[QUOTE=Eudoxia;32494917]Independent communities, government in a scale comprehensible by its citizens, molecular manufacturing/3D printers providing material goods and basic sustenance done by -- Yes -- robots.[/QUOTE]
Hmm...
That might actually work, though practically your molecular manufacturing/3d printers would be unrealistic but, eh, it's a dream.
Only issue with small communities is that your going back to tribes. Eventually differing opinions will lead to problems. Then war.
Still supporting the God/AI world leader.
[editline]6th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;32538770]A benevolent dictatorship is a close one, as it is both an efficient system and looks after the persons within their borders.[/QUOTE]
I support you.
[editline]6th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;32545481]Like you could have a system whereby there is a LAN for a single apartment block/office/factory/etc along with a local soviet. Then have all the ones in a city controlled by a single city council and a city level soviet. Connect them all up, distribute media to people for free and implement socialist practices such as healthcare, safety regulations, etc. The trade unions can be used to identify problems that can be sent to the local soviet and sorted out efficiently. The computers throughout an entire nation can be used for the processing of various things, with a machines spare processing power to be used on various things around the nation.
Dissent would be identified, silenced, and then have the root of the problem identified and fixed so it will not arise again, whilst keeping the people happy.
There would still be a central city and such, where national decisions can be taken with utmost efficiency.[/QUOTE]
Sounds EXACTLY like Helios. I mean, Helios was the internet after all.
I kidna like this idea, it seems efficient, though there is no way humanity would except this. *Sigh* we are such a stupid race.
One where the people working in said government care more about the people rather than all the money they make off of the aforementioned people trying to live their lives.
While I was in government class today I came up with an idea to reform the legislative branch, and the way the president/prime minister is elected.
There are no political parties. At all. The way voting works is each county (or however low you want to go) floats a candidate, and the whole state votes on the candidates (or for bigger states you can separate states into regions) Then, once a candidate has been picked for the state, the region that the state is in votes on the candidates. Whoever wins that, moves onto the national election. Whoever wins that becomes an elected official. The voting can either be done with a popular vote(I think it would be best), or an electoral college similar to what america has now.
In congress (or whatever) everything is done blind. Congresspeople are not allowed to socialize or become friends with other congressman. When someone wants a bill to be passed, they send it anonymously to a speaker who does not vote or give any opinion, who then reads it out anonymously to congress. Anyone wishing to debate the bill sends an anonymous argument to the speaker, who will then read it aloud. When it comes time to vote, all voting is done blind. Each legislator votes without consulting anyone else, and without knowing who said what, so we don't have the forming of political parties.
I call it the zero-party system
[QUOTE=neos300;32659432]While I was in government class today I came up with an idea to reform the legislative branch, and the way the president/prime minister is elected.
There are no political parties. At all. The way voting works is each county (or however low you want to go) floats a candidate, and the whole state votes on the candidates (or for bigger states you can separate states into regions) Then, once a candidate has been picked for the state, the region that the state is in votes on the candidates. Whoever wins that, moves onto the national election. Whoever wins that becomes an elected official. The voting can either be done with a popular vote(I think it would be best), or an electoral college similar to what america has now.
In congress (or whatever) everything is done blind. Congresspeople are not allowed to socialize or become friends with other congressman. When someone wants a bill to be passed, they send it anonymously to a speaker who does not vote or give any opinion, who then reads it out anonymously to congress. Anyone wishing to debate the bill sends an anonymous argument to the speaker, who will then read it aloud. When it comes time to vote, all voting is done blind. Each legislator votes without consulting anyone else, and without knowing who said what, so we don't have the forming of political parties.
I call it the zero-party system[/QUOTE]
Doesn't actually sound like a bad idea. It seems a little rough around the edges, but it's a good start.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;32659513]Doesn't actually sound like a bad idea. It seems a little rough around the edges, but it's a good start.[/QUOTE]
I came up with it in about 30 seconds because my goverment teacher decided to call on me to ask me what my perfect goverment was.
I was going to say something about socialism but my teacher is extreme republican so I had to think up this instead.
I've been thinking about this immensely as of recent, and although my concept is very similar to existing ones, here's my concept I've applied to a federal nation:
Of course there are two levels of government: State and Federal. State legislation must remain within the limits of a national constitution. There are multiple levels of government, being a House of Representatives and a Senate. Each state can have a varying amount of Represenatives, as Representatives represent towns and cities that meet certain conditions (such as a minimum population, a hospital and schools, stuff like that. Also a forum or meeting place, so people can discuss politics with their Reps on certain occasions). However each state has a fixed number of Senators (much like the US).
