If you were King/President/Prime Minister, what would be the first 3 things you do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

I've just thought of another thing: send some very good pot to PJ and especially Kaiser so they can chill, and forget about their world domination for a bit. ~;)

---

I move for pot to be exchanged with salvia divinorum. It shouldn't be hard for the Christian zealots to have a religious revelation with some 40x extract oil.

As dictator of Canada, I would

1) Re-legalize the duel and construct a model of its procedures in order to keep it safe on off the streets.
2) Legalize polygamy, gay marriage and other personal freedoms as well nuking Catholic education.
3) Remove Canada's anti-hate speech laws.

1) Establish a sane energy/transportation policy, focused on safely developing nuclear/fission and weaning Americans from cars, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, reducing our impacts on the environment, and improving safety.

2) Open up all the cool secret FBI and military secrets files to find out who killed JFK, what's being kept at Area 51, the truth about global warming and WMD in Iraq, etc.

3) Invade Canada

ichi :bow:

Since I live in Grand Cayman, not much I could militarily, or diplomatically.

1. Nationalize all Hotels/Resorts/Tourism Ventures
2. Kick all the snobby British/Fat Overly Rich Americans Off
3. Live like a Rockstar Baby :rockstar:

Fun game. :thumbsup:

The Benevolent Dictatorship of Kukristan, formerly known as the USA, sets out the following policies:


1. Domestic: On attaining adulthood, each citizen gets: 1 acre, 1 2-bedroom house (with utilities), 1 "green" vehicle, and 1 minimum-wage job working for me. Use those things, or sell them/shun them...your decision. I get 10% of whatever you produce yearly, and 5 years of personal service doing whatever I deem best (you pick which 5 years between age 20 & 50). To encourage teamwork, you may pick 1 person in your lifetime (a 'mate') to whom you can transfer your wealth after you have died. Only 1...choose wisely. When they die, all the wealth you and he/she accumulated reverts to me, for redistribution to new citizens. No mate? All ur base r belong to me. Education & medical = free.

2. Foreign: Don Corlene's policy in toto.

3. Politics: I am the final decider. Once a year, when you settle up your 10% production tax, you must journey to a location of my choice to vote (via an .Org poll) on matters I set before you.

President Papewaio.

1st thing: Demand a recount. It should put the opposition on the backfoot.

2nd thing: Make Wasabi my intern. ~D

3rd thing: Hire the Org Moderators and Patrons to actually run the country while I chase the intern around my office. ~:cheers:

1st : world domination
2nd :free club sandwiches for all
3rd :make national holiday 'St Georges' day more important , as English dont
celebrate their saints days like the Scottish or Irish
by making day a national holiday in which no-one works (apart from doctors police etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

President Papewaio.

2nd thing: Make Wasabi my intern. ~D

3rd thing: Hire the Org Moderators and Patrons to actually run the country while I chase the intern around my office. ~:cheers:

---

LOL

Ok, here goes.

1. Reintroduce national service, there goes unemployment
2. Ban religion, this includes Songs of Praise............ I mean damn that's a bad programme.
3. Change all laws including legalise and tax prostitution, ban immigration except when we want them, reintroduce corporal and capital punishment and make it a crime for politicians not to keep their promises.

Oh there could be so much more like

1. Ban chavs
2. Ban boy racers
3. Ban foreign companies from owning British companies (I'm taking the whole of Britain not just Scotland by the way)
4. Reserve the right to tell the EU, or anyone else, to go poke it (Using this terminology while laughing at them)
5. Reserve the right to invade anyone and take what we want without having to make up lame excuses ~;) ~D (Don't bite)
6. Cahnge IPR laws so that anything desigend by Britains or with British money belongs to me (Pet hate at work ~:) )
7. Enforce compulsory diets for fat folk.

Blimey, we've got everything from feudalism (still, it sounds a good feudalism, Kukri) to all out nazi aggression (dude, work those issues out).

