How to Reduce the Size of Government

[Naida_BR]

Let the platform that a candidate runs on be a contract with the people. When he is elected, if he doesn't do what he said in his platform contract, execution. If he is literally stopped by the opposition from a timely follow-through, so it isn't entirely his fault, life in prison immediately.

When the next person in line takes over after the first guy has been executed/imprisoned, he has a choice. Fulfill the platform contract of the first guy, be executed/imprisoned like the first guy... except if he voluntarily immediately resigns without taking office.

Same with every other person who is the follow-up person to take office as successor to someone who is executed/imprisoned/resigns. Fulfill the contract of the office you are coming into or die.

By the time they run through all the people in government, and the garbage collector resigns before he is executed, government problems will have straightened themselves out.



EDIT: Obviously, this is only a basic idea. I mean, we should add that if the elected fulfills his contract with the people, a new election is immediately mandated.

This cannot work.
If the first person do not fulfill their program then why the second who takes place should fulfill the programme that the first person has set?
He may don't have the knowledge or the beliefs to execute it.

[1715092098]

1715092098

[1715092098]

1715092098

[1715092098]

1715092098

[1715092098]

1715092098

[BADecker]

^^^ The "program" is what the people wanted done. If the first person doesn't do the program, why should the second be allowed to proceed with some other programs? That's not fair to the people. And the people is what government is all about, right? Let the program be done that the people contracted for. If they didn't want that program, they wouldn't have elected the guy to do it in the first place, right?

The second person doesn't have to do the program. He has 2 choices to start with:
1. Resign;
2. Accept the position of the first guy to do the contract.
So, he doesn't have to do the program. He can resign.

If he resigns, he is out of it. If he accepts the position, he has 2 choices:
1. Do the program of the first guy;
2. Don't do the program of the first guy, and get executed.

It will work fine. If everybody resigns or gets executed, government size will be reduced. The responsibility will go to local government to get the job done for their local area. And that is the way most of government should be done... on a local area basis - the State or County or City/Town/Village.

If some form of this idea is implemented, we will finally get smaller, more honest, more practical government.

[omonuyak]

The government especially the democrats systems that we are running all over the world is very expensive and many countries especially in Africa could not develop because of the running cost of government. The parliament is were most of this money goes including the presidential aids. If those two are not there the cost of running a government will be reduce.

[BADecker]

^^^ People of most other countries don't have the freedom mindset of Americans. Much of the attempts to "Americanize" operations in other countries is being done only to further fiat banking worldwide.

Look at the people of India and China. They all could easily overcome their governments in revolution form, and install freedom instead of what they have. But they don't want to. And their governments know how to keep them pacified just the right amount, so they can keep on milking the people.

[nofreecoins]

First one should be able to be sure the elections are fair and that people isn't influenciated by any mean and that is impossible. Then you need to know that the money the government manages is employed towards the country or it's interest.
Enviromental care should be a priority independent of wealth.

Could go on for a while but I feel it would be pointless.

[TheCoinGrabber]

"Execution"

Number of candidates drops close to 0. 

Anyway, a less brutal option about it is to put heavy restriction on anyone applying for office to deter people that might abuse their position. We need something more than simply divesting.

[btcforthewin]

Let the platform that a candidate runs on be a contract with the people. When he is elected, if he doesn't do what he said in his platform contract, execution. If he is literally stopped by the opposition from a timely follow-through, so it isn't entirely his fault, life in prison immediately.

When the next person in line takes over after the first guy has been executed/imprisoned, he has a choice. Fulfill the platform contract of the first guy, be executed/imprisoned like the first guy... except if he voluntarily immediately resigns without taking office.

This is barbaric

You are suggesting how to fight false promises not how to reduce government size.

Since the tittle talk about size of government, I want to say that the main problem of Government size is that people working there are not motivated to reach goals compared to private sector.

[netherfikk]

This sounds crazy and futuristic

[coolcoinz]

This is barbaric

You are suggesting how to fight false promises not how to reduce government size.

Since the tittle talk about size of government, I want to say that the main problem of Government size is that people working there are not motivated to reach goals compared to private sector.

There are many problems with the government's size. Mainly, there's too many people behind each MP, people who are getting paid for helping him decide what to do and sometimes even do his job for him. Do we vote for our representatives or for their teams of secretaries and assistants. If there's 20 people working for every MP, maybe the number of MPs could be cut in half? The result would still be the same.

They aren't motivated because it's usually not their only job. In most countries MPs work part time. In the old days these jobs were given to aristocrats and it had some interesting benefits. For instance, aristocrats had a lot of money and weren't motivated by greed and much harder to bribe. You had to put really big money on the table to make them change their minds. Nowadays, when poor people suddenly come to power they can be pretty easy to "persuade". Also, aristocrats were taking politics pretty seriously, as it was their only job apart from hunting, partying and various sports and arts and were pretty well educated. These days every moron can become an MP because we have equality, which means that there has to be a member of every minority, sex, religion and even sexual preference in every group.

[KingScorpio]

^^^ If you reduce the size of government down to the garbage collector, the IRS will already be gone, and without taxes and regulations, everybody will be their own private contractor.

when there is no government everyone will spend horrific amounts of money to protect his private property

[nofreecoins]

^^^ If you reduce the size of government down to the garbage collector, the IRS will already be gone, and without taxes and regulations, everybody will be their own private contractor.

when there is no government everyone will spend horrific amounts of money to protect his private property

You got it there .

[BADecker]

^^^ If you reduce the size of government down to the garbage collector, the IRS will already be gone, and without taxes and regulations, everybody will be their own private contractor.

when there is no government everyone will spend horrific amounts of money to protect his private property

You got it there .

You forget two major things:
1. We are spending it now, out of control;
2. Nobody says we can't increase the size of Government when we need to, but under complete control, via contract, rather than the free reign we give to the people who run our lives.

Actually, we can essentially cancel the Government right now (in the USA) with Private Membership Associations. And it's all perfectly legal. But I will leave the method for this to your imagination. All you need to do is think a little.

[IIV]

For the right democracy, let every people vote everyday for every issues in the parliament.
We have done so much in technology, everyone has a smartphone on their hands.
50% turnout should be must and 50% to pass a normal proposition. 2/3 for serious issues.

[mersal]

For the right democracy, let every people vote everyday for every issues in the parliament.
We have done so much in technology, everyone has a smartphone on their hands.
50% turnout should be must and 50% to pass a normal proposition. 2/3 for serious issues.

But the one who need to implement this are the one who get suffers if its gets implemented,so I don't think it will be implemented.

[BADecker]

For the right democracy, let every people vote everyday for every issues in the parliament.
We have done so much in technology, everyone has a smartphone on their hands.
50% turnout should be must and 50% to pass a normal proposition. 2/3 for serious issues.

In a democracy...

The majority who wins the vote essentially makes slaves of the minority who lose the vote. Is this fair to the minority?

The majority who wins the vote turns over their power to a small group of people who are supposed to enforce the items voted on. This small group might do what they were told, somewhat, but mostly they do whatever they want. So, the requirements of the majority don't get done, and the wishes of the minority don't get done, either.

What we get is a dictatorial group ruling over both, the majority and the minority.



The goal to aim for is this. Total freedom for everyone, except if he harms someone else or damages his property. This means that the job of government is to issue all kinds of warnings, but never punish anyone, except if there is harm or damage done... REAL harm... not things like the stupid little pickings on people for saying bad words.

Why this? Because it makes everyone his own government so that we have true freedom.



We start to implement the freedom by making the voting platform a contract with the elected. We make it serious by demanding execution for not fulfilling the contract. This isn't the only thing we do. But it is a start.

[fatnet]

there are a bunch of ways, but there is a one main problem, why minarchism, classical liberalism and etc are not working. the government is always becoming bigger, than it was before, thats why the only solution of this problem, which i have found is FOCJ(functional overlapping competing jurisdictions) and Panarchy(aka Polystate)

[BADecker]

All the States except Louisiana have an acknowledgement of the Federal Constitution right in their founding documents... their constitutions or agreements for statehood with the US gov. But this isn't enough. The States should add a clause that cannot be removed, rescinded, repealed that states that the State will always accept the rights for the people as detailed in portions of the Federal Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Once this is done, the Federal Government can be abolished, because the States are of a size and ability that they can govern themselves without Fed Gov. All that Fed Gov is doing is leaching off the States. Get rid of the leach, but keep its good parts - freedom and rights for the people - and let the people of each State control their location.

There is enough interstate communication between the governing people of all the States, right now, to maintain fairness for each State and its people. It's the Fed Gov that is making trouble for everybody.

[fatnet]

All the States except Louisiana have an acknowledgement of the Federal Constitution right in their founding documents... their constitutions or agreements for statehood with the US gov. But this isn't enough. The States should add a clause that cannot be removed, rescinded, repealed that states that the State will always accept the rights for the people as detailed in portions of the Federal Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Once this is done, the Federal Government can be abolished, because the States are of a size and ability that they can govern themselves without Fed Gov. All that Fed Gov is doing is leaching off the States. Get rid of the leach, but keep its good parts - freedom and rights for the people - and let the people of each State control their location.

There is enough interstate communication between the governing people of all the States, right now, to maintain fairness for each State and its people. It's the Fed Gov that is making trouble for everybody.

there is a problem, that smb, who already has the political power, has to lose it by its own decision, its pretty hard to imagine, and again, why noone is talking about destroying the government's monopoly for the violence on the land, its the only way, which will reduce the government, cuz while government has no competition on the current land it's monopoly, and monopoly will do everything monopoly owner wants

[nofreecoins]

Perhaps that wouldn't be a priority or a need if we focused on the current vacants , It just feels impossible to say anything when theres such chaos.

[BADecker]

All the States except Louisiana have an acknowledgement of the Federal Constitution right in their founding documents... their constitutions or agreements for statehood with the US gov. But this isn't enough. The States should add a clause that cannot be removed, rescinded, repealed that states that the State will always accept the rights for the people as detailed in portions of the Federal Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Once this is done, the Federal Government can be abolished, because the States are of a size and ability that they can govern themselves without Fed Gov. All that Fed Gov is doing is leaching off the States. Get rid of the leach, but keep its good parts - freedom and rights for the people - and let the people of each State control their location.

There is enough interstate communication between the governing people of all the States, right now, to maintain fairness for each State and its people. It's the Fed Gov that is making trouble for everybody.

there is a problem, that smb, who already has the political power, has to lose it by its own decision, its pretty hard to imagine, and again, why noone is talking about destroying the government's monopoly for the violence on the land, its the only way, which will reduce the government, cuz while government has no competition on the current land it's monopoly, and monopoly will do everything monopoly owner wants

Actually, no.

The 6th and 7th Amendments uphold the right to trial by jury. The 9th Amendment protects all the rights of the people that the Constitution doesn't mention:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Since the jury trial was available under common law before the Constitution or the Articles of Confederation (pre-Constitution Constitution), all it takes is a jury vote of the people to dissolve the Federal Government, or any part thereof.