Alot of the controversies in the media seems to stem from from the fact that different people think differently about what is society’s responsibility to it’s citizens. Right to a fetus’ life, or the right of women to have abortions? Yes or no to gay rights? Death penalty, or not? How far should freedom of speech go? How much privacy ought we have? And so on. Feel free to add any other topic to this. Under what principles would your society functions. How would those principles affect the issues I have mentioned. In essence, what does the government owe the people? What do the people owe the government? I’m very interested in what your society would do, and could your principles stand up to critisism? You don’t need a seven page essay, I’m just looking for what guidelines you would impliment, why and how it would affect many of today’s issues.
Hoping that this will lead to a congenial and insightful thread,
I think there’s a slight confusion here. Society is a collection of individuals tied by shared relationships and institutions. The morality of that society is usually, though not always, the morality of the majority of its members, and so you can’t really “decide” what morality a society has.
On the other hand, if you’re asking what kind of state / government people would like to see, and what morality it should reflect, that’s a much easier question. I would choose a state that is libertarian on personal morality – abortion, homosexuality and the like (and offers no incentives or disincentives, e.g. no public funding for abortion) – and as far as possible is kept strictly separate from any religious or moral majority’s desires. It would also include a strong welfarist element – public education, healthcare (although perhaps limited in scope) and some benefits (again, limited in scope to act as a safety net) – funded through taxation.
There would be limitations on foreign aid and overseas military commitments – for reasons of saving money, rather than because I don’t think they’re important – and an approach to crime that includes highly restricted gun ownership, an emphasis on re-education and prevention (e.g. with school classes on a kind of “social morality”), no death penalty, very severe sentencing (life means life) and a legalisation of, and hefty taxation of, certain soft drugs.
There may well be inconsistencies in my beliefs, and they’re obviously influenced by my European upbringing, but this is still the kind of state I would prefer.
One thing that MY society would do is end inheritance altogether.
The rich claim they are “entitled” to more of the pleasures of life because they work hard or smart. Then turn around and say their children and grandchildren get the pleasures for just being lucky enough to be born into a rich family.
Fine, then I’d say we should all be rich for being lucky enough to be born into a rich country. And the poor kids are just the same as the rich in that regard, and deserve a head start, too.
We once had a high inheritance tax, but the rich kid Jack Kennedy removed most of it.
Britain has a high inheritance tax for everyone but royalty, and their years are numbered, probably in decades, but few of those.
You seem to have the wrong thread. We just concluded a rather lengthy and spirited thread on inheritance taxes. Noone had a change of heart, but the discussion was good. (I am one of several that strongly disagree with your position.)
And with that handle you definitely need to post your thoughts in the “lottery” thread.
Interesting notion. What would be your reason for having such a rule? Personally, I think if you have money, it should be you who decides what happens with it. If you want to leave it to your kids, fine. If you want to give it to charity, fine. If want it used to make a platinum plated gold statue of you, fine. Whatever you want. If the government can take your money, then why shouldn’t it be able to liquidate your assets? Why give a precious heirloom to your children when it can fetch money for the government? BTW, thanks for actually answering my post.
My society would have a very limited government. There would be minor taxation, and taxes would go towards funding the judicial system, police force, army, public education and public healthcare. There would be bracketed income tax, though MORE bracketed than it is in the US (i.e Bill Gates would no longer be in the same tax bracket at my dad.)
All social services would either be private charities or run locally by the state or county (assuming this is the US I get to reinvent.)
Retirement funds like social security would be managed by private investors and the president of the SSA would be responsible to them for due dilligence.
Marijuana and other not-very-harmful drugs would be legal and heavily taxed.
I would support the use of capital punishment only in extreme, abominable circumstances (serial killers, war criminals.)
People would have the absolute right of free speach (except slander, of course) and religion. Religious morals or dogma will have no place in government or the institutions thereof.
Homosexual marriaged would be allowed.
Abortion would be allowed
The right to bear arms will be upheld and an instantaneous background check to insure that the buyer is not a felon or a nutjob will be required for all purchases.