The Perfect Society

[Kitty.]

A while ago, we had a thread where people described how they would run the government. It's time for a similar one.
If you could change society to where it would please you, what would you do? What rules would you make? How would people act?

[BDF]

Ugh... there is no such thing as perfect society by nature of it. Humans inherently will have differences, fight with each other, and some will attempt to grab power for themselves and elect themselves as leaders one way or another.

Perfect society is impossible.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by BDF

Ugh... there is no such thing as perfect society by nature of it. Humans inherently will have differences, fight with each other, and some will attempt to grab power for themselves and elect themselves as leaders one way or another.

Perfect society is impossible.

Brilliant non-answer! I think we can assume what she means is "What things would you change that you think would make a better society?" which is actually a obvious question..

On the other hand, this is a *huge* question. I'd like a few things though..

Greater freedom of information - zero censoring of any kind of content for those above 18, less for those under
Less power to the government - if the 51% of the people want something, the government cannot just say no, for example
Massively decreased surveillance, police power etc.
Decriminalise certain drugs and legalise prostitution.

That's just a few. Might add more later.

[TigerTank77]

Less government, but more centralized. No more states bickering and deciding on the level of personal freedom.

Lower drinking age to 18. Or, raise military draft age to 21. Pick one.

Create a federal unrestricted concealed carry system. Same principle as a driver's license. Doesn't say if and what you own, just that you can.
Requirements:
1. Must be 18 years of age
2. Basic firearms safety course
3. Sit down interview with a judge
4. Mandatory psychological examinations every 5 years, or after any incident involving the police (felonies only). Cannot posses if on medications for depression or other mental disorders. (Not including ADD)

Federal 'castle' doctrine.

Break up the republican/democratic parties into two groups each.

Term limits for everyone!

Massive high speed internet project.

Increased tariffs for any corporation who's workforce is primarily outsourced. Tax breaks for companies with US based production and who's workforce is primarily American based.

Make oil a utility. Prohibit speculation on oil prices.

Turn Nevada into a giant solar panel.

Place underwater turbines along the major rivers in the country.

Invest in inertial fusion power plants. Push it, become the leader in fusion tech, sell tech to other countries.

Use coal reserves to produce synthetic petroleum, instead of relying on foreign oil for petroleum products.

Reopen the FUCKING SPACE PROGRAM to private industry. Make NASA compete.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Less government, but more centralized. No more states bickering and deciding on the level of personal freedom.

Lower drinking age to 18. Or, raise military draft age to 21. Pick one.

Create a federal unrestricted concealed carry system. Same principle as a driver's license. Doesn't say if and what you own, just that you can.
Requirements:
1. Must be 18 years of age
2. Basic firearms safety course
3. Sit down interview with a judge
4. Mandatory psychological examinations every 5 years, or after any incident involving the police (felonies only). Cannot posses if on medications for depression or other mental disorders. (Not including ADD)

Federal 'castle' doctrine.

Break up the republican/democratic parties into two groups each.

Term limits for everyone!

Massive high speed internet project.

Increased tariffs for any corporation who's workforce is primarily outsourced. Tax breaks for companies with US based production and who's workforce is primarily American based.

Make oil a utility. Prohibit speculation on oil prices.

Turn Nevada into a giant solar panel.

Place underwater turbines along the major rivers in the country.

Invest in inertial fusion power plants. Push it, become the leader in fusion tech, sell tech to other countries.

Use coal reserves to produce synthetic petroleum, instead of relying on foreign oil for petroleum products.

Reopen the FUCKING SPACE PROGRAM to private industry. Make NASA compete.

You have my vote!

Also: invest heavily into alternative fuel!

[Pelios]

Ok I don't think I've ever posted my ideal perfect society so I'll give it a go, take into consideration I'm talking about the perfect society here where I live. Not in any specific order…
Population Control. Right now we have a problem of people having kids when they can barely afford to put a roof over their heads. Especially the Indigenous people they have no work and they multiply like rabbits. My solution after child number one sterilize them for free.

Education. Our currently education system is a fail (unless it is a private school) education needs to be encouraged here. Here the mandatory grade that the law requires is to complete up to 6th grade which is nothing, obviously children prefer to work over school. Even if they to want to continue studying sometimes the decision is between surviving or education, what would you pick? My solution is, if my plan for controlling the kids Indigenous people can have is to have better education plans for them meaning if they get good grades and have good behavior they will receive bonus “coupons” for food so they can go to the stores and buy food to help their family.

Jails/criminals. This one is a complicated one even though necessary for a “perfect” society. Right now I think our jail system is good but not perfect. Here in prisons if you want the basic necessaries you have to work for them not like in the prisons in the USA where it’s more like a summer camp than prison here if you don’t work you don’t get food that easy. Treat criminals like criminals especially repeat offenders reopen Alcatraz and build more prisons like Alcatraz.

I’m still working in my “perfect” society but this is all I have right now I’ll post the rest later when I decide what to do with the rest of the topics such as government, jobs, etc.

[MegaMadness]

Less violence.

[BDF]

Originally Posted by MonsterCosmonaut

Brilliant non-answer! I think we can assume what she means is "What things would you change that you think would make a better society?" which is actually a obvious question..

Well to me a perfect society is one in which everyone is happy, which in most circumstances is impossible.

A perfect society from my perspective alone is too big a topic for me to feel like answering. Summarising my views wouldn't do them justice, and open them to debate, and I don't particularly feel like spending over an hour writing a reply. Plus I don't know where to start.

[Anthropomorphic]

Perfection is the ultimate in subjective discussion and belief. My perfect society cannot be described no matter how many words I use, because there are subconscious and unconscious elements everywhere that can't be adequately accounted for. Furthermore, there are so many details among the conscious and noticeable ideas that it would be a waste of time to describe anyway.

