Politics Post your radical manifesto

[elon31]

History 101.

Only a right winger would ask "who pays for it?".

The federal reserves keep the printing presses going non stop?
Oh wait inflation.

Btw only a leftist wouldn’t know what Lenin’s reference “useful idiot” meant

 

[Number37]

The federal reserves keep the printing presses going non stop?

Why?

Btw only a leftist wouldn’t know what Lenin’s reference “useful idiot” meant

Hey China, What's that got to do with the price of rice?

 

[Gregthestopsign]

Why?

Cleary dont know about the basics of money!

Hey China, What's that got to do with the price of rice?

leftism is an evolution. of a dumbed down society! we know society has been dumbed down to astonishing levels and leftism is the evolution of that as its principals have never worked! never only led to destruction of society

all you leftists were referred to as "useful idiots by Lenin as you were the dumbest of the dumbed down society. that dumb that you think your intelligent but to dumb to realise it! true read up on some Lenin or Trotsky
the mods that run this leftist clown show of a forum know this thats why they heavily sensor anything that may point this out on the chance that one of you may not be as stupid and work it out the evil that leftism is and the clowns that promote it!

all the best useful idiot as the mods or one of the other extreme lwnj useful idiots will be triggered and go in to a mashing fit reporting the post reciting history and quotes by one of the famous communist leaders!

 

[Number37]

"principals" LOL
"sensors" LOL

I'm am so smart. You're are so stupid.

 

[Seeds]

Once you get to $10b net worth the Govt takes $9b, thanks you, and challenges you to do it again.

The wealth taxes usually suggested are between 0.25 and 5 percent. Not the 90 percent you have just suggested.

 

[Seeds]

Perks of globalisation where the company sets up an office in a low tax nation, the system allows and promotes it

actually globalisation leads to global governance which will result in uniform tax policies across countries and prevents tax avoidance.

its the lack of globalisation that enables companies to set up in low tax countries and then sell back in the home country tax free.

globalist international bodies are trying to fix this problem. But nationalism is getting in the way.

 

[Seeds]

My radical changes are to get rid of representative politicians entirely, and use the internet to produce a Forum of democracy that would allow all people to have and equal say and vote on every important issue that affects the population. Privately owned media corporations cannot exist, no one’s voice can drown out the others entirely.

I agree with some of seeds initiatives especially free universal education.

The reason of the most rational and intelligent voices would rise and nothing would be valued higher than reason, logic and critical thinking.
Kindness should also be emphasised because without that such a rational society could become too cruel.

Another thing I strongly believe is that everybody should contribute positively to society through some sort of work, and be given the opportunity to. Remuneration should be based around accomplishment according to ability and shouldn’t have a range beyond say the best paid get 5x what the least paid get.

There must be incentives, but not at the expense of other people entirely.

If we dont have privately owned media organisations then what do we have in the media space?

 

[Seeds]

1/ Ban all right wingers from public office.
2/ Ban political parties
3/ Universal Basic Income $70k/ per year
4/ GST 30%
5/ Free speech. Say what you want. If you say something that offends someone, then they are permitted to punch you in the nose once, with a fist cast out of steel. The offended is the judge/jury.

So basically a left wing dictatorship.

and how exactly do you encourage people to work if they get paid 70 thousand dollars a year from doing nothing? who would bother to work in a factory, be a hair dresser, school teacher, mine worker or retail worker if you could get paid 70 thousand and can spend all day at the beach instead? Particpation rates are already too low. They would crash under your system.

i sure as hell wouldnt work.

the prices of everything would rise 1000 percent under such a system (actually 1300 percent with your gst policy on top) as no one would work and the 70 thousand would quickly become worthless. Basically, your policy would create the german hyperinflation episode of the twenties.

wealth taxes and inheritance taxes are the way to go with increased welfare payments for the unemployed and basically no tax for the workers with little wealth. This encourages people to work and prevents rises in the cost of living caused by people not working.

 

[HairyO]

The wealth taxes usually suggested are between 0.25 and 5 percent. Not the 90 percent you have just suggested.

0.25% would be as unpopular with the billionaires because they accumulate out of pure greed. I wonder if there is anyone worth $180b who actually needs any more than the tiniest fraction. Its obscene ego and nothing more.

