Subsidize farming to bring interest into the field, and keep our nation a bit more sufficient.

no

no

NO

Leave farming to us down here, thank you.

No subsidize/tariffs cheating. Free the goddamn market.

The issue with capitalism is corporate corruption. The issue with communism is government corruption.

However, there is no issue that has ever happened to a government that upholds a fair as well as free market whilst upholding the rights of its citizens and obeying a republican(as in the government type) constitution.

What party or side do you consider yourself to be? I see negatives to Democrats and Republicans here.

I *think* he's referring to Bill, not Hillary.

Well, kill Bill, sure (he's the one who indiscriminatingly bombed Serbia, right?).

Place a quota of jobs for companies that must be filled in the US. This will generate money by stopping overseas shipping and bringing jobs home. This will be about 1-4% of the jobs in the company.

Overseas shipping is great. I love internationalisation, and it forces Americans to be competitive. "Protectionism" is a form of "anti-competition". If they want to compete, they have to work for a lower price, it's just babying Americans and raising more walls between countries. Pay whoever is the best, not just Americans only.

Subsidize farming to bring interest into the field, and keep our nation a bit more sufficient.

"Bring interest into the field"? What's that supposed to mean? Farming is already a pretty profitable business with hordes of businesses. As for if you mean just farmer families, nah, don't fund them. They're unsustainable (that's why you're funding them in the first site), either they need to get better at farming either they need to do something else, paying them for failing is not a good plan.

Limited amounts of fracking. If sustainable areas are able to be set up for wildlife, fracking could increase

Petrol digging should be ended altogether, but fracking is even worse, and pretty hard to trace. More digging for petrol is not the way to an energy-independent America, since petrol runs out, while wind and Sun and waterflow doesn't.

Make minimum wage at the level needed for sustaining oneself.

You say you are all about the jobs...why do you want to stifle them with minimum wage? Minimum wage is supposedly for "worker rights", but most "worker rights" harm both workers and businesses. If someone wants to work for less, why bar them from working for less?

increase tariffs.

No, for grounds given earlier.

Cut spending and size of the military slightly.

Frankly, cut spending by 110% - make the military forces pay back the government. They've already got enough military equipment for 40 years, if they need a bit more money, sell some tanks or stuff to Luxemburg.

Formally declare war on ISIS. Bring ground troops.

And bring about more havoc in the Middle East, as America is well-known to do. Seriously, I know you might have faith that your government and military forces are trying to do right, but you can't really have truth-based faith that your government and military forces do right at all. They wreck everywhere they go, they're the number 1 warring military forces, they're the biggest block against peace.

Allow Iran nuclear power, but weaponry will result in sanctions

First, Iran might as well have nuclear weapons right now, and you don't know it. You won't know it. However, Iran has no grounds to target America if America stops its awkward hostility against Iran and other OPEC countries. I mean really, just about every OPEC country is either in ruins, an American ally, or an American foe.

Iran has enough problems in the Sunni theocratically dominated Middle East.

Keep NATO, but require all members to contribute a certain amount of their armed forces to the organization.

Or, how about NATO stops doing "pre-emptive strikes" and go back to its original purpose of a defence pact. If Canada or something gets invaded then all the countries in NATO have to help Canada fight off the invaders.

Cooperate with Russia to take down threats in the Middle East.

There is much misinformation here. Russia is leaving Syria except for the old military base. So how about cooperating with Iran, who actually has been doing the most deed against the Mashriq since it joined?

Give all current illegal immigrants citizenship. Illegals after that will have to go through citizenship

Make citizenship mostly symbolic, no human should have an advantage over another just since they were born in a different set of borders ruled by a different government.

By the way, this seems pretty arbitrary.

The children of those mentioned in rule 4 will be given temporary citizenship until they are 18, and then must go through the same process.

Ditto.

Place a quota on refugees from Syria and Iraq. A large rush of refugees could result in social problems.

