This post is inspired by Stunt's Platform. Looked like fun, so I thought I'd hop on the bandwagon.
International laws/institutions.
The yardstick for military intervention would be changed. Military force would be unilaterally appropriate when in immediate danger of imminent attack, or in response to an attack. This would include state-sponsored terrorist attack. It would be legal when sanctioned by the UN in the following circumstances:
1)Immediate humanitarian crisis created by or not prevented by that state's government. Ie: mass killings, genocide, blockades leading to starvation. Litmus test will be the amount of human life in immediate danger. Natural disasters wouldn't count, but depriving aid through blockades might
2)Recent overthrow of a democratic government. If ever, in a democratic state, the executive, military or other group deprives the elected legislature of reasonable law-making power, outside intervention would be permissable. The test of the legitimacy of a government would have to take into account the honesty of elections, etc.
3)In a military conflict, UN approved or otherwise, the intentional targeting or reckless disregard for civillian casualties on a large, systematic scale. Napalming cities would count, individial soldier's excesses might not.
A terrorist attack would be defined as any attack by a non-state actor which explicitly and intentionally targets civillians.
The UN security council's voting would be revised so that no one country would have veto power, instead the permanent members' votes would have 3x the weight of non-permanent members.
The permanent seats would fall as follows: US, EU, Russia,China,Brazil,India,Japan and South Africa.
I'd like to include one country from the Middle East or North Africa, but I can't think of an appropriate one.
Each great power's region would have two other seats on the council, which would cycle through the way they are today. Their votes would each be worth 1x.
The point of this is to continue the cycling of seats among less powerful states, but to keep the basic balance of power intact through each large power's sphere of influence.
Canada's foreign policy:
In general, it would support the principles above. This is why I went into so much detail.
US policy: Border policy, security checks on immigrants and refugees, and coastal supervision would be developped in partnership with American security forces.
Trade should be expanded in any dimension that wouldn't threaten Canadian domestic policy or culture.
Military Policy: Spending should be increased, most especially in the Navy. We should have a significant Naval presence in the North, as well as be able to pull our weight in terms of coastal surveillance. Army and Airforce should specialize in fast reaction forces designed for humanitarian, peacekeeping and just a few dimensions of more aggressive, high-risk interactions. Perhaps recon, high-risk patrol, or special forces. The key is to specialize so that for those particular tasks, Canadian soldiers become in demand by our allies, and we can thus contribute our share in international affairs.
Foreign aid should be focused, perhaps on just one or two countries. Special attention should be paid to Africa, and help with their aids crisis.
Fiscal policy
A flat income tax should be introduced. This will reduce the disincentive effects that progressive taxation can impose on savings, thus leading to increased productivity. Capital gains and corporate taxes should be reduced or eliminated.
Consumption taxes would also be considered. Perhaps a blend of a consumption or a VAT tax with the income tax.
The key is simplicity in the tax structure.
Social programs:
A universal income supplement (of perhaps 4800$ a year) will be distributed to all. An additional credit (of maybe 2000$) per child in a household will be distributed. This is regardless of income, work habits, anything.
All other explicitly redistributive programs will be ended. EI, CPP, Child tax credit, welfare, almost everything.
Disability and senior's income supplement will continue, but taking into account the universal income supplement
Labour regulations designed to redistribute, ie minimum wages, overtime restrictions, etc will be eliminated. I might be swayed on the overtime, that may be more of a quality of life issue. And no one I've ever worked for followed that law anyway
Basic health care, phamaceuticals, education including 2 years of postsecondary, and child care will be universally accessible to all. Expanded health care, including things like optomentry, physiotherapy, and such will be provided for those under 18.
Might make those two years of postsecondary mandatory.
Private health care insurance and provision will be deregulated.
A new program would be subsidised moving expenses throughout the country. Maybe once every 5 years, you get a move on the gov't. This is to loosen up the employment market.
The key to all this is to eliminate means-testing of social benefits. Means-testing is what leads to people staying on welfare, because it costs them too much to get off it.
Social policy:
I'm a lib on this one. Do the math. I don't find it that interesting, really.
Ilike legalizing drugs, and providing the safer ones through licenses like alcohol, and the more dangerous ones medically.
OOh, almost forgot Environmental Policy
Not sure of the details here, but perverse subsidies to polluting industries would be ended, and subsidies would be provided to green ones. Maybe have taxes set up based on how polluting a proccess is, but that begins to defeat the purpose of my very simple system set up above.
I'll have to think on this one.
Oh, you have to write a test and get a permit to have a child. Haha, kidding, but part of me wishes.
International laws/institutions.
The yardstick for military intervention would be changed. Military force would be unilaterally appropriate when in immediate danger of imminent attack, or in response to an attack. This would include state-sponsored terrorist attack. It would be legal when sanctioned by the UN in the following circumstances:
1)Immediate humanitarian crisis created by or not prevented by that state's government. Ie: mass killings, genocide, blockades leading to starvation. Litmus test will be the amount of human life in immediate danger. Natural disasters wouldn't count, but depriving aid through blockades might
2)Recent overthrow of a democratic government. If ever, in a democratic state, the executive, military or other group deprives the elected legislature of reasonable law-making power, outside intervention would be permissable. The test of the legitimacy of a government would have to take into account the honesty of elections, etc.
3)In a military conflict, UN approved or otherwise, the intentional targeting or reckless disregard for civillian casualties on a large, systematic scale. Napalming cities would count, individial soldier's excesses might not.
A terrorist attack would be defined as any attack by a non-state actor which explicitly and intentionally targets civillians.
The UN security council's voting would be revised so that no one country would have veto power, instead the permanent members' votes would have 3x the weight of non-permanent members.
The permanent seats would fall as follows: US, EU, Russia,China,Brazil,India,Japan and South Africa.
I'd like to include one country from the Middle East or North Africa, but I can't think of an appropriate one.
Each great power's region would have two other seats on the council, which would cycle through the way they are today. Their votes would each be worth 1x.
The point of this is to continue the cycling of seats among less powerful states, but to keep the basic balance of power intact through each large power's sphere of influence.
Canada's foreign policy:
In general, it would support the principles above. This is why I went into so much detail.
US policy: Border policy, security checks on immigrants and refugees, and coastal supervision would be developped in partnership with American security forces.
Trade should be expanded in any dimension that wouldn't threaten Canadian domestic policy or culture.
Military Policy: Spending should be increased, most especially in the Navy. We should have a significant Naval presence in the North, as well as be able to pull our weight in terms of coastal surveillance. Army and Airforce should specialize in fast reaction forces designed for humanitarian, peacekeeping and just a few dimensions of more aggressive, high-risk interactions. Perhaps recon, high-risk patrol, or special forces. The key is to specialize so that for those particular tasks, Canadian soldiers become in demand by our allies, and we can thus contribute our share in international affairs.
Foreign aid should be focused, perhaps on just one or two countries. Special attention should be paid to Africa, and help with their aids crisis.
Fiscal policy
A flat income tax should be introduced. This will reduce the disincentive effects that progressive taxation can impose on savings, thus leading to increased productivity. Capital gains and corporate taxes should be reduced or eliminated.
Consumption taxes would also be considered. Perhaps a blend of a consumption or a VAT tax with the income tax.
The key is simplicity in the tax structure.
Social programs:
A universal income supplement (of perhaps 4800$ a year) will be distributed to all. An additional credit (of maybe 2000$) per child in a household will be distributed. This is regardless of income, work habits, anything.
All other explicitly redistributive programs will be ended. EI, CPP, Child tax credit, welfare, almost everything.
Disability and senior's income supplement will continue, but taking into account the universal income supplement
Labour regulations designed to redistribute, ie minimum wages, overtime restrictions, etc will be eliminated. I might be swayed on the overtime, that may be more of a quality of life issue. And no one I've ever worked for followed that law anyway
Basic health care, phamaceuticals, education including 2 years of postsecondary, and child care will be universally accessible to all. Expanded health care, including things like optomentry, physiotherapy, and such will be provided for those under 18.
Might make those two years of postsecondary mandatory.
Private health care insurance and provision will be deregulated.
A new program would be subsidised moving expenses throughout the country. Maybe once every 5 years, you get a move on the gov't. This is to loosen up the employment market.
The key to all this is to eliminate means-testing of social benefits. Means-testing is what leads to people staying on welfare, because it costs them too much to get off it.
Social policy:
I'm a lib on this one. Do the math. I don't find it that interesting, really.
Ilike legalizing drugs, and providing the safer ones through licenses like alcohol, and the more dangerous ones medically.
OOh, almost forgot Environmental Policy
Not sure of the details here, but perverse subsidies to polluting industries would be ended, and subsidies would be provided to green ones. Maybe have taxes set up based on how polluting a proccess is, but that begins to defeat the purpose of my very simple system set up above.
I'll have to think on this one.
Oh, you have to write a test and get a permit to have a child. Haha, kidding, but part of me wishes.
Facebook
Twitter