A new way of directing a country by the best possible solution

I have an opinion, which I find always filsl those quite gaps in conversation, and I usually find that the conversation come sback to politics, conspiracy theories or sport.

Some of my friends have said that I should try local politics and try and help in some way, as i dont just side with people whatever they say, but i can back people with a sensible idea or theory, even if it turns out not be popular for any reason, basically I'm driven by principles and rights and fairness, which it seems doesnt always come out in politics, as you have like in the UK 3 main parties, each with their way of doing things, so when a particular party comes into power, the solution to the problem is either a Labour, Conservative or Liberal way, even if its not the best way, and is many cases Labour will say an opposite to an issue, just because its the Labour way to say it.

What i would like to see is a move away from one way politics and instead problems are put out to tender paid for by the people.

The problem is brought up in parliment, its discussed and the problem broken down into speak that any person with an interest can understand. Then any person of from any walk of life can put their idea forward and it doesnt matter what ideology it is, or what background they are from, the ideas are pooled, discussed and then the idea is voted on rather than the other way around.

If the person coming up with the idea hasnt got the money to back it then the tax payer funds it directly, if for instance a corporation comes up with the best idea, then again the public purse pays for it, and jobs are created as a result, and profits made, but the idea is that the problem is resolved with the best idea.

Might be a bit new age, but from a young age, I just couldnt understand why when the three parties where discussing an issue, why one would say one thing, another another, just because they had to tow the party line, it seemed to me that if the prime minister said this is the best way, and importantly it was, why the other parties just couldnt say, yes well done thats right, lets get on with it.

To me career politicians are old school now, they have been brought up in that way, educated in a ceratin way, and only get to the top because they agree with their peers. Surely that cant mean that they always have the best ideas to the problems, and the interests of others other than those that vote their politics.

reply to post by multichild


Crowd-source governance. I like it. We just need a country.

Also a way of gathering feedback from a huge number of people on all of these decisions without having to gather them all in one place, because if our 30% voter turnouts have taught us anything it's that voting just gets in the way of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

So... voting from home on all the important topics... and a minimum participation level in this decision making process. Maybe you have to spend an hour on government work to earn your "free" television programs.

Okay... then we just need a way to cut out the money from these decision making processes. Otherwise the stupid ideas with lots of glossy media will be the winners 9/10 times, and the hypothetical country will be a corporate division sooner than you can say "I'm lovin' it!".

(I should reiterate... I like the idea. I come off as cynical sometimes... but that's just because I like to argue with myself.)

Hi,

Yes it can be corrupted as everything can, but I think if there is a large open forum as is the internet, then any idea that is a good idea that is deliberatly kept back will be seen by the masses, and the issue brought to the attention.

I just dont liek the idea of a certain group directing policies only accordign to their political philosophy, to me country wide decisons are not as simple as that, and it gives an opportunity from every person from any background to put forward an idea. It could end up that a group of ideas will be required, or in some cases an idea is so good that it alone will do, but the principle is that there is no political slant to it, its just the best idea.

Obviously you never please all, but I think this way could offer workable solutions that will get better results than say 52% yes, 48% no as is politics mainly in the UK.

multichild
It could end up that a group of ideas will be required, or in some cases an idea is so good that it alone will do, but the principle is that there is no political slant to it, its just the best idea.

Obviously you never please all, but I think this way could offer workable solutions that will get better results than say 52% yes, 48% no as is politics mainly in the UK.

I think the problem with our politics now is that we invest everything in single "One shot, many targets" solutions. Our approach seems to presuppose that there is only one right way to deal with a situation, and we can either fund it, or not. I like what you've brought up as it would allow an easier synthesis of new ideas that build on existing ones... or allow a mix and match process, whereby you could decide to proceed with one idea and get a small success, but then follow it up with enhancements. By the end (which will never come, by the way) you've implemented ideas 1, 32, 456, and 2067, and you have a solution that maybe covers 80% of the issue. That's a better track record than any of the fire-and-forget decisions going on completely separated from the will of the people in a parliamentary system.

Who ever got the idea that a single person could be representative of a group in all situations anyway? Valuing democracy does not mean voting every 4 years. It should mean taking an active part in the decision making process... rather than shoving the decision off onto a third party.

reply to post by CrikeyMagnet


Its inline with a capitalist approach as people do vote with their feet thats for sure, the market has to be continually on its toes to keep up with the demands, opinions and needs of the people, so its nothing new to the people of western society, the idea will be quickly absorbed and as time goes on, people will find more and more creative ways to come up with ideas to beat the rest.

The problem will be dealing with the many different ideas that come in, how they sorted and how do the people push their favourites forward and then what goes through.

There really cant be that many ways to solve a problem, so maybe they need to be grouped according to the initial ideas coming in.