If we are allowed to comment on other people's programmes for their country I would say I think Don's policies would be hugely in America's interests. (In real life I mean) I hereby appoint Don my minister for trade and foreign affairs. Steppe merc, Beruit and tribesman are hereby appointed ministers for fun.

1) Nationalise all industry and infrastructure which are vital to the day to day runnings of the vast majority of people in the country - private companies have been proven to not be able to cope / be trusted with them. Railways, healthcare, Gas, telephones etc

2) Real progressive taxation. It is no surprise that when the UK had the biggest form of progressive taxation - top rate 95% - we had the smallest difference between rich and poor. Tax bands would stay but tax for those in the higher bands would vastly increase.

3) Slash military spending by slashing military numbers and equipment. Embrace the EU and a new foreign policy / military department and have a common defence policy. Invest more money into high tech weaponry but have the military budget at minimal levels. Use money from this and increased taxation to spend more on important areas of social inclusion and public interest - Schools, hospitals and run down inner city areas.

~:cheers:

1) Legalise and tax everything.

2) Make duels on the common outside Parliament compulsory for all politicians who fall out.

3) Give Wales, Scotland, Cornwall, Ireland and anyone else who wants it independence.

4) Order the mass migration of English people to key foreign consitituencies in the EU so that they can vote there and subtly annex major parts of Europe.

5) Make wearing top hats compulsory. Let's see anyone have their hoodies up then! Bwahahaha.

Kurki, your feudalism does sound interesting. Though of course I'm against compulsary military service... unless I get a horse, can keep my long hair, and fight mounted using a composite bow... ~;)

I thought of something else. I would redisgn the military uniforms. Their too bland. They need to be more flashy, like the Persian, steppe and hussars sort of flashy. I'm talking bright colored kaftans, funky hats with feathers, bandannas, and long hair, with sabres as well as rifles. They would be mounted on the best geldings (stallions as warhorses wouldn't be practical in this sense, since they would be mainly used as long distance skirmishers, as opposed to chargers) To me, that is far more intemidating than a bald person in green on foot.
:charge:

And English Assassin, I would accept, assmuning Happy Land never got formed. ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

Blimey, we've got everything from feudalism (still, it sounds a good feudalism, Kukri)...

---

That's generous, thanks. ~;) I started with the concepts of ownership and inheritance, the 2 things we humans seem to argue/fight/kill over the most, and went from there. Of course I ignored the huge bureaucracy needed to administer Kukristan, and never addressed what happens when I, the dictator, die.

Interesting just how detailed some folks' plans are.

When you die, all your harem should also kill themselves in despair. As this will be every pretty women within 3,000 miles, the locals need not worry about their future, as they will never be able to reproduce anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAG

1) Nationalise all industry and infrastructure which are vital to the day to day runnings of the vast majority of people in the country - private companies have been proven to not be able to cope / be trusted with them. Railways, healthcare, Gas, telephones etc

2) Real progressive taxation. It is no surprise that when the UK had the biggest form of progressive taxation - top rate 95% - we had the smallest difference between rich and poor. Tax bands would stay but tax for those in the higher bands would vastly increase.

3) Slash military spending by slashing military numbers and equipment. Embrace the EU and a new foreign policy / military department and have a common defence policy. Invest more money into high tech weaponry but have the military budget at minimal levels. Use money from this and increased taxation to spend more on important areas of social inclusion and public interest - Schools, hospitals and run down inner city areas.

~:cheers:

---

You forgot step 4: Bend over and grab your ankles for Russia, China or some other large, predatory nation state. ~:eek:

And no offense Jag, but measuring the delta between the richest & poorest citizen is not a good measure of a nation's ability to create wealth. Myanamar does a terrific job at this, because everyone lives in abject poverty. Is that what you're advocating? Everone is equally poor and equally miserable?

With the EU defence policy there would be no need for such large nation state armed forces, so nothing like being invaded would happen.

