Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pass One Piece of Legislation in Your State/Country

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Pass One Piece of Legislation in Your State/Country

    If you could pass one piece of legislation to improve the quality of life in your state (or country if you live in a unitary government), what would it be and why?

    #2
    I'd pass a bill that would put the redistricting process in the hands of an independent, non-political organization in the state of Alabama. This state will remain a hard-right leaning cesspool so long as the republicans are allowed to gerrymander one big citiy per district with a fuckton of rural, suburban areas to suppress the youth and minority votes.

    Comment


      #3
      Kill everyone

      Comment


        #4
        Easy. Legal weed. Next question.

        Comment


        • Augustus Caesar
          Augustus Caesar commented
          Editing a comment
          I was expecting more laws like this, tbh.

        #5
        This is a rather interesting one; I could go in depth with multiple answers for which efficacy is contingent on various factors, but I'll posit a fundamental.

        Given that education is key, I would like to institute a policy that is all but certain to improve its quality across the board. Such a bill would require all government employees to educate their children at public schools. That is, anyone hired by the state or any municipality within the state for any position must send their kids to state schools. (This could also be expanded to the federal level for that hypothetical.)

        There are two likely consequences: (1) the law will -- understandably -- be heavily protested, and this would clearly illustrate the subpar quality of the public education system, most likely resulting in serious discussions, lobbying, and ultimately reforms, even if the bill is repealed; or (2) the bill remains, and legislators will willingly pass reforms for the sake of their children.

        I'm sure others have thought of this before, but you didn't ask for something unique!

        Comment


          #6
          Free housing

          Comment


            #7
            I would ban abortion, except when the child is deformed or the mother's life is at risk.

            65 million baby murders and counting, America.

            Dummycrats have passed the NAZIs as the most murderous regime of all time.

            Comment


            • Augustus Caesar
              Augustus Caesar commented
              Editing a comment
              “Dummycrats” is a new one.

            #8
            I'd make Surprise sex legal! :3

            Comment


            • Augustus Caesar
              Augustus Caesar commented
              Editing a comment
              Rape isn’t okay, Henry.

            • Killer Loli Illya-Chan
              Editing a comment
              Until they make it okay! We can still hope right?

            #9
            Originally posted by P408370R View Post
            This is a rather interesting one; I could go in depth with multiple answers for which efficacy is contingent on various factors, but I'll posit a fundamental.

            Given that education is key, I would like to institute a policy that is all but certain to improve its quality across the board. Such a bill would require all government employees to educate their children at public schools. That is, anyone hired by the state or any municipality within the state for any position must send their kids to state schools. (This could also be expanded to the federal level for that hypothetical.)

            There are two likely consequences: (1) the law will -- understandably -- be heavily protested, and this would clearly illustrate the subpar quality of the public education system, most likely resulting in serious discussions, lobbying, and ultimately reforms, even if the bill is repealed; or (2) the bill remains, and legislators will willingly pass reforms for the sake of their children.

            I'm sure others have thought of this before, but you didn't ask for something unique!
            Good

            Originally posted by Mae Borowski View Post
            Free housing
            Bad

            Originally posted by Wade View Post
            I would ban abortion, except when the child is deformed or the mother's life is at risk.

            65 million baby murders and counting, America.

            Dummycrats have passed the NAZIs as the most murderous regime of all time.
            Ugly

            Huh... I didn't think I'd make a Clint Eastwood movie reference in a political topic, but here we are.

            Comment


              #10
              Originally posted by Cid View Post

              Good



              Bad



              Ugly

              Huh... I didn't think I'd make a Clint Eastwood movie reference in a political topic, but here we are.
              Either free housing or make getting a job 100% easy and impossible for an employer to turn down an application, with no interview process

              Comment


                #11
                For One Night A Year, All Crime Is Legal

                Comment


                  #12
                  Originally posted by Mae Borowski View Post

                  Either free housing or make getting a job 100% easy and impossible for an employer to turn down an application, with no interview process
                  Both are pretty bad ideas. Giving everyone free housing would be extremely costly to the government, more so than any kind of welfare programs we have going on right now. You're talking about hundreds of millions of people all getting free housing. It's just not possible without bankrupting the government or forcing everyone to live in tiny studio apartments with only the bare necessities. Just not feasible. We do have low-income housing for people in extreme poverty, and that's about the best you can hope for.

                  And you can't tell businesses that have to interview every single person that applies for a job either. A ton of people just aren't qualified. It takes time and money to conduct interviews, doing such on a guy that never even graduated high school when he's applying for a high level engineering job would be a waste of both.

                  Comment


                    #13
                    Originally posted by Cid View Post

                    Both are pretty bad ideas. Giving everyone free housing would be extremely costly to the government, more so than any kind of welfare programs we have going on right now. You're talking about hundreds of millions of people all getting free housing. It's just not possible without bankrupting the government or forcing everyone to live in tiny studio apartments with only the bare necessities. Just not feasible. We do have low-income housing for people in extreme poverty, and that's about the best you can hope for.

                    And you can't tell businesses that have to interview every single person that applies for a job either. A ton of people just aren't qualified. It takes time and money to conduct interviews, doing such on a guy that never even graduated high school when he's applying for a high level engineering job would be a waste of both.
                    Maybe it should be limited to minimum wage jobs like cashiers that take little skill to do lol

                    It shouldn't take too much money to provide minimal housing, it doesn't matter if it's shitty apartments with a mattress. The government shouldn't be letting people be homeless.

                    Maybe another idea could just be that the government makes infinite money and abolishes inflation, then gives everyone money

                    Comment


                      #14
                      Originally posted by Mae Borowski View Post

                      Maybe it should be limited to minimum wage jobs like cashiers that take little skill to do lol

                      It shouldn't take too much money to provide minimal housing, it doesn't matter if it's shitty apartments with a mattress. The government shouldn't be letting people be homeless.

                      Maybe another idea could just be that the government makes infinite money and abolishes inflation, then gives everyone money
                      You still have an issue of not having nearly enough positions available. Should a small grocery store have to interview 30 people to fill one cashier job? Or should they narrow that list down by looking at people with job experience first and selection only from the five or six that has actually worked a register? It's usually just the manager that conducts interviews as well, if he had to take 30 or 40 minutes out of his day to interview every single person, he probably wouldn't have enough time to actually manage the store. Imagine applying for a job, getting the interview, and then waiting two months before you ever learn of the decision because the manager had 25 other people that he was required by law to interview. It's just silly.

                      Minimal apartments still cost $600 a month in low-cost areas, that price could easily double or triple when you get into big cities like New York. You could be looking at tens of billions of dollars per month to make that happen. Possibly over a trillion every single year. And that's just for housing, it doesn't include utility costs and food, which would also need to be provided to anyone that didn't have a job. We can't tack trillions onto the national debt every year, it'd bankrupt the country.

                      You can't make "infinite money" either. The US' currency is valued, at the moment, by the full force of the United States economy. (it used to be valued and backed by gold, but not anymore) If the government suddenly began printing up and giving away an infinite amount of cash, it'd drop the value of our dollar to nearly zero. Other countries would stop trading with us because our money would be worthless. We'd lose all of our imports and, again, our economy would simply crash and everyone would be up shit creek without a paddle.

                      There are options to expand economic equality and decrease the effects of poverty in America, but this ain't it, Chief.

                      Comment


                        #15
                        Originally posted by Henry the Slowbruh View Post
                        I'd make Surprise sex legal! :3
                        is this what they're calling rape nowadays

                        Comment


                          #16
                          Originally posted by Saffron View Post
                          is this what they're calling rape nowadays
                          Yes! You may also call it unexpected sex. Also, I like that Avi you have right now! 10/10!

                          Comment


                            #17
                            Originally posted by Cid View Post

                            You still have an issue of not having nearly enough positions available. Should a small grocery store have to interview 30 people to fill one cashier job? Or should they narrow that list down by looking at people with job experience first and selection only from the five or six that has actually worked a register? It's usually just the manager that conducts interviews as well, if he had to take 30 or 40 minutes out of his day to interview every single person, he probably wouldn't have enough time to actually manage the store. Imagine applying for a job, getting the interview, and then waiting two months before you ever learn of the decision because the manager had 25 other people that he was required by law to interview. It's just silly.

                            Minimal apartments still cost $600 a month in low-cost areas, that price could easily double or triple when you get into big cities like New York. You could be looking at tens of billions of dollars per month to make that happen. Possibly over a trillion every single year. And that's just for housing, it doesn't include utility costs and food, which would also need to be provided to anyone that didn't have a job. We can't tack trillions onto the national debt every year, it'd bankrupt the country.

                            You can't make "infinite money" either. The US' currency is valued, at the moment, by the full force of the United States economy. (it used to be valued and backed by gold, but not anymore) If the government suddenly began printing up and giving away an infinite amount of cash, it'd drop the value of our dollar to nearly zero. Other countries would stop trading with us because our money would be worthless. We'd lose all of our imports and, again, our economy would simply crash and everyone would be up shit creek without a paddle.

