government.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


That's what I'm trying to mention. It's difficult to explain.
I like your ideas! Keep up and then speak up!

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


In a common law system, anyone is allowed to file suit against anyone. It does not matter if they have Johnny Cochrane working for them.

You have the same access to the court system as anyone else.

How does that sound to you?

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


Well if they have a reason for a law suit then yes. People should just get what they can. But not as a way just to point the finger.

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


Well see, that was how the US was originally set up. If there was a disagreement on a contract or someone was hurt, a common law court was adjourned.

This was and still is the fairest and most judicial way of solving disputes. Now we have elected and appointed religious figures (IMO, lawyers, judges) etcetera deciding these cases.

We have created the oligarchy/feudal system of yesteryear.

Anyway, your utopian ideal will never work, I hope you understand that. A dictatorial system is ALWAYS based upon the morals of the dictator. I hope you understand the dictators of the past. They ALL had utopian ideals in the beginning, followed by atrocities that make ebola look nice.

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel

 

In a common law system, anyone is allowed to file suit against anyone. It does not matter if they have Johnny Cochrane working for them.

You have the same access to the court system as anyone else.

How does that sound to you?

ITs good, until we get to the point of giant oil spills, multi billion dollar bank/investment/insurance business side fraud, faulty pharma, manipulated markets water/power/oil/gasoline...

You know if we could separate individuals and Fictitious entities - consider them as separate and distinct I could play ball... I am telling you Libers, your little blind spot there is really detrimental - like trying to fart into a pigs mouth everytime it is brought up (:

You and I have agreed on so much - but you hide those positions away, when you should be advertising them.

reply to post by Janky Red


Bullschmidt.

We need to come together for one thing and one thing only and this crap would end.

LAW. Means LAW means LAW means LAW.

You either enforce law, or you do not. That is it. Period.

You know this.

edit by the way, the Packers won today!

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Bullschmidt.

We need to come together for one thing and one thing only and this crap would end.

LAW. Means LAW means LAW means LAW.

You either enforce law, or you do not. That is it. Period.

You know this.

edit by the way, the Packers won today!

edit on 3-10-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)

GREAT!!!

Can you bring that up in a Memneth1 thread?

You see he reckons an SOB should be "allowed" to drive around drunk as a skunk, a crime to him is only when the SOB slaughters someone else.

In this regard you and I are much closer... So why is this always obscured???

I agree, I am SURE you agree there are way to many BS laws too.

How can the libertarian Movement get this across better, because it is not implied, it would REALLY help
your case

GO Packers!!!

PS I saw ZZ TOP and Tom PETTY Friday

='s

Awesome!!!

reply to post by Janky Red




Hmmmm, you will find me closer to the theory of mnemeth than you will think Janky.

Being older, I have had some "supposed" criminal offenses pressed against me. Now that I am a couple years older, I realize that unless I harm someone, or infringe on their rights, I have NOT broken a law.

I tell you what Janky, if you do not like someone doing something, where they do not harm another, I WILL HAVE to call you a hypocrite.

43 now, never had a criminal offense EXCEPT the contractual agreements in regards to licensing. Sorry, wrong guy to bring that up!

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Hmmmm, you will find me closer to the theory of mnemeth than you will think Janky.

Being older, I have had some "supposed" criminal offenses pressed against me. Now that I am a couple years older, I realize that unless I harm someone, or infringe on their rights, I have NOT broken a law.

I tell you what Janky, if you do not like someone doing something, where they do not harm another, I WILL HAVE to call you a hypocrite.

43 now, never had a criminal offense EXCEPT the contractual agreements in regards to licensing. Sorry, wrong guy to bring that up!

Well then are you just here to Bullshcmidt or what???

you just said

We need to come together for one thing and one thing only and this crap would end.

LAW. Means LAW means LAW means LAW.

You either enforce law, or you do not. That is it. Period.

mnemeth doesn't believe in law as far as I can tell

Recently you and I agreed that banks should not be allowed to loan more than they posses.

Mnemeth does not give a crap as long as they do not get caught -

today you went on about morality as being key-

Which position is the moral one???



Ya I don't really like people driving around schmit hammered, call me conservative in that regard, some grow liberal as they get up in the years, wish me luck, shine the light for me

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


Common law was not created by the US. It was created in 1154. The only true instance of so called "common law" in use in the Unites States was in the so called West. And the only reason that was is because 'law' had not made its way out 'thar'.

The state of New York, which also has a civil law history from its Dutch colonial days, also began a codification of its law in the 19th century. The only part of this codification process that was considered complete is known as the Field Code applying to civil procedure.

The U.S. state of California has a system based on common law, but it has codified the law in the manner of the civil law jurisdictions. The reason for the enactment of the codes in California in the 19th century was to replace a pre-existing system based on Spanish civil law with a system based on common law, similar to that in most other states. California and a number of other Western states, however, have retained the concept of community property derived from civil law. The California courts have treated portions of the codes as an extension of the common-law tradition, subject to judicial development in the same manner as judge-made common law.

The United States federal government (as opposed to the states) only partially has a common law system. United States federal courts only act as interpreters of statutes and the constitution by elaborating and precisely defining the broad language (connotation 1(b) above), but, unlike state courts, do not act as an independent source of common law (connotation 1(a) above).

So by definition, the US has really never been under what is commonly and historically known as "common law".

The United States is a corporation, and as such subjects its 'citizens' to corporate Statues and Laws. This is the biggest Conspiracy of the United States, and is the key to removing all the problems today.

reply to post by HermitShip


Thought I would re dig this thread up.

Yes, I have been learning a lot about the common law and UCC that you bring up.

I imagine you are correct when it comes to the codification of corporate law to be the largest conspiracy against us.

Supposedly the US Constitution is the basis for all law in the US.

I say supposedly, because of on very glaring problem. US Tax Courts do not have juries. One can see by looking at the Constitution.www.constitutionallibertarian.co.cc...

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

There are numerous types of law implemented within the US.

One could say they followed the letter of the law when instituting the UCC but they did not follow the intent or the spirit of the law.

Corporate law removed the responsibility of the acts of the individual and placed them on the corporation. Instituting the removal of the responsibility, as Janky Red mentioned above.

Also, forcing people to be contractually obligated as corporations for just being born within the jurisdiction of these statutes. This is where the forced contracts such as the myriad licensing schemes comes into effect. Where once we were free to do as we wanted, as long as it did not harm another.

This of course brings into the argument, the fact now such things as criminal offenses, do not require a victim. The state itself can say it is a victim and require sovereign citizens (intended meaning of the Constitution) to become serfs or contractually obligated citizens.

When one is born in the US now, that "person" is under the jurisdiction of numerous contractual obligations just for being born. At this time a baby born is obligated for a debt in the neighborhood of $500,000.

Talk about slavery!

The United States has derived a system which is excellent when applied correctly. The only shortcoming I see with the system is that human nature has always called for organic hierarchy in every civilization throughout history. When this call has not been met appropriately more powers are given to the executive, to a single individual or a more centralized power authority. That is why I propose we should keep everything we currently have except establish a monarch.

So my preference is:

Constitutional Monarchy - a system of government in which a monarch is guided by a constitution whereby his/her rights, duties, and responsibilities are spelled out in written law or by custom.