Showing posts with label Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Policy. Show all posts

Saturday, 15 December 2012

Day 158: Prevention is the Best Cure - Equal Money System

Prevention is the Best Cure

Decision-making within an Equal Money System will adhere to the Constitutional Principle of ‘Prevention is the Best Cure’. This implies that with every decision made, all possible ramifications, consequences and outflows must be considered in order to design the policies and regulations in a way that do not cause unnecessary harm to the current or future generations of plants, animals and humans.

The moment disharmony exists, it indicates that the point of disharmony was not adequately prevented. Becoming aware of such a point of disharmony places us in a reactive mode. A reactive mode always takes place after the harm as a result of disharmony that has already occurred, and thus, it is in essence ‘too late’ as the harm cannot be undone. To design a regulatory political system based on reactive measures is therefore unacceptable, as it implies that we wait for harm to take place before action is taken. Currently, policy and regulations are mostly based on the interest of select groups. This causes harm to manifest on other levels that were not included in the equation, causing us to continuously be in a reactive mode as we attempt to correct the mistakes of our past. This is why it is so important to always design policies and regulations according to the Principle of What is Best for All, as it will enable us to prevent disharmony before it occurs.

Obviously, taking action before harm takes place also reduces the amount of resources that go into correcting mistakes and dealing with the consequences of carelessness. A simple example is nutrition. There are countless ills that are currently caused through inadequate nutrition, among which are diabetes, heart conditions, cancer, impaired cognitive functions such as memory capacity, and so on. Treatment for such ills requires a whole range of resources and is time-intensive. If the source is corrected, which is the diet, the ills are prevented as well as the need to use up resources for their treatment.

Initially, policy making will still largely involve correcting the mistakes of our past, as there were many, and thus many consequences. However, as we progress as a global society within the ability to prevent disharmony and to direct all matters in a harmonious way, we will be able to bring children in the world knowing that we’ve taken all preventative measures to allow them to live a life without harm. And thus, the principle of fear as it is now part of society will have been addressed and will no longer form part of our co-existence.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, 6 December 2012

Day 151: Media, Law and Information Accessibility within an Equal Money System

News and Media in an Equal Money System


Within an Equal Money System, the role of News and Media will be specific in terms of World Management rather than entertainment. The principles underlying News and Media will be based on how one can effectively co-exist on Earth.

Accordingly, the role of news and media in an Equal Money System will be twofold:

Policy Education

The implementation of any new law or policy will first go through a process of education to the public, to ensure effective understanding – as any laws and policies will have to be brought into being by everyone collectively. Within this, television will be used as the primary media to present educational information regarding the law/policy to be implemented in the form of documentaries and news broadcasting.

Watchdog

News and Media will also provide a channel for journalism as a form of ‘public policing’ where people can write or report on specific points which are not working effectively, which will then be addressed accordingly.

Law in an Equal Money System

Law within an Equal Money System will be required to be laid out within the utmost specificity. Within adhering to specificity and clarity to the utmost level, no space is left for the interpretation of law or policy. If at any stage it turns out that a door for interpretation was left open, this would indicate that the law or policy is not good enough and will have to be specified to close the gap. As such, there will no longer be a need for lawyers as ‘experts’ on law or courts for the purpose of interpreting the law. Education within the Equal Money System will provide everyone with the necessary reading skills to be able to effectively read and assess laws and policies for one self – at the level that it should be assessed, so all can be on an equal ground of understanding and clarity.


Accessibility of Information & Privacy

The tracking and gathering of individuals' information is a problem currently, as this data is being abused in the name of profit and is an outflow of inequality. Within a system of equality however, tracking of information is an essential component. In order to distribute resources most effectively, one requires to have information as completely as possible – to ensure that the basic needs of everyone are satisfied to the best of our ability. Within a system of harmony, one wants their information available – as a lack of information might result in one not receiving their part of the resources and support relating to one’s specific individual needs and requirements. In such a case, one would be the cause of one’s own disharmony.

Due to the transparent nature of any movement of information within an Equal Money System and its organizational structure – any point of abuse occurring will immediately become visible and will be dealt with accordingly (see the Politics wiki page currently for more information on the point of abuse). 
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, 3 December 2012

Day 149: Credits and Levels of Administration within an Equal Money System

This blog is a continuation within replying to a comment made in relation to 'Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System'. 

The point of resources allocation will further be clarified within the next blog.



Credits within an Equal Money System is only a 'word' and only serves to facilitate the allocation and movement of goods -- credits will not hold any other intrinsic value as money or credit do currently (where money is used as a 'store of value'), but only have a mathematical and accounting function. The credits within the Equal Money System will indicate the available resources, what is available for each one and accordingly credits will be allocated and then get distributed.

The amount of credits and types of credits each on receive, will be based on a formula as set out within the Constitution, that we all have agreed on.

When you view your Life Profile where your available credits are displayed, you then either would indicate "Yes, this particular allocation I am going to use" or "No, I am not going to use this particular allocation". If you’re not going to use it, it remains in your main available resource ‘bank’ so to speak. Which is where your credits are ‘stored’. Note that you won't ‘own’ the credits, it’s purely available resources on Earth.


