In a different discussion the subject of making the wold a better place was brought up. Of course the context of a comment like this shows the views of the person saying it when considering the things to improve or make better. Even if they don't focus on the thing to address, if the topic is about a politician, about wars, about global warming, or about religion then it can only be assumed that the thing to "make the world a better place" has to do with either fixing the trouble in that topic, or that a politician is the answer making changes to fix the world.

So without any other context to draw from in this OP, I would like to open the discussion on suggestions and methods that people, organizations and governments can do to make the world a better place.

However, one thing to add is some caution. Both socialist causes and socialist governments turn sour because of hypocrisy and corruption even though they say they are acting for the benefit of mankind or for that society.

Therefore in any suggestion or method be ready for it to be challenged. Because if others get behind this method and force it on the rest of society or the rest of the world through some sort of laws and legislation passed, there has to be a measure of caution. Otherwise "shared resources" are only handed to the leaders in power instead of actually shared in the dream of communism. Or if not that then some other issue based on the method of bettering the world.

Be ready and be open for challenges to suggestions. Good laws are needed in society to function well, and challenging the suggestions hopefully will show issues and loopholes to consider before agreeing or implementing something harmful and disastrous.

What are your suggestions?

It is obvious: If you want a better world, decrease the number of people. Stop procreating!

/cont

Unfortunately for Russia, once they gave up trying to knock the US out of the oil export business, the frackers were a major force.
Now they find that they can't get prices back up to where they want them to be.

Since 2014, per capita GDP has fallen by 30%. Household disposable income has fallen every year. Russia is hurting to the extent that Putin is forced to increase suppression of dissent.

Even while Obama was putting obstacles in its way, the US frackers were succeeding. Now that Trump has removed those obstacles, the US is becoming the major fossil fuel exporter. And, it seems, any thoughts of getting oil back up to $100 is forlorn and therefore hopes of Russian economic recovery is likewise.

Now the single best thing that could happen to Russia is that oil suddenly jumped to $100 for the long term. But that could only happen if the US stopped exporting and started importing oil again.

Sooooo, and I hope I haven't lost you here with too much logic, if Trump truly was Putin's puppet, his priority would have been, at the very least, to maintain Obama's brakes on the industry. Yet he did the opposite.

Why? Well I'll leave you to ponder that one.

oops wrong thread

Dear NNS,

I certainly don't have all the answers to the
big questions in life. All I feel I can do is
work on myself and hope that it will help to
make a difference.

1) Try to make a difference in
myself - for the better.
Make it a habit to respect everyone and be
kind and civil to others.

2) Recognise the humanity of other people and
respect their dignity.

3) Respect our differences.

4) Smile at people - instead of frowning. The smile you give is the smile you get back. Try to be helpful - when you see
someone who's struggling - try to help - like giving them
a seat on the train/bus/tram or helping them carry their
groceries. Little things do make a difference.

5) Focus on the positive, not the negative.

6) Give away your unwanted stuff so someone who actually
needs them can have them at no charge.

7) Drive carefully and be civil on the road.

8) Look for worthy causes to support.

9) Volunteer - if you're able.

10) Get to know your neighbours.

11) Finally, operate from a place of love.

ok try this threads requested answers
1 every company in the world to pay tax on every cent it earns, to the country it was earned in
Flat rate tax for every one, no loopholes no tax breaks, unless it is for true donations to charities
Set aid budget for every country , managed to be theft proof and of real value to those in need
Confront and act on world population growth, make laws [for every one] if needed
Invent one God, based on multiple lives [reincarnation] promising sins against a race in this life say you must be born into that race in your next life
How do you invent a God [we have had plenty of practice] Say land a spaceship, have its passengers tell us about their God, the one true God
Hollywood has the script writers and makeup artists ready to go

Want a better World , start educating people & get rid of video games.

To ttbn.

Give me a little bit more time to collect my answer. But I'll try to pose at least a few suggestions as well. Thanks for asking. :)

A few things to help the world be a better place.

•The access and ability to drink clean water. Across the world there are areas where poverty and starving people roam and they have no access to water. However there are many different modern technologies today that can result in a sustainable source of water that works in different environments. (Agricultural use instead of personal use, is a different beast to confront in desert areas).

•No more putting people on pedestals as if they have no flaws. Many of the western countries implemented a system of checks and balances so that corruption and cruelty in their leaders is lessened. If this same lesson can be applied to other sectors of society outside of the government, then we won't be surprised when leaders in a good cause, a good charity, or leaders in any religion have signs of one corruption or another. In fact we might be able to handle it better instead of waiting till it get so bad it can't be ignored. With regards to Christianity and the Catholic Church, let priests marry, because regardless of devotion or the goodness of religious vows, sex is a hard urge to suppress. Don't place that burden on them. Same lesson goes to donating your money in large sums to a charity and assume it won't be a temptation for the one receiving it. Know that no one is perfect and actively don't put them in a situation to entice them.

•Seek God in whatever you do. People will be surprised where you find Him even if they don't see Him everywhere they seek Him. This also helps on a personal level facing each of our common faults. Then after that, do anything you can as an extension of doing it for God. This hopefully will increase work ethic and charity. In other words, work as if you work for God, and act when life gives you an opportunity to give to those in need.

