Stephan55

IF I WERE KING....

29 posts in this topic

This is a fanciful thread to encourage all to post what they would do to "fix" the numerous problems of the United States, if they had omnipotent (or at least autocratic) power to do so.

All intelligent and polite discourse is welcome and debate about why anyone's suggestions may or may not work as written, or additional amendments to make improvements are encouraged.

If you find the idea of an absolute monarchy within this country repugnant, then think of this as if you were at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, but with a modern mindset. How would you go about creating a government truly representative of it's people?

A couple of Ground Rules are that we must first agree that climate change is real and we can't simply ignore the impact it is having and will continue to have on this and other countries. So if you live in a coastal or low lying area this may be of particular import to you.
A second rule is posts here must remain civil and respectful of each others views, regardless.

Since we are a diverse group, living in diverse places within this land (including Canada and maybe beyond), let us pretend that we are all part of the same country, and we are charged as representatives of our respective regions with creating a "constitution" that will fairly represent and protect us all. To this end we must all agree that persuasion and compromise is requisite if we are to achieve a unanimous consent. And, just as our founding fathers did, we must likely implement effective checks and balances to help insure the preservation of "our" government for future generations.

Okay, I'll begin as if I were somehow appointed the "benevolent" (and temporary) autocratic ruler of this fair land...

If I were king....
I would immediately remove the false legitimacy of "gerrymandering" and the "electoral college" in this country. (We are the only modern "democracy" to have either.)

I would implement term limits to all elected offices of government and make it impossible for any former elected official to "lobby" the government on behalf of any corporation for at least the equivalent of two terms after having left office.

I would make it impossible for any candidate to conceal the sources of his funding with mandatory reporting of all donors.
I would also repeal the SCOTUS decision making corporations the equivalent of individual citizens, and would minimize the amount that any individual or entity could contribute to any political campaign.
To help mediate that decision I would make it mandatory for all public and privately controlled media to provide a minimal standard amount of "free and equal ad time" to any person seeking any elected office. And make it illegal for any public and privately controlled media to accept any funding for political ads from any private or corporate source.
In this way, diminishing the current exuberant cost of running for office will hopefully encourage the best and brightest and not just the richest or most financially connected to run for public office.
Media would also be required to "fact check" any advertisements before allowing any of them to be aired or printed. "Truth" must be verifiable to be trusted.

I would implement a fixed and flat individual income tax, and eliminate all other private property and possession taxes. 
I would also limit the retirement and health benefits received by any politician to the equivalent of the least of their represented citizenry.
I would put "teeth" into the "balanced budget" amendment and eliminate the ability of congress to forever raise the debt ceiling (in time of peace).
With a flat and fixed income tax (and no way to tax persons out of their property) government will be forced to limit and prioritize it's spending. To increase available dollars government will have to work to raise the standard of living of all it's citizens.
I would do my best to incentivize politicians to fairly represent all citizens within their geographic area, regardless of party affiliation. As the only way for them to increase the personal gain of their office would be by improving the lot of their least citizenry.

In other words, I would reinstate the constitutional ideal of checks and balances, with the goal of making this truly a government of, by, and for it's people.

I would initiate mass infrastructure rebuilding projects with the emphasis on long term sustainability.
I would wean this country from it's dependence upon fossil fuels and encourage the maximum development of sustainable renewable energy enterprises (i.e. solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal, wherever available) that is environmentally benign. 
I would incentivize the development of new low energy consuming technologies, and more efficient ways of "storing and transporting" regional energy, and decentralize the power grid.
I would start by mandating all new federal and state government and public buildings be energy self-sufficient. Followed by older building renovation. As technology costs decreased I would mandate all private new construction be the same, and then further incentivize  renovation of older private dwellings.
I would invigorate rapid transit transportation and rail systems throughout the land.

Many ideas are continually popping into my head, and the devil of course is in the details...
So to get this thread started I'll stop for now...

My goal being, after I have successfully gotten us onto the "right" track of "Making America Great Again," (or rather "making us into the great nation that we should have been all along") I would depose myself and, like Washington, step down from public life...

So whether you wish to be an interim "king" or a "delegate" from your area, post your thoughts on how to persuade me to do things differently or how you would do them yourself (if you could).

If you were Solomon what would you do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't read all that. my intention span is too short. you're right of course about that dam electoral college.

lets see prominent democrat voices like Hillary Clinton prevail upon California democrats to vote to abolish it.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often fantasize similarly except I usually imagine having all the powers of Superman as opposed to being a mere king.

Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to say what I would do. I'm in Canada - hate-speech laws, ay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

I can't read all that. my intention span is too short. you're right of course about that dam electoral college.

lets see prominent democrat voices like Hillary Clinton prevail upon California democrats to vote to abolish it.

:)

LOL. I thought you were going to say to legalize all 50 foot women. 

latest?cb=20140212030512

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gershwin fan said:

LOL. I thought you were going to say to legalize all 50 foot women. 

latest?cb=20140212030512

only if they doan hold us up too high after they get their giant fingers wrapped around us.:D

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd command each thing, be it fish or fowl.
With a woof and a woof and a royal growl - woof.
As I'd click my heel, all the trees would kneel.
And the mountains bow and the bulls kowtow.
And the sparrow would take wing - If I - If I - were King!
Each rabbit would show respect to me. The chipmunks genuflect to me.
Though my tail would lash, I would show compash
For every underling!
If I - If I - were King!
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least I've got a few posters in this thread.
For awhile I was thinking that no one wanted the office of "King" or even "Queen," to wield that mighty power to right the wrongs of the kingdom, and make this land a happy, or at least a more contented place.

Still, I was hoping that those who post here might give some serious thought as to what should be done to make things better than they are, so we could rationally debate the merits of each postured edict.
Or play the respresentative game, where each person from far and wide would state the concerns of their regions people, and we could then jointly discuss what might be done to alleviate those concerns.

It is so easy to criticize and play the blame game, and apparently so difficult to actually search our minds and hearts for solutions to the problems that plague us all.

I assume that we all share some of the most important things in common...
We all eat, and drink, and breathe, and require shelter, and warmth in the cold, and cool in the heat...
We all (or most all) have families, and loved ones that we care about and wish likewise too.
And do we not all wish the best for this land, and a hopeful future for our progeny?
Do we not all wish to be protected from preventable diseases, as we wish our government to protect us from the threat of those which would do us harm.
We wish for our equal say and consent in how we our governed, and none of us wish to be denied that right.
Do we not all wish for an unpoisoned land, uncontaminated waters, and unpolluted air.
And I doubt that any of us wish for a world devoid of other forms of life than our own.

If any of us have concerns about such important things, then it should be of concern to all of us.
Because near, or far, we are all neighbors, and sooner or late our neighbors fate becomes that of our own.

So I hoped, in this fanciful kingdom of ours, we might address the issues that prompt our concerns, and see if we might not brainstorm some answers which appear to elude us in the "real" world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

I can't read all that. my intention span is too short. you're right of course about that dam electoral college.

You may not be able to read my friend, but I and I am sure that others can attest that your "intention span" is clear and long.

Okay, from those delegates present and accounted for, we have the motion of eliminating the Electoral College seconded.
What say ye all? Shall this motion be carried? Or is there any here that speak merit to continue the practice???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, darkblue said:

I often fantasize similarly except I usually imagine having all the powers of Superman as opposed to being a mere king.

Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to say what I would do. I'm in Canada - hate-speech laws, ay.

Fear not oh delegate from the northern Provence.
Thou art allowed to speak thy heart in this forum, so long as thou speakest true and with a civil tongue, as we wish that this land be not one of oppression, but of equal freedom to all, so long as one freedom doth not tread upon another.
Doest thou concur with the seconded measure above, or doest though wish to propose another?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Vautrin said:
I'd command each thing, be it fish or fowl.
With a woof and a woof and a royal growl - woof.
As I'd click my heel, all the trees would kneel.
And the mountains bow and the bulls kowtow.
And the sparrow would take wing - If I - If I - were King!
Each rabbit would show respect to me. The chipmunks genuflect to me.
Though my tail would lash, I would show compash
For every underling!
If I - If I - were King!

Yeah, sure, but STILL nobody has ever been able to explain to me what makes the Hottentot so hot!

(...so there!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

LOL. I thought you were going to say to legalize all 50 foot women. 

latest?cb=20140212030512

Ahhh, our delegate from Mahagonny land hast brought humour into the room. We welcome light hearts, so long as the intent is pure and without malice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Stephan55 said:

You may not be able to read my friend, but I and I am sure that others can attest that your "intention span" is clear and long.

