• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    Amerikkka should not exist. It must be abolished. There are concessions the State & capital will adhere to when we mobilize, but revolution will never be on the ballot.

    Domination is a byproduct of coercive hierarchy. To free ourselves from domination we have to be strategic in how we interact with systems of power. Non-reformist reforms can improve our material conditions in the short term, but true liberation is only achieved when we abolish all States, abolish Capitalism and abolish hierarchy.

    We don’t have to bargain for our humanity. We have the capacity to collectively organize and care for ourselves and the environment.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    Legalizing Prostitution just creates more Human Trafficking, as a result of allowing human traffickers to operate in the open under the guise of legality. We have decades of evidence that lead to this conclusion. We don’t need to keep trying it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 year ago

    What about making the highest tax bracket immutable.

    Basically, anyone earning more than that amount, for every dollar of earnings above that amount, taxes cannot be exempted, refunded or otherwise redirected.

    Say that tax bracket is 500k/yr, and some rich fuck earns 2M. They must pay the tax, whatever percent of tax that is, on the final 1.5M of earnings. So if it’s 50% taxes, they must pay $750k, plus whatever taxation is applicable to the first $500k. They can’t skirt it by putting that money into a tax shelter or by donating it to the corrupt charity that they run.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    Convert corporations into Worker Consumer Cooperatives to prevent investor wealth accumulation and regulatory capture and align business towards worker and consumer interests rather than short-term profit seeking.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      As someone who hates this God forsaken measuring system, I genuinely don’t know if the costs of this would ever be worth it. There’d be thousands and thousands of miles marker signs that’d have to be replaced, not to mention having to redo thousands of textbooks.

      Plus, when it comes to some things, imperial is just better. Mostly this is carpentry. 12 is way more divisible than 10 and fractions are way easier for cutting than decimal

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        There are also tons of machines and tools made to work in inches. As more things are becoming computer controlled, it’s easier to convert between inch and mm on the fly, but every drill bit, end mill, and tool holder for the manual mill in my company’s shop is in inch.

        I’m also gonna disagree with you on the 12 better than 10 front. Just use a calculator if you can’t do it in your head and round to the nearest mm. I bet you’ll learn what 10/6 and 10/3 are faster than 12/5 too.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          I can actually do all of those in my head, so that wouldn’t be an issue for me.

          But yeah, all of my tools and bits and holders are imperial, and someone else better be paying to get the damn things replaced or they are staying imperial even if we go metric. I think the only things I have in metric are allans (allens? I’ve never had to spell it out), like 2 hole saws from an old project, and a set of calipers I was gifted and have used maybe twice

          • Liz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            Everyone thinks the the switch would somehow be overnight and everyone would be required to throw away their old stuff. In reality, you just replace the things when they wear out and all the new equipment is metric. Tada!

      • Liz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        It would very much be worth it. Imperial invites mistakes by using weird conversions and factional sizes. I often have to stop and think which factions of an inch are bigger or smaller than each other. When Australia switched from imperial to metric, it’s estimated they save about 10% annually from having a lower error rate. Fewer things need to get fixed or replaced from measurement mistakes.

        A kitchen-scale example: I once mixed up tablespoons and teaspoons when adding baking soda to my pancake mix. They turned out disgusting and we had to re-make breakfast because version 1 was inedible. Such mistakes are less likely to happen under metric.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The UK did this.

        It’s absolutely worth it. If you are worried about textbooks staying in circulation for a long time especially in 2024 then you got bigger issues to be honest.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Can’t we just have both, and teach both? But like, in a more committed fashion than we currently do. Probably swapping out road signs and textbooks as they naturally need to be swapped out, to include both sets of measurements and the conversions between them.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This will be considered for v4 as “Transition to metric system”. It would take several years for the transition to completely take place for the average American. I’m also probably going to add “end daylight savings”, which is close to being passed anyway.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    Can you please create a community for this? I’d love to be able to discuss each point separately, and suggest others.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      I will consider this for v4, although I’m still torn on whether that’s a good idea. It would give religious entities a direct reason to influence politics even more. Any good reasons to the benefit other than more tax revenue?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        It would give religious entities a direct reason to influence politics even more.

        They’re already influencing politics, and there’s nothing being done to stop them. There’s no reason to believe that they will stop or slow down.

        • @[email protected]OP
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Yea after more research this is the conclusion I’ve come to. I think ending the tax-exempt status of religious entities is the best solution to stop the problem.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            i think there is potential to do one better and find a more productive solution. start a crackdown, investigate religious entities that are clearly making a profit from rental land. threaten them with removal of tax exemption. investigate institutions that participate in political activity. threaten them with taxes.

            if the IRS would start doing this for all the ultra wealthy, this will be a natural antecedent to that process.

            i don’t see why it has to be an all or nothing deal, unless i am missing something huge.

            • @[email protected]OP
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Nope, that would be definitely seen as religious persecution. Only way is to equally end all religious tax exemptions simultaneously.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                oh sorry there’s another key fact to this, religious institutions are tax exempt under 501©(3) in the same way as all other charitable organizations.

                so going after “religious organizations” already means you are going to have to define which 501c3s are “allowed” or not—and unfortunately there’s a lot of crossover of semi-but-not-really religious groups. so any attempt at un-tax-exempting churches is going to look like persecution to some because the line is going be drawn somewhere. think of yoga or mindfulness studios, plenty of which are 501c3. are they religious? well, yeah, often. all of them? certainly not. so how do you choose? in any raw “tax the church” scenario you end up litigating what consitutes “religious” or not—which looks like ( and arguably might be) proto-persecution.

                so, investigate the profit. publish the documents showing a church breaking its 501c3 requirements. give them 180 days to knock it off or something, then tax them like the rest of us. you’ll probably also catch some non-religious 501c3s doing shady stuff as well—and all the better.

                hope this makes sense.

                edit: i guess the other assumption i made is that we don’t want to just… tax all non profits. i hope we both can agree that would be shitty lol.

                edit 2: ok you don’t make that assumption, so there we go.

                • @[email protected]OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  think of yoga or mindfulness studios, plenty of which are 501c3

                  They shouldn’t be tax exempt either. If they generate profit, they should pay tax on it. Subsidies are used to benefit specific activities, and they are easier to investigate for fraud as to whether the subsidy is spent as intended.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        Then better enforce the separation of church and state, to ensure they dont influence politics. I thought the reason they were not taxed was to ensure they didnt influence politics.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        The sheer amount of land they would have to sell off to be able to pay their taxes would drive prices down for houses and farms. The LDS own something like 850,000 acres or something of just farm land. People could build affordable housing or just housing in places increasing supply.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    41 year ago

    I would add:

    Equal Rights Amendment

    Reverse Shelby County v Holder

    Reverse District of Columbia v Heller

    Add ethics code for Supreme Court with enforcement authority

    Discharge federal student loan debt and regulate higher education costs

    Demilitarize police

    Ban property tax based school funding

    Abolish the death penalty

    Federally mandated paid vacation, paid sick leave, overtime over 40 hours, and a ban of right-to-work laws.

    Allow the Army Corps of Engineers to repair and maintain infrastructure.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    131 year ago
    • ranked choice voting - ok I think we can agree here
    • Mandatory voting - how? Currently voting is handled state by state, you want to make the federal government take that over? What would the punishment be for not voting? Frankly I disagree with this
    • Universal vote by mail - even more how? Again, federal takeover of voting process? How do you ensure no votes are lost especially when someone will be punished for not voting?
    • Voting day national holiday - definitely agree.
    • Legalize marijuana - this takes a lot more than just saying “marijuana is legal now.” Are previous marijuana related convictions going to be overturned, if so how? Are marijuana sales going to be regulated? If so how?
    • Legalize prostitution - similar questions as with marijuana
    • Revert citizens United - certainly agree here but that’s a big fuckin how? It was explicitly the supreme court overruling a law passed by Congress. Amend the Constitution to say something explicit?
    • Abolish corporate home ownership - very strange stuff here because you start touching on the above, too. Maybe more you’re looking to cancel corporate personhood but that comes with a huge amount of problems too
    • Abolish electoral college - sure why not if you’ve solved the voting issues above
    • Abolish gerrymandering - this is what made me make this response in the first place. You can’t just say “abolish gerrymandering” without some plan for it. That’s like saying “abolish borders” like it’s meaningful. How? Who decides what districts look like? Will there still be districts? If not how will representation be determined?
    • Abolish filibuster - I think the filibuster is fine. If everything else on this list goes through, hopefully we have meaningful ways of ousting useless obstructionist politicians instead
    • Merge Senate into house - why? What does this solve?
    • Remove house rep cap - FUCKING agreed. The cap is unconstitutional and absurd
    • Universal healthcare - lots of hows here too but Obamacare was a good start and I’m down with single payer
    • Universal basic income - how much? Does it count toward the 50k below?
    • Income up to $50k untaxed - fine. I also think any monetary amount in the legislature should be increased by the CPI automatically every year. Fines, limits, payouts, etc.
    • Ban tax prep - hmm ok
    • IRS files taxes for citizens - how does this work? Is tax code flattened to make it so citizens have no choices to make? Do things like tax credits for buying solar panels go away?
    • Vat for luxury items - who decides what’s luxury?
    • Supreme Court 15 year limit - disagree, the whole point of lifetime terms is to prevent getting what’s yours and getting out.
    • Increase highest bracket tax - sure why not
    • Collateral for loan is realized gain - expand?
    • Abolish PACs and lobbying
    • Politicians banned from stocks - so they can’t own shares of any companies? Or they just can’t trade while in office? Does this go for any elected official? More than just elected officials?
    • Municipalize Internet - at a minimum declare it a utility. What’s the rest of the plan?
    • Abortion constitutional right - I’d argue it already is one, though the supreme Court evidently isn’t in agreement. An explicit “bodily autonomy” amendment would be nice. Add a right to privacy to that too, expanding on the 4th.
    • Ban tipping - idk if I agree with trying to codify what should be a cultural change, but I’m generally on board with the Idea. There’s a million loopholes to close in any language to this effect
    • free financial education - just like… Government funded seminars? Mandated high school courses? What do you take out to fit this in?
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      We have mandatory voting in Australia. It’s “enforced” by a AU$20 fine. Not really a true punishment, more like a nudge. It’s more of a societal understanding here, you turn up to a polling place as a civil duty. You can donkey vote if you want, you can draw a cock on the ballot form and invalidate it, doesn’t matter. As long as you got your name crossed off, and most importantly had the opportunity to vote, then you’re clear. I wouldn’t have it any other way, it means that there can’t be changes to dissuade people from voting, and politicians don’t resort to wildly populist policies to try and encourage people to come out to vote. Also helps that federal elections always occur on a Saturday, and employers are required to give time off in order to vote.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      100% on the “lots of missing 'how’s” point. You skipped the “ban lobbying” one, which is probably the second biggest “how” after the gerrymandering.

      Lobbying is not some official policy or process. Senators don’t have “lobbying hours.” Lobbying is basically just “being at lunches and parties that politicians are at.” Unless you’re proposing Congress not be allowed to go out in public and live as secluded monks, I don’t see how you “abolish” it…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      a lot of your questions boil down to “how” and no hate but it’s just funny to witness lemmy discovering what drafting legislation looks like

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s exactly my point. There are people working hard to make these things happen and generally these are very well supported by the public, but without the plan behind them, theres no substance here.

        The reason these don’t get passed is because of the particulars of implementation. you can’t write a bill with the only text being “universal healthcare” without a lot more to it. Once there’s a lot more to it, then it gets picked apart and rejected.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Sure but what’s the actual action there? Implementation of a wealth tax? What property counts for that? Is there some other technique he/you are talking about? Taking a loan will now count as income?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Making a loan count as income will mess up legit home purchases. If you went that route it couldn’t be that simple.

          A big benefit to the buy borrow die strategy is the step up basis for your children. Realizing the gain will move the basis up and cause a taxable event.

          I don’t know all the details, much less if this plan is perfect, but I think that’s the idea.

          Maybe removing step up basis is enough, to help reduce generational wealth. IDK

    • qaz
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Politicians banned from stocks - so they can’t own shares of any companies? Or they just can’t trade while in office? Does this go for any elected official? More than just elected officials?

      What about only allowing investments in broad index funds? But banning trading specific stocks and options could go a long way too.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Mandatory voting - how? Currently voting is handled state by state, you want to make the federal government take that over? What would the punishment be for not voting? Frankly I disagree with this

      Tax credit for voting. Make it count like a $50 charitable donation would.

      If you’re thinking, now, “but then poor people would always vote and rich people would be off sailing their yacht”, I completely agree.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Man, the rich just fucking off away from society would be delightful. Things might actually function in society.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Tax credit for voting.

        Yes. Or even better just cut a check or give cash or equivalent.

        Make it count like a $50 charitable donation would.

        No. That’s a deduction, and it’s worthless for the vast majority of people who have less in deductions than the standard deduction. Also doesn’t reduce taxes by the full amount: a $50 deduction would be at most like an $11 credit (or cash) for most people, if it even mattered.

  • KillingTimeItself
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21 year ago

    mandatory voting is not something i agree with.

    The house and senate should both exist, they both serve a purpose. The senate gives every state an equal footing, the house gives every state representation in regards to population, so they both serve a very explicit purpose.

    idk about house rep cap. There are already so many, perhaps improve the makeup of the reps though? That’s pretty messy.

    on the supreme court term limit, include an age limit as well.

    That’s it, everything else would be fine probably?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    151 year ago

    I don’t like a 15 year term for scotus.

    A term limit does make sense, but either in the form of a forced retirement age or a 36 year term. They should also be barred from collecting a wage or benefits from any employer after the end of their term (they should get a damn good retirement package, too).

    There are good reasons for SCOTUS to be a life appointment. You don’t want them being bought out with lucrative cushy job offers once they leave. 36 years ensures one appointee per presidential term.