this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
992 points (91.3% liked)

General Discussion

13461 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy.World General!

This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.


🪆 About Lemmy World


🧭 Finding CommunitiesFeel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!

Also keep an eye on:

For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!


💬 Additional Discussion Focused Communities:


Rules and Policies

Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.0. See: Rules for Users.

  1. No bigotry: including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘silly’ questions. The world won’t be made better by dismissive comments to others on Lemmy.
  4. Link posts should include some context/opinion in the body text when the title is unaltered, or be titled to encourage discussion.
  5. Posts concerning other instances' activity/decisions are better suited to !fediverse@lemmy.world or !lemmydrama@lemmy.world communities.
  6. No Ads/Spamming.
  7. No NSFW content.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BugleFingers@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I haven't really seen it mentioned here yet but policy makers and judge rulings should either have additional schooling in the area they are making the policy/ruling on OR have a mandatory specialist/professional input throughout the process. So many of these brain dead policies come from not even know what TF they are talking about.

I want proper understanding from these people before they agree or pass something because "it sounds good" from lobbying

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tree@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

"Abolish corporate personhood" doesn't go far enough. Abolish corporations. Companies over a certain size should be forced to convert to either a worker-owned co-op or a non-profit organization. Human society needs to evolve past being centered around maximizing shareholder profits.

[–] Isoprenoid@programming.dev 8 points 1 year ago

You forgot land value tax. Otherwise it's looking good.

[–] Hoomod@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Term limits on SCOTUS should be 18 years, with one Justice retiring every other year.

Unless the court expands, then the term limits could be shorter

[–] TehWorld@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, 10 years is too short. 18 sounds pretty good. I'd also want to give them a full retirement. Ostensibly, they'd be less likely to sell influence.

[–] slurpeesoforion@startrek.website 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Abolish capitol punishments
Codify body autonomy

[–] RazorsLedge@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why do you post an image of text?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/STAR_voting

Star voting to avoid some of the potential negative outcomes of RCV

Do not merge the house and Senate. They perform different, but equally important functions, once you remove the house cap and force them to start legislating again.

Remove the illegal revision done by a single person to statute 1983 of the federal code, in 1874. This removes Qualified Immunity, and resets the law back to, "naw fam, no one, not even a Sitting President, Congressman, or SCOTUS Justice is above the law, and no one has any sort of immunity." If you need immunity to do the job, the job shouldn't be done.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/15/us/politics/qualified-immunity-supreme-court.html

It also follows that congresspeople can now be prosecuted for insider trading, and SCOTUS justices can be prosecuted for accepting bribes.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] thezeesystem@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Don't forget to abolish slavery.. wait forgot they call it prison now.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wealth tax. You forgot that one. Otherwise every billionaire will suddenly make $49,999 in salary.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] craigers@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would add patent law reform, and remove the ability to hold private and public office (ie you can't be a board member of Monsanto and be on the EPA), oh and no campaign donations allowed; everybody gets an equal stipend to campaign, we have the internet you don't need to go shaking babies and kissing hands.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Wouldn't the ban on tax preparation companies hurt mostly the middle class? The rich can just get full time accountants to handle all their finances, and these accountants will also optimize their taxes as part of the general service they provide.

[–] ma11en@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Most countries don't require the nonsense you go through at all.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago (6 children)

The nonsense is there specifically to benefit the tax prep companies. Getting rid of one without the other isn't... Anything anyone is advocating for. You get rid of both, simultaneously, because you have to, and because it's right. How you make it work? Tax the rich, mostly

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Fully funded public news media with a legal firewall between government interests and that media. Controlled by journalists and representative members of the public. We desperately need to get working interests back into news media, nearly every flavor of our media is currently owned by corporate interests.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Whats a luxury item for purposes of VAT? You’ll be hung up forever on that.

For example cars:

  • some consider all cars a luxury we need to step away from
  • some see the reality that cars are required for most of us
  • where do you draw the line between a “necessary” car and a “luxury” car?
  • for the love of god, no special treatment for light trucks
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Not sure what is called, but ban and back tax/punish people/companies who use those foreign PO boxes and claim that that company owns the IP everything that they use, so they actually made no profit, all to avoid paying taxes. And then because "made no money" they get cash from the governments.

[–] chetradley@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One more.

Now that corporations aren't people, only people can own residential land.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No tax reform? It’s a great start to make taxes easier for most individuals but we shouldn’t be allowing wealthier people to pay less percentage of taxes. There’s a bewildering array of complexity that doesn’t matter to most individuals but only serves to lower the tax rate if people who can afford to take advantage of it

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] miridius@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ban political donations, all political parties get the same, small campaign budget and allotment of advertising space/airtime funded by the government instead

[–] TehWorld@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The BIG unintended consequence here is that this makes starting a new party just to leech off the government a big target. Who cares if you never get anyone elected, so long as you can have government paid salaries and airtime.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ElectroVagrant@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Roleplaying as Decronym bot for a moment:

Acronyms, initialisms, and other phrases seen in this thread:

Shortform Likely Meaning
VAT Value-Added Tax
IRS Internal Revenue Service
UBI Universal Basic Income
CPI Consumer Price Index
GDP Gross Domestic Product
FPTP/FPP voting First-Past-The-Post, or First-Past-Post voting
STAR voting Score Then Automatic Runoff voting
RCV Ranked Choice Voting
IRV Instant-Runoff Voting
STV Single-Transferable Vote
AV Approval Voting
321/3-2-1 voting 3 Semifinalists, 2 finalists, 1 winner via rating candidates
MMP Mixed-Member Proportional (Representation)
PAC Political Action Committee
CCC Civilian Conservation Corp
EC Electoral College
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
EU European Union
US United States
SCOTUS Supreme Court of the United States
RMV Registry of Motor Vehicles
IIRC If I Remember Correctly
TF The Fuck
UBU Universal Basic UwU
[–] T156@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Depends on what time-scale. Sweeping changes all in one go would be asking a lot, and none of these are minor changes on their own, either.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cristo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I like almost all of this, but I disagree with merging the Senate and House as well as a VAT on luxury items. We already have tax on basically every transaction and the burden is on the consumer, that needs to change. What should happen is that all taxes on food items currently should be removed. I believe the separation of Senate and House, while burdensome and inefficient at times, really does an essential good for American society. We would fare much better if we had term limits and more than two (essentially one) political party.

Edit: I want to continue with strickening the UBI from this list as well in exchange for significanly improving social services to make sure that everyone is guaranteed food, housing, medical, and security. I get that income is important and some people cant work, but inflation is real and that money has to come from somewhere not just the ether. It would be better to create/improve upon existing social safety nets to make sure everyone can contribute to society in some way rather than just giving everyone money for nothing.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›