[RD] Your Federal Policy Wishlist

[El_Machinae]

Inflation is ruinous to people who own a lot of assets.

I'll disagree with the above, but mainly because it lacks caveats. But it's part of a larger discussion. I was in a discussion with financiers the other day, and I think that I made some headway (finance people think of inflation in a very different way compared to non-Austrian economists). I kept just saying "Yes, it has problems. Inflation is a type of tax. It just doesn't work the way you think taxes work." Over and over.

Every complaint, then I'd say "yes, it's a tax". No one likes a tax, we get that. Well, except fines. People like fines, as long as it's for some outcome they approve of. Everyone seems to think of taxes as 'bad but necessary', and cannot see the growth side of the equation. Tax ends up being some type of power-grab by the government or some type of enforced charity service. So, it's a long road of a discussion. It's a tax, so then it matters what you buy with it. At that point, it's a discussion. Boy it was a long discussion.

The financiers had a hard time getting to 'the government can spend money usefully using a set of paradigms" from their "the government should be spending on 'certain services', that they approve of". I wasn't able to get to "inflation is how we get certain useful outcomes the cheapest way we know how", but I think I made headway.

 

[Hrothbern]

You're sat down in front of a nice-looking desk. People in suits surround you.

They say: "CFC User! The upper echelons of our government have approved one broad, or very specific, change that is entirely at your discretion! It must be somewhat realistic and relevant for the country we live in. The power is yours to effect a change unlike any we've seen before. Make your choice wisely!"

What change do you make to your country? It must be something you feel would make it a better place and it must be something that is actually within the realm of possibility (so no troll answers like "mandatory puppies for all" or "everyone pays me $5 a day"). What do you think would move your nation ahead, right now, based on a single policy change?

It can be as broad, or as specific, as you want. It can be as selfish, or as selfless, as you want. But it must be a serious answer, and it must be relevant to the nation-at-large.

A change that has no other democratic base than that it is the elected government (I assume) that gives me that choice ?
Apparently it is not needed that it was in their election or party program.
hm

As fairy wish:
In the US a National Health Service like in most western countries, and the money saved, 3-5% of GDP or so, towards Climate.

For my own country Climate,
But I am tempted to introduce a social conscription, whereby everybody is forced after secondary school to work 1 year in social programs and projects: for elderly people, physical or mentally handicapped people, youth work, helping kids with school homework, etc. Each trimester another social class, but aimed at the poor. One day a week a school day for project feedbacks, learning social skills and societal structure.
Hoping that leads to some better awareness of how our current society treats the weak and from there more social responsibility and cohesion.

 

[BenitoChavez]

Another edict from El Presidente Spengler: Abolish the electoral college, and do elections by national, popular vote. We've had two train-wrecks of a President elected by a minority of voters recently, and it's been nothing short of disastrous. The twits can still be twits, and they can still elect twits to represent them in Congress (although I might approve Tim's idea of a remedial Social Studies test for voters), but they don't get to choose the President anymore. It's proven to be too dangerous, not just for this country, but for the world. It isn't entirely their fault that so many voters are so stupid - they've been misled, miseducated, and straight-up lied to for decades - but we can't let them [screw] things up like this anymore. As Dr. Foreman said in an episode of House M.D., "If a patient has T.B., it may not be his fault, but I'm still not going to let him cough on me." Enough is enough.

As long as we are on voting reform, if I might make a suggestion to El Presidente. Change election day to not be on a Tuesday. I'm sure there is a good reason historical reason as for why it is on a Tuesday but it doesn't make sense for our present day society. People have jobs, they have kids who need to be picked up from school/daycare, and a million other things to do in their daily lives. Picking one day out of the year to vote and having it be during the week is too restrictive.

Instead voting should done over the course of a week and it should be a national holiday i.e. everyone gets that week off from work/school. We could use that week to give for some free civics lessons to the public so that they can pass their remedial Social Studies test. And voting should be compulsory, a $100 fine for not voting. I realize that might not sit well with some people so we can give a $100 credit for those that do vote to balance it out. Basically I want to give everyone as much incentive as possible to vote as it is vital to a properly functioning democracy.

 

[rah]

If you need an incentive to vote, (positive or negative) I probably would prefer that you do not vote.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I am tempted to introduce a social conscription, whereby everybody is forced after secondary school to work 1 year in social programs and projects: for elderly people, physical or mentally handicapped people, youth work, helping kids with school homework, etc. Each trimester another social class, but aimed at the poor. One day a week a school day for project feedbacks, learning social skills and societal structure.
Hoping that leads to some better awareness of how our current society treats the weak and from there more social responsibility and cohesion.

That would work for some people, who don't know that they would enjoy that sort of thing until they try it, and some need a little push to try it.

But there are some people who absolutely do not belong in the "helping professions" or anywhere near the marginalized groups in society. I've met social workers who honestly couldn't give a crap about the clients, as long as the client shuts up, lets the worker dictate to them, and the paperwork gets done.

I've met nurses who should never have been let anywhere near a patient; some of them endanger patients, and don't care. Some do it because it's inconvenient to actually follow the rules, and some do it out of indifference or spite. One nurse told me - to my face - that it's my fault that my father has dementia. Only the realization that being arrested for assault wouldn't be worth it stopped me from slapping her across the face.

Some places already have volunteer programs in schools, where the kids learn about volunteering earlier in life. If it's introduced earlier, that helps identify the people who find it to be a good fit with their lives, who enjoy it, and are good at it. The ones who hate it might end up making different career choices so they don't grow up to be the kind of nurse who should have been a truck driver and never allowed anywhere near sick people.

As long as we are on voting reform, if I might make a suggestion to El Presidente. Change election day to not be on a Tuesday. I'm sure there is a good reason historical reason as for why it is on a Tuesday but it doesn't make sense for our present day society. People have jobs, they have kids who need to be picked up from school/daycare, and a million other things to do in their daily lives. Picking one day out of the year to vote and having it be during the week is too restrictive.

Instead voting should done over the course of a week and it should be a national holiday i.e. everyone gets that week off from work/school. We could use that week to give for some free civics lessons to the public so that they can pass their remedial Social Studies test. And voting should be compulsory, a $100 fine for not voting. I realize that might not sit well with some people so we can give a $100 credit for those that do vote to balance it out. Basically I want to give everyone as much incentive as possible to vote as it is vital to a properly functioning democracy.

What a lot of people in Canada don't know is that if their work hours prevent them from getting to a polling station, their employer is obligated by law to allow them three consecutive hours off, in which to vote. I found out that my bank closes early on election days, to allow the employees to vote, and encourage the clients to vote, as well. Of course the ATMs are still available.

Of course there are options now that didn't exist before, like advance polls, mail-in ballots, in-home special ballots... but you have to jump through hoops for those. Even at advance polls people are questioned as to why they're voting in advance, since the acceptable reason is that the person will be absent from the constituency on voting day. "Because my boss won't give me time to vote" isn't one of the reasons accepted for using the advance polls, so people end up having to lie about being away.

A lot of people have recommended holding elections on the weekend. Canada tried that with the advance polls in the 2015 federal election. They were held over Thanksgiving weekend, and the results were disastrous for some of the senior and disabled voters. Some of the supposedly "accessible" polling stations were located on the second floor of the building... with no working elevator. Seems that because the polling was not only on a weekend, but a weekend with a stat holiday attached, there wasn't anybody available with a key to operate the elevator. So anyone who couldn't manage stairs was prevented from voting.

That is just one of the many egregiously wrong things that happened in the 2015 election.

 

[Synobun]

I wasn't questioned when I went for the advance poll. Best voting experience ever, though. No crowds, no wait. Super easy and stress-free.

 

[Zkribbler]

How would that possibly work as the American industrial base has already been annihilated ...

Erm, US is #2 in manufacturing, not exactly "annihilated"

 

[Lexicus]

Erm, US is #2 in manufacturing, not exactly "annihilated"

Yeah, but that's mostly coming from electronics.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I wasn't questioned when I went for the advance poll. Best voting experience ever, though. No crowds, no wait. Super easy and stress-free.

Consider yourself lucky, then. Some EC workers think they get to question you about all kinds of things before handing you the ballot.

In my case I do all my voting by in-home special ballot. I qualify for this, and it's the law that I be accommodated. The contrast between municipal, provincial, and federal is night and day.

Municipal - no problem.
Provincial - might take a bit of reminding, but it ultimately was problem-free.

But federal? Harper's little Reformacon minions were hard at work, doing their very best to make it as inconvenient as possible for the non-Conservatives to vote... meaning I checked and double-checked and triple-checked my place on the voter's list to make sure I wouldn't be among those receiving robocards directing me to nonexistent polling stations or mysteriously changing my name or address, as this had happened to others far more times than could possibly be accounted for by simple error.