That said, I'm liking Ben's (TgerTank77) ideas. It's not perfect to me, but it certainly sounds far better than the world I live in now.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

I'd go with what TigerTank77 said but also some other bits:

1) Scrap the current youth criminal system and have it model Italy's youth criminal system.
2) Increase funding and resources for psychiatric wards because at present, prison psychiatric programs are being used since there is not enough space elsewhere most of the time.
3) Attempt to simplify municipal by-law systems. I don't know how it is in other places but Toronto's is a catastrophe that keeps getting worse.
4) For primary and high-school, all teachers except physical education ones must have at least a Master's degree alongside the teaching certificate. Alternatively, teachers with at least two Bachelor's degrees alongside the teaching certificate can teach. Teachers with anything less can either apply for administrative positions or go back to college/university.
5) Cirriculum is to be less strict so teachers can encourage more thinking of their students.
6) Basic science classes (biology, chemistry, mathematics and physics) are to be mandatory at grade 9-11 along with mandatory language courses of the official languages of the country. Grade 12 allows for more specialization in specific science courses. Grade 13/OAC is to be re-instated and remain as optional. For all of high-school, religious classes are to be optional, never mandatory. All schools (public and private) are to be secular, however, some can have more religious classes if they wish, keeping in mind all of them are to still be optional.
7) Prisons and jails are to put rehabilitation first, punishment second. There are to be regular inspections of the prisons and jails, and inspectors are to select a random sample of inmates from each cell to interview in order to figure out any changes and problems.
8) Zero-tolerance laws are to be scrapped.
9) All universities and colleges should only have students (or their parents) pay for books and supplies. Individual courses should not be paid for in an attempt to massively reduce tuition, resulting in it being similar to Germany's system. Community colleges can remain as they are or change, it is entirely up to them.
10) Address issues of Aboriginal people while not trampling over the geological profession. Their populations are to be reduced because at present, they are quite large. If no peaceful method is sought, then sterilization and negative eugenics are to be enforced. That tribe is to be monitored for several years to ensure the population doesn't immediately spike back up. More jobs are to be available for them and all who are working or report receiving income are to pay income tax. Researchers, doctors and whoever else are to enter the reserve if allowed but if issues are reportedly not being dealt with, entry is mandatory and shall be accompanied by armed individuals (i.e. police). If the group is attacked, on their next return, they are to be accompanied by a much stronger force, such as police in riot gear, members of the army and any volunteers who have undergone sufficient training and psychological exams. As many Aboriginals are to be killed until peace is restored or immediately arrested, as doctors, researchers and other non-armed individuals are not to be harmed by the Aboriginals.
11) All claims of wanting the government to pay for cultural wipe-outs, such as what the Aboriginals are doing, is to be denied immediately, unless they can show a) evidence for what happened to them AND b) why the government should consider to pay them. These claims can have a jury if desired.
12) Decriminalization of marijuana and perhaps other drugs, as well as create a version of the "red-light district" for prostitution.
13) Tolerance of all religions, otherwise fines occur and eventually imprisonment.

There probably are more details but these are good enough.

[kadyCHAOS]

everyone go back to their own country. and help america get out of its own debt before bending over backwards to save someone elses ass.

[JKmadu619]

The Man XX Master: Hmm, you lost me on a few ideas, but that sounds pretty fricking decent.

- Justin

[JKmadu619]

In my ideal "Utopia" I would:

1. Revamp crimal punishment system. Including but not limited to"

- A death penalty for anyone who has comitted more than three murders. If there is enough solid proof against them (Such as the murder weapon having their finger prints on it...) and/or they confess they will be exucuted.

- Removal of any an all reproductive organs on rapists. If person is involved in child molestation they will also serve twenty years of jail time.

- Rehabilitation for crimes such as but not limited to: Theft, Drugs charges, Domestic abuse. Find what makes the person act in these ways and fix it.

2. As a requirement to pass highschool the schooling system will have a self defense class that will basically outline many different forms of weaponless self defense. At the age of 30 a weapons course must be taken to renew drivers liscense.

3. Forced fingerprinting. Every three years all your fingers will be printed. Hair and skin samples will be taken for DNA testing. Then when the death penalty is brought back we can imediately pinpoint who killed who.

4. More scholarships. Having a job while in highschool and maintaining it for six months will grant you 1,000 dollars of scholarships. You are eligable to continue to get these scholarships for as long as you hold your job for, until you graduate highschool.

5. Government paid tutoring programs. Kids need to be smart. Less idiots is good.

6. You are not allowed to drop out of highschool. No doubt about it.

7. Everyone will be paid a small sum ($500) and an apartment when moving away from home. They will posess this and it will be provided by the government. The apartment cannot be sold however, and will be saved for future generations. You will be expected to move out after living in the apartments for five years. Keep young people off the streets and give them a fighting chance.

I may continue later.

- Justin

[Loving Linux Penguin]

Oh boy...so much to say.

1) Make it so that politicians actually PROPERLY represent the people instead of arguing amongst themselves about the most stupid issues ever.
2) Mandate that 75% of autos are powered by electricity or clean hydrogen within 15 years.
3) Mandate that 80% of all electricity is created with renewables within 15 years.
4) Make healthcare affordable for every American. Move to a single-payer system in-which the government ensures everyone.
5) Find ways for police to enforce laws without the need to regularly shock people with tasers or shoot them.
6) Invest money in HIGH SPEED RAIL coast to coast in order to make travel affordable and convenient.
7) Find ways to keep things secure without massively invading the privacy of citezens.
8) Get the border patrol patrolling the BORDER instead of places 40 miles south of it!!!

And I think of more I will post again

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by MonsterCosmonaut

Decriminalise certain drugs

I'm curious why you say decriminalise as opposed to legalise, which is really a half-assed measure which addresses none of the problems associated with essentially giving organised crime a monopoly on the production of drugs.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Massive high speed internet project.