Okay, from those delegates present and accounted for, we have the motion of eliminating the Electoral College seconded.
What say ye all? Shall this motion be carried, or is there any here that speak merit to continue the practice???

Hell Stephan, I'VE been saying the antiquated Electoral College system, and one that IN FACT enables voters who live in smaller populated states a larger and thus inequitable "voice" in determining our Presidents, should have been consigned to the dustbin of history, since my high school days!

(...that of course would have been just a few miles east of where YOUR high school days were spent, dude!) ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Vautrin said:
I'd command each thing, be it fish or fowl.
With a woof and a woof and a royal growl - woof.
As I'd click my heel, all the trees would kneel.
And the mountains bow and the bulls kowtow.
And the sparrow would take wing - If I - If I - were King!
Each rabbit would show respect to me. The chipmunks genuflect to me.
Though my tail would lash, I would show compash
For every underling!
If I - If I - were King!

Our delegate from the northern Carolinas has brought us forth lyrics from the "Land of Oz."
Perhaps there is a worthy message to be found in such.
I present the full presentation for our entertainment, and perchance enlightenment!

"If I Were The King Of The Forest"
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Stephan55 said:

Our delegate from the northern Carolinas has brought us forth lyrics from the "Land of Oz."
Perhaps there is a worthy message to be found in such.
I present the full presentation for our entertainment, and perchance enlightenment!

"If I Were The King Of The Forest"
 

 

Well, seein' as how we seem to be pullin' out the old stuff here, I'm sure we all remember the following from just about a decade and half ago, don't we?!...

bush_cheney_oz.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dargo said:

Hell Stephan, I'VE been saying the antiquated Electoral College system, and one that IN FACT enables voters who live in smaller populated states a larger and thus inequitable "voice" in determining our Presidents should have been consigned to the dustbin of history, since my high school days!

(...that of course would have been just a few miles east of where YOUR high school days were spent, dude!) ;)

We welcome the delegate from Sedona Land, and are happy to hear his wisdom.
Ahh yes, you bring to memory the nascent days of my youth, before my current appointment to chair this realm with fidelity.
So by your words, Sedona Land agrees with the disposal of the Electoral College.
But thy words hearken us to echos of another republic, from another time which, if I am not mistaken, whose delegates made the counterpoint that larger states might easily overpower and drown out the voice of the smaller states, if there were not some safe guards of a "fair" and "equal" measure of representation built in.
What say you to such an argument that might be put forth to defend the Electoral College?
Doest such a counterpoint carry any merit to thy mind?
Please speakest thou, as if thy words were addressing those representatives of smaller states that have yet to join this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dargo said:

Well, seein' as how we seem to be pullin' out the old stuff here, I'm sure we all remember the following from just about a decade and half ago, don't we?!...

bush_cheney_oz.jpg

Ahh brave Dargo of Sedona Land, thy humour doest not depart thee.
But within this delegation we must be mindful to keep our humour light and without unintentional malice.
The goal here is mutual consensus to pass helpful and not deleterious legislation.
Our delegates come here from distant parts of our fair land. We want none to fear that a majority might trample the equal rights of any minority. Nor do we wish for a minority to hold a majority hostage by with-holding their votes.
Our delegates must be of one mind so that when they return home to their constituents they can be proud to announce the unanimous passage of our kingdom's constitution. 
This duty shall require much diplomacy, mutual respect and a willingness to reasonably compromise from all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Stephan55 said:

Fear not oh delegate from the northern Provence.
Thou art allowed to speak thy heart in this forum, so long as thou speakest true and with a civil tongue, as we wish that this land be not one of oppression, but of equal freedom to all, so long as one freedom doth not tread upon another.
Doest thou concur with the seconded measure above, or doest though wish to propose another?

I said I'm in Canada.

Didn't say I was in medieval England.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, darkblue said:

I said I'm in Canada.

Didn't say I was in medieval England.

Thou may speak in whichever dialect best serveth thee and thy people.
Whether thou choose to fully indulge in this fantasy or not, thou art welcome as a Canadian delegate to this fine and far flung assemblage.

And now my friends, to assist in our preparation for what I hope will be numerous friendly debates within this thread may we indulge ourselves in a fine example of "American Rhetoric" from the following:

Lincoln–Douglas debates excerpt from "Abe Lincoln in Illinois" (1940) 11.41 min

https://americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechabelincolnillinois.html

https://americanrhetoric.com/mp3clips/newmoviespeeches/moviespeechabelincolninillinois.mp3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stephan55 said:

Thou may speak in whichever dialect best serveth thee and thy people.