 

[Seeds]

0.25% would be as unpopular with the billionaires because they accumulate out of pure greed. I wonder if there is anyone worth $180b who actually needs any more than the tiniest fraction. Its obscene ego and nothing more.

They work for the status of winning and being successful more then the money at that point. Money is simply the way they evaluate the score. All taxes are unpopular with the people that have to pay them.

 

[HairyO]

They work for the status of winning and being successful more then the money at that point. Money is simply the way they evaluate the score. All taxes are unpopular with the people that have to pay them.

Then the tax would be perfect. The one who has had the most resets to $1b gets awesome bragging rights.

They certainly dont need $500m yachts with 3 helipads. Its obscene.

 

[Mofra]

5/ Free speech. Say what you want. If you say something that offends someone, then they are permitted to punch you in the nose once, with a fist cast out of steel. The offended is the judge/jury.

Libel? Slander?
Misleading and deceptive conduct under Australian Consumer Law?
Political honesty?

'Free speech' is such an overused term it's lost any real practical meaning

 

[Number37]

Libel? Slander?
Misleading and deceptive conduct under Australian Consumer Law?
Political honesty?

'Free speech' is such an overused term it's lost any real practical meaning

All covered by the right of reply via a steel fist.

 

[Mofra]

All covered by the right of reply via a steel fist.

So if your career, reputation, relationships are ruined by slander, and all you get to do is *punch the perpetrator?
Forget prevention, let's just deal with the aftermath?


* If you're able bodied, disabled people can GAGF under your plan I guess?

 

[Number37]

So basically a left wing dictatorship.

and how exactly do you encourage people to work if they get paid 70 thousand dollars a year from doing nothing? who would bother to work in a factory, be a hair dresser, school teacher, mine worker or retail worker if you could get paid 70 thousand and can spend all day at the beach instead? Particpation rates are already too low. They would crash under your system.

i sure as hell wouldnt work.

the prices of everything would rise 1000 percent under such a system (actually 1300 percent with your gst policy on top) as no one would work and the 70 thousand would quickly become worthless. Basically, your policy would create the german hyperinflation episode of the twenties.

wealth taxes and inheritance taxes are the way to go with increased welfare payments for the unemployed and basically no tax for the workers with little wealth. This encourages people to work and prevents rises in the cost of living caused by people not working.

You will lose 30% of your $70k to GST.
Not all of the $70k has to be given in cash.
Energy/utilities, telecommunications, public transport. All free via nationalised services.
You could buy Telstra, for example, for $15bn.
All 3 are natural monopolies & were previously nationalised.


People complained of being in lockdown, getting bored with finding stuff to do bla-bla-bla.
You really think most people are going to sit around and do nothing all day?

What do you think will happen to wages?
Business will have to pay wages that entice people to work.
Most won't work full time. Isn't that what is happening now, by stealth?



Wealth and inheritance taxes are easily avoided. Set up a company in the Cayman Islands and put all your assets into that. It really is that simple.

 

[Number37]

So if your career, reputation, relationships are ruined by slander, and all you get to do is *punch the perpetrator?
Forget prevention, let's just deal with the aftermath?


* If you're able bodied, disabled people can GAGF under your plan I guess?

You don't have to personally carry out the punch. You can sub-contract.

How many people getting punched in the nose with a steel fist will it take before people start moderating what they say?
Remember, the standard isn't slander, it is whether the other person is offended or not. That is a very low bar.
On the other side, people will just get used to others s**t-posting and learn to ignore it.
It will all fizzle out in due course. IMO.

 

[Mofra]

You don't have to personally carry out the punch. You can sub-contract.

How many people getting punched in the nose with a steel fist will it take before people start moderating what they say?
Remember, the standard isn't slander, it is whether the other person is offended or not. That is a very low bar.
On the other side, people will just get used to others s**t-posting and learn to ignore it.
It will all fizzle out in due course. IMO.

Ok, so saying bad things is worthy of the introduction of corporal punishment - will this be subject to the regular court system?
What about other crimes? Are rape and murder excluded from this corporal punishment scheme, and only words included? Advertising, cartoons, pictures included?