We're trying that over in Australia. Incredibly expensive, massive bureaucracy with more employees than clients and a widespread recognition that it will be obsolete once finished.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Increased tariffs for any corporation who's workforce is primarily outsourced. Tax breaks for companies with US based production and who's workforce is primarily American based.

Read up on comparitive advantage and gains from trade. If you're butthurt about outsourcing cut red tape and taxation so your country is more attractive, don't penalise businesses for not sharing your ignorant views that trade destroys wealth.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Make oil a utility. Prohibit speculation on oil prices.

Speculation in a free market leads to more stability in markets. If you think that prices are being forced up too much, maybe as leader you should tell the fed to get its head out of its ass and stop pumping money into the economy at 0% interest.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Invest in inertial fusion power plants. Push it, become the leader in fusion tech, sell tech to other countries.

This could just as easily apply to any emerging technology, and there is no compelling reason why the government is in a better position to do this than private enterprise. If you really want it to take hold in your country, like above, you make your country an attractive place to do business, you don't have the government assume the role of entrepreneur.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Use coal reserves to produce synthetic petroleum, instead of relying on foreign oil for petroleum products.

There's nothing inherently wrong about using imported oil. Like I said above your ideas about trade are totally off the mark. If there actually were tangible benefits to producing oil from local coal (as opposed to some vague and economically meaningless "energy independence") there is no reason the private sector couldn't do this.

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

4) For primary and high-school, all teachers except physical education ones must have at least a Master's degree alongside the teaching certificate. Alternatively, teachers with at least two Bachelor's degrees alongside the teaching certificate can teach. Teachers with anything less can either apply for administrative positions or go back to college/university.

So a teacher will be required to be either ridiculously overqualified to teach the content that they are (a masters degree is going to be at far too high a level to be relevant to teaching the basics in high school or lower, and the argument that they should know more than what they have to teach is already addressed by the bachelors requirement) or they will be required to dick around in university for twice as long to gain a completely irrelevant second bachelors?

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

All schools (public and private) are to be secular, however, some can have more religious classes if they wish, keeping in mind all of them are to still be optional.
...
13) Tolerance of all religions, otherwise fines occur and eventually imprisonment.

Right, so you will imprison individuals who break some vague notion of being "intolerent" to religion while forcefully banning religious schools?

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

10) Address issues of Aboriginal people while not trampling over the geological profession. Their populations are to be reduced because at present, they are quite large. If no peaceful method is sought, then sterilization and negative eugenics are to be enforced. That tribe is to be monitored for several years to ensure the population doesn't immediately spike back up. More jobs are to be available for them and all who are working or report receiving income are to pay income tax. Researchers, doctors and whoever else are to enter the reserve if allowed but if issues are reportedly not being dealt with, entry is mandatory and shall be accompanied by armed individuals (i.e. police). If the group is attacked, on their next return, they are to be accompanied by a much stronger force, such as police in riot gear, members of the army and any volunteers who have undergone sufficient training and psychological exams. As many Aboriginals are to be killed until peace is restored or immediately arrested, as doctors, researchers and other non-armed individuals are not to be harmed by the Aboriginals.
11) All claims of wanting the government to pay for cultural wipe-outs, such as what the Aboriginals are doing, is to be denied immediately, unless they can show a) evidence for what happened to them AND b) why the government should consider to pay them. These claims can have a jury if desired.

I like how you say claims of wiping out aboriginal people are overstated while at the same time advocating ethnic cleansing of them.

Originally Posted by Jazz Guy

2) Mandate that 75% of autos are powered by electricity or clean hydrogen within 15 years.
3) Mandate that 80% of all electricity is created with renewables within 15 years.

How do you enforce such vague "mandates"?

Originally Posted by Jazz Guy

6) Invest money in HIGH SPEED RAIL coast to coast in order to make travel affordable and convenient.

Air travel already does that for the most part. It's faster over any reasonable distance than high speed rail and is actually so cost effective that the subsidies paid to amtrak could pay for free plane tickets on many routes. You could make it more affordable by cutting regulation and more convienient by stopping your federal employees from molesting passengers.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Frosty

We're trying that over in Australia. Incredibly expensive, massive bureaucracy with more employees than clients and a widespread recognition that it will be obsolete once finished.

Yes, but the idea is to create a high speed system than easily be upgraded. The fact that it will eventually become obsolete shouldn't be an issue. Wireless will never be as secure or fast as a hardwired connection, and if you throw up your hands because technology is advancing too fast, then you're going to fall behind really quickly.

Originally Posted by Frosty

Read up on comparative advantage and gains from trade. If you're butthurt about outsourcing cut red tape and taxation so your country is more attractive, don't penalize businesses for not sharing your ignorant views that trade destroys wealth.

First of all, insults are going to make you look like a mouth breathing corporate whore. Second of all, I never said trade destroys wealth. But I hardly call moving jobs overseas because you can pay 3rd world workers next to nothing a "gain."

Originally Posted by Frosty

This could just as easily apply to any emerging technology, and there is no compelling reason why the government is in a better position to do this than private enterprise. If you really want it to take hold in your country, like above, you make your country an attractive place to do business, you don't have the government assume the role of entrepreneur.

Government competing and/or working private enterprise. And you can only make your country so attractive to businesses before your government becomes subservient to boardmembers. This isn't some bullshit Ayn Rand universe where we need to bend over backwards for businesses or they'll throw a temper tantrum and destroy society.

Originally Posted by Frosty

There's nothing inherently wrong about using imported oil. Like I said above your ideas about trade are totally off the mark. If there actually were tangible benefits to producing oil from local coal (as opposed to some vague and economically meaningless "energy independence") there is no reason the private sector couldn't do this.

Except for the fact that taking away our need for foreign oil allows us to focus on becoming more independent and stop wasting money on a quickly disintegrating resource, which, believe it or not, is a good thing.

And the whole "free market is best and corporations are pure and benevolent" thing got old a long time ago.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

The Man XX Master: Hmm, you lost me on a few ideas, but that sounds pretty fricking decent.

- Justin

I can try to explain the ones you're confused on but this requires you to say which ones you don't understand and why.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

1. Revamp crimal punishment system. Including but not limited to"

- A death penalty for anyone who has comitted more than three murders. If there is enough solid proof against them (Such as the murder weapon having their finger prints on it...) and/or they confess they will be exucuted.

One huge issue with the confession aspect is confessions can be coerced and even if they're not, there's a lengthy history of people falsing confessing on purpose so they can temporarily bask in glory.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

- Removal of any an all reproductive organs on rapists. If person is involved in child molestation they will also serve twenty years of jail time.

Removing reproductive organs would have long-lasting consequences on their overall health, so even when they're serving time or doing something else, their health is dwindling. Also, castration has been show to do relatively little in deterring sex offenders from re-offending because castrating assumes the reason why they offend is purely a sexual motive, when it often is about power, not sex.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

3. Forced fingerprinting. Every three years all your fingers will be printed. Hair and skin samples will be taken for DNA testing. Then when the death penalty is brought back we can imediately pinpoint who killed who.

DNA testing is quite an expensive under-taking, more expensive than fingerprint analysis. On such a large scale, there would have to be some crazy deal negotiated or pay trillions. Besides, it can immediately lead to who killed who. It's like saying since your fingerprints were on the kitchen knife, then you obviously were the one who killed Tom, despite the fact you own the knife. Even if someone else used the knife only once, it still doesn't immediately mean they were the killer because all you've done is proven that at some point, the person held the knife.

Originally Posted by Frosty

So a teacher will be required to be either ridiculously overqualified to teach the content that they are (a masters degree is going to be at far too high a level to be relevant to teaching the basics in high school or lower, and the argument that they should know more than what they have to teach is already addressed by the bachelors requirement) or they will be required to dick around in university for twice as long to gain a completely irrelevant second bachelors?

Your argument is two-fold: a Master's degree is excessive and getting a second Bachelor's degree is a waste of time so it's pointless. I can understand the second part but you have not explained why a Master's degree is excessive. I do not see why so not stating your argument makes it a useless statement.

For the second part, I do agree, it can be somewhat silly for the teacher to do another Bachelor's but the hope is the degree isn't completely irrelevant. In trying to find an argument against it, I cant really think of one, so I'll say you're correct, getting a second Bachelor's is irrelevant. The exception is if the teacher decides to teach more than one area that are quite far apart.

Originally Posted by Frosty

Right, so you will imprison individuals who break some vague notion of being "intolerent" to religion while forcefully banning religious schools?

Not so. Religious schools would not be banned per say, as they can exist as I mentioned. They could have more religious courses than non-religious schools, so in effect, they aren't banned.

Originally Posted by Frosty

I like how you say claims of wiping out aboriginal people are overstated while at the same time advocating ethnic cleansing of them.

I haven't advocated for ethnic cleansing. When I said allowing doctors, researchers and others to enter the reserves, the purpose is not to change their culture, instead the purpose is to decrease the high criminal rates since they have the highest rates for all of Canada and most of the US. Many of them often complain of how they are treated by others within the reserve, so it would be to gain more research data on the interactions as well as finding some peaceful solutions.

[JKmadu619]

The Man XX Master: I'm Canadian as well and I understand how you are fed up with aboriginals and the money we are paying to them without a real plan for us to co exis, however sterilizing them seems drastic for instance.

I realize many of my ideas are "Out there" and I realize castration (Or in the rare cases of female on male rape, removal of reproductive organs.) is harmful and dangerous. However for someone sick enough to do something like that, I feel that it's fine. They might do it for power rather than sexual pleasure, but I sure as hell bet they won't be raping anyone soon afterwards.

And as you said about the death penalty, and how people do confess. I realize this, I wath 48 hours every weekend it's on and In many cases people confess for something they didn't do. If they are only doing so for money and fame, they would probably reconsider for their life. If they are mentally insane to the point where they would confess, they probably aren't good citizens anyway.

I understand the issues with fingerprinting, however if they suspected you as the killer or the person who stole something, or the person who did some crime, they could then try to match your finger prints. Pherhpas laws could be placed so that only when you are a suspect can they search your prints.

Also, maybe hair and skin samples could be stored until needed, and then testing would be done. As I said above, store them and only test them when the person is question is suspected of comitting a crime.

- Justin

[Tynan]

Originally Posted by kadyCHAOS

everyone go back to their own country. and help america get out of its own debt before bending over backwards to save someone elses ass.

well that means everyone that are not native americans would have to go back to there own country. because if you really think about it, everyone but them came here illegally.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Yes, but the idea is to create a high speed system than easily be upgraded. The fact that it will eventually become obsolete shouldn't be an issue.

If it were so easy to create a system that can be magically upgraded without any tradeoffs I doubt there would be issues raised with whether such a system would be obselete.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Wireless will never be as secure or fast as a hardwired connection

Those two factors aren't the only considerations in networks even if there were enormous discrepencies between wireless and hardwired in terms of security and speed now and well into the future, and I don't think either of us is in a position to either make assumptions about the future or the relative importance of various factors to consumers. This is why I don't think such things should be centrally planned according to my own preferences.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

and if you throw up your hands because technology is advancing too fast, then you're going to fall behind really quickly.

Or you could, you know, just not have matters decided through central planning.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

First of all, insults are going to make you look like a mouth breathing corporate whore.

Sup pot, my name is kettle. I heard you called me black?

