1) Ban all forms of public advertising.
2) Limit free speech rights to individual citizens.
3) Make it a criminal offense to file a frivolous lawsuit.
4) Make it unlawful for non-individual citizens to own stock and then only in a company they are directly employed by.
5) Make corporate officers criminally libel for any illegal acts committed by their companies.
6) Make it unlawful for a news organization to disseminate information that is factually inaccurate or irrelevant to the public welfare.
7) Make it unlawful to own more than a single residential property.
8) Make it unlawful to file a patent on techniques of any sort, methods of communication, or anything that occurs independent of human intervention.
9) Require professional jurists trained in the law, the effective critiquing scientific evidence, and to ignore emotional arguments.
10) 100% socialized medical industry where all treatment and access is fully communal and not for profit.
11) 100% socialized legal/penal system where all representation and incarsaration is fully communal and not for profit.
12) 100% socialized educational system where expenditures are based purely on number of students and advancement is strictly limited by individual achievement and not for profit.
Filed under: Politics
1. Would destroy our society. So many businesses and jobs depend on this that the disruption would be huge.
2. So if you and I form a literature club we cannot talk about it to others?
3. I like this. It is just that the definition of such a lawsuit needs to be very carefully defined.
4. Again would cause a huge disruption in our society. And it would outlaw mutual funds, you’ve got a problem with those?
5. You own an aspirin company and some idiot employee comes in work after hours and poisons a bottle. Some customer buys the bottle and dies. So YOU get prison for life???
6. You see an accident and a reporter interviews about it. You lie for some reason so the news agency is liable? How do you define “irrelevant to the public welfare?”
7. You decide to buy a second house and rent it out, given the renter the joy of living in a house that he cannot qualify to take a loan out on or knows he will be moving in a year or two. Oops, it cannot be done. What sense does that make?
8. Actually, you need to hire the lawyers that can pull off stunts like that.
9. You know not what you ask for. Who pays them? The problem is they would still be people, subject to whims and prejudice. No better than 12 random people.
10. Great if you needed an aspirin, bad if you needed a bypass. Medical care is an incredibly complex problem that needs to be solved a piece at a time.
11. Great, you are framed for murder and you get some uninspired nose picker that doesn’t care about your case for he gets paid the same either way.
12. Not a good idea. Just on one level, how about students in an expensive area? Millions would be needed just to buy a few acres to build a school while in inner cities, just thousands would be needed so the inner city students would have lots of cash for classes and teachers while the expensive area students would all be sitting in a circle sharing a book in a field.
Just a hint, Communism doesn’t work.
1) Don’t be silly, mankind got by for a good long while without billboards. Small businesses get by on word of mouth, and advertising would still be permissible—just limited to places you expect: TV, radio, magazines, etc. You should never just see an ad while you’re walking around outside. It lessens and cheapens the world for all of us.
2) We could tell anyone we want about it: what we couldn’t do is lobby the government.
3) Exactly.
4) I don’t have anything against mutual funds but I also don’t give a crap if they go away. The point is it would limit companies in size and make shareholders responsible for the treatments of workers—since they ARE the workers.
5) That’s just being nonsensical. I am talking about company policies, for example the chemical company that blew up half of India back in the 90’s (Union Carbide) because it violated safety regulations and no one was held responsible because, hey, it’s a corporation and NO ONE is responsible. In the scenario you suggest the person would clearly be held accountable for their own actions. Now, if the company was found to have shoddy security that allowed it to happen, that’s another story.
Will get the the otrhers a bit later.