Innovation and America
 

FC's RIP America thread inspired me to create a counter-thread; not for the sake of argument, but for the sake of brainstorming. I believe too many politicians and their advisors today are trying to re-package existing institutions and systems when they should be innovating. Coming up with innovative solutions to big issues seems to be lost on the every day American; accepting recycled policies at face value is the norm. I know most of you have ideas and opinions on what could be done to better our stumbling nation and I'd like this thread to be the forum for those ideas and opinions.

This article might help get you thinking:

Schumpeter: Think different | The Economist

Health Care

Revolutionize food system. Tax companies for producing food products that cause health problems. End farmer subsidies for corn, wheat, and soy, to create a more bio-diverse food supply. Reward farmers via tax subsidies for bio-diverse, organic practices. Reward tax breaks to citizens who use their yard for a garden. Disallow food stamp use for processed, nutrition-void foods. Encourage states and municipalities to create tax subsidies for merchants who sell real food products to local consumers.

Budget Issues

Downsize military significantly. Become isolationist nation with policies geared towards rewarding isolationist, self-sufficient economic practices. Create tax incentives for citizens to burn less fuel. Overhaul Social Security system, create a sustainable model at expense of constituent self-interests. Anchor currency to global standard and end fiat model. Reinstate banking regulations and end the megabanks who can gamble risk-free with tax payer dollars.

Education

Increase teacher salaries and create more scrutinous hiring and firing standards to revolutionize the education system and remove deadbeat babysitters.

Other

Legalize and tax online poker. Enforce integrity in the advertising industry. Decriminalize drug use. Increase taxes on alcohol manufactures. End corporate lobbying.

I love how much all of this makes sense to me, but you're still going to get so much shit for it.

Horrible. How do we determine which foods are bad vs good? Do we follow the latest diet craze. Every other week there is a study published that says "oh turns out this is good for you" or margarine is better for you than butter, wait no butter is better than margarine.

Give the individual more freedom in choosing their diet to achieve weight and other parameters that are under an individual's control. Publicize health insurance. If you're obese increase the amount you pay in taxes for health insurance by X %. If you are a regular smoker increase your payments by Y %. Use empirical risk assessment to determine these percentages. Increases in health insurance cost can only be triggered by something that can empirically be measured or tested in the body. Not a rumor from someone that you drink alcohol or there is a picture of you on facebook with a cig in your mouth.

Now mine:

Government
Add a fourth branch of government comprised of scientists, engineers, and economists to keep the lawyers and politicians in the legislative branch of government in check and ensure that decisions are based on empirical evidence.

This branch would have the power to veto bills passed by congress/senate based on a majority consensus that a bill is based on non-empirical evidence or there is a significant amount of evidence that if a bill were put into law it would be more of a net detriment than net good to society, the economy, or whatever.

Any minority stake in congress could also put a bill up for review by this branch and the branch can give official recommendations to congress.

Members of the branch would be appointed by their peers in the Academic scientific community. Only accredited academic institutions can nominate/vote someone into the branch. While first implementing the branch, congress will decide what institutions are "accredited." henceforth the accredited institutions will determine whether another institution can be accreditation or if accreditation can be revoked.

Processed food = taxed. HFCS, sugar, etc, tax it all.

No.

Philosopher Kings.

Charging sales tax for non-healthy food accomplishes this easily.

+1

+1

Isolationist nation has and always be a terrible idea, we need the ability to export to the rest of the world to sustain financial growth. However, imposing strategic tariffs will create a level playing field in most manufacturing sectors.

End teachers' unions. End teachers' pensions. Make it easier for people who WANT to teach to be able to do so. For example, a professional chemist teaching chemistry. A paid intense summer training course to prepare someone to teach could easily be implemented.


Also a national internet sales tax.

Censorship is bad mmkay.

Legalization and taxation of pot would be swell.

Unnecessary with decriminalized and taxed drugs.

There is some legitimate lobbying that needs to be done by various industries. Most politicians are not at all educated about all the various areas they're voting for legislation on. However, lobbyists should not be allowed to contribute campaign money.

UB - I like a LOT of what you said, but how can you justify legalizing and taxing online poker when you are legalizing drugs and not taxing. Also, why tax what people want to do with their personal lives and own money?

ID - Your idea for a 4th branch is fine, but putting government in charge of creating it is suicide to the cause. There would be more corruption involved in that branch than any other because they hold the veto pen to everything. Most "academics" are theorists who couldn't survive in the real world anyway, yet you want them in charge of our veto pen. Would these "scientists" be the same ones who Al Gore cited for his global warming campaign?

DDT - Not any summer in the world could prepare one to teach in a classroom. Being a great scholar on a topic doesn't make a good teacher; being able to teach is what makes a good teacher.

UB's idea of raising teacher salary is similar to my thoughts. I've thought if teacher paid $100k per yer, that it would be lucrative for scholars to go into teaching which would, in turn, make our educational system far better.

I don't believe the legislative branch is to the point of corruption where they couldn't choose valid academic institutions. They wouldn't consider the Church of Scientology as an accredited organisation they would choose places like MIT. Congress wouldn't choose the people who would be representatives in the 4th branch. Only form the initial body of Academic Institutions that determine who are representitives.

Like the BCS.

I knew you would say something like this, every almost teacher I've ever talked to has said the exact same thing; but you know what every experienced teacher says? "You learn how to teach by teaching, not in college." The bottom line is that there are people who are passionate about their subject matter and that would translate into passionate teaching, but for most 1-2 years of full time schooling is not an option once they have started a "career"

Again, thank you for proving my point.

You two are practically finishing each other's sentences!

It's so cute. You guys are so cute together.

What doesn't prove your point lately? You disagree with everything, take a stance on nothing, and claim victory on anything.

Well he didn't say he was against doing the same for drugs, and I would be confident in betting that he would agree with it. Just because he mentioned one thing doesn't mean he is against every other idea in the realm of thought.

So, Beebs, you DON'T think slavery should have been abolished?

I just don't get why everybody wants to tax what we choose to do with our own time and money. How about we cut useless departments (Department of Education) which would prevent the need to tax anything.

Cut medicare, medicade, and social security.

Boom, debt crisis averted. Legalize marijuana and tax it's consumption. Boom, new multi-billion dollar industry and tax revenue stream. America is saved.

ill get more on this when im not on my kindle but i have to sa that creativity and innovation in asia is shit. because of heirarchical culture and respecting others bullshit as well as resistaceto change and more focus on rote memoriztion there is just crap developmental innovation.

this thread is for america asia-boy

America should probably strike the asian countries now while they're still weak.

We could start by just destroying Iraq and securing the oil for ourselves while simultaneously beginning to drill in Alaska. This cheap oil would allow us to fight the massive war that will surely follow when we blow china out of the water. Then we could just wipe most of our debt away with blood.

Allow me to inform you, my dear friends.

There are two main problems facing America today in my estimation:

1) Gerrymandering.

"gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundaries to create partisan, incumbent-protected districts. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander; however, that word can also refer to the process."

Gerrymandering - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Basically what you have happening is Democrats and Republicans drawing district lines that create safe havens for one or the other political party. So for example, when you re-draw a district line to create a Republican stronghold, there's little to no chance that a Democratic challenger will win a vote there, like, ever. This is a huge problem, because then the incumbent Republican's only potential challenger will be another Republican, which encourages the incumbent further to the right, in order to appeal more to his own party and be as "pure" as possible. Rather than cater towards the middle in order to have as broad appeal as possible, the incumbent is pushed further and further right, creating a larger chasm between Republicans and Democrats, and making things like compromise political suicide. This is what we saw largely play out in the debt ceiling fiasco.

I guess I should clarify that when I talk about districts I'm talking about members of the House of Representatives.

The other major downside to this is that it creates career politicians, because even though House members have to stand for election every two years, for reasons that I mentioned above they will rarely get voted out unless usurped by a more "pure" politicians from their own party.

The good news (I guess) is that they're experimenting with new ways of redistricting that is hopefully less partisan in both California and Florida. If it works out other states should follow. The bad news is that most people don't even realize this is a major source of our countries political problems; using the Tea party as an example, we can see how a minority of the minority party can stop the entire legislation process.

2) Public education.

A democracy does not - cannot work unless the public education system is fixed. It's another of the major reasons our country is so split right now. We live in a country where most kids who amount to anything attend private school now, creating a two tiered system that's going to and already has begun to spell trouble. Then you have a large and growing number of parents pulling their kids out to be home schooled, largely for religious reasons I might add, that is further fragmenting education.

Compounding these problems are the fact that teachers are clearly underpaid. It's insane that a nurse can get an associates or a bachelors and make twice what a teacher who needs a masters does. Then you factor in that they're public employees dependent on people paying taxes and the economy doing well, and it's just not a good deal. Basically we have cashed strapped states and anti tax zealots and teachers who go into debt to get a nearly worthless post-bach degree.

The public school system was put in place so that our country would be populated with informed citizens who could participate in civil society. As of right now half the country doesn't even believe in evolution.

Evolution is a bad example. Because it's a religious issue first and an educational issue second. But in general I'd agree that our education system is poor.