>>286 Remove female suffrage.

America. Not very exciting, but pass full weed legalization. I know it's probably gonna happen anyway at some point, but I can't think of anything else atm and I just wanna get this shit over with already. The reason's obvious. It's good shit. Relaxing, like alcohol.

>>288 It ruins your brain though. Lost a good friend to drugs so I'm not a fan tbh.

>>289 >It ruins your brain though I looked into that a few years back, and it seemed like the research on that was inconclusive, largely due to bias in the studies. >Lost a good friend to drugs so I'm not a fan tbh Please don't think of weed as being similar to stuff like crack and meth. They're really not the same. Weed is a much milder experience. Comparable to caffeine I'd say. Probably a bit more intense than that. And it's not super addictive like those drugs either, again kinda like how caffeine is addictive but not super addictive.

Universal Healthcare. I'm sure you can guess from that alone where I'm from. Imagine dying because you're too poor to afford a hospital trip or a doctor's appointment.

>>315 Medicare and Medicaid work pretty well. And you cannot be turned down at the ER.

>>315 >Where I'm from A place where you wait forever on lists and then die while they give preferential treatment to third world immigrants.

>>390 That's an issue with the implementation of your countries national healthcare service, not the idea of it. The problem should be fixed at its source, not worked around by just cutting out the entire system. That's like fixing a tooth ache by pulling out the aching tooth. >>316 You have a point, and I am glad for the existence of medicare and medicaid. They alleviate my 2 biggest issues with privatized healthcare. Still, I feel like a fully nationalized healthcare system is the better option. How specifically its done is not as important to me. The hospitals and doctors offices themselves could be government owned, or hired by the government, or just payed for by government issued insurance. As long as everyone has access to healthcare and doesn't have to fear it costing too much.

>>404 Absolutely. Plus those costs are inflated beyond belief. Any place that charges 20 bucks for half a slice of ham on a haiwaiin slider is a con game.

Legalize all drugs. Getting punished for a crime where the only "victim" is yourself is the kind of pseudo-morality puritan bullshit that needs to be left in the past where it belongs.

To be honest, I'd like to make illegal brainwashing our children with lgbt bullshit, stop sending those faggs to "read" histories and remove all LGBT rights from egalitarian marriage to free trans surgery.

>>286 Make all forms of fictional porn and "hate speech" legal since both things seem to be in rising demand as of late.

>>288 >America. Not very exciting How about a law stating that any politician that spends more than 15 total years in elected political office is given the death penalty upon the conclusion of the term that coincides with the 15th year?

>>405 >>404 >>316 >Medicare and Medicaid work pretty well. And you cannot be turned down at the ER. That's the reason why medical bills are so high in the first place. Hospitals cannot turn away ER patients, so that puts them into debt for all the free testing and treatment (If need be for the latter); and the reason they cannot turn away ER patients is because, if they do, then they don't get the kickbacks from the government in the form of Medicare and Medicaid. IN OTHER WORDS, the government is threatening hospitals with the incentive to support whatever medical bullshit they demand, or have even more fun struggling to pay the bills than they already are. You can read all about it right here: https://infogalactic.com/info/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act Also, little fact about Medicaid that people don't tell you: The way Medicaid is setup is that the system only cares about however much money you're making month-to-month. So, any months you make $0 in income, you are immediately eligible for Medicaid. The catch: THE SYSTEM DOESN'T CARE HOW MUCH INCOME YOU MAKE DURING THE REST OF THE YEAR. In other words, some rich-prick could have his income setup so that he receives ALL his money during the month of January, and then go onto Medicaid from February to December without having to pay a dime. And, it's all paid for with your tax dollars.

>>286 Restrict voting rights to landed married men (or widowers) with at least two children in their family unit (so no baby daddies). Landed: If you own land, you have a greater stake in your country because you cannot just pack up and leave without a major loss. Married and two children: Controversial due to the state of modern vaginakin, but necessary. Being the head of a family ensures you're invested in the future, and therefore are forced to think further ahead than your own cessation. Male: Because women should never decide anything, and feminism is the proof. That is, assuming a proper monarch and aristocrats cannot be found, otherwise I'm throwing out the republic and make a feudal state.

>>415 so then all the more reason to just switch to fully nationalized healthcare. It won't be a poor balancing act anymore because everyone's getting the exact same treatment. Any loopholes like what you said should be fixed as they're discovered of course.

>>417 That's what every single first-world country, with the sole exception of the U.S., already has. Go look at how "well" all those countries are operating. Hell, Canada is perhaps the most nationalized, and the only reason their healthcare system hasn't failed is because they're next door to the U.S.

I guess abolish lobbying. It seems kinda corrupt that rich people can just buy things into law. I feel like that's a pretty obvious issue in a democracy, and I don't think I've every heard anyone say that lobbying was a good thing.

>>461 >I don't think I've every heard anyone say that lobbying was a good thing. Because things used to be worse: https://archive.vn/pIRuP >Although the court’s denouncements of lobbying matched the public’s disdain in the 18th century, with some legislatures even banning the practice, it’s not like that period was a lost golden age. >Even as judges condemned lobbying with fire and brimstone rhetoric, the term ‘lobbying’ gained prominence in the early 1800s as railroad companies sought contracts and land from legislators. But lobbyists often did not need to ingratiate and subtly influence; they simply bribed outright. >The letters of the railroad baron Leland Stanford, who later served as governor and senator of California, are full of embarrassingly frank details about bribes, kickbacks, and monopolies. During the golden age of vote buying in New York, Tammany Hall politician George W. Plunkitt famously explained the difference between “honest and dishonest graft.” In 1877, when the Georgia legislature banned lobbying, they did so after it came to light that lawmakers had sold 35 million acres of land to a business conglomerate for a scandalously low price. All but one of the lawmakers had been given shares in the business venture. >When Georgians discovered the scale of the corrupt land sale, they literally set fire to the documents used by the government to grant the land in a giant bonfire presided over by the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate. It was like they were ceremoniously burning the possessions of a boyfriend or girlfriend who had scorned them. >It’s hard to say whether America has become more or less corrupt since then. Researchers who study the topic note that most hard data comes from subjective surveys, which are recently initiated and simply ask people about their perceptions of corruption. America does fairly well in these surveys, ranking 16th in the world as of 2015. But explicit bribery still exists: Between 1990 and 2002, 10,000 officials were convicted for corrupt acts.

Change the full work week from 40 hours to either 35 (7 hours, 5 days) or 32 (8 hours, 4 days). Technology has lowered the need for working as many hours as many people do, but instead of working less, they're working the same amount and the large corporate higher-ups are taking all the extra profit. Not a fan. Though I'm concerned with how this would affect small businesses. There might need to be adjustments to account for that.

I'm torn between banning censorship and banning copyright as an idea.

>>559 I think banning copyright is a bad idea, since it would just lead to everyone ripping each other off and no one having any originality. I do think it should be weakened, but not banned entirely.

>>601 Copyright serves some purpose, but it should be very limited. The length should be a maximum of 10 years or until the death of the creator (not owner), whichever comes first. No exceptions or extensions ever, under any circumstance. It should apply only to commercial use, non-commercial use should never be a copyright violation.

Outlaw lobbying. The idea had good intentions, but most of the time it just ends up being a way for rich people and cooperation to buy things into law. It's probably the most obvious form of corruption in America and other democracies.