When I phoned the Returning Officer to arrange for my in-home ballot I didn't expect the weeks-long runaround I got. I was asked a lot of impertinent questions, such as how did I get my mail, how did I do my shopping, how this-that-and-the-other, and was told that I'd have to get someone on the voter's list who would normally vote at my polling station to vouch for me that I actually am me and that I live where I live, even though I would also have to provide the same kinds of ID that anyone else would have to, and we would actually be doing this in my own living room surrounded by evidence that I'm me and I live there. It wasn't until weeks later that they told me I didn't actually have to do this; it must have been one hell of a speech the campaign worker gave her (I did get someone from my candidate's campaign team to advocate for me). Among other things, the Returning Officer tried to get away with "I'll send somebody over, IF I HAVE TIME."

Not good enough. It's the LAW that they had to accommodate me. And when I was making final arrangements, she had one last outrageous demand: It's the rule that anyone voting by special ballot has to provide a photocopy of whatever ID they're using, or the EC workers take pictures of it in the case of in-home ballots. This Reformacon Returning Officer wanted me to access my online banking and allow the Deputy Returning Officer and Poll Clerk team to look at my current bank statement.

No. Damn. Way. I told her there was no way I would ever allow that. I pointed out that I had already told her which forms of ID I had, and that all were on the approved list. Elections Canada has no need of my SIN, bank statement, credit card statement, tax return, or any other financial documents.


So if you avoided all that, congratulations. There were a lot of problems in the ridings with incumbent Reformacons, since that party would have hired their own to staff the polling stations. It's not the first time this sort of thing went on; back before my medical issues prevented me from working outside the home, I did work for Elections Canada in various capacities. The first interview was conducted by a 60-ish woman who was friendly, and at one point asked me point-blank if I was a member or supporter of the Reform/Canadian Alliance party. That's actually not a question that's even legal, let alone ethical. Her reaction when I didn't immediately say yes was an "Oops, I wasn't supposed to ask that, but as long as I did...?"

I tapdanced my way out of that by saying (truthfully) that I had known the incumbent for many years, as he had been my high school biology teacher in Grade 12. She beamed, taking it for granted that of course I would support my old teacher, and I got the job (should have had it anyway, given my previous experience in municipal elections; the basics are the same at all three levels of government).

 

[Lohrenswald]

Was thinking about making a huge list but since the op says one thing I'm just gonna go with two lol:

Leave EEA and NATO

 

[Hrothbern]

How would that possibly work as the American industrial base has aready been annhilated

Erm, US is #2 in manufacturing, not exactly "annihilated"

Yeah, but that's mostly coming from electronics.

Manufacturing in the US could not follow with (knowledge and investments) efficiencies the low cost Chinese import of more simple consumer products between 2000 and the 2008 crisis.
China moved on to high level product manufacturing export since the crisis, which is much more threatening for the industry of developed countries, because it made investments in emerging innovations more risky for developed countries, which happened less than could have been done, especially in the US. The 50 Billion tariff package of Trump to China aims NOT at those cheap consumer products but high level products.
Moneywise electronics kept growing in the US since 2000, but the rate of improving labor effeciencies was higher, resulting in a loss of jobs in electronics between 2010-1017, despite being the second fastest growing sector in money.
Car industry grew faster moneywise, driven by foreign investments.

Here a traditional McKinsey report describing a 4th generation growth scenario for the manufacturing industry in the US, along the classic free market way of thinking, and concluding that it is lack of financing, avoiding of capital risks, lack of innovative forward thinking, that needs to be tackled in order to make that happening. This applies to electronics as well.
Following that scenario would increase both GDP as jobs in manufacturing (until ofc the growth stops by market size limitations and the efficiency driven push out of labor will dominate again (4th generation = AI integrations all over the place)).
Staying on top of the competition rat race of manufacturing, countering the normal price down and shrinking of a maturing sector, needs continuous high rate of investments, which is basically lacking in the US from US money. Other countries investing much more benefitting, whether already having high wages like Germany or in a transition state from cheap to more expensive labor like China.

https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-i...g-it-in-america-revitalizing-us-manufacturing

 

[El_Machinae]

Liking post, flagging video for later watching.

 

[EgonSpengler]

As long as we are on voting reform, if I might make a suggestion to El Presidente. Change election day to not be on a Tuesday. I'm sure there is a good reason historical reason as for why it is on a Tuesday but it doesn't make sense for our present day society. People have jobs, they have kids who need to be picked up from school/daycare, and a million other things to do in their daily lives. Picking one day out of the year to vote and having it be during the week is too restrictive.

Instead voting should done over the course of a week and it should be a national holiday i.e. everyone gets that week off from work/school. We could use that week to give for some free civics lessons to the public so that they can pass their remedial Social Studies test. And voting should be compulsory, a $100 fine for not voting. I realize that might not sit well with some people so we can give a $100 credit for those that do vote to balance it out. Basically I want to give everyone as much incentive as possible to vote as it is vital to a properly functioning democracy.

I definitely like the idea of it being a national holiday.

I go back and forth with myself on compulsory voting, though. If it can be combined with education reform, I might be in favor. Currently, though, too many people are too poorly educated on vital issues. I remember after the 2016 election of Donald Trump, a radio show was taking calls from listeners. A woman called in to explain that she "held her nose and voted for Trump", because she believed that cutting taxes for corporations and for the wealthy would charge up the economy, improving wages for working people and whatnot. She never used the term "trickle-down economics", but that's what she was describing. The thing is, we know that it doesn't work. I think she was well-intentioned - she admitted that she didn't think Trump was a good man, she said she thought Obama was, and had voted for him - but she felt the country needed someone with business experience to run the country. Once again, she was misinformed, and thought Trump was a good businessman.

I dunno... On the one hand, I believe that if you don't vote at all, you're voting for whoever ends up winning. On the other hand, I'm not sure that a misinformed vote is any better than not voting at all. I harbor that woman and others like her no ill will - on the contrary, I feel some solidarity with them - but I think she was as qualified to elect a President as I am to do surgery. I mean, ffs, as I write this, the Attorney General is on the radio quoting the [bleep]ing Bible in defending a policy position. (Okay, it turns out that I do harbor that well-intentioned woman a little ill will. I hope she's horrified and ashamed to be an American right now.)

 

[rah]

But if anyone suggests there be a test or any limit on voting, they're instantly branded as a republican racist, so it's not going to happen.
Even the stupid and non-attentive will always have the right to vote, unless those republican racists get their way.

 

[Synobun]

But if anyone suggests there be a test or any limit on voting, they're instantly branded as a republican racist, so it's not going to happen.
Even the stupid and non-attentive will always have the right to vote, unless those republican racists get their way.

I think education is better than restricting voting rights. People will still reject it, but those who don't will be served well with the increased attention towards navigating politics.

 

[rah]

While I agree, that's not very realistic so the outcome will be the same.

 

[bhavv]

I'd like to see the test score based education system scrapped, and while it may still may involve tests, start seeing more countries adopt the Finnish methods of education as opposed to the American / British ones.

The premise that being able to memorise more things and perform better in exams = higher intelligence / ability is arguably incorrect and not applicable to every individual.

And legalize drugs .... I just wrote an explanation as to why but then realized that might be discussing illegal things.

 

[Lexicus]

Restricting voting rights is a very, very, very, very, very bad idea.

 

[Berzerker]

And legalize drugs .... I just wrote an explanation as to why but then realized that might be discussing illegal things.

everything we're discussing is illegal

 

[Arwon]

I definitely like the idea of it being a national holiday.

I go back and forth with myself on compulsory voting, though. If it can be combined with education reform, I might be in favor. Currently, though, too many people are too poorly educated on vital issues. I remember after the 2016 election of Donald Trump, a radio show was taking calls from listeners. A woman called in to explain that she "held her nose and voted for Trump", because she believed that cutting taxes for corporations and for the wealthy would charge up the economy, improving wages for working people and whatnot. She never used the term "trickle-down economics", but that's what she was describing. The thing is, we know that it doesn't work. I think she was well-intentioned - she admitted that she didn't think Trump was a good man, she said she thought Obama was, and had voted for him - but she felt the country needed someone with business experience to run the country. Once again, she was misinformed, and thought Trump was a good businessman.

I dunno... On the one hand, I believe that if you don't vote at all, you're voting for whoever ends up winning. On the other hand, I'm not sure that a misinformed vote is any better than not voting at all. I harbor that woman and others like her no ill will - on the contrary, I feel some solidarity with them - but I think she was as qualified to elect a President as I am to do surgery. I mean, ffs, as I write this, the Attorney General is on the radio quoting the [bleep]ing Bible in defending a policy position. (Okay, it turns out that I do harbor that well-intentioned woman a little ill will. I hope she's horrified and ashamed to be an American right now.)

Nah, you're voting against whichever of the candidates you're at least slightly more inclined towards. That could either be a winner or one of the losers.

Also, something like 25% of adults in the US voted for Trump, 63 million in a country of 300 million. It's folly to think all the people who didn't vote, and especially those who were discouraged or explicitly prevented from voting by a heavily racialised system of electoral administration and law, would have stumped for him.