Open Government Dialogue
« Back To OpenGov - Open Government Brainstorm

politics

User Profile Image politics
Member since : Jun-03-2009 (Verified)
1 Ideas, 6 Comments, 139 Votes

User Activity Stream

Ideas Posted

I suggest you change the rules so that these international companies start re-shoring. To do this, merely dictate that any company with less than 75% of its staff in the US will not get preferential treatment for US government contracts, grants, subsidies, or bailouts. These huge multi-nationals will re-shore in a heartbeat so as not to lose out on their easy money government contracts.

Why do I bring this up? I work for a large multi-national who has no problem off-shoring American white-collar jobs in the tech industry to foreign labor.

And yet, they have huge government contracts, and have received money from the government, as well as subsidies, tax breaks, etc. Take away the incentives and it comes down to money. And almost guaranteed contracts incentivizes them to comply. You could even push this policy further by denying patent applications for businesses w/ less than 75% labor in the US. That would really push these companies back. Assuming, of course, the US wants to have its citizens employed in jobs that pay taxes.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 4205 Ideas
12345678910….168169Next »

Comments Posted

politics 9 months ago
sewalkie - While I agree that many of the policies that started rolling after 911 were not good and should be repealed, I don't necessarily agree that re-investigating 911 is going to change anything. I have no first hand knowledge; however, I see these conspiracy theories come out with and without supposed evidence to back them up. I trust my government isn't going to attack its citizens just to start a war; there's far too many patriotic individuals at all levels of government that would have leaked or at least revealed prior knowledge of the attack. This is the same reason I believe that the US will never truly become a police state...Military and police are free thinkers and know the price of just blindly following orders (thanks in large part to 20th century European, Asian, and Russian atrocities).
politics 9 months ago
Its naive to think that this system will change simply because its a bad idea. This is how it works:

If you want it bad enough, you will allow the riders to go through. If not, then the bill dies.

Either way, it helps keep a cap on the number of ridiculous laws that get passed. Of course, if Congress or the President don't have a filter and don't care about the laws being passed, its moot anyway.

It helps with the balance of power and the reasonable ways laws are being passed.

I was initially against it, but I understand the reasoning behind it and changed my mind on the idea. This way, hopefully, either nothing gets done in Congress, or, at least, if things do get done, they're at a cost that must be weighed by the members of Congress.
politics 9 months ago
Why don't you just stop using insurance. Then you would see how much things cost.

Rumors abound that many doctors charge 40 - 50% less if insurance isn't part of the equation. Why then do we use insurance? Could it be a tactic to help pay for medicare and medicaid?

Yes, most hospitals and insurance companies get only a fraction of what they should receive from medicare/medicaid. To make up for this, they have to charge insurance more.

Why not just allow more doctors or an in-between profession (between doctor and nurse) that can make medical decisions but isn't as costly and exclusive to produce. Increase competition and you will bring down costs.
politics 9 months ago
Nah, they'll just track your IP and then send the IRS after you! America's all about economic control ... look at how we're playing China ;)
politics 9 months ago
"-No lifetime pension or a pension of 50k a year standard across the board. Currently 2-3 times more generous than Corporate pensions."

At 50k a year, they'd be lucky to see a 5k a year pension. More like 10x the current pension formulas that corporations employ.
politics 9 months ago
If you are this naive, perhaps you should go back to school.

This is how the bills have always worked, in both republican controlled and democrat controlled congress.

They're not gonna change the rules now, after all... if the majority party changed the rules, and then lost power, how would they get their legislation passed?

Let's face it, politicians should be outlawed. But that's never gonna happen either.