Post your vision of progressive [America]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Since we're into the debate over foreign policy and whether or not it is what "America" meaning the people really want, post your vision (progressive foreign policy). Canadians, UKs, input your vision for your respective countries.





What do you want the US (or other) global vision to be and how do you think it should be carried out?

I think we'll have some different visions than that spouted by our leaders (policy makers).





Myself, desiring "peace on earth" and other sappy stuff like that, I would desire Canada to have first a stronger stance although there are some people worried about economic backlash from opting out of involvement.

We would try to help the voice of oppressed nations through underground networks. From these voices we would be able to better infiltrate the propaganda networks of supreme leaders such as Khomeini of Iran, and help support the democratic movement there for example.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    I envision a world where French-Canadian hockey fans have enough common sense not to boo our National Anthem during a hockey game, but then these are the same people who want independance from Canada as a whole so I suppose I shouldn't expect much. Amazing how much difference a line on a map can make in people's attitudes [ meaning the Canadian map, not the N. American one].



    Yes, yes. This is my vision: for people everywhere to see past the lines on the maps and join hands in a brotherhood of man. Someone cue the Lennon tape, damnit!



  • Reply 2 of 13
    We should just nuke all of the other countries. They're not worth the trouble. Nuclear winter and economic hardship and environmental catastrophe would of course ensue but it is worth it.
  • Reply 3 of 13
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    You are one sick puppy, but every forum needs one so be glad you're the original.

  • Reply 4 of 13
    Some men get in touch with their feminine side. I happen to be in touch with my fatalistic, Stalinist, apocalyptic inner child.
  • Reply 5 of 13
    Moogs I didn't ask people to reveal what they envisoned the world as....I asked you what your progressive foreign policy would be if you were in power.

    True, it was in terrible taste to boo your anthem and don't really like the separatists either ...at least you're being positive..... unlike ColanderOfDeath!!



    Look if you're just going to jerk around, go post your stupid crap elsewhere.



    Look, I am trying to gain a sense of the disparity between Paul Wolfowitz and the conquer-campaign and with real Americans..!!!!!!!!
  • Reply 6 of 13
    sammi josammi jo Posts: 4,634member
    Things aren't going to get any better until the electoral system is amended to give us proportional representation, meaning *all* the people getting a say in the running of the country, rather than half of the pathetic 40%-50% who bother to vote. Most people who don't vote are either too lazy or feel their vote doesn't count for anything... is that indicative of a system thats in need of fixing or what?



    Presidential campaigns should last for 2 months maximum....the way it is now only leaves the race open to those who can afford to run an 18 month campaign/buy the Presidency. Dump the electoral college system for the Presidential race. He (she maybe in future ) is president of the *whole shebang*, and each vote should have equal weighting, and the winner of the popular vote gets the White House.



    Fix campaign reform and get big corporate and trade union money out of the electoral process.



    A progressive America ain't even going to get off the ground until this medieval electoral time capsule is updated.
  • Reply 7 of 13
    dviantdviant Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sammi jo

    Things aren't going to get any better until the electoral system is amended to give us proportional representation, meaning *all* the people getting a say in the running of the country, rather than half of the pathetic 40%-50% who bother to vote. Most people who don't vote are either too lazy or feel their vote doesn't count for anything... is that indicative of a system thats in need of fixing or what?



    Its more indicative of ambivalence and ignorance to me. Everyone has the right to vote, whether they choose to or not is another matter.



    \
  • Reply 8 of 13
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    The electoral system is old and outdated though, whether or not turnout is good. Originally, it was designed to allow the House of Representatives choose the president most of the time because back then, there were usually more than two candidates and they expected there to be no electoral majority in many elections. Now, though, with two candidates, there's always an electoral majority so Congress never has to decide.



    I'm not sure which direction the US should shift with regards to foreign policy, though. Perhaps try and not piss off so many other countries in the future? Seriously, though, I suppose we can choose between being the world's policemen and being more isolationist. Neither of those is very appealing though, a good balance would be the best but also the hardest to maintain. But I'm really not sure which way we should lean.
  • Reply 9 of 13
    chweave1chweave1 Posts: 164member
    I envision a progressive America where everyone and every corporation is charged a flat imcome tax of 15%, no deductions, no nothing (This would, on average, be a hefty increase for the corporations, and a sizeable decrease for individuals). Then, to help with voter turn out, registration must be made easier. The US has some of the most difficult/annoying voter registration policies of any democratized country. And, yes, get rid of the Electoral college. Then, outlaw the unfunded mandate. Newt Gingrich did not get enough credit on this issue. They are wrong, and go against the federal system.



    And then we need REAL campaign finance reform. I do not see how a 2 month campaign limit would work when we have such set election cycles. Those kinds of limits only work well in systems when elections can occur in the middle of an incumbent's term (parliamentarian systems with a no confidence vote for the most part). How would you outlaw campaigning in the US before the September of the election year???? So to tackle the money issue, you have to directly address the money.



    Lastly, I would put severe penalties and sanctions on teh Recording Industry Corporations and Microsoft. Enough said.
  • Reply 10 of 13
    splinemodelsplinemodel Posts: 7,311member
    6% flat tax. Small government. . . Instead, funnel services through private providers. This can work if information is super cheap. (not quite there yet).



    I don't feel like going into debate, but we can have everything we have now -- except better and cheaper -- with a really low tax rate. If the internet can be handled privately, almost anything can be.
  • Reply 11 of 13
    Canadian government also needs major downsizing. Gun registry a huge bumfundle (to coin a term)...costing 1 billion over budget!! A friggin database!





    Should dump back benchers, all they do is pick their nose. Put them to the bloody grind stone, do some work for their districts!



    Stronger government policy, harder hitting ministers, not these old geizers like the defense minister "Yes Mr.Powell, yes we really do value you Mr.powell" *suck suck suck suck*



    DUMP THE SENATE. They cost billions a year and do not make a significant impact on the progression of rights of Canadians and other issues.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    Electoral reform to proportional representation.



    More rigorous parliamentary debating rules and any other inexpensive options to give parliament a greater semblance of accountability. Currently, question period is an exercise in rhetoric and red herring.



    Abolishment or reform of the Senate. This is essentially the Prime Minister's board of directors. In fact, Senator Michael Kirby is also on the board of directors of Scotiabank. He is more accountable to major financial institutions and doubtless other corporate friends than to the Canadian public.



    More money for defense. Proper helicopters, transports, camouflage, etc.



    Less economic development loans to companies which will clearly not develop the economy.



    Like DMB said, the gun registry is a bumfundle.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    chweave1chweave1 Posts: 164member
    I have often wondered whether or not a parliamentarian system, even one with proportional representation would work in the US. I think many Americans see in the news that other countries have many many political parties and say to themselves "we need that here!" But i doubt that they realize that our system deters multiple parties while their systems promote them. They assume that the circumstances here are similar to those over there.



    That leads me to another source of reform.



    We need to somehow adress our system's inability to have multiple parties. Not that I think this would solve much, but it would be nice to have many choices--to break up the current choices into let's say four that would allow americans to more accurately associate themselves to a party that they agree with on almost all issues... IF anything, it might help voter turn out.
Sign In or Register to comment.