(continued)

(Continued)

•Actively seek out and uproot drug cartels. Give the police and the authorities the tools and the authority to do this. As for alcohol, know that many crimes and accidents are influenced by alcohol. Know this and treat it accordingly. Don't drink to get drunk, and fight that culture that encourages this.

•The only thing internationally to try and force other nations to do is to hold honesty and fairness in the courts systems. If that can be done they can do a much better job of sorting their own issues, then the international community can by holding UN declarations or making new UN laws to try and force other nations to. The exception to this rule is military action, and when other nations show a danger to your own or to other nations.

•Last thing. Think before you act, and learn from your mistakes. Too much momentum is being done by acting on people's emotions and trying to manipulate them to one cause or another (or for their vote by doing the same thing). Cut that momentum by not rushing into any action, except the ones that actually are emergencies.

To Individual.
That sounds like a solid point. Any specific suggestions on educating people? (Is the education replacing video games, or is removing video games just a means of removing a distraction people get glued to?)

To Yuyutsu.
I take it you mean to stop procreating as a means of a better management of the world's resources? I don't think that will have as much of an effect as people want it to have. There is still the greed and desire for more that is part of human nature. Having less of a population won't mean the resources will be managed better or that the poorer people will have a better share of the resources. Instead I'd argue that by lessening the population of parents there will be less of a drive to make the world better for the next generation. Thus the problems of the younger generations will be more likely ignored by the problems of older generations that hold the power to make d visions or to vote.

To Foxy.
I like those approaches. Often it comes down to our own actions more then forcing others to do what we want. For the first three suggestions here is my challenge. How? In other words how do you do this to those who agitate you and disagree with you. What can be done so that you can show love to your enemies instead of trying to beat them at their own games. The issue of confrontation is the hardship to overcome in your suggestions. It's often a struggle to stand by standards of being good without a model or a set of examples to strive after.

To Belly.
Your suggestion is to tax everyone and at the same time lie and manipulate them all with a new made up religion? Take a hard look at Scientology, because that is my example for saying this is a bad approach. (The reasons against both suggestions are longer to explain, but the example of Scientology should be enough to point out most of the error).

Dear NNS,

You wrote;

"Both socialist causes and socialist governments turn sour because of hypocrisy and corruption even though they say they are acting for the benefit of mankind or for that society."

We have a universal health care system in this country, you do not in yours. It is a socialist system and one we are very proud of. Nearly all of the Western world have one in place. A proper universal health care system in your country would make an immeasurable difference to ordinary Americans where the highest cause of bankruptcy is medical expenses.

As a Reddit user these are the type of stories I am seeing frequently;
http://www.reddit.com/r/confession/comments/bcctu4/i_25m_had_sex_for_money_with_people_males_and/

Perhaps a little change in mindset might be useful.

Dear NNS,

You asked me how I would make the first 3 points
work in my list of methods for a better world.

It does not take long to discover that we all have
a streak of prejudice within us which at times,
seems a compulsion. While we all like to think
of ourselves as tolerant persons, even
passionate in our belief that we are equal. It is
apparent that we all have a continuing obligation to
work on our attitudes.

Every day we hear of grievances in connection with
which ethnic background, or some similarly irrelevant
difference, is blamed. It is, of course, the height of
arrogance to believe that we are superior to others, yet
this attitude is hard to eradicate.

Sometimes our suspicious approach to those who seem
different appears to be heightened by media presentations
that distort and aggravate incidents. At times this
almost appears malicious.

I recently heard of an infuriated theatre attendant who
became irritable by a migrant who was unsure where to
line up.

"Why don't you learn how we do things here?"
she shouted in exasperation at the bewildered victim.

Such absence of courtesy and understanding is inexcusable
and should prick the conscience of all of us.
Incidents such as this one can provoke defiance, and
even a desire for retaliation.

Our aim should always be to behave with respect towards
others, and to encourage this in all people.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

Firstly, your response was better than mine: "Seek God in whatever you do."!
If everyone did this then we would no longer have a need for any specific suggestions on how to improve the world, including mine.

Secondly, apologies for not yet responding to your posts in http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=20224&page=6
I should get there eventually, but you deserve thorough answers and I am short of time these days. This is why I also posted just a one-liner on this thread, without due explanations.

«I take it you mean to stop procreating as a means of a better management of the world's resources?»

No, resources were not on my mind. I meant to stop procreating as a means to reduce human population to about 1% of what it currently is.

The more people there are on earth, the more they bump into each other and step on each other's toes, so the more controls, regimentation and complexity are needed. My aim is to reduce these so we can live more simply in nature, avoiding the emotional and mental distractions of modern life that take our attention away from God. True, life might not be easy on the physical level, especially for our generations that are already so spoiled, but this will not be a problem for new generations who never knew otherwise.

«Instead I'd argue that by lessening the population of parents there will be less of a drive to make the world better for the next generation.»

Of course: ANY measure that makes the world better will reduce the drive to make the world better (and vice-versa, so would you suggest making the world worse in order to increase the drive to make it better?).