What I'm getting at: how would it work for local issues like where should a new water pipe be constructed in a certain specific small area if that change doesn't drastically effect everything else in the overall system?

Both global and federal/local levels will function within the same framework in terms of laws and policies. Implementation of policy will be region-specific which is where local administration comes in.

Implementation at a local level will be carried out by a local council, elected by the locals, which must regularly be substituted by new members. The point would be to make the local council an opportunity for each one to take a moment of responsibility within the system and to do their ‘civic duty’ so to speak. Therefore, each member will only serve one term. And within that one hopes to eventually have each person during a lifetime serving a term on the council, so that each one can experience what it means to work with a group of people.

Within this, education again plays a part. A person will not just be able to become a council member without first going through preparation, where one requires to go through a process of training and understanding in terms of what is involved – so that there is a smooth transitioning process within changing from council to council.

To apply for such a position, one would submit their availability and apply for a position. Once their term has ended, it is time for the next person. Unless there is no alternative, a person will not be allowed a second term; each one only gets a single term. This way, each one can get the opportunity of experiencing what it means to be a leader within a point of responsibility and within a point of distribution.

In terms of any form of abuse that may occur, anyone will be able to address and direct the point of abuse directly to the federal administration in reporting that there is a problem in this particular local council, where authority is being abused. If a person makes such an assertion and this assertion is based on some form of mental disorder, it will be addressed accordingly. If the abuse of authority is based on some mental disorder, it will be addressed and supported accordingly. The fact that a person goes into a mental disorder does not make them completely dysfunctional, and thus does not completely exclude them from participation. They are addressed, corrected and then receive a chance of forgiveness to correct their point. One will thus not be ‘branded’ as mental disordered – because it is simply part of the human condition at this stage. Currently, not enough is yet understood about how this all functions, and therefore, there is going to be some difficulties, where we need to address the mental disorder.

Once a person has proven their effectiveness within administrative responsibilities on a local level, they are eligible to submit their application for a position on a (more) global level.



 Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, 30 November 2012

Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System

Many people ask the question whether 'What's Best for All' and 'Democracy' from the starting point of 'the majority rules' are not contradictory or incompatible.

What is being looked at within such questions is a scenario where a majority wants to enforce a particular policy -- but this policy is not best for all – what then?

Many democracies existent today are constitutional democracies. A constitution contains a set of fundamental principles and guidelines according to which the particular state will be governed. It is thus a 'framework' within which all decisions, policy and legislation are made. Whenever a new policy is being developed or when policies are reviewed -- it has to be checked whether it adheres to the base principles, as outlined within the Constitution. If they are not -- they are considered to be 'unconstitutional' and can hence be disregarded. This also implies, that even in democracies today -- one cannot vote on policies which are in essence unconstitutional, and there is thus a 'limit' on what is acceptable and allowed. So, what we are introducing within and Equal Money System, where Equality and What is Best for All are the base principles of the Equal Money Constitution: is nothing New.

Within this, it is thus implied that achieving and enforcing what is Best for All is not contradictory to democracy per se -- as the available options to be voted on, will always be within the framework of what is Best for All. As such -- voting will not exist from the perspective that one is presented with a policy and either 'likes' or 'dislikes' it based on an opinion one has and would vote accordingly. Instead, one will be presented with policies which have been designed by various agents from various backgrounds/expertise who have volunteered to contribute their time to design policies as frameworks and guidelines in terms of how particular points are to be managed -- and these are always designed within the starting point and context of Equality and what is Best for All. The end result coming from this process, will then be peer reviewed to cross-reference the proposal and make sure that all points are aligned within what is Best for All and that no points have been left unconsidered.

All of these processes, will occur in a transparent, publicly available manner -- where at any moment, anyone can check the movement of information -- leaving no space for 'hidden agendas'.

Upon completion of the peer review, the particular proposal or policy will be presented to the public for voting -- which is then in essence the final stage of review/cross-referencing. Within the voting process one is then in fact indicating that one agrees that what is proposed is indeed Best for All -- and if one disagrees, one would have to back up this disagreement with the necessary proof and evidence -- upon which the policy/proposal can be revised/re-evaluated (simply having an 'opinion', is thus not acceptable).

Within this structure Education will play a major role, within ensuring effective education to all children in order to provide them with the necessary mathematical, scientific and common sense skills and insights, to be able to evaluate and participate within policy formulation or policy-review effectively.

The focus is thus on the Participation of the Majority within directly taking part in the policy creation process.

Within this, the approach of 'Prevention is the Best Cure' also plays a vital role -- where we want to ensure that all policies and decision-making are done in order to prevent consequences resulting from inequality. When consequences have already manifested, this would indicate a major problem in the effective application processes where a point within the foundation is unsound and 'cracked' so to speak, which results in having to 'go back' and fix things -- which is unnecessary and could have been prevented, and these points would as such require urgent attention. We thus want to ensure at all all points are taken into consideration at all times, so that a sound foundation can be in place which will prevent unnecessary harm and abuse from taking place. This is in contrast to our current system, which only acts after problems and consequences have already taken place and only then devise solutions -- which is in essence, doing everything 'backwards'.
Enhanced by Zemanta