For State wide legislation, the populace can propose bills to their Representatives or Senators, or either of them can propose their own bills. Once this has been accepted, a petition is started, and once a certain amount of signatures are met (probably proportional to the population of the state, such as 10%) within a certain period of time, the bill is passed to the governing body of that state. If at least half of the Representatives pass the bill, the bill goes to the Senators of the state, where instead of saying yes or no to the bill, they have to either accept it or properly justify why the bill shouldn't go ahead. If at least 30% of the senators do this, the bill is then presented to the populace, and although not all the voting body should need to vote on it, a certain minimum of people must vote for it, and if it passes say 60% approval, it then bypasses the Senate. This effectively finishes the bill, and determines whether or not it is passed. If less than 30% of the senators block the bill, it is still passed anyways.
Similar concept for Federal bills. There are no petitions after a politician proposes a bill, but a bill needs a petition of a minimum signatures before being proposed. Federal bills can introduce new legislation, but can also adjust the constitution (I'll go into that later). For legislative bills, the Reps for each state vote on the Bill, and it needs 50% approval from the Reps of each state to be passed. This means that a 90% approval of a few states can't bypass a 20% approval from other states. Once that is done, it is passed to the Senators and once again if at least 30% of Senators justify why it shouldn't go ahead, it will stop and the populace should have the vote yet again. So pretty much same concept as State legislation. For changes to the constitution, the bill only goes through the Representatives (and needs 50% approval from all states), and instead of going to the Senate a national compulsory referendum for all voters in called on. If at least 60% of all people in the nation vote for it, it goes through and the constitution is changed.
Political parties can be formed, but they won't recognised. This means that politicians can identify themselves with one of the parties, but it won't be official. Instead of only two parties, many parties of course can be formed. Voting for Reps is done within the areas that the Reps represent. Many candidates can stand, but it is not first past the post. Rather, candidates who receive the least amount of votes are removed one by one, and so multiple rounds of votes are performed. This is done till a clear majority is found (at least 50% of votes for a candidate). Same goes for senators. Reps can only remain in office for 16 years straight, with terms of 4 years. Once a Rep has finished his fourth term, he needs to step down from office until the next election, or if he or she meets certain criteria (minimum age and residence in the state for example), he or she can stand for the senate (but give up his or her Rep seat if he or she can still stand for Rep). Senators also have term limits, but only of 12 years (three terms of four years). After that, he or she can go back to the Reps or try for Senator next elections.
The idea is very rough and similar to existing systems, but I kind of like this government. It gives more power to the people, and the idea of at least 50% of Reps in each state supporting federal bills mean that larger states don't get more power over smaller states. Anyways this is the political side, I still need to think of the economic side. Anyways so far it is just improving the current system a bit. Things like a referendum for changes to constitution already exist in some places, such as here in Australia.
[QUOTE=Alpha 1-1;32659381]
Sounds EXACTLY like Helios. I mean, Helios was the internet after all.
I kidna like this idea, it seems efficient, though there is no way humanity would except this. *Sigh* we are such a stupid race.[/QUOTE]
Humans tend to naturally gravitate towards a despotic ruler. Most democratic regimes survive on average for about 200 years then lapse into despotism again. The best idea in this case would be to exploit the situation so as to create a stable long lived regime that cares for the people and is intend on taking over the earth and having large scale space exploration.
The perfect government would be absolutely no mass control over anyone. It might be a chaotic, scary world, but it would be the perfect government. Basically a socially global free-for-all.
[QUOTE=neos300;32659739]I came up with it in about 30 seconds because my goverment teacher decided to call on me to ask me what my perfect goverment was.
I was going to say something about socialism but my teacher is extreme republican so I had to think up this instead.[/QUOTE]
I know exactly how it feels to have a teacher who fundamentally disagrees with you. However, last year during an AP government class I took, I had perhaps one of the most neutral teachers I've ever had. To this day, I still can't figure out if he's a Democrat or a Republican. He did an amazing job masking his own opinions.
[QUOTE=neos300;32659432]While I was in government class today I came up with an idea to reform the legislative branch, and the way the president/prime minister is elected.
There are no political parties. At all. The way voting works is each county (or however low you want to go) floats a candidate, and the whole state votes on the candidates (or for bigger states you can separate states into regions) Then, once a candidate has been picked for the state, the region that the state is in votes on the candidates. Whoever wins that, moves onto the national election. Whoever wins that becomes an elected official. The voting can either be done with a popular vote(I think it would be best), or an electoral college similar to what america has now.