Ain't got no people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, darkblue said:

Ain't got no people.

Thy Provence may be large in geography and small in population, it matters not to us either way, except when we address concerns of representation apportionment. 
If thou be a minority of one, thou art granted equal representation here, for thy voice no doubt represents that of many others of a similar mind. It is for those others as yourself that you speak, and therefore by the terms granted within this kingdom do thy represent "your people."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Stephan55 said:

thy voice no doubt represents that of many others of a similar mind.

Scary thought.

Probably true, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dargo said:

Yeah, sure, but STILL nobody has ever been able to explain to me what makes the Hottentot so hot!

(...so there!)

Always leave 'em pondering. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

Always leave 'em pondering

Oh wise Vautrin, from the Northern Carolinas, thou speakest true in this example. 

Howst doth thy wisdom fare regarding the motion presented this day, seconded by two, toward Elimination of the Electoral College.
Doest thy vote count for or against the passage of this amendment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

Our delegate from the northern Carolinas has brought us forth lyrics from the "Land of Oz."
Perhaps there is a worthy message to be found in such.
I present the full presentation for our entertainment, and perchance enlightenment!


 

 

One thing that makes us unique is that we have a hell of a witch problem here. The first thing we

do is kill all the witches, not the lawyers. Then we can consult with the lion or maybe better yet

with the scarecrow. Yeah, get rid of the EC. It no longer makes sense, if it ever did. Next, make

sure there is such a thing as a free lunch. Then start considering a free supper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vautrin said:

One thing that makes us unique is that we have a hell of a witch problem here. The first thing we

do is kill all the witches, not the lawyers. Then we can consult with the lion or maybe better yet

with the scarecrow. Yeah, get rid of the EC. It no longer makes sense, if it ever did. Next, make

sure there is such a thing as a free lunch. Then start considering a free supper.

Much to contemplate here.

We have heard your vote against the Electoral College.
Our fine delegate from Sedona Land hath said:

5 hours ago, Dargo said:

the antiquated Electoral College system, ... enables voters who live in smaller populated states a larger and thus inequitable "voice" in determining our Presidents, ...

It brought to memory similar arguments from a distant time in another land in which delegates made the counterpoint that larger states might easily overpower and drown out the voice of the smaller states, if there were not some safe guards of a "fair" and "equal" measure of representation built in.
What say you to such an argument that might be put forth to defend the Electoral College?
Doest such a counterpoint carry any merit to thy mind?

Regarding such matters as witches and lawyers, truly none save you have yet brought up these concerns in our fare land. Though I doest recall a similar problem, again from a distant land in another time.
If any of our other delegates confirm such a presence and concern, perhaps a federal amendment can be added to address such an issue.
But first methinks it would behoove your independent consult with the scarecrow (after he has been awarded a brain) and the Lion (after he has validated his courage) before proposing such a bill and submitting it for review by this august body.
If it be shown that the witches are benign, and merely wish to practice Wicca and or Earth centered naturalistic religious practices, then they shall be protected as any "religion."
I propose that this land have an amendment protecting the freedom of religion, and freedom from religion.
By the power invested in me, this kingdom shall not become a theocracy under my
watch. 
However I may consider any amendment banning all lawyers who advertise their
litigious services beyond those listed in a phone book or on-line search. 


My role as Monarch though supreme is but a temporary office, to deal with the immediate problems at hand.
But our goal at this convention is to establish a self-sustaining government, guided by a constitutional rule of law and free of all despots, be they benevolent or tyrannical.
At present we are here to establish a sturdy foundation upon which this government can be securely built.
It has not yet been considered by this body, and we have yet to hear the voices of delegates from our other Provinces that may wish to limit the responsibilities, size, and intrusion the federal government.
If the Province's choose to extend the power of the federal government at the diminishment of Provincial rule then so be it. But the decision to do so must be unanimous.

Regarding "free lunches" and "free suppers," doest thou propose this as a national measure for the destitute and infirm, or for all?
I see merit in concerns about the former being cared for, but for consideration we require clarification as to the extent of this concern, and whether or not it can or should be addressed at the Provincial levels, or does it merit a national amendment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us