Seriously though, I call you out for clearly having no education in regards to the economic matters which you think yourself competent to comment on, you call me a "mouth breathing corporate whore", and I'm the one who needs to lay off the insults?

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Second of all, I never said trade destroys wealth.

It was implied so strongly that it's difficult to even call it a mere implication.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

But I hardly call moving jobs overseas because you can pay 3rd world workers next to nothing a "gain."

The economically ignorant have a bad habit of looking merely at the costs of any activity, which are very concentrated and obvious (such as closed factories) and ignoring the benefits, which are much more dispersed and less obvious (cheaper products for consumers at large). Moving production to places where it is cheaper and more efficient is a gain. Deal with it.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Government competing and/or working private enterprise.

What is that supposed to mean? From the sounds of it this entails "competing" where the government "competes" by largely doing its own thing with enormous public subsidy or "working" where you have the government getting into bed with companies and distorting the entire market that way.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

And you can only make your country so attractive to businesses before your government becomes subservient to boardmembers.

Capitalism =/= corporatism. I never advocated crap like special favours to business, and merely cutting tax and red tape is hardly becoming "subservient to boardmembers".

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Except for the fact that taking away our need for foreign oil allows us to focus on becoming more independent

This is a vague and totally useless term economically speaking. Trade benefits all participants. The USA doesn't need "energy independence" any more than your family needs to start making their own clothes to become "clothing independent".

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

This isn't some bullshit Ayn Rand universe where we need to bend over backwards for businesses or they'll throw a temper tantrum and destroy society.

And the whole "free market is best and corporations are pure and benevolent" thing got old a long time ago.

I'm sure those meaningless rants about capitalism make you feel really good inside, but they just make it clear to everyone else that you're in way over your depth despite thinking that memorising a few soundbites from your "edgy" friend who read something by Marx sometime makes you qualified to comment on economics.

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

you have not explained why a Master's degree is excessive. I do not see why so not stating your argument makes it a useless statement.

A teacher should know the knowledge they are to impart on their student, plus arguably more to the extent that this extended knowledge helps them understand and explain the more basic concepts they are to teach. A typical bachelors covers atleast this if not more in regards to high school (and definately in regards to primary). Taking a masters degree will merely blow 1-2 years of their life learning material that is so advanced and/or obscure that it will have no relevance to the basic material taught at a lower level.

From personal experience, the first year of my economics degree was mostly the material from high school, but at a higher level and with a few more topics on top. IMO this alone would be a perfectly satisfactory level to teach high school economics. Since then the second year material is at a level well above relevance to the basics of high school (knowing your way around indifference curves isn't really useful when you're teaching someone the basics of supply and demand), and the majority of third year material is of a more specialised nature (knowing your shit in regards to regression modelling or the intricate details of the healthcare market sure as hell isn't useful to teaching the basics). Extending this trend to masters-level material will almost certainly result in an education that makes them no better at teaching, but will do a fantastic job of making them older and more indebted when they hit the job market.

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

The exception is if the teacher decides to teach more than one area that are quite far apart.

But that's a totally difference issue. That's just the outcome of consistantly applying the "must have a relevant bachelors" condition in regards to a minority of teachers who will teach unrelated subjects.

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

Not so. Religious schools would not be banned per say, as they can exist as I mentioned. They could have more religious courses than non-religious schools, so in effect, they aren't banned.

I thought you said that all schools were to be secular and all religious classes are to be optional?

[Nostalgia]

If I could change society and make rules my rules would be :
1. All young people or people who are able bodied or who can stand will have to give their seats up on public transport for someone who is unable to stand or who is not able bodied or is elderly.

2. have areas in public where people can drink like have an area on the beach where people can drink alcohol.

3. Enforce fines on people not clearing up their dogs shit. Like invent a way that when a dog is micro - chipped it is also given a vaccine that when it does a number 2 and the owner does not clear it up you can tell which dog did it and where the owner lives and then someone can go and collect the fine and if they refuse to pay the fine they are arrested. So it is pretty much illegal to not clear up your dogs poo or pay the fine. If you pay the fine you don't get arrested. If you don't pay the fine you get arrested.


3. Minimum wage would go up.

4. Everyone would be respected no matter what their age, ability, gender, sex, race or culture is.


5. Everyone would be treated in a similar way.


6. Travel and public transport would be cheaper.

7. The government would change.

can't think of any more right now.

[Reverie.]

If I could create the perfect society there would be certain things out of my control due to free will. If I could control those..well:

-Make bullying punishable by prison.
-Make it socially acceptable to be gay, straight, lesbian, bi, black, white, mixed race, aisian, fat, thin, tall, short and any other variation of humanity.
-Make some sort of a plan to cut down on global warming.
-Improve public transport because I think buses suck.
-Improve education. Make the teachers less of a bully in some cases and force people who dont pass exams to retake until they do.
-Make it law that if someone commits a crime (such as deliberate murder, especially in more than one case) that it can be punishable by death is enough evidence is provided to say the person is guilty.
-Make euthenasia okay as long as the circumstances allow the patient to verbally permit it in the presence of someone reliable.
-Make abuse, rape and such like it punishable by life in prison..literally..and with no luxuries. People like that would be made to suffer the worst kind of life style.
-Make it socially known that people are depressed and SH for reasons other than attention seeking.

Um..I'll add more later if i think of any.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Frosty

I'm sure those meaningless rants about capitalism make you feel really good inside, but they just make it clear to everyone else that you're in way over your depth despite thinking that memorizing a few soundbites from your "edgy" friend who read something by Marx sometime makes you qualified to comment on economics.

Believe it or not, I don't hate capitalism, and I think Marx was a tool. But if it makes you feel better to pull straw men out of your hat everytime someone doesn't agree with you and your "super advanced economic education" and ideals, go right ahead.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by SquidPid

3. Minimum wage would go up.

You do know that price floors create a surplus, right?