No, it doesn't, it's been shown many times. America should never refuse a refugee (for one, it's ironic), since helping a human is far better than helping your government. Giving a human access to American living settings is far more important than making sure than, what...culture? For having cultural superiority? For making sure the Germanic whiteskins stay the majority? Whiteskins, you've had your turn in America, don't fret and make laws to make sure you're at the top. And...I can't really think of any other problems. Crime rates and general hooliganism are usually less than the natural population, so nothing there.

Revive NASA and place a greater emphasis on its possibilities.

There are no good possibilities, only military ones. Colonising Mars? America's behind there. Astronomy is cool, but it's just so expensive, you could spend the money on much more things. The American space programme has always been embarrassingly slow despite being very well-funded (in truth, more funds went to developing the rocket that went to the Moon than the whole American atomic bomb project) in the past, and it'd cost loads to get it up there, and with that money, hold referenda on controversial subjects, do government-led statistic studies to see what is right (for example, gun control), invest in clean energy, do cheaper research.

Introduce the idea of nuclear power.

Um, that's been "introduced" 90 years ago...America is pretty big when it comes to nuclear power. But it sharply lags behind in clean power.

Provide money to national parks, and allow limited mining and logging in them if agreed.

Allow more public access for fun, then if that doesn't work, then allow mining, and if they're still not profitable, then sell it. Keep the ones that are profitable.

Eminent domain can be used only if the reason for use is logical

That is so vague. But anyhow, a commitee should never legally choose for you whether you get to keep your life/land. Your life and stuff are the two things that should never be taken away from you against your will, especially if it's a legal misdeed.

Let the district choose whether or not evolution is taught in schools.

Holy crap, are you serious? Evolution should most certainly be taught, it's the scientific theory of evolution that has by miles the most proof behind it. But no, since you can't see an atom/chemic bonds, then it must be God holding humans and life together? Holy crap, c'mon.

The income tax is the worst thing to ever happen in American history. It paved the way for huge government, which is never a good thing. I don't understand how people are okay with the government just taking what you earn.

Keep (but lower) income tax, it's probably a necessary evil. What countries spent and how countries got their money was much different in the times of no taxes, nowadays there'd be no way to realistically fund all of it without some taxes of kinds.

The issue with capitalism is corporate corruption. The issue with communism is government corruption.

That's a problem with both, except corporate corruption/embezzling doesn't mandate you giving money to them by law, while government corruption does.

However, there is no issue that has ever happened to a government that upholds a fair as well as free market whilst upholding the rights of its citizens and obeying a republican(as in the government type) constitution.

Rights = you can kill or hurt anyone you want, and not be given punishment by the government
= you can steal anything, and not be given punishment by the government

Sounds great, Mongolia.

What party or side do you consider yourself to be? I see negatives to Democrats and Republicans here.

I am for the Libertarian group the most in America, Marc Feldman is the candidate I like the most, maybe I'll do a what's bad about him, too. But anyhow, the Libertarian Group is not going, so Democrats out of the two big groups. You see the problem list for Sanders and Clinton are much shorter than the Republicans, the Democrats are less warmongering and more for-immigration, which are the big + for me.

Well xy you act as though the government allowing theft and murder is a bad thing.

If anything, it's a good thing for the countrues that are lawful republics with more respectable rights.

When you have an economy based on the free market, you're creating a free market political sphere. You can elect who best represents you, you can migrate to a better country. If there are no better countries, revolution works well too.

In essence, if your country has an awful constitution, expect to get trampled by your superior neighbors.

It's natural selection in politico economics. You should feel stupid in exactly 3..2..1.

Why Marc Feldman is bad (it's going to be a short list):

*For lowering foreign help spending.

*For totally ridding any kind of taxpaid healthcare (including funds to lower-income folk to buy some health).
*For forcing vaccination upon children only if they go to public school (they can still spread illnesses/die even if they don't).
*Against putting any government-set restrictions on buying a gun.

