Jump to content

flaurora_sonora

Member
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by flaurora_sonora

  1. 1. Bilingualism: I agree that having official languages handled at the national level is wasteful and imprecise, especially in a country with the size and history of canada. Consider cases like the city of Gimli or ethnic enclaves like chinatowns in big cities; the government does not need to be involved, especially at such a broad scope. If a city or part of a city has a large proportion that uses a certain language then that area will naturally want to use that language on signs and such; no legislation necessary. Side note: I live in quebec and speak mainly english. 2. Multiculturalism: With communication being as easy as it is over the internet, a person's culture does not need to be geographically determined anymore. Of course, parts of a person's culture can still depend on location; a jamaican bobsled team (this was a movie!) or being a lumberjack in the desert will not go so well. Meanwhile other cultural limitations are lifted with greater ease of travel or communication; you can be interested in poetry or a great starcraft player from practically anywhere in the world. Overall, I agree that the government making rules to try to force this is a waste. 3. Foreign Aid: This is good in principle but so often drained or derailed by the middlemen. Unfortunately, many persons want to simply throw money at a problem rather than seeing it through. Even worse, those with money may only give charitably as a way to avoid taxes and not because of any desire to do good. Ultimately, the person giving is responsible for doing the research to determine that their efforts are not misused or corrupted. Giving money can often do more harm than good as it can create a dependancy on money rather than addressing the problem directly, which may be blankets or water, et cetera. Installing our own problematic currency systems elsewhere can be a form of economic warfare, which leads to the next point. 4. Immigration: Physical warfare isn't really cost-effective anymore (considering the world would learn about any sizeable aggressive action with the present day ease of reporting machinery (anybody with a cellphone can simply post something onto youtube) and there would be outcries to intervene). Also, Canada is cold ;p There are many alternative methods that have been used: economic warfare, cyber warfare, psychological warfare (mind control, for instance, through the media), information warfare, and more. Why physically attack someone when you can convince them to build a prison around themselves and pay for it out of their own pocket? In terms of a country encouraging immigration: it depends on the reason. Whether immigration is being encouraged to attract a cheaper labor force (and compete for the jobs of current citizens) or whether it is to attract talented thinkers who stimulate industry in the country are different scenarios. Citizens should, of course, have a say about such policies. I do think it's schizophrenic and financially wasteful to install tools to invade the privacy of those crossing something vaunted as an open border. 5. Minorities: I don't think it's the job of the government to encourage or punish being a minority. Everybody differs in many ways (too many to list). Some like certain books, some like certain foods, some like certain ideas. A variously skilled population provides a resilience. Again, I don't think it's the government's job to pay for (even less, to enforce) personal beliefs. 6. We have to stop waiting for others to fix our problems (this has not worked very well so far)! Nobody wants to rock the boat or see when it's sinking: this is a bad combination. Rising above a fearful survival-based way of thinking offers a greater perspective. I agree that to achieve this we must be skeptical of stories we're being told and verify them. Ignorance is bliss if it's not abused by others. Putting it another way: stupidity taxation has to end, one way or the other.
  2. Here are some emerging alternatives to taxation; let's use them! There are now many crowdfunding sites online (gofundme, indiegogo, kickstarter, et cetera). This modern funding method allows more refined funding schemes than stealing from everyone and therefore interacting with a people (in the sense of a herd) rather than with persons (recognizing personal differences). Any government that does not acknowledge these differences is unrefined. Laws are an approximation of how persons behave in society. While acknowledging they are approximate, we should nevertheless endeavor to have them accurately reflect social behavior. Laws are added far more easily than they are removed. This imbalance is a cause of much frustration. For a supperior alternative to the technology used by our legal system (500-year old printing press technology) look at how online game worlds manage their social spaces. League of Legends has a tribunal system where the players vote whether to punish behavior that has been reported by a player as undesired. Various MMORPGs are facing this issue also and experimenting with various ways of formalizing norms of social behavior. The community decides right then and there; not laws that were drafted in ignorance (or spite) of how society would develop in the future. Cash is declining in popularity so that earning income tends to automatically mean that income is taxed (by the payment systems in use). At the same time, many jobs are emerging that are not automatically subject to income tax. Paypal's fee can be a more attractive option than the government's fee for use as an income earning management system. There are sites like freelancer.com and others who generally make finding specific types of jobs easier while asking a lower fee for their use. kiva.org and other microlending is a way to put currency just sitting around in your bank account to use. It is worth considering the origin of the word currency (as an analogy to a flowing current of water) and noticing that water is useful when it is flowing and not when it is stagnant. Broadening this idea is another alternative funding method to taxation. It exists. It works. If banks are too greedy to lend without expecting a large return then persons can now take the matter into their own hands. The people has to govern the governors, it seems. Saying it another way: if nobody submits to parasites, the parasites will have to adapt if they want to survive.
  3. Cut taxes by half: nothing vague about that. I'll reiterate for you things that I wrote and make clearer connections. Remove income taxes: Boom! This possibility achieves the goal at once. Couple this with disconnecting from a debt-based money system and an enormous strain is alleviated from the national government. For those thinking about retirement pensions: I look forward to the ability to choose how to save my money. Cut all tax types individually by half: This possibility is a more balanced approach. Controlling and penalizing institutions (digital speed readouts for road traffic, signs in the middles of crosswalks, financially incentivized stalking (e.g. speed traps), etc.) that could be replaced by personal responsibility could be cut heavily. Bureaucratic bloat could be cut heavily while modernizing government mechanisms. Subsidization of petroleum could be cut heavily while encouraging cleaner, more efficient energy sources. Make taxation of persons voluntary instead of a one-size-fits-all approach (making it become funding): This possibility is a more intelligent approach. Persons would not be involuntarily paying for things they do not want. Here are some examples of how a person's funding of government could be customized. A person could opt-in to paying for health insurance; this would remove the current disincentive to being healthy. A person could choose to fund a new road near their house since it would benefit them or a person who prefers to walk could choose not to fund it. A person could choose to subscribe to a garbage pickup service or choose to handle their own garbage and spend money elsewhere, etc. Part of the problem is that we citizens don't have the information about what things are costing and what presumably our taxes are paying for. If you provide specific costs of programs, then I'll provide specific ways I'd cut them.
  4. This would be a party with a tangible, measurable, simple platform. Persons would show up to vote for this. Cut taxes by half. No platitudes or vague promises. Unfortunately politicians, for the most part, want to take the easy road of appearing beneficial rather than making tangible improvements. In practice, money from taxes is allocated for projects that already exist and if a politician wants to fund their own project often the temptation to weasel in a new tax instead of risking the unpopular move of cutting a program is too great. It should be a normal process in government to rank the effectiveness of its programs and improve what's working while obsolescing what isn't; not some scary idea. Politicians could say things like: "We're subsidizing sustainable energy because this makes sense for the people and for our budget; we think you'll be pleased" "We're reforming educational institutions from being profit-seeking to giving our citizens the knowledge needed to improve our country and their lives instead of trying to squeeze outdated textbook ideas into modern life; we think you'll be pleased" "We're disconnecting from a debt-based money system that requires ever increasing sacrifices from future generations and will give you more freedom to decide what to do with your life; we think you'll be pleased" Oh how far is the ideal from our current government structure... Even assuming you earn little money: 15% federal income tax 15% provincial income tax 5% federal sales tax (they're double-dipping; you pay when money comes in and you pay when money goes out) 6-10% provincial sales tax (they're double-dipping; you pay when money comes in and you pay when money goes out) other taxes or fees (property taxes, etc.) You do not get to use AT LEAST half the money you work hard at a job you probably do not like. Your money is not your own. You may have noticed police speed traps around. This is what the money you're being taxed of is paying for: more surveillance and control; not better roads. In other words: you pay taxes to be harrased and potentially have to pay more for speeding tickets. You are paying for your entrapment. Trim the fat! Personally, I would like to turn things around before they get nasty.
  5. The taxation system uses modern computer technology; magnetic strips, embedded chips, tap, etc. while the system of citizen participation in government still uses the 500 year old system of "elected" representatives talking to each other in a parliament room. It's clear what the priorities are.
×
×
  • Create New...