                            There are options to expand economic equality and decrease the effects of poverty in America, but this ain't it, Chief.
                            Like I said before, no interview process. You just walk in, ask for a job and you get it that day. If there aren't enough jobs make more because there are too many ppl who can't get jobs and they should be able to get jobs.

                            Free housing means no monthly cost. You put an apartment there and fill it with people. Not complicated. And beggars can't be choosers, so no electricity = no bills. Charities already feed poor people so they can live off that until they get jobs.

                            And that's why I said abolish inflation so the value doesn't drop.

                            Comment


                              #18
                              Originally posted by Mae Borowski View Post

                              Like I said before, no interview process. You just walk in, ask for a job and you get it that day. If there aren't enough jobs make more because there are too many ppl who can't get jobs and they should be able to get jobs.

                              Free housing means no monthly cost. You put an apartment there and fill it with people. Not complicated. And beggars can't be choosers, so no electricity = no bills. Charities already feed poor people so they can live off that until they get jobs.

                              And that's why I said abolish inflation so the value doesn't drop.
                              So instead of requiring an application and interview process to weed out the people that would not be suited to a position, you would just have businesses be forced into hiring the first person that walked in off the street? And how are you just going to create new jobs out of nowhere? A small business can't just hire anyone and everyone that comes asking for a job, they'd end up having to pay employees pennies a day because they wouldn't make enough revenue to pay them a decent wage. You can't just make stuff happen, dude.

                              Space is usually at a premium in cities, mate. Normally, you're not going to find a big and empty plot of land to build an apartment complex on. And even if you did, you're probably looking at a multi-million dollar construction project. Who's going to pay for that across the thousands of cities and towns littered across America? You're still looking at adding trillions of dollars to the national debt, plus regular upkeep of these new complexes that will continue to add costs year after year. Instead, the government would probably have to pay rent for these people to fit them into existing apartments. So there would be a monthly cost to tackle, unless the government decided to strong-arm the owners of the complexes to make them house people for free. But then that becomes a detriment on a (probably struggling) business owner and makes their life worse, possibly pushing them into poverty. This idea is lose-lose no matter how you look at it. You can't just do everything for free man.

                              Abolishing inflation the US won't stop the value of our money dropping, it just prevents the cost of goods and services within the US from increasing. The value of our money would decrease significantly because wouldn't be able to back that value with anything. We'd essentially be asking the rest of the world to just pretend like we're worth more than we actually are. And that's not going to happen.

                              Comment


                                #19
                                free housing is the reason why we have so many inner city problems, from poverty to crime rate to education. Just pointing that out. (And they still aren't free, they're just shitty)

                                Comment


                                  #20
                                  Originally posted by Cid View Post

                                  So instead of requiring an application and interview process to weed out the people that would not be suited to a position, you would just have businesses be forced into hiring the first person that walked in off the street? And how are you just going to create new jobs out of nowhere? A small business can't just hire anyone and everyone that comes asking for a job, they'd end up having to pay employees pennies a day because they wouldn't make enough revenue to pay them a decent wage. You can't just make stuff happen, dude.

                                  Space is usually at a premium in cities, mate. Normally, you're not going to find a big and empty plot of land to build an apartment complex on. And even if you did, you're probably looking at a multi-million dollar construction project. Who's going to pay for that across the thousands of cities and towns littered across America? You're still looking at adding trillions of dollars to the national debt, plus regular upkeep of these new complexes that will continue to add costs year after year. Instead, the government would probably have to pay rent for these people to fit them into existing apartments. So there would be a monthly cost to tackle, unless the government decided to strong-arm the owners of the complexes to make them house people for free. But then that becomes a detriment on a (probably struggling) business owner and makes their life worse, possibly pushing them into poverty. This idea is lose-lose no matter how you look at it. You can't just do everything for free man.

                                  Abolishing inflation the US won't stop the value of our money dropping, it just prevents the cost of goods and services within the US from increasing. The value of our money would decrease significantly because wouldn't be able to back that value with anything. We'd essentially be asking the rest of the world to just pretend like we're worth more than we actually are. And that's not going to happen.
                                  I just don't like interviews because even if you're over qualified for the job you could be rejected just because you can't pass the inquisition and mental gymnastics. I'm afraid I'll never get a job because I'm not a social God.

                                  Comment

                                  Working...
                                  X