In congress (or whatever) everything is done blind. Congresspeople are not allowed to socialize or become friends with other congressman. When someone wants a bill to be passed, they send it anonymously to a speaker who does not vote or give any opinion, who then reads it out anonymously to congress. Anyone wishing to debate the bill sends an anonymous argument to the speaker, who will then read it aloud. When it comes time to vote, all voting is done blind. Each legislator votes without consulting anyone else, and without knowing who said what, so we don't have the forming of political parties.
I call it the zero-party system[/QUOTE]I like this a lot.
Where's Winner when you need it?
More stuff about my idea I thought up in the shower: (This part won't work unless the citizens actually take the time to read stuff about candidates and vote based on that info)
There is no such thing as donating to a campaign. The way a voter receives info about a candidate is that an outside source (such as a private investigator) collects all information, good or bad, about the candidate and votes based on that info.
I do believe that a perfect government would be Socialist liberal democracy...
The best government is the one with which has the most support among the people at the time.
Not to say it's the perfect one, but it's the one it deserves. Not enough social evolution has been done yet to determine it.
I don't think there is such a thing as a perfect government. But a good government is one that is more concerned with the welfare of it's people rather than how much money it can earn.
The problem is that you can agree with some of their policies but not others, it seems like a better plan would be to vote for the policy rather than the party.
I love how Pepin starts by saying that there's no such thing as a perfect government and then starts masturbating to some bullshit anarcho-capitalist society that is free of crime and poverty because the free market is the answer to fucking everything forever.
As for a perfect system, there isn't one and anyone who says otherwise is either utterly delusional or a propaganda minister.
I've always been a strong believer in socialism, but I know for a fact that in practice it'd never work.
As someone said earlier, the perfect government is having no government. But you cannot have a perfect government in an imperfect world.
Didnt an episode in Star Trek state that the Nazi's/Hitler's form of government was the most efficient?
The perfect government is an utopia, and the reason is quite simple:
Power corrupts people.
[editline]25th October 2011[/editline]
-snip-
My Government is the one
Negotiating with terrorist organization and then releasing 1000 prisoner terrorists for one solider of it's own.
happend last week, the solider gilad shalit returned home after 5.5 years held by terrorists.
[QUOTE=Lyoko2;32972304]My Government is the one
Negotiating with terrorist organization and then releasing 1000 prisoner terrorists for one solider of it's own.
happend last week, the solider gilad shalit returned home after 5.5 years held by terrorists.[/QUOTE]Israel is far from being a good government. It's hilarious and surprising that you have the audacity to proclaim something so absurd.
[editline]26th October 2011[/editline]
And you didn’t release “1,000 terrorists” Around a dozen were pretty brutal terrorists and a hundred others served life-time (e.g. attacking/stabbing occupation soldiers). The media emphasized on this group of people and specifically stated how many of them were terrorists. People just assume they all were because of the media only covered the worst of the prisoners, not the rest.
The rest/majority were [URL="http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,656934,00.html"]no doubt given false[/URL] convictions [URL="http://www.btselem.org/administrative_detention"]or were just denied trial[/URL]. Primarily due to being used as a bargaining chip for deals like this, or for political reasons.
One that doesn't include assholes, liars or idiots.
[QUOTE=Virtanen;32972558]One that doesn't include assholes, liars or idiots.[/QUOTE]
Now THAT will never happen, sadly.
There is no way to make a "perfect" government. As long as a you have human beings, people will hold different opinions and not everyone will be happy.
I, in all honesty, say Communism, provided that it is done correctly.
A perfect government is one that never has to govern because its citizens aren't assholes
[QUOTE=pike1337;32984143]I, in all honesty, say Communism, provided that it is done correctly.[/QUOTE] Except that's impossible considering that whole 'human nature' thing.
[QUOTE=kaine123;33012313]Except that's impossible considering that whole 'human nature' thing.[/QUOTE]
Not really. If you have 5 generations of people raised in a Communistic environment it will always remain as such for a long time.
The perfect government is one that supports the needs and the wants of the general population rather than spoon feeding power to those who are already powerful in regards to their financial and social standing.
I don't know, Sweden seems quite awesome. Maybe not perfect but pretty good.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;33013006]Not really. If you have 5 generations of people raised in a Communistic environment it will always remain as such for a long time.[/QUOTE] Give me an example of a communist country that hasn't had huge problems where communism was a leading factor to those problems.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.