SydLexia.com Forum Index
"Stay awhile. Stay... FOREVER!"

  [Edit Profile]  [Search]  [Memberlist]  [Usergroups]  [FAQ]  [Register]
[Who's Online]  [Log in to check your private messages]  [Log in]
What you do if you became president in the 2008 election?


Reply to topic
Author Message
Bouya
Title: Delinquent
Joined: Aug 15 2007
Location: Suzuran
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 02:38 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Kacen wrote:
I should tell you from personal experience not everyone there is poor...plenty are not, I have a friend on the internet from Guadalajara and hes fairly well off. Also the Yucatan is also fairly thriving from what he's told me. It's just some people in northern Mexico who are poor.

And then theres the fact they may not be less well off than other people, it's just our money is worth lot's more than theres, they can come here and do a simple job and make enough that it could sustain them back in Mexico.


That's great. There's people in america who aren't poor as well, while others are. Personally, I'd rather have everyone who's taking from the system, on the books. And if there are wealthy in Mexico, that's cool, they can pay some to make up for all the tax money and health care their citizens stole out of the pockets of people like me.
View user's profileSend private message
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 03:25 pm Reply with quote Back to top

I've said it before, even in a grad school paper, Mexico and the US would both be better off if we had just annexed Mexico during our war from 1846-1848. We were just too racist at the time to allow Mexicans to become citizens, all of Mexico would have been a lot harder to integrate instead of just California & New Mexico, and the Whig party had been giving the Democratic party trouble over the war and had been trying to end it for a while.

Hell, we might as well take Canada too. If we had a stronger army in 1812 we would have already. North America should just unite at this point anyway. We need to counterbalance the EU's economic power as it is; we're already losing ground.

I did forget to mention earlier, and other people's posts have reminded me, that I would also make English the official language (it already is the undeclared official language) - no more wasting ink printing two different translations on everything. Also, Social Security has to be tied to the stock market so that it will not be a welfare system instead of the personal retirement fund as FDR intended.
View user's profileSend private message
Tebor
Moderator
Title: Master of the Universe
Joined: Aug 22 2005
Location: Gotham City
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 03:36 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Cattivo wrote:
I've said it before, even in a grad school paper, Mexico and the US would both be better off if we had just annexed Mexico during our war from 1846-1848.

North America should just unite at this point anyway. We need to counterbalance the EU's economic power as it is; we're already losing ground.

I did forget to mention earlier, and other people's posts have reminded me, that I would also make English the official language (it already is the undeclared official language) - no more wasting ink printing two different translations on everything.

Mmmmm, I like these plans for North Western hemisphere domination... Twisted Evil


"If you will not tell me, I will hurt people!!!" -Nuclear Man

"Do you hear? The alpha and the omega. Death and rebirth. And as you die, so will I be reborn!" - Skeletor

8341 unread forum updates since I left (2/7/14)... Uh-oh.
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Syd Lexia
Site Admin
Title: Pop Culture Junkie
Joined: Jul 30 2005
Location: Wakefield, MA
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 03:49 pm Reply with quote Back to top

There is a leftist conspiracy theory that America, Canada, and Mexico will unite into a continental entity under the guise of strengthening their economies that result in the Constitution being displaced, thus allowing corporations more leeway in ignoring human rights and abusing the proletariat.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 06:18 pm Reply with quote Back to top

The only condition that I want a one North American government is if it's all under the US Constitution. That document is near perfect, and no other one can possibly displace it in my view. Actually, I would support a one-world government if it was under the US Constitution.
View user's profileSend private message
TheRoboSleuth
Title: Sleuth Mark IV
Joined: Aug 08 2006
Location: The Gritty Future
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 06:33 pm Reply with quote Back to top

We'll take Canada, but we get to keep your healthcare system. In return, we'll give you....ummm...BEEF JERKY.


Image
 
View user's profileSend private message
JStrangiato
Title: El Hombre Strangiato
Joined: Jun 12 2007
Location: Texas
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 07:01 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Kacen wrote:
enshinkarateman wrote:
Kacen, I've got to say, there's this thing called the Establishment Clause. It kinda goes like this:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

When I said secularize I meant on a public and government level. And Scientology is not a religion it's a scam(or possibly in my theory a cover for something, but I won't go into that), I don't know how anyone can't see that, it's so blatantly obvious. What kind of religion makes you PAY?! It's banned in France and Germany which guarantees freedom of religion, and I'm sure other European countries as well.

While I do agree with you that Scientology is largely a scam, its followers still have the right to believe in it. Freedom of expression-if a church makes its followers pay, and they do so of their own free will, and as long as it doesn't endanger anyone else, it should be allowed. And I don't know about France, but in Germany, Scientology isn't banned, but merely classified as a business instead of a religion.

Kacen wrote:
enshinkarateman wrote:
No offense to you, but I'm sure at least some of the things you're proposing would be unconstitutional. And Communists, anarchists, etc, no matter how much you disagree with them, they still have a right to say what they feel. First Amendment for ya.

You need to think of things relevant to the time they are in, first of all.

Secondly, each one of these group's freedom of speech is belayed by the fact their intentions and wishes in the long run are to subvert the country itself. Somehow, I think, if the founding fathers were asked to consider such things (at the time such issues were not anarchism or communism[concept as a movement didn't even exist back then]), they'd agree on at least imprisoning or deporting these people. Taking advantage of a governmental freedom to voice such distaste of the government that grants such freedom basically cancels it out, so to speak.

Regardless, I am more in favor of a technocracy and a new, fresh political movement never seen before that I wish would overtake the world. Down with the old, down with fascism, communism, marxism, anarchism, democracy, capitalism, autocracy, and in with the new!

Technocracy, meritocracy...that is what I am getting at...an evolution of Democracy!

While it is true that the Founding Fathers would have deported/silenced its critics (see Alien and Sedition Acts), we are not in the founding father's time anymore. In keeping with freedom of speech, symbolic and otherwise, anti-American groups still have the right to say what they feel about out country, provided it won't lead to a riot, or deaths, or anything like that. Those that do incite violence can be tried and imprisoned, bit deporting them is not the answer. If they are peaceful about voicing their opinion, imprisoning them is not an option (see 1984)
Regardless, deporting "people you don't like" to a death camp is a pretty bad way to run a country. We don't need another Holocaust.


My music/humor blog (R.I.P.): http://lavidastrangiato.blogspot.com/
Chondra "Mrs. Claudio" Sanchez on Enshin a.k.a. Jake Strangiato wrote:
I really like this person.

 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Bouya
Title: Delinquent
Joined: Aug 15 2007
Location: Suzuran
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 07:51 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Cattivo wrote:
The only condition that I want a one North American government is if it's all under the US Constitution. That document is near perfect, and no other one can possibly displace it in my view. Actually, I would support a one-world government if it was under the US Constitution.

Would you reword it to take any of the ambiguity out of extremely loose interpretations on it?
View user's profileSend private message
Tebor
Moderator
Title: Master of the Universe
Joined: Aug 22 2005
Location: Gotham City
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 07:52 pm Reply with quote Back to top

-bjork- wrote:
Cattivo wrote:
The only condition that I want a one North American government is if it's all under the US Constitution. That document is near perfect, and no other one can possibly displace it in my view. Actually, I would support a one-world government if it was under the US Constitution.

Would you reword it to take any of the ambiguity out of extremely loose interpretations on it?

I wouldn't. The forefathers put them there for a reason and those ambiguities have helped more than they've hurt.


"If you will not tell me, I will hurt people!!!" -Nuclear Man

"Do you hear? The alpha and the omega. Death and rebirth. And as you die, so will I be reborn!" - Skeletor

8341 unread forum updates since I left (2/7/14)... Uh-oh.
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Bouya
Title: Delinquent
Joined: Aug 15 2007
Location: Suzuran
PostPosted: Jan 17 2008 07:59 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Tebor wrote:
-bjork- wrote:
Cattivo wrote:
The only condition that I want a one North American government is if it's all under the US Constitution. That document is near perfect, and no other one can possibly displace it in my view. Actually, I would support a one-world government if it was under the US Constitution.

Would you reword it to take any of the ambiguity out of extremely loose interpretations on it?

I wouldn't. The forefathers put them there for a reason and those ambiguities have helped more than they've hurt.

But it could potentially work the other way around.
View user's profileSend private message
Grimmriffer
Title: vaguely perturbed
Joined: Jun 19 2007
Location: God's waiting room
PostPosted: Jan 18 2008 12:28 am Reply with quote Back to top

Good stuff all around.

I generally agree with most of the serious, Constitutionally viable positions advocated by you guys, so my post is pretty much the same thing.

If I were president/benevolent dictator I would:

Get the fuck out of Iraq. Yes it will lead to genocide, possibly resulting in a fundametalist regime, but oh well. I never wanted this war, and America never needed it.

Reduce our role in Afganastan to pussy-ass U.N. peacekeepers. As long as there is no genocide, we don't intervene, no matter how corrupt the government becomes.

Make it clear that any future attack against the United States, conventional or otherwise, will provoke a nuclear response. This will be leveled against any government in which even a shread of cuplablility can be established. We'll give them 2 weeks to clear out their capital. We'll go down in history as the biggest assholes ever, but its a hell of a lot cheaper than waging an unwinable conventional war.

Make the income tax "flatter," or more simplified.

Create matching tax breaks for any public or private expenditure which reduces dependency on oil. This can be applied to technology/business practices which reduces energy consumption or provides a viable alternative for fossile fuels. Salaries do not count. I recognize that there is a huge potential for abuse in this, but taxes need to be lowered anyway.

Personally plant a tree a day. I'd encourage others to do the same.

Get all the top scientsts and energy representatives and hammer out a clear understanding of global warming and a conscice policy to deal with its undoubtably inevitable effects.

Start hacking away at Social Security.

Reduce the Department of Education to a monitoring service, if it isn't one already.

Eliminate Homeland security and let the FBI and CIA do their jobs, just have them all meet with the Joint Chiefs once a week.

Change Airforce One to Airforce Fun. Wink


Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

"The master would not approve."
 
View user's profileSend private message
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
PostPosted: Jan 18 2008 12:31 am Reply with quote Back to top

From what Bjork said in another thread -

Qualify the rule that being born here automatically makes you a citizen by stating that if both parents are illegal, citizenship is not gained.
View user's profileSend private message
TheRoboSleuth
Title: Sleuth Mark IV
Joined: Aug 08 2006
Location: The Gritty Future
PostPosted: Jan 18 2008 02:00 am Reply with quote Back to top

Cattivo wrote:
From what Bjork said in another thread -

Qualify the rule that being born here automatically makes you a citizen by stating that if both parents are illegal, citizenship is not gained.

Whats the distiction?


Image
 
View user's profileSend private message
Bouya
Title: Delinquent
Joined: Aug 15 2007
Location: Suzuran
PostPosted: Jan 18 2008 02:59 am Reply with quote Back to top

Cattivo wrote:
From what Bjork said in another thread -

Qualify the rule that being born here automatically makes you a citizen by stating that if both parents are illegal, citizenship is not gained.

Anchor baby law is something that I can't believe was ever passed in the first place. I don't have a problem so much with someone border-close coming over and having a baby on the taxpayer's dime. A birth can be a complicated thing, so whatever. But to then grant the baby citizenship and go, "oh, we can't break up a family" and then also go, "well since the baby can't take care of itself, you parents will get the checks and assistance from the government"... wtf. If I illegally filter funds, I can go to prison for years, but this kind of stuff is a-ok?
View user's profileSend private message
Syd Lexia
Site Admin
Title: Pop Culture Junkie
Joined: Jul 30 2005
Location: Wakefield, MA
PostPosted: Jan 18 2008 10:15 am Reply with quote Back to top

If a baby is born on US soil to illegal immigrants, we should give the baby to Freddy Krueger. For it is the souls of children that give Freddy his power, and if we keep giving him babies to slash up, perhaps we can control him and strike an uneasy truce with him where he will only haunt the dreams of America's enemies' children.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
TheRoboSleuth
Title: Sleuth Mark IV
Joined: Aug 08 2006
Location: The Gritty Future
PostPosted: Jan 18 2008 05:03 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Syd Lexia wrote:
If a baby is born on US soil to illegal immigrants, we should give the baby to Freddy Krueger. For it is the souls of children that give Freddy his power, and if we keep giving him babies to slash up, perhaps we can control him and strike an uneasy truce with him where he will only haunt the dreams of America's enemies' children.

Kinda like what we did with Jason Vorhees and teen pregnancy?


Image
 
View user's profileSend private message
Char Aznable
Title: Char Classicâ„¢
Joined: Jul 24 2006
Location: Robot Boombox HQ
PostPosted: Jan 19 2008 02:19 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Exactly!


Image
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
docinsano
Title: Boner King
Joined: Jan 08 2008
Location: Mpls Mini Soda
PostPosted: Jan 19 2008 03:34 pm Reply with quote Back to top

So many good things here.

I always seem to bitch about taxes so heres my idea. I like the idea of a maximum wage tax system. If you make more than enough money to live comfortably, you should be taxed more than some poor bloke who can barely pay his rent every month. As for me, I think if you make over 250K/year, you are fairly well off and should be able to live more than comfortably. Secondly, I recently read an article in Reader's Digest about how the government wastes about one trillion dollars of our money every year. That pissed me off. I pay my taxes every year so the federal gov't can waste it on shit like an Earth-monitoring satellite that never made it into space? What the fuck. And according to the article, this satellite sits in a closet in Maryland and the storage cost for it is one million a year. If this is really how they spend federal tax money, I surely would like more of a say in how they are spent. Sorry about all this, I just really hate paying taxes every year. Sure, I get a refund, but in the end, I'd rather have it on my paycheck.

Another thing that needs to be improved is public transportation. The interstate highway system is such a shitty idea in this day and age and cars are the poorest investment anyone could ever make. Not everyone can ride a plane, and In my opinion, flying is kinda lame. It's like riding on a flying bus. Big whoop. What we need over here is a high speed rail system. Sure, it'll be a big investment and domestic air travel may suffer, but it'll pay off in the end. And as a bonus, I can ride a train. I've never traveled by rail before, but it sounds more fun than flying.

Well, i tried to keep it brief, there's so much here i agree with so i just wanted to add my couple of pennies into the jar.
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:      
Reply to topic

 
 Jump to: