If you had the opertunity to run the Country

Make me Supreme Dictator of the Universe for Life and see what I can do!

 

We would put all of our energy into alternative engery and give our scientists a workable environment. B)

 

Anyone that wants that job is either a megalomaniac or a moron. Take yer pick.

Wildkow

p.s. Unless that persons name is George W. Bush.

 

Interesting topic.. there are so many things that could/should be changed..

I think I'd start by firing a ton of people. We have way too many over paid people in departments that have too many people running them and there are far too many politics involved.

Then I'd eliminate polictics altogether - nothing should be done because it will get you re-elected or is what will make certain groups of citizens happy. Whether it makes people happy or not, the only thing we should be doing is what is RIGHT and will make this country a better place.

Finally, I'd look at our immigration policy. I'd do two things. 1) Make it easier to stay in this country (visa/citizenship..whatever), but make sure everyone is tracked and pays taxes. 2) Ship out any people that are here illegally (problem with doing this today is that I think it's hard to be in this country legally these days).

And I like a lot of the other things mentioned too..

The problem however is that its near impossible to get much done in our government. That's one reason Presidents need to be in office for multiple years. If it was just a year, they'd probably get nothing done.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Aug 22 2006, 07:25 PM) [snapback]308002[/snapback]</div>

After reading the suggestions given here, I'll add "history" to that short list of subjects. Perhaps we'll live another decade or so that way.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Aug 22 2006, 06:35 PM) [snapback]307921[/snapback]</div>

I think we should be able to vote for or against pay raises for those guys in DC. Aren't they supposed to be working for us?

That said; I'm very happy to be living here in the USA....even with all her faults.

 

I would demand that wannabee dictators reach 5th grade spelling level. For now, that would exclude OP and the shrub.

Opportunity.

 

No one has addressed corporations yet. I'd elevate people above corps. No, corps are not people and should not have the same rights. I'd do as the Japaneese have done and limit the highest paid corp. manager to a percentage of the salary of the lowest paid worker. I'd tax corps on worldwide income (just as the IRS does now to citizens) and if they moved offshore I'd eliminate the PRIVELIGE of allowing them to do business in the US. I'd make them have sinking funds for clean up after they abandon a site and not allow them to abandon the mess for the government. In return, I'd have nationalized healthcare for workers.

Now lets talk about inheritance taxes. Since one of the basic premises of our society is we are all born equal, and if one is born with a trust fund they will never be equal, I'd allow anyone to leave anyone else a small inheritance and have a 100% tax on the remainder. Again, if the wealthy just moved their money offshore I'd tax them at 150% and not allow them or their prodegy for 7 generations to live in the US.


Politics: Regarding lobbiests, I'd outlaw them and imprison anyone who attempted to lobby.

I'd reward public servants with pay, vacation time, respect, and good retirement plans.

Tax system: I'd have a flat tax on ALL INCOME no matter of source and no exceptions like non-profits, churches etc. with a minimum income not taxed at all.

Balls: A demonstrated requirement of any wanna be politician.

Polls: re: voting. If the outcome of an election differed from exit polls there must be a required hand count which means all voting machines must have a paper trail and not be hooked up to the internet.

Presidents: Are to be held to a higher standard than ordinary citizens and immediately elimated if they fail to live up to these standards.


The most important one of the above? BALLS to do the right thing

 

I actually meantioned a few items adressing corporations and industry issues but kept mine rather simple yet the repercussions of those changes would be HUGE.

True Cost Pricing and transparancy would scare the hell out of todays Corps. lol

 

I'd outlaw polling.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 24 2006, 11:40 AM) [snapback]308905[/snapback]</div>

I'll second that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 24 2006, 11:40 AM)</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Aug 24 2006, 09:59 PM) [snapback]309195[/snapback]</div>

The unofficial Prius Chat poll finds 28% of respondents would outlaw polling ...

 

Interesting read. Some of your ideas are beyond the scope of what the President can accomplish, and If some of you were president I'd fear we'd be the United States of North Korea but thats beside the point.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(galaxee @ Aug 22 2006, 11:09 PM) [snapback]308023[/snapback]</div>

I always get a kick out of this.

Why do you think the President, those who serve at the pleasure of the President, Senators, Justices etc are overpaid?

(just for those playing at home, they're not)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Aug 26 2006, 12:13 AM) [snapback]309718[/snapback]</div>

Perhaps they're unfamiliar with the extent to which polling affects the behavior of our elected officials.

Bush revamps war on terrorism.

"Noting polls that show growing Iraq war opposition, Bush and other Republicans have been stressing links between Iraq and the broader war against terrorism — a connection Democrats generally dismiss."

"An AP-Ipsos poll released Wednesday found that 60 percent of Americans believe that in the long run there will be more terrorism in the United States because of the war in Iraq.

That's up substantially from an AP-Ipsos poll taken in December 2003, after the capture of
Saddam Hussein, when the figure was 40 percent.

In the new poll, 40 percent of Republicans said they believe there will be more terrorism in the U.S. because of the war. That compares with 74 percent of Democrats. The poll of 1,001 adults, taken Aug. 7-9, had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Also, a CBS-New York Times poll on Wednesday said just 44 percent of Americans now consider the Iraq conflict part of the broader war on terror — as the administration contends — down 10 points from June. More than half now say it is not."

So, they're trying to "spin" the war driven by polling.

****************

Oh...and I'd cut off both hands of hackers. Let them type with their feet. And castrate them. They should not reproduce.

 

you're right, in comparison to the average CEO they aren't paid THAT much.

these are elected positions, and as such they are civil servants and not working for a for-profit organization (though i'm sure some will debate that). they shouldn't be in it for the money.

so the president makes $400k a year which is a good chunk of money, though the job is stressful and you're up to public scrutiny, if not public malice. like i said, he wanted the job and that should be expected. also, his family is entitled to live in the white house and i'd assume he has all of his transportation security taken care of for him since he needs security for aforementioned potential public malice.

well if someone paid my rent, gas, and electric bills, probably along with cable tv and internet... and transportation too... i wouldn't need nearly as much money as i do now. i don't know about you. i wonder what the value of these things alone would be? shouldn't that should be included in the value of the presidential salary? after all, we as taxpayers are footing the bill. i don't know how many jobs pay for all that stuff for you.

when i pay taxes i also have to include in my income any amount of tuition reduction that the university gives me as a part of my contract- it's not compensation that i see, or that i can use to pay my bills, but it's still part of my income. same principle.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(galaxee @ Aug 26 2006, 01:24 PM) [snapback]309813[/snapback]</div>

Good point.

First, he has free room and board et al.

So not only doesn't he need $400k a year, but shouldn't he pay taxes on the equivalent of the free services he receives? I'd say one or the other. Services/Compensation are taxed and you get a salary or No salary and you get services for free.

After all, when you win a car on a gameshow you have to pay tax on the value.

And I think we should continue to emphasize 'civil servant' and 'not-for-profit'.

These guys get fabulous perks too...great health care and a wonderful pension plan. All for free. Well, free to them. We pay the bill.

 

I agree with you, they shouldn't be in it for the money. Senators make $165,000 a year. Trust me, for these people's credenetials $165,000 is nothing compared to what they would make in the private sector. I don't make much less than that, and I'm a frickin Realtor (and I don't even make a lot for good realtors). Plus, in Washington a ~$150k salary is fairly average, its hard for a family to live well here on less than that.

As far as the President, he doesn't live in the White House for his own pleasure, he lives there so that his entire life can be effectively scheduled for his maximum efficiency and for his security. If you look at the President's daily schedule, he's an unbelievably busy man. Also the financial aspects of his civilian life don't stop just because he's President, he also has private expenses. Usually the President has considerable private wealth though, but we can't use people's private wealth to judge what they should earn for a specific job.

As for $400k a year being a lot of money, again its not. CEOs of companies make 3-4 times that much depending on the company, and I'd say his job is more important than that. To go back to my own business, I know Realtors who make more than $400k (a lot of them), my father is a Vice President of a very small company and he makes $350k. Presidents of large Universities make $300-$700k.

When you look at what these people COULD be earning in the private sector, their government salaries are a HUGE pay cut. As for perks, you don't think they'd get great healthcare and a great pension plan in the private sector too? Many companies even pay for homes and living expenses for their executives, my father for instance gets a car (a Lexus LS430 no less), all of its gas, maintenance, and car insurance as a perk. His company rents an apartment in Manhattan for him also when he's there on business and again, its a very small company.

You can't expect good people to do good work for nothing.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 26 2006, 11:02 AM) [snapback]309799[/snapback]</div>

This was a criticism of President Clinton also, and I don't think it was justified with either man. Sometimes politicians use polls to change their own minds and support a policy they don't really believe in just to win an election, and then "revert to form" after safely in office, that wasn't the case with either President Clinton or Bush. They use polls to see how their message is being received, and then work to get the message across. But it isn't "wishy washy" or "hypocritical" if its the same message they have always been giving, but stated differently so people understand it.

For those of us who support our efforts in Iraq, we think its obvious there's a link between the wider war on terrorism and the former regime in Iraq. We remember the great "Axis of Evil" speech, where all the current players were mentioned ... Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. And we see the mistakes made in Iraq that created the vacuum for muslim extremists to gather there from around the region to try and destablize our efforts. Saddam supported terror publically, funding the families of suicide bombers, grinning and proclaiming them heros because they blew up a bus with teenagers in it. He represented the Arab regime that, while not a wahabi muslim extremist, was supporting their efforts because he wanted to see more Americans and Jews die horrible deaths. Al Queda in Iraq is there because after disposing Saddam we didn't secure the country, and they ARE muslim extremists.

While its an interesting question to debate if we should have invaded Iraq or not, it really begs the question. What do we do now? We have to deal with it now, and I've yet to hear of any plan with a ghost of a chance of working that isn't a copy of the Administration's basic plan.

Using a poll to see if people understand your message is not "spin". If your message stays the same, the poll is a method to see if people are understanding your words.