«Thus the problems of the younger generations will be more likely ignored by the problems of older generations that hold the power to make d visions or to vote.»

I am not talking about minor adjustments that would still keep civilisation as we know it going. This is a long-term approach, by then existing older generations will be in their graves and hold no power.

To SteeleRedux.
I wish for a better healthcare in the US. However, I am aware of the cost, and several concerning corrupting features of the healthcare system in the US. This isn't something that is going to be an easy fix by just turning to a socialist healthcare system and have the government pay for everything. (There's a concern with that approach as well with some of the government paid healthcare for soldiers and veterans being critized as sub-par. So a trust issue with government healthcare exists for the US as well). The issue with just having the government pay for healthcare is that the free care isn't managed well. It's only gotten more expensive before Obamacare because of insurance influence ready to pay the bill and issues with healthcare and insurance interactions. Having it universal without addressing the costs will only have it fail and leave those depending on it without much option to turn to.

With this in mind (as much as it sucks to not have good health insurance or universal healthcare) universal healthcare might not be an option worldwide. It just might not be do-able and ready to fail in the parts of the world that have several obsticals with the cost or with other healthcare issues.

When I say to not force anything on other nations except a fair and honest judicial system. I say this because I think the UN and other international organizations make a big fuss about several issues and are corrosive on a country finding answers that actually work and on a country's autonomy and sovereignty to rule itself. Keep the standard practical and reachable. (Maybe fair and honest court systems are not reachable in some countries. If that's the case, what hope if there for universal healthcare in those places?). With a fair court that treats everyone the same, and honest without bribery or other issues then that's a good start for that country to settle it's own issues and making headway in the process.

To SteelRedux.
Sorry man, I misplaced where I made the comment about socialist governments turning sour. I thought it was in one of my bullet points instead of the OP. (If that explains any of my response).

My point regarding socialist governments is that in most examples historically and currently (possibly all examples) of a socialist government coming into action the result is the country turning impoverished, bankrupt, corrupt, and/or oppressive. However, the promises that lead to those results were the socialist dreams that hook people and drive them because they want a better life.

It was a cautionary remark regarding suggestions to make the world better, and implementing them. Here's the next paragraph in the OP to give done more context.

"Therefore in any suggestion or method be ready for it to be challenged. Because if others get behind this method and force it on the rest of society or the rest of the world through some sort of laws and legislation passed, there has to be a measure of caution. Otherwise "shared resources" are only handed to the leaders in power instead of actually shared in the dream of communism. Or if not that then some other issue based on the method of bettering the world."

Dear NNS,

Well as you can see I decided to preemptively challenge your notion about socialism and did so with a specific example which your retort seemed to be summed up with “Having it universal without addressing the costs will only have it fail and leave those depending on it without much option to turn to.” Yet it is patently the lack of universal health care combined with rapacious insurers which has driven such horrendous costs to the consumer in your country.

The ills you speak of are the fruits of leaving your health care to corporations rather than the reasons not to mimic what the rest of the Western world has in place for their citizens.

You also wrote;

“With this in mind (as much as it sucks to not have good health insurance or universal healthcare) universal healthcare might not be an option worldwide. It just might not be do-able and ready to fail in the parts of the world that have several obsticals with the cost or with other healthcare issues.”

Well let's look at the history of infant mortality in China. A little history first;

“When the Communist Party took over in 1949, health care was nationalized, a national "patriotic health campaign" attempted to address basic health and hygiene education, and basic primary care was dispatched to rural areas through barefoot doctors and other state-sponsored programs. Urban health care was also streamlined. However, beginning with economic reforms in XXXX, health standards in China began to diverge significantly between urban and rural areas, and also between coastal and interior provinces. Much of the health sector became privatized. As state-owned enterprises shut down and the vast majority of urban residents were no longer employed by the state, they also lost much of the social security and health benefits.”
Wikipedia

Now I have blanked out the date with XXXX. Let's see if you can guess when it was given that infant mortality rates plummeted after the system was nationalised.

Here is a graph which might give you a clue;
http://knoema.com/atlas/China/Infant-mortality-rate

Continued

Continued

You will see that when privatisation began the fall in infant mortality ceased and actually went up. Just think of how many lives the area under that graph represents. Literally 10s of millions of infants lost to privatisation. Now the Chinese government has made some effort to correct the impacts of those reforms but only through easier access to insurance and tiered payments. It's child mortality rate is well above a country like Cuba.

Actually Cuba is interesting, despite a continued brutal blockade inflicted by the US and being a far poorer nation its infant mortality rate has been better than the US since the turn of the century.

http://knoema.com/atlas/Cuba/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Infant-mortality-rate?compareTo=US,CU

Simple, effective and free healthcare making extraordinary difference to peoples lives. My question to you is should the people of Cuba as they move from a blockaded nation continue with a socialised healthcare system or let the corporations take it over?

To ArmChair Critic.

I checked around for China's infant mortality rate for other internet sources to confirm your article and also look at the US and Australia's rates.

Unfortunately I'm discovering that the numbers don't match between sites and it's difficult to find numbers for the latest years instead of an older website still up recording stats five years old or older. The other aspect to look at is two similar terms. Infant mortality rate and, mortality rate under 5 years old.

Regarding China, here's what I found from two sources. According to http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-01/21/c_137762506.htm
In 2018 the infant mortality rate in 2018 was 6.1 per 1000. A drop from 6.8 in 2017. However the site you posted was an infant morality rate of 8 for 2017. (Perhaps they accidentally reported on the morality rate under 5 years old. That was 8.4 according to the article I found. The data integrity gets worse comparing to other sites as well. According to http://www.geoba.se/population.php?pc=world&page=2&type=019&st=rank&asde=&year=2018
in 2018 China's infant mortality was 13.27. Compare that to both the US in the same statical chart as averaging 5.52, and Australia as 4.21.

(Continued)

(Continued)

One issue here is where is the data coming from to confirm the results from conflicting sites. (In a different site the average in 2018 for the US was less then 5.52, and I assume the same is true for Australian states by a site that is home based in Australia instead of a world wide study with more likely results to error). A second issue is that the Chinese infant morality rate while going down dramatically over the years is still higher then the rates reported in the US and Australia.

Honestly, I want universal health care to work. And if it can that's great for the country making it work. But I also see countries in modern day as well as in the past jump to a communist style government and then sink dramatically in a short amount of time. Venezuela is the modern example to have suspensions on socialist style countries, and to really weigh out the issues before jumping in.

As for your question on Cuba. I don't know what they should do. I don't trust insurance, but it's better then nothing. Cuba will have to consider if a socialist healthcare will be better or if they won't be able to sustain it. That's going to have to be their judgement call.

......apologies in my last posts. There were meant for SteelRedux not ArmChair Critic.

To Yuyutsu.

Adding the other discussion, don't worry about it. Much of what I said were based on my ongoing observations and criticisms. If you want to correct what I said if it was wrong (if you have time), you can. But no one likes to hear criticism on themselves, and I probably shouldn't have said it the way I did. Either way it's up to you and there's no obligation on your end.

As for this topic, I don't think suggestions should be a competitive thing for whose suggestions are better. The world is a big place and has many issues. Any suggestion to make it better, even if it is just our personal behavior only as Foxy posted, that is something that is worth mentioning and considering.

That said I don't agree with your idea to stop procreating and reduce the population size to 1% of what it is now. If our spirituality can only survive in the best of conditions then it is a very weak spirituality. Instead, it seems at least a few religions came to add assistance to the poor, the burdened, suppressed, and oppressed populations of the world throughout history. It is under such conditions that though the worst parts of mankind can be found harming each other, as well as some of the most rich examples of people doing just the opposite and being better because they examine their beliefs and their attitudes more closely. Bringing them to look to God because of it, or at least bringing them to reject their older attitudes in favor for a better outlook.

I disagree with the suggestion for other reasons as well, but on the merits that you've posed that this will help, I don't think it will be worth it.

To Foxy.

You're definitely highlighting part of the issue in observations where people don't act on prejudices or annoyances while still thinking of ourselves as good and tolerant people. So with this weakness in mind, I would say there are things a person can do to help refuse or eliminate the trend of saying one thing, but doing the opposite.

Here are the clues I would look at. What does the bible say about such matters? There are specific actions that the bible looks at to not do. Even to not call another person an idiot or another demeaning term. By looking at both honing in on specific traits that are good to keep in practice, as well as keeping in mind the behaviors to avoid; then we can actually do what we say we stand for, instead of saying we are for tolerance but not living up to it when our patience is tested.

If not the standards in the bible, then having something for specific standards none the less is one suggestion to avoid falling into the traps of our own anger and other frustrations.

One other suggestion is a mentoring method. Basically, having an example to look to and to strive after, and to guide a person away from making dumb mistakes at a moment's notice. The same method would also encourage more mentors taking up a less experienced person in the field they are in.

For example in the US, becoming an electrician is part education and taking classes, as well as a second part of following an experienced electrician for a period of time to have the example of applying what they've learned and avoiding life threatening issues. I think the mentoring aspect of life should be applied in many other areas of life.

If you have other suggestions on this issue, or challenges on the points I suggested let me know. That's the whole point of this discussion.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

«If our spirituality can only survive in the best of conditions then it is a very weak spirituality.»

Isn't this a daredevil attitude?
What if our spirituality is indeed weak, as it often is?

You wrote that this thread is not a competition, and I agree, but is spirituality a competition, a show-off on whose faith will be preserved and not extinguished under the harshest conditions? I think not! I think we should pray for the best of conditions and be thankful for the grace of having our prayers answered. There is no sense in being ashamed for riding first-class and having a gentle, peaceful journey.

See also Luke 4:9-12

«Instead, it seems at least a few religions came to add assistance to the poor, the burdened, suppressed, and oppressed populations of the world throughout history»

Of course. If we do find ourselves in this unfortunate, chaotic and so imbalanced world then we ought to help others. Material help is very good, spiritual help is even better, so I agree with everything except the word "Instead".

Dear NNS,

With respect mate, getting picky about exact numbers does not take away from the central point I made, that the privatisation of the Chinese health system dramatically slowed the rate of decline in infant mortality and for a while even caused higher per capita death figures.