As for the difference between the extremes being a bad measure I certainly disagree. It is the best measure of a society. If you want to go to one extreme and state that everyone living in poverty is better than 50%, I will say yes, if through that situation you deal with the problems rather than pretend they do not exist as the ruling 50% out of poverty deceive themselves. Likewise everyone living very comfortably is better than 50%, for obvious reasons.

Jag,

Defence policies are (at least supposed to be) just that. If you disband your military, aren't you inviting attack?

I'm sorry, I read the 2nd part of your post 5 times, and I cannot understand what it is you're trying to say. So, I'm going to ask you in multiple choice format. Are you saying:

A) It doesn't matter if everyone lives in poverty, so long as EVERYONE lives in poverty?

B) Once 50% of the population lives in poverty, by definition, it won't be poverty anymore?

C) Some variant I can't conceive.

I'm not being difficult, I really can't make sense of your 2nd paragraph.

And you never answered my premise. At what point can society say "Okay, I've done enough. This person is unhelpable". If I insist on my constitutional right to sit on my ass and drink 1000 bottle dollars of cognac all day, doesn't society owe me that? Especially if I can claim that I'm in the lower bracket of the income scale? And yes I'm using hyperbole, because I want to pin you down... at what point can society say 'we've thrown enough of our resources away on this individual?' And don't say something esoteric like 'we should do all we can', or 'we'll know when we've done enough'. I'm serious, I want a means test out of you...

Have Jag arrested and brain-washed until he can only say: "Socialism is evil, Europe is evil, Socialism is evil, Europe is evil........." ~;)

Quote:

---

Defence policies are (at least supposed to be) just that. If you disband your military, aren't you inviting attack?

---

Not at all we would be hidden behind an EU shield plus we would not have all our armed forces disbanded and as I stated I would be quite willing to invest in high tech weaponry. Lets face it boots on the ground is becoming less and less the major factors in wars.

Quote:

---

I'm sorry, I read the 2nd part of your post 5 times, and I cannot understand what it is you're trying to say.

---

Man, I should be a politician! ~D

I am stating that the status quo of people in poverty is going to become far more likely to be overthrown if more people are in poverty and hardship. With say 50% of the population in poverty and 50% well off, the status quo will - in all honesty and as proven - not be broken, where as if everyone was in the same common condition things would change. so if it be everyone starts off at the same level of income which is not very good, all the better for the change in fortunes.

But then again, it is not very likely that everyone is going to be in poverty. If we took the current situation and added redistribution, it is absurd to state that everyone would be below the poverty line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Henry V

Have Jag arrested and brain-washed until he can only say: "Socialism is evil, Europe is evil, Socialism is evil, Europe is evil........." ~;)

---

You never know, give me £3 billion and you might not need the brain-whashing. ~;)

Well, isn't 'poverty' a relative term? Isn't it defined by 'most of our citizens should expect to have at least this', and this changes as society improves itself? 30 years ago, central air conditioning was a pretty extravagant luxury here in the States. Now, no home is built without it. Is it fair to say that a person who's given a free home, but without central air conditioning, is being forced to live in poverty? Is it society's obligation to go build him a new house with central air?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAG

where as if everyone was in the same common condition things would change. so if it be everyone starts off at the same level of income which is not very good, all the better for the change in fortunes.

---

But since your socialism is implanted, what incentive do people have to produce more and work harder ? You'll just take their money away !

This is, apparently, the problem in some parts of Africa, where it is custom that you share your wealth with your 'tribe'. The net result is that nobody works hard.

There was an article in the Onion once, 'communism doesn't work in shared apartment' or something like that. The thing was, everyone agreed to do an equal amount of work. There was just one guy who didn't do his part. Of course, certain people got pissed about it and didn't want to do anything before that guy did his part. It was a domino effect and the result was that no one did anything around the apartment anymore.

Now I've lived in quite a few shared houses, this story is very real, although, often, one or two people will work, and the rest will just make fun of them because they are such idiots and the rest have it easy.

Point is (finally !) socialism has its purpose, to redistribute wealth in an economically healthy society, but in a poor society, it just doesn't work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Well, isn't 'poverty' a relative term?

---

Usually poverty is defined as having to spend a certain amount (50% IIRC) of your income on food. It's definition is debatable of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

I thought of something else. I would redisgn the military uniforms. Their too bland. They need to be more flashy, like the Persian, steppe and hussars sort of flashy. I'm talking bright colored kaftans, funky hats with feathers, bandannas, and long hair, with sabres as well as rifles. They would be mounted on the best geldings (stallions as warhorses wouldn't be practical in this sense, since they would be mainly used as long distance skirmishers, as opposed to chargers) To me, that is far more intemidating than a bald person in green on foot.
:charge:

---

You're in bright clothing. I have a sniper rifle.

OSOK. (Figure out the acronym).

1: create a budget surplus (romove welfare, cut back all spending generall, fire 10,000 government employees)

2: reduce the number of laws by 80%, and remove all special rights which have been granted to 'protect minority groups', they are unfair to everyone else.

3: make it harder to sue, as part of the effort to promote personal responsibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAG

You never know, give me £3 billion and you might not need the brain-whashing. ~;)

---

How about a cookie and some pie? ~;) ~:cheers:

1. Place a large tax on SUVs/Trucks that aren't being used for real work, like farming or construction. People living in areas with bad roads could be exempted on a case by case basis. This would be part of legislation thats more enviromentally friendly.

2. Create a zone in the country where everything is legal. I'll call it the North American Freedom of Action Zone or NAFAZ. Basicly it will be an area of the country with no federal, state, or local government. Legal jurisdiction will belong to the US Marshals, and industrial/commercial development will not be allowed.

3. Ban all Saturn commercials. Saturn is a crappy car which relies on extremely corny commercials that suck.

4. Ban all OnStar commercials which involve children. These commercials attempt to emotionally persuade Americans into buying a product by using children which is just plain wrong. OnStar is a great product, but they need to get rid of the crappy commercials.

Quote:

---

You're in bright clothing. I have a sniper rifle.

OSOK. (Figure out the acronym).

---

Why am I fighting you in the first place? And where are you that you can hide using sniper? Why would I commit my cavalry forces to anywhere, much less a place other than plains?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Well, isn't 'poverty' a relative term? Isn't it defined by 'most of our citizens should expect to have at least this', and this changes as society improves itself? 30 years ago, central air conditioning was a pretty extravagant luxury here in the States. Now, no home is built without it. Is it fair to say that a person who's given a free home, but without central air conditioning, is being forced to live in poverty? Is it society's obligation to go build him a new house with central air?

---

Yes poverty is relative but no to your question.

Okay, well, where is the line in your mind then, Jag? At what point do you say "okay, this guy has given enough, and this guy has taken enough"? Or can you? Is there any sense of a limit in your mind?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mercian billman

2. Create a zone in the country where everything is legal. I'll call it the North American Freedom of Action Zone or NAFAZ. Basicly it will be an area of the country with no federal, state, or local government. Legal jurisdiction will belong to the US Marshals, and industrial/commercial development will not be allowed.

---

I think that there are some problems with this point: if everything is legal, why do the US Marshals have legal jurisdiction. Also, if everything is legal, how can industrial/commercial development be banned there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Laridus Konivaich

I think that there are some problems with this point: if everything is legal, why do the US Marshals have legal jurisdiction. Also, if everything is legal, how can industrial/commercial development be banned there?

---

Sorry that was my mistake.

Not everything would be legal, things like rape, murder, and other violent crime would be illegal. "Victimless" crime would not be illegal though, so you could smoke all the pot you want.

Industrial and Commercial development would be banned because were trying to re-create the idea of the old west here. The ban is really unneeded (sp?) though because firms would be discouraged from locating their operations in the area due to lack of infrastructure.