*Against time limits for American lower house members.
*For curbing a citizen's suing powers (you can't sue whoever you want for any grounds).
*Against funding wind power.
*For greatening hydraulic fracturing, but with more oversight forced.
*Against mandating a photographic identification to vote.
*Against federal teaching/marking standards.
*Against testing those getting welfare for drugs.
*Against the Transpacific Partnership (TPP).
*Against legalising suicide, even for terminally ill patiences (though he is for the right to refuse life support)
*Against the death penalty.

*Against taking out references to God in government stuff.

Well xy you act as though the government allowing theft and murder is a bad thing.

If anything, it's a good thing for the countrues that are lawful republics with more respectable rights.

When you have an economy based on the free market, you're creating a free market political sphere. You can elect who best represents you, you can migrate to a better country. If there are no better countries, revolution works well too.

In essence, if your country has an awful constitution, expect to get trampled by your superior neighbors.

It's natural selection in politico economics. You should feel stupid in exactly 3..2..1.

I feel your stupidity, not mine.

So you are for governments allowing legalising theft and murder since they'll get conquered anyway? First, that's still legalising theft and murder, and it's going to happen for a something timeframe, not nothing. Folk will kill folk and legally get away with it. Second, countries don't get conquered based on how they rule, its a factor, but today much bigger factors are what resources does the country/geopolitic aptitude and how strong is it (which is partially influenced by government kind).

Think about this, though, what if the government uses the same bit of the constitution to kill anybody they want, whenever they want, for whatever grounds? That's an unfree environ, but a strong one, since they can kill any protestors (and of course, the constitution is legally mandated, so that you can't edit it).

Yeah Bill Clinton was the bloke who bombed Serbia. Add Bush Jr and Sr ,and Obama to the list too. I think we could spare the Peanut President.

If you want to avoid being conquered and governed over, don't be governable.

i like big government keep me nice nd warm

Xy a nation that kills its protesters is not a nation but a genocide in progress. By murdering their own people, they'd be braking human rights and their economy would take a nose dive from sanctions and lack of labor force.

Honestly, xy. Do you even consider

china b doing all sorts of shit that would be considered crimes against humanity

where r their sanctons lol

Xy a nation that kills its protesters is not a nation but a genocide in progress.

First, a genocide means killing a specific group of folk based on some cultural aspect of them, I think the word you look for is democide.

By murdering their own people, they'd be braking human rights

There's no human rights to break, the constitution says it's ok - it's ok. As you said, "you act as though the government allowing theft and murder is a bad thing."

their economy would take a nose dive from sanctions and lack of labor force.

Oh, what an idealistic outlook of the world...where are the American sanctions on Israel, I wonder...

What about Vermin Supreme?

Xy, I think you are ignoring my point.

By Natural Selection, the current governments of today have been created. Because past types have failed or fell into pieces, new and better and learn'd governments rose from the ashes. If a government doesn't allow such basic human rights such as life and liberty or taxation with representation, they are not going to last long from external pressure and internal pressure. The thing that will turn a government's head the most is the mobs that arise from working masses.

Xy you continue to misunderstand or worse, you purposely distort my points. When a nation WILLINGLY, puts into its constitution that basic human rights are not a part of their nation's right, it is okay because that government will never last.

If the government does not satisfy its people with decentralization, liberties, rights, etc., the government will not maintain popular support, and without popular support you might as well be non-existent already.

It is similar to Gandhi's situation. The British soldiers can only slaughter so many Indians, they will only have so many bullets, and there are only so many Indians. There's a point where they either run out of ammunition or there are no more Indians. If they run out of Indians, there is no labor force. Without a labor force, there is no economy and without economy there is no government because the government has nothing to base itself upon.

If the government does not maintain a balance of limited government, maintaining the rights of its people and sustaining a free but fair market, the government will collapse because the work force will eventually dissipate, whether through genocide (oh I'm sorry, 'democide', because I care about words rather than sentiments), rioting or other protest methods.

So when I say it's not a bad thing, it's because it doesn't matter. The government will never last long enough for it to matter.

Law, and in succession, rights, is the fundamental distinction between anarchy/democracy and the Republic. (This is more of a personal speculation, but I'd say Law is what prevents majority rule and minority rule from existing, replaced by "legal" rule, you could say?) And if you want your republic to last, you need good laws. Those without good laws will die out, those with will prosper.

this is how i think the american government should be, get ready for full on socialism :P
*fuck israel, leave it to its own fate
*use drones only in the event of a war
*grow foreign help spending but only if you can be sure that the foreign governments arent just going to take all the money
*let everybody work, no work visas
*take private land but only for things like windfarms or research and give money to those your taking the land from
*let the FBI spy on people, if your not doing anything wrong what does it matter to you
*make national teaching standards stricter(like in finland), education is the future of the world and from what ive seen the education in the US is pretty lousy
*dont make companies have employment quotas, just employ the most qualified
*stop companies from donating to campaigns, some companies will ind other ways but some will also be discouraged
*make companies serve anyone
*limit legal suing powers, everybodys suing everybody for ridiculous things and the only people who are winning from this are lawyers
*shrink the american space programme or change it completely so that its more efficient
*gay marriage legal
*rid the death penalty, too risky, if it turns out you were wrong about the person there is no going back
*implement a carbon tax (fucking tony abbot, removing the carbon tax in Australia)
*no photographic identification for voting
*always give welfare to those without a job but give less if they arent looking for work and more if they are
*legalise marijuana
*dont make bitcoin legal currency
*send troops to crush ISIS as quickly as possible and then gtfo of the middle east including israel
*have GMOs not have to be labelled
*fracking legal but heavily discouraged and only in areas without people
*prochoice, the fetus isnt a human yet
*take references to god out of american legal stuff, 17% of america isnt christian
*open borders
*no torture
*decrease military spending a shitload
*no gerrymandering
*government healthcare for all, but only if its something serious, if you go to the doctor for a cold you have to pay for that yourself


theres probably a lot more but i cant think of them right now

*let the FBI spy on people, if your not doing anything wrong what does it matter to you

Folk have a right to privacy, disband the FBI in general, we don't need it.

*make companies serve anyone

Why? If you don't like a certain group of folk , don't serve them. You're a bigot but you shouldn't be forced to serve them. And if you're that bad, folk will stop buying from you and force you to either go out of business or start serving the folk you weren't serving.

*legalise marijuana

Legalize all drugs, not just marijuana.

*have GMOs not have to be labelled

Folk have a right to know what they're eating at all times.

*send troops to crush ISIS as quickly as possible and then gtfo of the middle east including israel

That would make even more folk hate us and give the radicals fuel for their fire. Just leave.

you all need a beer, I feel sorry for your poor blokes,

you continue to misunderstand or worse, you purposely distort my points. When a nation WILLINGLY, puts into its constitution that basic human rights are not a part of their nation's right, it is okay because that government will never last.

It's not ok, even assuming it won't be long-lived, that kind of thing should not have any existence. You can justify torture using the same phrase: it won't last.

Also, say where I have distorted your points at all.

By Natural Selection, the current governments of today have been created. Because past types have failed or fell into pieces, new and better and learn'd governments rose from the ashes.

Well, congratulation to the genius who figured that out. The grounds government is here today is since it wasn't thrown away earlier.

[/quote]If a government doesn't allow such basic human rights such as life and liberty or taxation with representation, they are not going to last long from external pressure and internal pressure. The thing that will turn a government's head the most is the mobs that arise from working masses.

If the government does not satisfy its people with decentralization, liberties, rights, etc., the government will not maintain popular support, and without popular support you might as well be non-existent already.[/quote]

Have you not seen, like, every modern government? Some worse than others. And the sad truth is, the more authoritarian governments are the more stable ones, with freedom comes a weak government. It was not Stalinist's paranoid unfree USSR that led to its collapse, even in one of the worst wars to befall Russia ever, but it was Gorbachöv's open free USSR. It wasn't DPPSO Aleksandr III who was killed, but the freer Aleksandr II. In Yugoslavia, in China, Mao-Tsedung had his great time.

It is similar to Gandhi's situation. The British soldiers can only slaughter so many Indians, they will only have so many bullets, and there are only so many Indians. There's a point where they either run out of ammunition or there are no more Indians. If they run out of Indians, there is no labor force. Without a labor force, there is no economy and without economy there is no government because the government has nothing to base itself upon.

Gandhi's a special case, that there is rioting even going on in the first site, and one of the things he constantly talked about in his speeches was how effective basically embarassing the British subjects, disheartening them, if you want to think of it as psychologic warfare, sure, go ahead.

If the government does not maintain a balance of limited government, maintaining the rights of its people and sustaining a free but fair market, the government will collapse because the work force will eventually dissipate, whether through genocide (oh I'm sorry, 'democide', because I care about words rather than sentiments), rioting or other protest methods.

That's few countries, even today. China, a very big government, with little freedom, and doesn't have free markets all over (and even the "free markets" are not fully free). India and America, India's a medium government, America's a big one, with middle speech freedom, mostly free markets. But I don't disagree, governments like these will eventually dissipate, just as everything does, but I guarantee you the confederation lasts less than the federation.

And you literally said something like "How can anyone like Democrats this election year?"! Democrats aren't that much better, but you're supporting folk who want to grow military spending even more, making a new war on immigration, going on with the war on drugs, for uncurbed government surveillence on its population, over the Democrats?

And if you want your republic to last, you need good laws. Those without good laws will die out, those with will prosper.

Law: if you insult the president, we put you in gaol for 2 years. Belarus has this actual law, and is poor on speech freedom, didn't see riots last I checked.

grow foreign help spending but only if you can be sure that the foreign governments arent just going to take all the money

Woah woah, why are you even giving it to foreign governments? Heck no, don't trust them with that money, just pay to Doctors without Borders, and other like organisations.

let the FBI spy on people, if your not doing anything wrong what does it matter to you

It's more what the FBI is doing wrong. This will only make it easier to kill or arrest those spreading bad words, it paves the way to a restricted speech freedom. Just imagine if Trump takes your suggestion here (he says he will), combine that with tougher "libel laws", and you've got little speech freedom. Don't trust the government. They corrupt like everything.

make national teaching standards stricter(like in finland), education is the future of the world and from what ive seen the education in the US is pretty lousy

America's actually quite ahead, it's basically the same argument when saying that America should legalise gay marriage since every other country has - no, still a pretty small minority of countries legalised gay marriage. According to the UN teaching index, America ranks #5.

limit legal suing powers, everybodys suing everybody for ridiculous things and the only people who are winning from this are lawyers

No, folk are paying their lawyers for this, and folk should be allowed to pay their lawyers. Folk should be allowed to sue anyone they want for any grounds, and any curbing of that is basically doing the very thing you hate - making big businesses super-powerful. If suing wasn't allowed in a capitalist world, capitalism would grow ugly.

rid the death penalty, too risky, if it turns out you were wrong about the person there is no going back

Or, or, just have stricter standards for proof, so it won't "turn out you were wrong". And still, there is no going back if say the fellow dies in gaol, no way to get those years back.

implement a carbon tax (fucking tony abbot, removing the carbon tax in Australia)

I'd be for something like this, but I've no idea how it would be measured/implemented.

dont make bitcoin legal currency

Why not?

have GMOs not have to be labelled

Hell, no. GMOs have to be labelled, for grounds I gave earlier. They're dangerous, eaters always have a right to know what is in their food.

America's actually quite ahead, it's basically the same argument when saying that America should legalise gay marriage since every other country has - no, still a pretty small minority of countries legalised gay marriage. According to the UN teaching index, America ranks #5.


compared to other first world western countries it isnt that far ahead, and for the biggest economy on earth it should be first second or third, according to the OECD rankings it is 28th
http://www.educatoronline.com.au/news/oecd-reveals-global-education-ranking-200395.aspx