And the fact that he US is probably the wealthiest country in the world compared to Cuba who has been under severe blockade for decade after decade yet is able to produce a lower infant mortality rate than the US speaks directly to the approach both have taken.

For you to say; “Cuba will have to consider if a socialist healthcare will be better or if they won't be able to sustain it.” completely misses the point that they have been able to sustain it, especially in the face of brutal blockading.

Universal health cover is one of the great leaps forward in the betterment of the lives of so many and a substantial contributor to “making the world a better place”. Yet you remain equivocal, why is that? Is your ideology that pervasive that you are choosing to ignore this self evident truth of its impact?

Been pondering this question:

I've got a few ideas but I'm only going to give you one at the moment.
It's a good one though.

- Number 1 -

Bring truth back to media.
How am I going to do it?
I want to give journalists a kind of a truth-rating or feedback rating.

That when they lie or mislead in their articles (which are recorded in an archive) they will be given a score that reflects their ability to inform the public with facts, not narrative and conjecture.

I'll bring back truth, ethics and arguments that hold merit;
To a lazy media gone rogue;
- Who forgotten their first job is to report facts.

Because we can't fix anything in an environment that values narrative and conjecture over facts.

- We must fix this -

To SteeleRedux.

I checked the numbers myself because the details matter. Too often one hyped up opinion claimed fact turns up to be over fed hype and just fake news. It's a good idea on issues that have popular support or popular distaste to double check the facts. I would have thought you've have liked to hear that some report China's infant mortality rate as better then your report did. However the offset from around 6 per 1000 to 13 per 1000 is a big enough jump to question the data based on conflicting accounts.

Your point on socialism is only focused on universal healthcare. However my point on socialism is that when it fails it fails in a big disastrous way. Look again at Venezuela's history of mismanaging it's resources while a socialist ideological dictator greatly harmed the only real resource that the country had to make it rich enough to support all of the socialist endeavors. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/16/how-venezuela-struck-it-poor-oil-energy-chavez/

My point it in the OP on socialism was to think carefully on any suggestion before trying to implement it. There can be disastrous results. As for universal healthcare. That is one cause in socialist ideologies. But it has success occurring in as a stand alone measure in democratic countries, not just socialist countries. As for why I am on the fence on the matter of universal healthcare? Because it's expensive. It would need to be planned carefully before trying it out. There is no other reason needed.

Regarding Cuba. Here's what I found on why certain countries have been sanctioned by the US. If it's the US's wealth though and they say to not be part of a country's economy how is that different then a single person or a small group deciding to boycott a business? Just as it's up to Cuba on how they will do their own healthcare (as well as the rest of their economy), it's up to the US on how it decides to manage it's own affairs as well.

https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0410/countries-sanctioned-by-the-u.s.---and-why.aspx

(Continued)

(Continued)

If your suggestion is for universal healthcare, great. My challenge to that suggestion is on how to manage healthcare's skyrocketing costs, either before or after getting to a universal healthcare system. So that it can be stable enough to not tank the economy that is holding it up.

That challenge to universal healthcare doesn't have to be answered by you SteelRedux. But it should be there for any country that is considering universal healthcare.

To Armchair Critic.

I like that idea a lot. It would require a massive whistle blower movement though that can get caught up in finger pointing on mudding up the reliability of news agencies and whistleblowers as well. But even with that, reliable news is worth the fight.

Armchair critic good morning, your recent post amused me
See we both would want the same, but between us wipe out all media
You my ABC and the truthful media me the right wing ranter insulting truth Fox
In the middle truth can be found, we have always, from the very first newspaper in old Sydney, had paper owners reflection their own views, Rupert may have go his ideas there
A better world will not be gained by killing our enemies
Just maybe a universal tax rate, everyone pays, no tax breaks/refuges and a levee on every dollar to truly wipe out world hunger housing shortages and police birth control in every race creed faith will be a start

Hey Not_Now.Soon,

"It would require a massive whistle blower movement..."

I haven't really had time to think about ironing out the kinks and foolproofing it.
It's like a big bunch of ideas bouncing around the back of my head.
The idea will slowly start taking shape if I were to think on all the finer details.

I wasn't thinking so much about the public becoming a gang of dobbers;

I'm thinking more along the lines of creating a media environment where journalists and reporters are FORCED to self censor all their own non-factual and misleading bs, just like they expect from us these days.

Think of eBay and it's feedback rating as an example.
You're not going to buy an item from a seller that has poor feedback, - the item might arrive late;
- damaged due to poor packing;
- not as described (if it turns up at all);

eBay created a rating system and then sellers themselves have to make sure they do what's necessary to keep a good rating.

Thinking about that same idea in the context of news.

Maybe an idea is to list some categories for some context.

Is the article factually correct?

We have like 50 news organisations all report the same story.
How crazy is that?
Why not compile and verify all the facts relating to a particular issue or story and then build the REAL article from those verified facts?

Is it biased?

Does it give an accurate representation of the broader view of the issue?

[Cont.]
Does it allow uncensored comments?

Some comments sections have voting individual comments up and down.
Maybe you could have 2 comment sections with tabs.
One would be normal comments whilst the other could be facts to be verified / refuted as the article 'grows' based on all the facts.

And reporters will get a rating, based on the quality of their reporting.
If you have a low rating you won't be sought after or taken seriously so it's in a reporters own interests to ensure they write factual news that is not biased or misrepresented.

I'm thinking about maybe like an article that changes and grows;
- As more facts are verified -

Cascading Facts... or Something... I dunno.

Sometimes news stories can be 100% factual but still be completely misleading in describing the bigger picture of what's really going on.

Got to think of all the reasons and ways news can be manipulated and weaponised in to foolproof a system that works for us not against us.

Hey Belly

"In the middle truth can be found"

Sadly, in the middle can be found little but total bs these days...
But you can sometimes find the truth;
- If you're willing to wade deep enough through all that crap

"A better world will not be gained by killing our enemies"

Pro's and Con's to everything;
- I'm sure I could find a way to argue that it could... if I tried; But would my argument be 'ethical' and 'hold merit'? I don't know.

"Just maybe a universal tax rate, everyone pays, no tax breaks/refuges and a levee on every dollar to truly wipe out world hunger housing shortages and police birth control in every race creed faith will be a start"
- A lot of issues there and a lot of pro's and cons to consider...
In general, money is only one part of the equation;
Another part is developing a foolproof plan to MAKE IT HAPPEN.

AC we differ, thankfully, it remains my view you dislike, even try to prove it does not exist, fear the center
I understand it is how you must think, or it undermines your right of reality views

I don't know about methods for a better World but a better Australia is possible if fewer people voted Labor !

Yes - lets keep what we've currently got.
Revenge, ambition, poor decisions -
losing half of voters hope and trust.
Lets all pine for the days when society reflected
and the government served the interests of
middle aged white men.

indy are you Aware those who do vote for the incoming Labor government do not agree with you?
Does that matter? or are you ok with claiming what others think doesn't matter

online voting by the public to decide important issues instead of the politicians making all the decisions

Of course it would need a lot of security. Let the computers count the votes,
Every person could be given a code number for their computer and all the
numbers cross checked to make sure there are no two identical numbers

I think the fact that big businesses, and companies and banks operate globally
is the problem.
They have no real loyalty to any country or people when it comes to employing
people and paying taxes.

A Greek politician said,
" that the money is running the show now
and when the money is in charge
there is no democracy"

To Foxy.

Think about what you said earlier and think on the suggestions you made for making the world better.

From your last post.

<<Lets all pine for the days when society reflected and the government served the interests of middle aged white men.>>

From the first three points of your suggestion.

<<1) Try to make a difference in myself - for the better. Make it a habit to respect everyone and be kind and civil to others. 2) Recognize the humanity of other people and respect their dignity. 3) Respect our differences.>>

I grew up where it was taught in schools by some teachers that men are the evil of the world, and the same for being white. Worse if your a Christian. Makes you kind of bitter to hear this stuff in high-school and college, as well as ongoing through out life the attitude that if your a white man then your opinion doesn't matter, and expecially don't count.

Just a heads up to try and turn from that attitude. Sexism and racism is alive and well being played against people to cause even more bitterness which could be a cause for more counter- sexism and racism in response. Call this a friendly "turn from your sins" kind of thing. Not trying to shame you. But be aware of it. That's the first step to living up to the suggestions you made earlier.

To CHERFUL.

I wish I had the same trust and hope in the system as you have. I don't know if more voting would help anything anymore in a climate of trying to sway the crowds instead of hear them. But regardless it should be better then politicians getting in and then ignoring who they represent.

Either way thanks for contributing the idea and highlighting the problem of population politics being ignored by the politicians. I don't have a suggestion for that, so I'd be willing to try anything else to make it better.

Hey Not_Now.Soon,

As part of my earlier media idea:

What I want to see added to my 'journalist rating system' which ensures reporters and journalists maintain a standard of ethics, factual, non-bias, without omission of facts etc.

Is some kind of online media platform:

For now, I'll call it 'Showdown'.
- Like Wild West duels -

An online platform which provides a place where people can challenge other people and their points of view to a 'Showdown' based on the arguments presented by their opposing points of view.

You could have all kinds of people on all kinds of topics challenge other peoples ideas and views.

- Truth, ethics and arguments that hold merit. -

You could have Progressives having showdowns with Conservatives

Globalists with Nationalists

People who support censorship against those who support free speech.

Almost every topic and issue imaginable could be represented, and the bigger picture view of all these issues could be examined in detail.

My other idea is 'Socialist Base level' jobs system to provide an opportunity to those that lose under capitalism.

Under capitalism (and merit) 2 people go for the one job.
'Merit' chooses the best candidate suitable for the job.
And the remaining job applicant gets nothing.
The losers of capitalism, are those who wish to help themselves, but have no opportunity to do so,
No opportunity to take part in the local community and economy.

Double dole for full time work doing things to help the government save money or build a better nation.
You pay people $250 a week on Newstart to do nothing.
Why not pay them $250 more and gain a full time worker?

My system creates 'the job you have when you don't have a job' and makes use of the 5% unemployment that capitalism needs to prevent wage growth, and gives people doing it tough the means to get back on top, or at the least - stay afloat during tough times.

I'll remove the need for many government programs (and $ spent) by previnting people from falling down in their lives in the first place.

[Cont.]
Just as an extra note:

The losers of capitalism, those who 'didn't get the job';
- Did so because they were lacking is some kind of skill that the successful applicant had.
With that in mind the 'Socialist Base Level Employment' idea needs to include a provision to help people increase their skills.

You do this with 'Training credits' similar to working credits;
but 'training credits' are used to spend on updating or increasing your work skills.

I want to reduce the cost of training new skill by putting as much learning that can be done by app, on app;
So that all you'll need to spend your 'training credits' on is 'testing' when other people (and equipment) are required.

The bigger idea is that people who chose take take part in the employment model gain skills and money that help them get back into the capitalist (normal jobs) system with better skills to succeed in this system, and the work they do also provides more capitalist opportunities within the nation and for them to do so, whilst reducing stain on the welfare cost unto the economy, and having a system that is fairer and more economically sustainable.

By the way, this employment scheme would not be compulsory.
Its based on 'providing an opportunity to help oneself' not 'punishment for failure to meet set requirements'.

Those are my 2 'big' ideas.

Create a fair and economically sustainable system for employment;

Create a media environment that holds journalists and media accountable for what they write and keeps them honest.

If we did these 2 things, we'd change everything.

Many will think an active Labor member and past union official should not think like this
But I do and think we can get a better world out of it
Every unemployed person who is fit should work for social sercurity benefits
Including jobs for country workers in places no jobs exist
Fair wages but not overr the top, to leave reason for all to find higher paid work
Work must not compete with or take existing jobs
And may not be used as free labour for businesses
Work, clean river edges and remove unwanted trees in them
Build tourist camp/picnic sites
A backpacker trail around this country
Bike riders included and horse riders too
Assist pensioners with fire wood lawn mowing and usful things
We can and must think out side existing bounderys

Hey Belly,

"Every unemployed person who is fit should work for social security benefits
Including jobs for country workers in places no jobs exist
Fair wages but not overr the top, to leave reason for all to find higher paid work
Work must not compete with or take existing jobs
And may not be used as free labour for businesses"

I considered many of these issues when I originally thought out this plan a couple of years back.
If we can't lower the cost of wages, then the only other way we can make the country more competitive lower transport and energy costs.

The 'thing' that I settled on to provide these jobs is building national infrastructure.
Now I'm not sure if its a particularly good idea or not;
But what I thought of would be to build the Aussie section of China's Silk Road.
That being a 'straight line' HSR connecting all Australian capital cities, plus an eastern inland route.
'Bring the country to the city and the city to the country'
- I figure 400kmh trains should get you 250ks inland in 45 mins.
- Close enough to live in the country and work in the city.

Then I want to build a new national highway alongside it.
But withing this HSR and highway I also want water, electricity, gas, internet.
All built into it like a 'national conduit'.

When they're building roads and infrastucture there's so many jobs that could be done by unskilled.
Even after the jobs finished they'll spend 3 months planting trees.
There's no reason you can't turn all that land clearing and earthmoving into jobs, and mass training opportunities.

When its done I want to build on that, with big factories in every state where workers assemble relocatable homes straight off a production line, and shipped via the new road / rail network.

Build solar farms anywhere along the network, adding them into this national grid, move water from one dam to another and generate power from the water flow, etc.

Each idea, builds on the earlier one and tackles a different problem.

Armchair Critic while we have some ideas in common I can not support a scheme that takes jobs away from current paid workers
It defeats the whole purpose of the employment scheme
Current jobs must remain
However the work I see is in fact nation building without taking existing jobs
Nothing however to stop inland water conservation or returning water inland becoming part of the scheme
My point is existing business and jobs should not be chalenged by the proposed scheme

Hey Belly,
"while we have some ideas in common I can not support a scheme that takes jobs away from current paid workers"

I don't want to impact on normal jobs or the normal job market in any way;
That said, don't think the current work for the dole system doesn't impact on the normal job market already.
For example, if people are mowing and whipper snipping nursing homes etc. doesn't that take away from jobs that legitimate businesses do.
What if these nursing homes are privately owed?
Are they not gaining a benefit from this unpaid work?

Lets go back a bit.
Firstly why pay $250 week for someone to do nothing;
When you can pay $500 and get a full time worker?
Double Dole for full time work doing things to help the government save money with the hope that the work they do offsets their entire $500 cost - therefore reducing the $250 week liability to zero.

Lets say I wanted to end the 'I can't get a job excuse' and replace it with a system of 'the job you have when you don't have a job'.
How do you create half a million jobs of meaningful value-adding work that span the entire country?

The only thing I can come up with that fits that bill is a national infrastucture project spanning the entire nation that could not otherwise be done without a lower wage cost.

Therefore it doesn't take jobs away from anywhere, and also creates normal jobs too.

Lets say we plan the project and realise we need 10,000klms worth of road and track. Then you cut that into 10,000 1 klm projects, and everybody either side of the line works on their small section.

Work need not be confined to 'travelling distance of the project';
With the relocatable homes factory idea, it will start off as assembling 'dongas'.

We're going to need a lot of construction material for concrete and we can get it by forcing miners to clean up mine sites; and sending people there to work on site to get whats needed.

[Cont.]
When you build a road, it opens up country to more business opportunities.
Creating a system where you have 'the job you have when you don't have a job' safeguards human usefulness.
It ensures that humans can always create an environment for growth and new jobs.
It also gives people an opportunity to prevent themselves from going backwards or into a downward spiral when they fall on tough times.
- Which reduces the need for social programs to deal with people who've fallen on tough times.

Think of the money and emissions saved in aviation if you have HSR running from renewables like solar, wind, power generators in the train wheels feeding back into the grid?

(note I also support building thorium reactors to add low cost energy into the grid as well)

Why spend money policing welfare?
Just give those who don't want to help themselves the bare minimum and give those that do want a job and to help themselves an opportunity with double the unemployment benefit.

I may stand with the right generally, but there are a few leftist issues I support.

If we have free education and healthcare than we need free jobs to pay for it all.
That's the reality of the bigger picture.

Also it balances a 'top down' or 'trickle down' approach to the economy, with a 'bottom up' approach to injecting money into the economy where its needed.
These people will spend their their earnings straight back into the economy.

AC basicly we are close in this case
The current system is flawed, have seen little dictators ,them selve unemployed running forrest jobs then taking all the gear at completion
Managment will be the biggest problem
Workers on these schemes some, and only some times, treat the whole thing as a rest day

Hey Belly,
Obviously, I didn't look too much into the finer details;
And it's good that you started to pick them out.

All I really came up with was the basic kind of plan which takes all the main issues into account.
Matching certain problems with solutions and trying to mesh all these ideas in a way that actually works.
That said, I myself would agree there's probably a million ways this idea could fail and it would take a huge team of people to go over it, foolproof it, find the way in which it WILL work.

Some things I didn't mention.
Do you know Labor had a white paper in 1945 on full employment?
It was always pie in the sky I think.
Impossible, until now.

You see my idea relies on one thing they never had in 1945, and only got in the last 5years.

You could've come up with this idea in 1945, but you couldn't have made it work.

This idea relies on smartphones with apps.
Without them, there was no way previously to manage people randomly logging in, searching for a job shift in their area, confirming the shift and going to work (as well as matching job shifts with skills on a digital resume, and showing a video / info of the tasks required during the shift)

Only the tech we now have today can manage those tasks.

As an incentive, earnings paid directly into a payment card at end of shift.
Also training credits (similar to loyalty points) will be added to your account to spend on training for new skills.
Also, earnings from this scheme would not cause a deduction in the normal unemployment benefit.

Idea number 3.
Its one thing to get the media to be honest, but you also have to get government to do so too.
- People elected to government must keep their election promises -
That is, you can't say you WONT do a carbon tax and then do one.
(This isn't about the Carbon tax specifically, but about honesty and doing things the right way)
If you want to go against a promise you made to the citizens, you have to wait for a new election where the people first get the opportunity to vote on the changed position of your original election promise.

Armchair Critic 1945 was the year of my birth and a long time ago'
That Labor, like most left of center parties did have even communists, and at least dreamed of a far better world
And boy was it needed then
Full employment, once a promise now in reality a threat
Yes know a trade unionist should not think like that BUT truth matters
Such a thing would shut down businesses, they can not get workers, or can not pay them the inflated wages such a thing would bring
My work for the dole system would be a healthy way of both giving a job, and having a pool bosses can recruit from
Nothing is easy the middle path is the best way in my view

One of the reasons I reject Globalism over Nationalism is that it insults me that foreigners think we can't figure out whats best for us ourselves.

I think there is a path to make societies better for the people living in them.
If an idiot like me can figure things out, well what are those fools doing?

It a shame things can't just be simpler.
Why can't the people just chain the doors at the next session of Parliament, and when the pollies try to escape;

The people will get on the loudspeaker and say "Nope, you're not coming out!"

"Not until you all work together and start figuring out some real policies that benefit the nations citizens!".

I reckon it would make great reality TV, you could even make it into a movie.
I could just imagine the politicians starting to lose their composure;
And then watch their mental states deteriorate as the fear, paranoia and blame sets in.

Feel free to use any of my ideas if you can find someone who'll listen.
If its for the betterment of the country then that's all that matters.

Sadly though, the foreseeable future doesn't look too rosy.
I'm not sure any of the above matters because I think others have plans on the planet already;
We might all end up in a big war in a few years, maybe sometime after 2020.
http://youtu.be/H6LYj49SDP4

I too love a sunburnt country the aussie soldiers hat , the Aussie way of life
BUT lets us look, seen those ANZAC films, the real stuff young Aussies marching to war?
Cheeky grins larkins lovable pure Aussies?
We have great young service men and women now, very very proud of them lest we forget
Bring those ANZACS back today, if we could, see they no longer exist, we have changed
The she will be right mate Aussie has followed ww2 migrants, bought a home saved money learned there are better things to eat than the sunday roast, we can not afford it now in any case
We can not turn back, but we can make the best of it, see the whole world is America like, a nation of migrants