Help design a new government - Page 2 - Political Forum

AzTeK · 03-25-2008, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

The extradition treaty with Mexico, as with all countries I am aware of, states that a person extradited cannot face a penalty that is not allowed in the extraditing country. Mexico, like most civilized countries, prohibits the death penalty therefore the death penalty cannot be applied to any person being extradited from Mexico. This is a treaty that the US agreed to so why is there an issue? There are no problems with extraditing a person from Mexico under the conditions of the treaty we have with them.

These same rules apply to cross-state extraditions inside the US as well btw. You probably know it, but just to clear it up for BobH. If a murderer that committed the murder in Texas is captured in, say, New York, and if that guy was to face possible execution if sent back to Texas, then the state of New York has every right not to hand him over.

jpn of Seattle · 03-25-2008, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

1) Publicly financed campaigns restricts Freedom of Speech. If I, as a private individual, wish to support a candidate for office then I should be allowed to spend my money promoting that person. Freedom of speech is vital in keeping a democracy healthy.

Equating money with speech works great for the rich and the toadies of the rich. It sucks for the rest of us.

Look at how the tax rates have plummeted for the rich.

It's no coincidence.

tresha · 03-26-2008, 12:21 AM

A few thoughts:

Give federal judges the power and autonomy to sentence people (i.e, no mandatory minimums and the like)

Create and implement true campaign finance reform

Set real monetary limits on lobbysits' "donations"

I believe there is already an apparatus in place, but do something to hold the president more accountable for his/her actions.

Declare the "war on drugs" the miserable failure that it is and re-direct the money into things like treatment and schools; two things that have been advocated for years to make a more last impression on the drug problem anyway.

nerv14 · 03-26-2008, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

1) Publicly financed campaigns restricts Freedom of Speech. If I, as a private individual, wish to support a candidate for office then I should be allowed to spend my money promoting that person. Freedom of speech is vital in keeping a democracy healthy.

The first amemendment protects freedome of speach which just means that people are allowed to express whatever they want, not do anything they want because of what they feel. You would be allowed to support any candidate you want but giving money to a candidate is a whole other story.

Besides interpretations of the 1st amendment there is also the fact that publicaly financed campaigns would have huge practical benefits. It would end alot of the rich's control over the sellection of certain candidates. Instead of a candidate's support from the money that their supporters have it would instead be from the actualy people. That is much more democratic European countries where it is used.

Quote:

3) The People do not elect the President, the States do. Generally speaking people have a gross misunderstanding of how a president is elected. Each State is given a number of Electorial College Members equal to their Congressional members. Each state then decides how those Electorial College Members are selected. The State Legisalture could select them, the governor could select them, the people could vote to select them, or they could even be selected by chance. It is left solely to the State to determine the selection process by the Constitution. People should understand this and actually try reading the Constitution.

Even though this is not my arguement since this thread is about a new government maybe the poster wanted the United States to be the United State. Even though I disagre with that, America's government could be redone and made more federal.

BobH. · 03-26-2008, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

The propositions put forward were merely revisions to our existing government which would be addressed by Constitutional Amendment. Do you suggest writing a new constitution from scratch?

It is a fallacy of of the Left that corporations don't pay taxes. The owners of the corporation do pay taxes. Except for a small percentage of the annual profits reserved for expansion or investment, which the corporation does directly pay income taxes on, the majority of profits are distributed as stock dividends to the owners (stockholders) and they pay the income taxes on this income. The corporation pays income taxes on all net profit after distributions to the stockholders and the stockholders pay income taxes on the distributed profits.

The extradition treaty with Mexico, as with all countries I am aware of, states that a person extradited cannot face a penalty that is not allowed in the extraditing country. Mexico, like most civilized countries, prohibits the death penalty therefore the death penalty cannot be applied to any person being extradited from Mexico. This is a treaty that the US agreed to so why is there an issue? There are no problems with extraditing a person from Mexico under the conditions of the treaty we have with them.

1. I expressed, in my opinion how best to improve one particular aspect of building a "New Government."

2. If it were true that Business' pay their share of the taxes, then they would rank first in taxes paid rather then any other category.

3. This country along with the States that have a "Death Penalty" are civilized, dispite the claim "not."

Fact is that if Kenneth Ray McDuff had been executed the first time he killed four people, rather then given a reduced sentence by the US Supreme Court and Overcrowding, six or seven young females would most likely be alive today.

By "Civilized" do you mean Cable TV, Gyms, Libraries, three meals a day, beds, congigal visits, and the right to stab, beat or slash to death any inmate one desires, that "Civilized?"

Or was there another "Civilized," in mind?

Fact is that Mexico observes the right not to send criminals that face the "Death Penalty" back to the US where a crime was committed, and at the same time does not do anything to hobble a flood of Illegal Immigrants, Drugs, Criminals and only God knows what else.

Sounds kind of like our country, huh?

How does that 14th Amendment go? Something about equallity of the Law, or was that "Pick and Choose?"

jpn of Seattle · 03-26-2008, 10:20 PM

Federal corporate taxes in the United States are the third lowest among developed nations. They have dramatically fallen over the past thirty years due to the influence of the rich and powerful in our politics.

It's sickening to watch the toadies of the rich carrying their water for them while the middle class disappears under the massive federal debt.

BloodPhart · 03-26-2008, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prrriiide

Like the Constitutionally enumerated DoD and DoJ?

Better idea: instead of eliminating or creating any departments, take the ones we have and make the people running them individually responsible for the ethical and cost-effective way the department and its sub-departments is run by using salary incentives and dis-incentives. The carrot and stick method might be pedestrian, but it has worked for many years.

That would be a free market idea that conservatives have been trying to push into the government for years. The government is too bloated and wasteful. But you would have to weaken Laws that protect Labor Unions. Government Unions are some of the strongest, and they would never go along with their members getting more scrutiny.

BloodPhart · 03-26-2008, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpn of Seattle

Federal corporate taxes in the United States are the third lowest among developed nations. They have dramatically fallen over the past thirty years due to the influence of the rich and powerful in our politics.

Thats completly not true. I posted this a few weeks ago in another thread. the corporate tax rate in the US is around 38% with no plans to cut it anytime soon. That is second only to Germany at 38.1%, which plans to cut in the next year.
Europe is slashing corporate tax rates to lure them.

Quote:

It's sickening to watch the toadies of the rich carrying their water for them while the middle class disappears under the massive federal debt.

The federal debt has nothing to do with the middle class. Class warfare solves nothing

AzTeK · 03-27-2008, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodPhart

The federal debt has nothing to do with the middle class. Class warfare solves nothing

Federal debt, specially at the proportions of the US (absolutely speaking) can have and has a real influence on inflation. Inflation generally is a cause of the middle class disappearing. The rich don't care about inflation, they even profit from it. The poor..well, they'll just get poorer. The middle class however is the one getting the big shaft in terms of degradation of status. A middle class cannot form and cannot be upheld without very moderate inflation rates. Big government debt, specially if it rises as quickly as US debt has risen during W. Bush, has a real impact on inflation - and thus on the middle class.

jpn of Seattle · 03-27-2008, 09:49 AM

The federal debt exploded as tax rates on the rich were slashed (and the tax on corporate taxes were slashed by more than a quarter between 1979 and 2006). This is a burden on the middle class as government involvement in managing our social and economic infrastructure is weakened as a result.
And it tends to raise interest rates.
And it weakens our overall economic standing.

And it must be paid for eventually, somehow. Restore the tax rates on the rich to where they were when they were doing just fine, in the 1990s. Use the income to implement universal health insurance and and bring fisacal sanity back to D.C.

Why is deficit spending so popular among Republicans?
http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif