Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×

More from deviantART



Details

Submitted on
April 24, 2012
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
2,301
Favourites
2 (who?)
Comments
4
×

Right Wing Failure...

Tue Apr 24, 2012, 10:42 PM

My Links

Piscus Inferno
My Gallery
Favourites
Stamps

Top Stamps

Digital Art stamp by Lumaris
I Support Imagination stamp by c3ph31d
I Support Erotic Art Stamp by trinitylast
Canada Stamp by l8
3D Stamp by TomerM
:thumb57888728:
Support Poser Artists by NightsongWS
Renderaholic Love Stamp by ClaireJones

My Groups

:iconposeraddicts:
:icondazclub:
:icondazzl3d:
:iconthe-warcraft-legion:
:icondragonnation:
:icon3dgurus:
:iconden-of-the-troll:
:iconkinky-curves:
:iconrealm-of-fantasy:
:icondragonartists:
:icondapagan:
:icon3d-enchantment:
:icondafantasy:
:iconelves::iconmacusers:


The Failure of the Right Wing


This is something I wish people would start to realize, and start to come to grips with: The Right Wing philosophy is broken.  Capitalism is in itself inherently flawed.  It is the new Monarchy, and is a problem.  So let's look at why it is broken, and how it can be fixed, and how to make life better for all.

A traditional monarchy has a king or queen in charge, with their court having some power and influence, the lords and ladies of various areas below that having more, and then the power filtering down to their direct helpers, the taxmen, law keepers, etc. having a decent amount.  They make up a small minority, and then the serfs, the peasants, have no power and are pretty much servants to the royalty.  The royalty have all the money, the peasants have next to nothing.

Now we have politicians making the laws, with rich corporations enjoying the influence they have over them with money to fund their political campaigns, and keep their friends employed, the bureaucracy itself, self serving and unable to be changed, as it keeps itself in power, and then the little people pretty much in debt to those above them.  Very few at the top, many at the bottom.  All the wealth at the top, next to nothing down the bottom.  Sounds like a monarchy to me.

The problem is, the power resides with the politicians, and for all their noble words and speeches, they only seek to keep power, influence and then retire comfortably.  And the corporations that fund them, and 'lobby' them, are literally just buying votes for what they want.  And since they have all the money, they can afford to spend it to keep the money.  And that's all they want is to keep the money.

The key fix, the one that will make the biggest impact, is also the hardest one to accomplish.  The entire system must be torn down, and rebuilt from scratch with a few key things in place.

#1. Pay of elected officials should be equal to the average pay of their constituents. NO MORE.  This has a couple of effects.  Firstly, it stops politicians from going into politics to make money from a cushy job.  It also cuts down the operating budget for the government quite effectively.  This also encourages a politician in a poorer area to work harder to make the people in his area more prosperous.  It encourages them to think of growth, not just making themselves money.

#1.a. Pay of non-elected people working in higher areas of the government should always be lower than the average of all people in the country.  No more exorbitant paycheques for people who aren't even elected.

#2. At the end of the term of an elected official, constituents should vote on performance, to determine pension if any.  This encourages politicians to work FOR the people, not for the corporations, special interest groups, and anyone else.  If they want to get a pension, they need to earn it in the eyes of those who elected them.

#3. Lower the entry bar for people to run for office, so it's not just the rich that can do it.  This will need to be done, as many will not want to run for office in lower income areas at first, but if the bar is low enough, the people of that area will stand up and represent themselves, even just to make a job for themselves.  People who care about the community but are unable to do anything with low wealth can make a difference in the government.

#4. Make legislation that television ads are banned for political campaigning. It must be done in print, online, or live.  No more slander campaigns on TV.  No more BS stuff designed for people who don't really look at the issues.  You either read if you want to learn the issues, talk to people, or you prove you don't care.  This also stops the insane amount of crap you see on TV before an election.  A debate on TV is fine, but no one wants to see ad after ad.  Also, people can post signs in their own lawns, but NO SIGNS ON PUBLIC LAND.  No more weeds of signs that you see along the road.  If you don't have permission of the land owner, you can't put a sign up.

#5. All election campaign funds must come from donations which must be documented as to who made them, and none from personal funds of the candidates.  This stops the rich from having an advantage over the poor.  And since the funds donated will be open for all to see, if you notice that candidate A has been given 10 million by EvilEmpire Corp. you know who he will support.

#6. Taxation will be based on the amount of money you make.  The more you make, the more you pay.  This is the one which will be the hardest to do in the current system, but is the most needed.  No more tax hide-outs for the rich.  And if you don't pay, all your assets are seized if you are above a certain tax bracket, and they are sold off until your taxes are paid, the unsold ones returned.  And I will break it down in terms of an economics lesson now as to why this is necessary.

If you take 20% of the profits made by a man who makes 10 million a year, you have not even left him incapable of supporting himself.  He still has more money than most people make in their lifetime, and can live quite well off that.  He cannot claim he is being robbed, as he can still afford his Porsche if he wants.  All that extra money isn't going to help the economy.  He can claim that he will invest it into a business and that business will make jobs all he wants, but that will not happen.  Say Bob Joe invests 10 million into Widget Corp.  Widget Corp stock goes up, and the people with their stock make more money.  They take their money and invest in another company, and on it goes.  Does any of that money go to make more jobs?  Nope.  Why not?

Jobs are created with a demand is found.  A demand for jobs comes when people are needed to do something (labor) or make something (craftsmen) or the like.  There is only a demand for these things if something is needed to be made or done.  When a rich man invests in a company, no one else needs to do anything except his stock broker, and he already has a job.  Since there is no demand, no jobs.  As the rich person's quality of life is quite high, they do not need to buy much of anything.  Sure they may buy a 'toy' from time to time, and while they may cost a lot, the amount of labor required for them is negligible.  One person buying a yacht does not increase the demand for boats, so no new boat assembly jobs are created.

Now, if you cut the taxes to the middle and lower class, a strange thing happens.  They begin to have more disposable income.  After they have saved a certain amount, they no longer need to save.  At that point, they start to work on improving the quality of their life.  They buy new TVs, new cars, new computers, new gadgets.  They buy better food, they start going out and getting haircuts and going to spas.  And think, this isn't just a few dozen people, like with the rich, this is a few million people.  So all of a sudden there is a need for more TVs, more cars, more computers, more gadgets, more hair stylists, more spa personnel.  And the companies that provide these see a demand.  And with that demand, they open new plants to make them, train new people, build them.  Jobs are created.  More jobs are created, and more people have disposable income.  It creates even more demand.  And the whole thing snowballs until you reach a saturation point where there are enough jobs for everyone that wants to work.

When you cut taxes to the rich, the only people who benefit are the rich.  There is no "trickle down" as rich capitalists like to tell you.  It never occurs.  When you cut taxes below the rich, it begins to increase production and jobs all around.  It stimulates the economy in a way that could never be accomplished by giving breaks to the rich.

Of course, the rich would try and convince you that cutting taxes to the middle class means that the government would starve.  There would be no money to pay for roads or schools, or anything else important.  But what they fail to mention is that is because they are NOT paying anything significant.  If they were FORCED to pay their fair share, the government would have a huge surplus, and be more then able to handle the lower portion of taxes from the lower income brackets.  And why do they fight against it so badly?  Because if the rich are taxed too much, they might not be able to afford that second solid gold Hummer.

Featured Artwork


Reflection of Fate by Zeronis
Inscription by Zeronis Blood Elf Deathknight by Zeronis
Three Heroes by Zeronis Diablo Class Death Knight by Zeronis Nariko Goddess of War by Zeronis


Poser Content Creators

:thumb59678787: Adiene Stamp by Nephanor Wenchy Stamp by Sabreyn Vex Stamp by Sabreyn Sabby Makes Me Happy... by vexiphne

Disclaimer

The deviations posted on here are the property of Dragon Rift Studios. Use in any work, modification, or reproduction without permission is prohibited. They are not to be used as stock in any way shape or form. If it is found that they have been used without permission, you hereby give Dragon Rift Studios permission to find you and let loose a pack of rabid weasels in your underwear.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconshiyar:
Shiyar Featured By Owner Aug 23, 2012
You've nailed every point I have ever tried to make people understand. Maybe even said it better then I would have. Mind if I share it?
Reply
:iconnephanor:
Nephanor Featured By Owner Aug 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Go for it.
Reply
:iconquamp:
quamp Featured By Owner Jul 25, 2012
:iconclappingplz:
Actually, there was a movement a few years ago in the USA to get a constitutional amendment limiting the amount a candidate can spend in an election. They had an online petition that had somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 million signatures on it.
When presented to congress, every member said "this is political suicide. I'm not doing it." :(
Reply
:iconquamp:
quamp Featured By Owner Jul 25, 2012
Another thing: slander ads were banned locally once. The law was immediately challenged as a violation of free speech, and struck down.
Reply
Add a Comment: