If you're the leader of a country, what would you do?

The title speaks for itself.

What would you do? If you're the leader, what would you do to make your country a better place than it is now. Or what changes would you bring towards the betterment of the country.

For example you can say you'll increase the tax. Why? To gain more income. Or reduce the tax to make the citizens happier. The happier they are, the better the country they will be. Those are the examples that I can think of.

Remember to give your suggestions and please justify your suggestions.

What would you do and why?

Remove all entitlement programs ( To cut useless spending)
Repeal Affirmative action (Might as well cut the stupid ideas)

((OOC: i think this thread may be a good one to put in the debate room cause then we can say what we would do and why and then it could be debated upon being a good idea or not. several small debates in one thread on one topic would just be brilliant!))

Here's what I would do: Give leadership to someone else.

I could run a country if I truly had to, but I don't want leadership unless I have absolutely no choice.

Well, if what you're saying is, a leader with no opposition to what I would wish to do, and all I would wish would be law, then I would pass a Public Option into law, regulate insurance, get rid of 'pre-existing conditions' not enabling you to get insurance, re-institute the seperation of financial and trade banks, allow gay marriage, re-evaluate current government programs to cut unneeded spending, re-evaluate energy policies, increase commerce through common wealth stimulus, raise corporate and high bar tax rates, lower all other taxes, re-evaluate international taxation of product, and fine companies that do not adhere to any new ammendments or old ammnedment.

I'd also institute a government bailout program for companies in which the companies assets are defined and restricted, giving the company an amount equal to or slightly above the current worth of what can be seized if the company fails, and allow the company a 2 year safety net to try and re-establish itself. If then the company is not yet able to get back on its feet, the government will seize all assets up to the value of the bailout loan. Any leftover moeny the company may have will then be distributed by the government to the employess of that company is a basis of pay wage in the company (highest bracket getting the least amount of money, center bracket the most, and lowest bracket a middle share amount). If the company succeeds in getting back on its feet within the 2 year period, it will be required to pay off the bailout loan to the government, with interest. The interest will be acrued from the time of 6 months after the loan onward until the loan is paid off. If the company is able to excede a 30% over margin within the 2 years, it will be required to start paying off the loan at that point.

I would also strongly wish to institute a national learning law, in which student who have problems with school, or work, will have a place near where they live, that they can go to for help, at no cost to the parents. This cost will be maintained by the bracket change in tax rate, which will increase overall national income by 240% average. With this change, I would also get rid of social advancement in school, in which a child who would have failed the grade is moved up to the next grade instead. This way, students stop graduating without the proper knowledge needed to graduate school. With the new learning centers, student with problems should be able to help themselves get help with schools. Obviously, these centers will have to be greatly regulated to make sure they are helping, and these other changes would not be made until we were sure they were working, but I believe it would be a help.

Another thing I would want to do is advance all hospitals and medical sciences in the country, making sure that people have a place to go when they get sick, and that there will be a cure or treatment for them when they go there (obviously not everything will have a cure or treatment, and time is needed to deal with these things, but advancement is needed, more than we currently have).

There's more I would do, and even more to do with the medical sense of it, but I'm tired of typing, lol, so this will be my post.

Wow! Viper! Way Cool

Ok. Mine is simple, no war and no corruption. that's what i'm going to do first in providing a peaceful society. Smile

mines kinda like yours light =]

first id start by intimidating people into obeying my rules, which would be simple....no crime which includes theft, rape, murder etc etc and no drugs, alcohol, or tobacco. however that wouldnt be enough id either let them convert to being naturally "good" people or id force them to. kinda hard to explain....kind hearted mature people that always do the right thing sums it up i guess. as for the political side of things, the rest of the world would either agree in which case thatd be good if it spread to the rest of the world(world peace), or theyd disagree which would be their choice.....until i had enough supporting countries to crush their opposition. id raise taxes to help support those in need meaning the poor, etc, around the world not just in my country but only to an extent so that my own countries economy wouldnt crumble. and the rest i could adjust along the way as need be since everyone would agree with me because theyd know id do whats best for them.

So lemme get this straight... You'd ban drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, then raise taxes, all while being intimidating? You wouldn't last a year ruling a country!

Hooray speakeasies! ... I mean, I couldn't rule a country because I don't have the necesary education to do so.

But I think having some sort of "newer" checks and balances by educating the people to know how governments work and how to tell if someone in it has become corrupt would make things a little better. People like Blagojevich make it too easy to tell who should be impeached but there are probably other people we don't know about who are taking advantage of their position.

Hrm... If I was the leader of a country I won't make it a democracy... That's just bull-crap.
I'd run the country myself, handpick greatminded people to help me run it (Example: economics wizkid to help run the country's economy).
I'd make people equal, cut down on monopolies, and start reviving the now-dead middle class.
Cut political hate. Talk friendly with other countries and trade openly. Laws would be more liberal. Guns would be disallowed.

Gosh, there's so much I wanna do... Keep government power. NOT lie to people about taxes. Regulate large firms like Microsoft. Invest a lot of money in small firms, subsidies. Spend more money in research and science.

There's much more.... These are just general and not in depth.

Ryojin wrote:: Here's what I would do: Give leadership to someone else.

I could run a country if I truly had to, but I don't want leadership unless I have absolutely no choice.

Pretty much same thing with me, though I'll openly admit that there's no way I'd be able to run so much as a freakin' concession stand, MUCH less an entire country! I'd probably screw so many things up...but hey, no one said that I had to be one, so until the day that I'm forced into office by a majority rule (which I hope never, ever, EVER happens, for their and my own sake), I don't have to worry about it! I'm all good! Smile

Ryojin wrote:: So lemme get this straight... You'd ban drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, then raise taxes, all while being intimidating? You wouldn't last a year ruling a country!

id pretty much be light from death note ryojin except for a couple extra things and u know how it turned out with light. i mean he did die...but thats only because of people on the "police force" that in reality dont exist. i mean no ones as smart as l and n. however i think im at least half as smart as light was so id have tons of people loving me light he did and theyd be loyal to me no matter what i did. and btw regarding the higher taxes thing i also mentioned that i wanted people to become loving all around good mature people meaning theyd willingly donate more money for taxes, whether its because they loved me or were afraid of me.

Animefreak3000 wrote:

Ryojin wrote:: So lemme get this straight... You'd ban drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, then raise taxes, all while being intimidating? You wouldn't last a year ruling a country!

id pretty much be light from death note ryojin except for a couple extra things and u know how it turned out with light. i mean he did die...but thats only because of people on the "police force" that in reality dont exist. i mean no ones as smart as l and n. however i think im at least half as smart as light was so id have tons of people loving me light he did and theyd be loyal to me no matter what i did. and btw regarding the higher taxes thing i also mentioned that i wanted people to become loving all around good mature people meaning theyd willingly donate more money for taxes, whether its because they loved me or were afraid of me.

Oh, where to begin with this one...

1) You'd have to have a high IQ and a Death Note to do what Light did.
2) Intelligence does not equal love and/or loyalty. If anything, being smarter than average alienates you from others, making them dislike you.
3) The only reason most people were loyal to Light was because he could kill them with ease if they weren't loyal.
4) You can't force people to permanently change.
5) If people are afraid of you, then they will not like you. If they do not like you, they will not want you ruling over them. If they do not want you ruling over them, they will make it so that you are not.
6) Judging by your usage of the english language in your post, it doesn't seem like your claim of being at least half as smart as Light holds up...

Think about it in terms of reality, and not in terms of anime where a retarded two year old rabbit could rule a country effectively.

Ok people, come on. This is not the Debate section. This thread is just for fun. So chill!

Unless you guys wanna make it a debate thread Very Happy

Firestorm wrote:: Ok people, come on. This is not the Debate section. This thread is just for fun. So chill!

Unless you guys wanna make it a debate thread

This thread would probably make a nice addition to the debate room, I see several posts already, that could be argued with. SupaBurn

Ryojin wrote:

Animefreak3000 wrote:

Ryojin wrote:: So lemme get this straight... You'd ban drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, then raise taxes, all while being intimidating? You wouldn't last a year ruling a country!

id pretty much be light from death note ryojin except for a couple extra things and u know how it turned out with light. i mean he did die...but thats only because of people on the "police force" that in reality dont exist. i mean no ones as smart as l and n. however i think im at least half as smart as light was so id have tons of people loving me light he did and theyd be loyal to me no matter what i did. and btw regarding the higher taxes thing i also mentioned that i wanted people to become loving all around good mature people meaning theyd willingly donate more money for taxes, whether its because they loved me or were afraid of me.

Oh, where to begin with this one...

1) You'd have to have a high IQ and a Death Note to do what Light did.
2) Intelligence does not equal love and/or loyalty. If anything, being smarter than average alienates you from others, making them dislike you.
3) The only reason most people were loyal to Light was because he could kill them with ease if they weren't loyal.
4) You can't force people to permanently change.
5) If people are afraid of you, then they will not like you. If they do not like you, they will not want you ruling over them. If they do not want you ruling over them, they will make it so that you are not.
6) Judging by your usage of the english language in your post, it doesn't seem like your claim of being at least half as smart as Light holds up...

Think about it in terms of reality, and not in terms of anime where a retarded two year old rabbit could rule a country effectively.

I don't know, it seems pretty smart to me to shorthand words instead of writing it all out like an idiot, and since it would be my country I could also easily kill people even though I don't have a death note. What else...oh, I also said I wanted it to be a perfect society so I would not physically harm anyone unless they tried to harm me, or break extreme rules like no killing....so they would fear me because of my power yet love me for what I'm capable of.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: I don't know, it seems pretty smart to me to shorthand words instead of writing it all out like an idiot.

Well, I have to disagree with you on that. Shorthand is not an intelligent form of writing no matter which way you may wish to interpret it.

Another thing, completely disregarding what I just said, SHORTHAND IS AGAINST THE RULES. PLEASE READ THE RULES.

Thank you, That Is All.

^ Yeah, that.

There's also the fact that it makes you look like an idiot who can't spell properly. No, I do not mean to imply that you are an idiot who can't spell properly, but that is the main effect that the style of typing has.

Moving on from that... People can not be intimidated into becoming the perfect society. Hell, there is no such thing as a perfect society, as nature (human or otherwise) will not allow it.

Sure, if you lead the country, you might be able to get people to kill other people for you. Sure, that might cause them to fear you. What I don't get, though, is how you got the delusion that love would somehow come from it. Sure, you can kill. Guess what... So can everyone else. It just isn't legal in most cases. How would you be any different than the murderers in jail? You'd be in a position of power. That's it.

Reading your post, I can honestly say that if you were ever to rule over my country like that, I will not hesitate to take you out. I will not be intimidated into submission, nor will I ever love such a leader, and neither will most of the population.

Before you post again, please give some serious thought about the reaction that people will have to your actions. If you know people at all, then I believe your plan would change.

Coldhardt wrote:: Hrm... If I was the leader of a country I won't make it a democracy... That's just bull-crap.
I'd run the country myself, handpick greatminded people to help me run it (Example: economics wizkid to help run the country's economy).
I'd make people equal, cut down on monopolies, and start reviving the now-dead middle class.
Cut political hate. Talk friendly with other countries and trade openly. Laws would be more liberal. Guns would be disallowed.

Gosh, there's so much I wanna do... Keep government power. NOT lie to people about taxes. Regulate large firms like Microsoft. Invest a lot of money in small firms, subsidies. Spend more money in research and science.

There's much more.... These are just general and not in depth.

So basically you would start going down the tyrant road ?

First things first, what makes a monoply ? People make monoplies by buying from a specific company over others, they must be doing something right for people to do this. Why in the world would someone ever want to start a buisness when you are standing over them with an axe, ready to cut off peices of their buisness if they ever get to large, like an ominous lawnmower. I also find it odd on how you call democracy bull - crap and yet think what basically amounts to a Monarchy will be any better. (One leader, seemingly not elected by anyone , picking people without any sort of election. Why should they follow you ?)

What do you mean by political hate ? I wish to have a more definitive idea on what you beleive . (And while we are on the subject, please define how people aren ot equal)

Guns are not allowed ? So basically you wish for people to have to turn to criminals to protect themeselves. If they can't turn to a legal precedent , than they will turn to crime instead.

How much did you think about this ?

and honestly AnimeFreak, How do you expect to make a loving society when you rule by fear ? I would not pay a cent to your system

Tyranny is not a perfect society

Ryojin wrote:: ^ Yeah, that.

There's also the fact that it makes you look like an idiot who can't spell properly. No, I do not mean to imply that you are an idiot who can't spell properly, but that is the main effect that the style of typing has.

Moving on from that... People can not be intimidated into becoming the perfect society. Hell, there is no such thing as a perfect society, as nature (human or otherwise) will not allow it.

Sure, if you lead the country, you might be able to get people to kill other people for you. Sure, that might cause them to fear you. What I don't get, though, is how you got the delusion that love would somehow come from it. Sure, you can kill. Guess what... So can everyone else. It just isn't legal in most cases. How would you be any different than the murderers in jail? You'd be in a position of power. That's it.

Reading your post, I can honestly say that if you were ever to rule over my country like that, I will not hesitate to take you out. I will not be intimidated into submission, nor will I ever love such a leader, and neither will most of the population.

Before you post again, please give some serious thought about the reaction that people will have to your actions. If you know people at all, then I believe your plan would change.

I meant I'd set an example and over generations no matter who I killed or what I did it'd be for the better so they'd come to love me. I could care less if I was in charge of a country and they loved or liked me right at that moment.

again just like light I would't care what happened to me while I was alive or dead I would be there to help people no matter what actions I'd have to take. however I would anticipate being assassinated as you said u would have done but It's not like I would come out into the light I'd stay hidden and not let anyone know who I truely was except for like a right hand man that would be my ginny pig.

on top of that whether you really wouldn't be intimidated or not doesn't reflect an entire country's people, and even if they weren't I'd pressure their family, friends, and anyone else they'd ever met.

actually i guess I'm sounding more like lelouch from code geass lol. alright a mix between him and light. if I became the target of my country and the worlds hate that would cause a change that would hopefully be long-lasting.

Shadowed Luminous wrote:

Coldhardt wrote:: Hrm... If I was the leader of a country I won't make it a democracy... That's just bull-crap.
I'd run the country myself, handpick greatminded people to help me run it (Example: economics wizkid to help run the country's economy).
I'd make people equal, cut down on monopolies, and start reviving the now-dead middle class.
Cut political hate. Talk friendly with other countries and trade openly. Laws would be more liberal. Guns would be disallowed.

Gosh, there's so much I wanna do... Keep government power. NOT lie to people about taxes. Regulate large firms like Microsoft. Invest a lot of money in small firms, subsidies. Spend more money in research and science.

There's much more.... These are just general and not in depth.

So basically you would start going down the tyrant road ?

First things first, what makes a monoply ? People make monoplies by buying from a specific company over others, they must be doing something right for people to do this. Why in the world would someone ever want to start a buisness when you are standing over them with an axe, ready to cut off peices of their buisness if they ever get to large, like an ominous lawnmower. I also find it odd on how you call democracy bull - crap and yet think what basically amounts to a Monarchy will be any better. (One leader, seemingly not elected by anyone , picking people without any sort of election. Why should they follow you ?)

What do you mean by political hate ? I wish to have a more definitive idea on what you beleive . (And while we are on the subject, please define how people aren ot equal)

Guns are not allowed ? So basically you wish for people to have to turn to criminals to protect themeselves. If they can't turn to a legal precedent , than they will turn to crime instead.

How much did you think about this ?

and honestly AnimeFreak, How do you expect to make a loving society when you rule by fear ? I would not pay a cent to your system

Tyranny is not a perfect society

there would be no criminals....and no guns being imported into my country because of my "border police" that I'd have set up. Even if by some chance some criminals had guns, I'd order someone to kill them and anyone associated with them. however what would those ordinary people need protecting from since there would be no crime since theyd all be dead.

how can u say u cant rule by fear. if you are nice, as in say a president, people are raped, killed, abused, etc and the majority of them aren't punished and if they are it's not a punishment they deserve which is death which sets an example for others to do the same thing since they might get away with their crime.

I think u said something about why should they follow me. They would follow me not only because it's the right thing to do but at the moment they would be forced to.

"First things first, what makes a monoply ? People make monoplies by buying from a specific company over others, they must be doing something right for people to do this."

In economic terms, a monopoly is when a firm dominates the market 100%. They can put the prices as high as they want and hurt the people. The government will prevent this from happening. Get your facts straight, please.

As for the democracy part, look at the past leaders of the United States, they can't do anything. They're utterly useless and just a face for the public. Obama recently sent more troops to Afghanistan AFTER his people there warned him not to -- coming from someone who received the Nobel PEACE Prize, it seems very hypocritical.

Also, I never said it was a monarchy. If you understood that, then I apologize. I meant to say the leader would have more control than that of other legislative and judicial firms. I do not want a democracy because it is a popularity contest. How many times, in your school life, have superficial and incompetent people been awarded with a seat like President or Treasurer? Well, I will try to stop that.

--------------
About why I want to "stand them with an axe, ready to cut off peices of their buisness if they ever get to large," is mainly because of companies such as Microsoft and Starbucks. Starbucks has thousands of them across the world. In my city, in particular, there's two in one corner. The second one opened where a local coffee shop used to be.
Microsoft steals people's work and remodel it. If you come up with an innovation, they copy it to a CD, crack it and send they're teams of developers to make their product more wanted. They can produce it faster and cheaper than you, the normal software designer can. Microsoft is in computers, software, and even video game consoles. If it continues at this rate, they will dominate most markets. If they do so, they will control higher power than governments.

----------------
As for people being equal or unequal, let me use the example of Tax cuts for the rich in America. If you know anything about that, you wouldn't be arguing.... But no, you're clearly too caught up in the virtual world to know ANYTHING about the outside world.

My opinion to you, Shadowed Luminous: Get your facts straight before talking and don't try to flame unless you wanna get flamed back.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: I meant I'd set an example and over generations no matter who I killed or what I did it'd be for the better so they'd come to love me. I could care less if I was in charge of a country and they loved or liked me right at that moment.

In what situation would it be for the better? Say Human A kills Human B. You would learn of this and have Human A killed. You wouldn't know whether or not it is a justified kill. It could have been an accident for all you know. Yet you would kill Human A anyway. I look at that and see you not setting an example to not kill, but the opposite. Even if you somehow succeed into intimidating people into not committing crimes, it will last only as long as you live. Once your commands fail to come in, once people stop being murdered for their crimes, they will start breaking the law again, and most likely worse than before you even came into power.

Either way, I don't see people loving a tyrant.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: again just like light I would't care what happened to me while I was alive or dead I would be there to help people no matter what actions I'd have to take. however I would anticipate being assassinated as you said u would have done but It's not like I would come out into the light I'd stay hidden and not let anyone know who I truely was except for like a right hand man that would be my ginny pig.

1) Wrong. Light did care whether he lived or died. If the ending didn't prove that, then take a look at how far he went to keep his identity secret. If you can't make the connection, then try thinking about why he wanted to keep his identity secret...
2) If you are in a position to give commands, you are in a position to be found. Even if you took every measure to try to ensure your safety, if the people want you dead, they will find you.
3) guinea pig.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: on top of that whether you really wouldn't be intimidated or not doesn't reflect an entire country's people, and even if they weren't I'd pressure their family, friends, and anyone else they'd ever met.

I am an average American. It doesn't seem so unlikely that the population on the whole won't be intimidated into submission. Look back to when this country first got started. We separated from our mother country because of taxes. Just think of how we would respond to your rule. Also, Americans value their freedom highly, especially after 9/11. Take that into consideration as well.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: actually i guess I'm sounding more like lelouch from code geass lol. alright a mix between him and light.

Actually, you sound more like someone who loves anime at an annoying level and thinks they know the best way to rule a country.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: if I became the target of my country and the worlds hate that would cause a change that would hopefully be long-lasting.

Change... For you? Yes. For the country/world on the whole? No.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: there would be no criminals....

There are ALWAYS criminals. Always has, always will.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: and no guns being imported into my country because of my "border police" that I'd have set up.

No matter what you set up, people will still find ways to import them. Set up checkpoints at every road leading in or out of the country, and smugglers will simply stop using the roads. Build a wall around the country, and smugglers will build ladders.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: Even if by some chance some criminals had guns, I'd order someone to kill them and anyone associated with them.

Okay... Hypothetical situation here... Say my brother has a gun under your rule and is caught with it. You would kill me because of it? Ridiculous. Again, you wouldn't be in a position to know who the innocent ones are, so you would be blindly murdering people. Also, it isn't uncommon for criminals to know a hell of a lot of people. You'd likely be killing off most of the population if you put your plan into action.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: however what would those ordinary people need protecting from since there would be no crime since theyd all be dead.

There's more to be protected from in life than just criminals.

Also, think about relations with other countries. What if a country decides to go to war with you? Then you would need those guns. You'd be stuck with a catch-22 situation. Either you keep your no guns policy and lose the war, or you get guns to fight with, which are likely to be illegally distributed among the people which would destroy your plan.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: how can u say u cant rule by fear.

Take a look at the history of the world. Name one leader who successfully ruled by fear. without eventually being assassinated or exiled. I personally can't think of anyone.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: if you are nice, as in say a president, people are raped, killed, abused, etc and the majority of them aren't punished and if they are it's not a punishment they deserve which is death which sets an example for others to do the same thing since they might get away with their crime.

The problem with this is that it will still happen. Some will be deterred from taking such actions, but if the majority of people who commit these crimes don't care about the current consequences, what makes you think that yours will make them care much more?

And speaking of setting examples... You'd be killing people, therefore also setting the example of killing. Congrats.

Animefreak3000 wrote:: I think u said something about why should they follow me. They would follow me not only because it's the right thing to do but at the moment they would be forced to.

Why would they be forced to? If the civilian population outnumbers the police population in the country, and the civilians do not like your rule, they will not follow it. If the police try to take action against civilians to stop any rebellion, then the civilians will take out the police before moving on to you.

And just think... Your police population would likely be less than it is right now. Why? Think about how many would take off because they morally object to your method of ruling.

Everything that I have said has been based on my experience with the real world, people in general, and history, not from anime where anything goes without question...

On that note, this thread seems to have become a debate, so I will move it from the Lounge to the proper section...

Coldhardt wrote:: "First things first, what makes a monoply ? People make monoplies by buying from a specific company over others, they must be doing something right for people to do this."

In economic terms, a monopoly is when a firm dominates the market 100%. They can put the prices as high as they want and hurt the people. The government will prevent this from happening. Get your facts straight, please.

As for the democracy part, look at the past leaders of the United States, they can't do anything. They're utterly useless and just a face for the public. Obama recently sent more troops to Afghanistan AFTER his people there warned him not to -- coming from someone who received the Nobel PEACE Prize, it seems very hypocritical.

Also, I never said it was a monarchy. If you understood that, then I apologize. I meant to say the leader would have more control than that of other legislative and judicial firms. I do not want a democracy because it is a popularity contest. How many times, in your school life, have superficial and incompetent people been awarded with a seat like President or Treasurer? Well, I will try to stop that.

--------------
About why I want to "stand them with an axe, ready to cut off peices of their buisness if they ever get to large," is mainly because of companies such as Microsoft and Starbucks. Starbucks has thousands of them across the world. In my city, in particular, there's two in one corner. The second one opened where a local coffee shop used to be.
Microsoft steals people's work and remodel it. If you come up with an innovation, they copy it to a CD, crack it and send they're teams of developers to make their product more wanted. They can produce it faster and cheaper than you, the normal software designer can. Microsoft is in computers, software, and even video game consoles. If it continues at this rate, they will dominate most markets. If they do so, they will control higher power than governments.

----------------
As for people being equal or unequal, let me use the example of Tax cuts for the rich in America. If you know anything about that, you wouldn't be arguing.... But no, you're clearly too caught up in the virtual world to know ANYTHING about the outside world.

My opinion to you, Shadowed Luminous: Get your facts straight before talking and don't try to flame unless you wanna get flamed back.

First things first, I am not flaming you or even attempting to flame you. If I was I'd just call you an idiot and be done with it

On to more important matters

Let me put forth the following situation

What happens if the people simply stop buying from a monopoly like Starbucks? Starbucks can't run into people's homes and threaten them to drink their coffee. I have my facts straight, you need to consider all the possibilities. Starbucks should be able to raise their prices as high as they wish; the business does belong to them. (If they do this though, who is going to buy from them? If they do not get money from the people, how do they expect to grow further to the 100% you speak of ?) The government should not even fit into the picture

The president does not do much, if your looking for the seat(s) of power take a gander at the legislative branch. Back to the president though, I do not think he should have received the Nobel Peace prize, considering he has not done anything to deserve it. Also which people do you mean exactly, I’ve heard numerous people warn him against this sort of thing. Please elaborate

On to the next area

So if your leader went totally crazy and started using his power for evil, how shall he be stopped? People may be stupid enough to treat elections as a popularity contest (Barrack Obama’s election is a good example), but this does not mean the system itself is flawed. Let me attempt a comparison of sorts

After you finish using a dish (The system) for a meal, it is usually covered with remnants of said meal (People’s stupidity). Do you throw it away because it is dirty or do you wash it so you can use it once more?

If Microsoft is stealing someone’s work then they should be sued for it, if the motion fails, stop buying products from them.

Also

So you think I “flamed” you and your automatic response is to try and do it right back? Try to act like the better person

Also do you have a specific example of these tax cuts for the rich you would like to bring up or are you referencing that old “argument” democrats seem to use whenever they want some unwarranted support for their next foolish bill ?

And by all means, if you have some magical point that I am not aware of, please bring it up. While my main point in the debate room is to get people to think further, I would enjoy for someone to tell me something new …

"What happens if the people simply stop buying from a monopoly like Starbucks? Starbucks can't run into people's homes and threaten them to drink their coffee. I have my facts straight, you need to consider all the possibilities. Starbucks should be able to raise their prices as high as they wish; the business does belong to them. (If they do this though, who is going to buy from them? If they do not get money from the people, how do they expect to grow further to the 100% you speak of ?) The government should not even fit into the picture"

Tell that to Starbucks when they started making unbranded coffee shops. Same coffee, different names, different decorations, etc... It did happen. People might stop buying Starbucks. But they won't stop buying the same coffee under a different name.

As for Microsoft stealing work, look all around you. Take Microsoft Office as an example, they were NOT the first word processors or spreadsheets. Do you know the names of the first ones? No, you don't. Again, people cannot "stop" buying products from them because they are cheaper and more efficient than anything else - WHY? Because they dominate the market.

For telling you something new, am I not giving you my personal unique opinion? Yes I am.
I do not rehash nonesense people hear on TV.

--------
Short summary because its 5AM and I am dead tired:
- The public is ignorant and will buy anything advertised toward them.
- Monopolies are bad and that's what I'm stopping in my country, or at least that's the main goal.
- Tax cuts for the rich example: charity. Any citizen of the United States should know that (I am not a citizen and I know it!).
- By people I mean his people in Afghanistan - His advisors.
- When did I flame? The only person I see flaming is you. You called me an idiot. I said I'd flame back. Never said I started.
- You're one of the few people that can distinguish between onto and on to.
- Instead of critiquing every post you read, could you possibly say you like something for once? Stubborn, stubborn boy.
- If you want something new, you might want to read what someone says before automatically dismissing it as incorrect and false.