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Believe it or not, I don't hate capitalism, and I think Marx was a tool.

Well then maybe you should show this by holding some sort of economic belief that isn't an ignorant and poorly founded distaste for the free market.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

But if it makes you feel better to pull straw men out of your hat everytime someone doesn't agree with you

Rich coming from the guy who in his last post went on some silly rant about how I want corporatism.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

and your "super advanced economic education"

I understand economics and I'm not ashamed of this. If this somehow threatens you and your tendency to hold strong viewpoints on something you understand little about, by all means mock me to make yourself feel better.

[kadyCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Jónsi

well that means everyone that are not native americans would have to go back to there own country. because if you really think about it, everyone but them came here illegally.

exactly. so everyone back in there own country would equal just about a total reset with anything involving immigration/illegal aliens. give a fresh start so to speak.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

The Man XX Master: I'm Canadian as well and I understand how you are fed up with aboriginals and the money we are paying to them without a real plan for us to co exis, however sterilizing them seems drastic for instance.

If other methods are failing, then more drastic methods should be thought of and possibly imposed. I'm not saying all Aboriginals are to be sterilized as you recall from the initial post. Yes, I am very fed up with them and the fact the government has been so damn lenient on them, even favouring them to the point where in the Criminal Code of Canada, for sentencing, the judge should consider whether they are Aboriginal, so as to sentence them to a specially-built institution for Aboriginals. It's not promoting equality for them, it's promoting inequality for them. Many geologists are fed up with them because trying to mine outside but near their reserve still allows them to get up, bitch about it, etc... . Hell, they were allowed to stake their land anywhere they damn well wanted and many staked land over important geological or mining areas. Mining and forestry is a huge industry in Canada's economy and the government lets these people screw it all up, any time the government attempts something with them, it causes a shitstorm of whining and bitching, "woe is fucking us". They can get jobs and money, yet don't need to pay any income taxes. I'm fed up to my neck with them. In my perfect society, if they did stake such land, I would have armed groups come in and move them far away from that area. If they fight back, the armed groups can use lethal force if needed. Later on, if it so happens they were put on important land areas, tough shit, move them elsewhere again.

I would give some sort of encouragements (i.e. financial) for those who got off their reserves and got actual jobs. I'd give further encouragements if they left their reserves and got jobs elsewhere in Canada, although I would impose restrictions on what jobs would be available to them (i.e. cannot be doctors but can be politicians if they make it into office).

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

I realize many of my ideas are "Out there" and I realize castration (Or in the rare cases of female on male rape, removal of reproductive organs.) is harmful and dangerous. However for someone sick enough to do something like that, I feel that it's fine. They might do it for power rather than sexual pleasure, but I sure as hell bet they won't be raping anyone soon afterwards.

In 2007, Dr. John R. Hughes examined the effect of castration (among other treatments) and their effectiveness on pedophilia. To quote from his paper:

"[d]uring the next year [1981], surgical castration was evaluated, with claims that the procedure strongly decreased sexual thoughts and frequency of coitus, especially when performed in men of 46 to 59 years of age. However, 31% could still engage in sexual intercourse so it was not considered a reliable treatment for sex offenders. No further reports about surgery for pedophiles are found after 1981 on the Internet's Medline" (Hughes, 2007, pg 675).
http://cpj.sagepub.com/content/46/8/667.abstract

Instead, chemical castration is used because it is not a permanent effect, although there still can be some health affects. Such agents include cyproterone acetate (CPA) (used for 30 years) and medroxyprogersterone acetate (MPA) (used since 1950s), alongside some newer other ones (Briken, Nika & Berner, 2001). From the same study, the authors report the effects of a long-lasting LHRG agonist on 30 male sex offenders, including rapists and pedophiles:

"... 21 reported progressive erectile failure after 6-12 months. All men over 35 years of age and some younger men a lack of sexual interest in women and an inability to achieve or maintain an erection. Bone-mineral density decreased significantly in 11 of 18 men ... this loss [according to Rosler and Witzum] 'could be prevented by the concomitant administration of calcium or vitamin D or a biphosphonate drug' ... long-term administration of LHRH agonist unquestioningly inhibits pituitary gonadal function, it initially increases release of LHRH, which thereby increases testosterone serum for 4-6 weeks [according to Bradford] ... an antiandrogen such as CPA could offset an acute increases in testosterone secretion" (Briken, Nika & Berner, 2001) [italic emphasis in original]

My point is, although chemical castration has its flaws, they can be maintained. Furthermore, if the person does not sexually offend or have interests for however many years, one could say they are safe for society, so surgical castration becomes an unnecessary punishment. What if they want to have children of their own? You could say the children may sexually offend or the adult may sexually offend their own children, which has happened in the past, but they should still be given the ability to pro-create.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

If they are mentally insane to the point where they would confess, they probably aren't good citizens anyway.

So killing them even though they aren't the actual criminal is fine because they're a harmless nuisance to society, despite the fact they can be managed in other ways?

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

I understand the issues with fingerprinting, however if they suspected you as the killer or the person who stole something, or the person who did some crime, they could then try to match your finger prints. Pherhpas laws could be placed so that only when you are a suspect can they search your prints.

Already exists.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Also, maybe hair and skin samples could be stored until needed, and then testing would be done. As I said above, store them and only test them when the person is question is suspected of comitting a crime.

One massive issue is it opens a huge door for framing someone and encouraging corrupt behaviour by forensic scientists. You watch the First 48, you can be imaginative or think of cases like this.

Originally Posted by Frosty

A teacher should know the knowledge they are to impart on their student, plus arguably more to the extent that this extended knowledge helps them understand and explain the more basic concepts they are to teach. A typical bachelors covers atleast this if not more in regards to high school (and definately in regards to primary). Taking a masters degree will merely blow 1-2 years of their life learning material that is so advanced and/or obscure that it will have no relevance to the basic material taught at a lower level.

While I acknowledge that having a Bachelor's can be suitable enough, the purpose of the teachers having Master's degrees is to increase what is taught at the basic level. As a rough analogy, children in grades 2-3 in the system I mention would be learning what children in grade 4-5 learn in the present system. If the teachers have a more thorough understanding, they can provide more insight and answer more challenging questions posed by students. Furthermore, students in grade 10 in the proposed system would be at the level of grade 11 students at the current system. Although, perhaps a Bachelor's degree is suitable even for this.

Originally Posted by Frosty

But that's a totally difference issue. That's just the outcome of consistantly applying the "must have a relevant bachelors" condition in regards to a minority of teachers who will teach unrelated subjects.

At the time when I wrote the initial post, I was not thinking of the view you presented, so in further thinking, getting a second Bachelor's degree should only be necessary if the teachers are to teach unrelated subjects. If not, they don't need a second one.

Originally Posted by Frosty

I thought you said that all schools were to be secular and all religious classes are to be optional?

I did and I still maintained that in the previous post. If you recall in the first post, I said religious schools can have more religious courses if they want but all of those courses still must be optional. From a practical sense, such religious schools probably would have these courses as "forced optional", in that there's more pressure to take them as though they actually were mandatory. That is fine, so long as the school does not view the mandatory courses as being more optional.

[razors_and_rosary]

Have politicians say honestly what they can do.
Have politicians decide on deadlines for what they can do.
Have politicians stick to their deadlines like every other person in the world has to.

Proportional government with the AV system.
Extend the coorporation discrimination law to political parties.

Landfill mining for previously wasted resources for recycling.

These are the first few things to come to mind, but a true and comprehensive utopia is essentially impossible, so what we should really aim for is the best dystopia available.

[JKmadu619]

The Man XX Master: What if they want to have their own children? Seriously? If they wanted their own goddamn children they could avoid comitting such a crime. I saw to hell with the bastards.

However I would settle for chemical castration, but part of it would be the terror of not having your reproductive organs. It would prove a point more than anything else. If nothing else it would stop repeated rape.

And about killing anyone who confesses to a crime they didn't comit: Sure it would be bad, but no one would confess for fame if they knew that they would be decapitated the next morning. If they can prove their innocence fine, if they cannot they should have thought things through a little better. It simple screws with evidence and pulbic opinion.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

The Man XX Master: What if they want to have their own children? Seriously? If they wanted their own goddamn children they could avoid comitting such a crime. I saw to hell with the bastards.

You're speaking in hind-sight but people don't live in hind-sight. Ryan Hall and Richard Hall wrote a well-known paper titled A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recividism, Treatment of Outcomes, and Forensic Issues (2007). Part of it included a typology for female sex offenders, with the categories of Experimenter, Male-accompanied, Male-coerced, Nurturers, Psychologically Disturbed (i.e. psychosis), Teacher/Lover and Traditional (i.e. same pattern as common males). Some of these categories, such as Male-Coerced, the family has a child although the female is passive and not willing to offend but is forced by the child's father. Such individuals may have children for that reason (although the female probably is unaware until it happens). Alternatively, the Experimenter tests out various sex acts but may not stick with any kind in particular. Often, they are very young offenders, so they have ample time for rehabilitation and generally aren't strongly motivated to harm in a particular way. My point simply is, some don't have kids for the purpose of harming them and when they harm, they don't think whether they'll have kids years later (i.e. like everyday people, we don't always know or plan to have kids at a certain time).

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

However I would settle for chemical castration, but part of it would be the terror of not having your reproductive organs. It would prove a point more than anything else. If nothing else it would stop repeated rape.

As I just mentioned, 31% of castrated sex offenders could still have sex, hence, they can still rape. It's not a cure-all, far from it. Losing your reproductive organs would cause terror, I cant imagine why it wouldn't but it leads to numerous health complications, many of which require medications. If doctors know why these health complications occur, it opens the door for further punishment. In effect, the punishment requires care as it can endanger their health, resulting in it being a cruel and unusual punishment. If chemical castration works a bit better by not being permanent, it seems like a better route to go.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

And about killing anyone who confesses to a crime they didn't comit: Sure it would be bad, but no one would confess for fame if they knew that they would be decapitated the next morning. If they can prove their innocence fine, if they cannot they should have thought things through a little better. It simple screws with evidence and pulbic opinion.

If they were to be killed the next morning, that would be an incredibly quick case and sentence. Trials where the death sentence is a possible outcome are often very, very long cases and can span years in court. If you know who Richard "The Night Stalker" Ramirez is, you'd know after around 3 years being in court, he's still alive and through enough garble, is not sentenced to death.

If a trial were to have the death sentence that fast, then that speed would screw with evidence and public opinion.

[ALLorNOTHINGforCHRIST]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

The Man XX Master: What if they want to have their own children? Seriously? If they wanted their own goddamn children they could avoid comitting such a crime. I saw to hell with the bastards.

However I would settle for chemical castration, but part of it would be the terror of not having your reproductive organs. It would prove a point more than anything else. If nothing else it would stop repeated rape.

And about killing anyone who confesses to a crime they didn't comit: Sure it would be bad, but no one would confess for fame if they knew that they would be decapitated the next morning. If they can prove their innocence fine, if they cannot they should have thought things through a little better. It simple screws with evidence and pulbic opinion.

sometimes people do confess to protect others; therefore, if they did that then the real criminal would still be out there, yet they ( the police ECT would still not persue the case.

[Xujhan]

Wait, Frosty still posts around these parts? I haven't seen him in months. Though I guess this thread would basically be a bat-signal to him.

To everyone else posting: I notice that many people are suggesting changes that are beneficial to some, but not all. I also notice that the person making the suggestion is never the one who will be losing out. Things like majority rule, exceptionally harsh prison systems, forced sterilization and so on might be fine for the many, but can be exceptionally unfair to the few. Remember that one of the duties of society is to protect the rights of minorities as much as possible, regardless of our personal feellings toward them. Especially to those who say things like: "Fuck the criminals, they deserve it, they had their chance," I'd perscribe a dose of compassion. When a person has already lost his or her freedom, very little is gained by taking vengeance upon them except to make ourselves that much more barbaric. To any Christians who happen to forward that sentiment: a double shame on you. Can't you think of a significant character who preached forgiveness for all, even those you would hate? It's depressing to see that, as an atheist, I make a better Christian than some of those who claim to believe.

Also, it should be noted that answers to the question will differ greatly depending on whether or not you mean a global society, so you should specify which you mean.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Xujhan

Wait, Frosty still posts around these parts? I haven't seen him in months. Though I guess this thread would basically be a bat-signal to him.

To everyone else posting: I notice that many people are suggesting changes that are beneficial to some, but not all. I also notice that the person making the suggestion is never the one who will be losing out. Things like majority rule, exceptionally harsh prison systems, forced sterilization and so on might be fine for the many, but can be exceptionally unfair to the few. Remember that one of the duties of society is to protect the rights of minorities as much as possible, regardless of our personal feellings toward them. Especially to those who say things like: "Fuck the criminals, they deserve it, they had their chance," I'd perscribe a dose of compassion. When a person has already lost his or her freedom, very little is gained by taking vengeance upon them except to make ourselves that much more barbaric. To any Christians who happen to forward that sentiment: a double shame on you. Can't you think of a significant character who preached forgiveness for all, even those you would hate? It's depressing to see that, as an atheist, I make a better Christian than some of those who claim to believe.

Also, it should be noted that answers to the question will differ greatly depending on whether or not you mean a global society, so you should specify which you mean.

HEY, YOU! TAKE YOUR THOROUGH LOGIC AND SOUND REASONING AND GET OUT OF THIS THREAD. WE DON'T LIKE YOUR KIND 'ROUND THESE PARTS.

[Loving Linux Penguin]

Air travel already does that for the most part. It's faster over any reasonable distance than high speed rail and is actually so cost effective that the subsidies paid to amtrak could pay for free plane tickets on many routes. You could make it more affordable by cutting regulation and more convienient by stopping your federal employees from molesting passengers.

It has been proven that by nature rail travel is MUCH less expensive and uses much less energy. Diesel fuel and electricity both cost much less than jet fuel, and you don't need to hire thousands of federal employees to screen passengers, either.

Another thing to add to my list, make same-sex marriage legal in all states.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by Jazz Guy

It has been proven that by nature rail travel is MUCH less expensive and uses much less energy. Diesel fuel and electricity both cost much less than jet fuel

So then why is air travel frequently cheaper?

Also note that fuel costs aren't necessarily the only or even major determinent of price. Obviously a rail network requires much more infrastructure than having a plane fly through the air.

Originally Posted by Jazz Guy

and you don't need to hire thousands of federal employees to screen passengers, either.

The federal government could just as easily employ people to molest train passengers too. Such policies don't necessarily make flight an inherently expensive option.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Frosty

So then why is air travel frequently cheaper?

Also note that fuel costs aren't necessarily the only or even major determinent of price. Obviously a rail network requires much more infrastructure than having a plane fly through the air.

Airports. That is all.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by MonsterCosmonaut

Airports. That is all.

I'm somewhat sceptical that a few buildings and a large expanse of tarmac is necessarily going to cost more than hundreds if not thousands of miles of train tracks, especially maglev train tracks which you'll need if you want your train to even approach the speed of aircraft.

[Magic.]

More focus on education, freely available to everyone, especially children. Everyone should have access to the same quality of education, and it should be high quality. That includes sex education, not preaching abstinance ... free contraception to all

Where crime happens, we should focus on rehabilitation, giving prisoners reasons not to recommit crimes. E.g. give them skills they can get jobs with, so they have a chance to improve their lives rather than straight back to crime. And no I don't mean be cushy with them, just help them help themselves.

Less pay to movie stars and sports players ... more to people who provide valuable services like doctors, nurses, firefighters, teachers etc, not just entertainment.

[~Mr. Self Destruct~]

Originally Posted by Magic.

More focus on education, freely available to everyone, especially children. Everyone should have access to the same quality of education, and it should be high quality. That includes sex education, not preaching abstinance ... free contraception to all

Where crime happens, we should focus on rehabilitation, giving prisoners reasons not to recommit crimes. E.g. give them skills they can get jobs with, so they have a chance to improve their lives rather than straight back to crime. And no I don't mean be cushy with them, just help them help themselves.

Less pay to movie stars and sports players ... more to people who provide valuable services like doctors, nurses, firefighters, teachers etc, not just entertainment.

You don't think doctors are paid enough? I do agree with the rest of what you said however.
I'd also like more advocation for more globalized-esque markets, as if to somewhat equalize the flow of cash coming into different industries. Some may call it socialism, but is that synonomous of bad?
Just for the record, I don't advocate pure socialism. I'd consider myself part-way between regulated capitalism and socialism. My own personal poilitical doctrines; as Leninism was to Lenin.

[Composure]

My perfect society would be if the Governor-General decided on a double dissolution right at this very second. Clearly, that isn't going to happen. I don't live in a perfect world, then.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by ~Mr. Self Destruct~

You don't think doctors are paid enough?

Being a doctor takes more education than almost any other profession, comes with more responsibility than almost any other profession, and is more demanding and stressful than almost every other profession. Until every doctor is paid more than any sports star, I won't think they're paid enough.