 

[Number37]

Ok, so saying bad things is worthy of the introduction of corporal punishment - will this be subject to the regular court system?
What about other crimes? Are rape and murder excluded from this corporal punishment scheme, and only words included? Advertising, cartoons, pictures included?

Anything that is covered by free speech.

Dutton sued someome for being called a 'rape apologist'.
Under the new rules, would he take up the option to punch or just let it slide?
Would Bazzi call him a 'rape apologist' knowing that Dutton could punch him, or would he choose his words more carefully?

The courts aren't full of slander/defamation cases. They're actually very rare.
Sure, the current laws play a part in keeping the numbers low.
I wouldn't expect there would be an explosion of people s**t-posting.

As you said previously, free speech has become almost a nothing term.
Mainly because, like everything, the extremes at either end have blown it all out of proportion. For 99% it is a nothing issue.

 

[awaremind]

Most people just aren’t that big of sooky sooky la las to bother, legal action is expensive and stressful.

 

[Gethelred]

You don't have to personally carry out the punch. You can sub-contract.

How many people getting punched in the nose with a steel fist will it take before people start moderating what they say?
Remember, the standard isn't slander, it is whether the other person is offended or not. That is a very low bar.
On the other side, people will just get used to others s**t-posting and learn to ignore it.
It will all fizzle out in due course. IMO.

Studies have demonstrated that introducing violence as mandated by the state causes its victims to recourse to violence ever more steadily and to recognise violence as an acceptable method to achieve goals. The inverse has been found to also be true; the longer you can put off a human from being subject to violence, the less likely it is that they will use violence to obtain their goals or see it as a valid solution to a problem.

Violence has a hardening attribute towards a society that is open with it. It's why we moved away from corporeal punishment and government use of pain as punishment for crimes.

 

[Mofra]

Most people just aren’t that big of sooky sooky la las to bother, legal action is expensive and stressful.

Much of 'free speech' that is actually legislated against is covered by different terminology anyway.

The ACCC regulate ACL so misleading and deceptive conduct (false advertising) is, in theory, appropriately dealt with.
Workplaces have rules regarding appropriate conduct
Fraud and Deception are generally covered by state laws (victims would be more likely to actually want their stuff back rather than just punch the perp)

 

[Gethelred]

Most people just aren’t that big of sooky sooky la las to bother, legal action is expensive and stressful.

If you made it cheaper to do, more people would do it.

Don't think it's a case of the wealthy being 'sooky sooky la las' so much as it's a financial barrier to defamation. Pretty sure, if given access to that part of the law on a broader basis, you would see defamation cases skyrocket because offense isn't confined to the upper classes.

 

[Number37]

Studies have demonstrated that introducing violence as mandated by the state causes its victims to recourse to violence ever more steadily and to recognise violence as an acceptable method to achieve goals. The inverse has been found to also be true; the longer you can put off a human from being subject to violence, the less likely it is that they will use violence to obtain their goals or see it as a valid solution to a problem.

Violence has a hardening attribute towards a society that is open with it. It's why we moved away from corporeal punishment and government use of pain as punishment for crimes.

This is not govt handed out punishment.
This is self regulation of behaviour between individuals or groups.
What you are describing is symmetrical schismogenesis. See Bateson.
Schismogenesis is overcome by reducing information asymmetry between individuals or groups.

 

[Number37]

If you made it cheaper to do, more people would do it.

Don't think it's a case of the wealthy being 'sooky sooky la las' so much as it's a financial barrier to defamation. Pretty sure, if given access to that part of the law on a broader basis, you would see defamation cases skyrocket because offense isn't confined to the upper classes.

You might see defamation cases skyrocket, but the average damages would fall dramatically. Joe Bloggs getting called a peddo isn't as defamatory as the PM getting called a peddo...simply because the PM stands to lose more fame than Joe Bloggs.

 

[Gethelred]

This is not govt handed out punishment.
This is self regulation of behaviour between individuals or groups.
What you are describing is symmetrical schismogenesis. See Bateson.
Schismogenesis is overcome by reducing information asymmetry between individuals or groups.

I was actually referring to Albert Bandura's social learning theories, and his experiments which demonstrated violence - particularly societal violence - as being a result of experience, whether violence is committed towards the person or to someone else in the vicinity.

The amount of violence within society increases. It isn't who is doing the violence that is important, but that violence is occurring.