Remove the FDA, reclassify the CDC as a military wing and fire / retrain accordingly.
Wut? Why? The FDA was created in response to real problems, and it reduced those problems. Why are you trying to undo that?
And how in the hell is the CDC a military wing?!
Rebuild the IRS from the ground up, consumption tax and a one-flat for every income. No bracket fuckery.
Okay, at least I understand this. It’s a horrible idea, but I do understand it.
Abolish every single public payor system that exists now (Medicare, Medicaid, etc.. But excluding ones that serve veterans)
That’s insanely arbitrary, and obviously a non-starter with the GOP’s very large retired base. You’re not just stupid and evil, you’re also unable to read the room. Cutting medicare isn’t going to happen.
I’m guessing you’re a veteran? Or do you just worship the military?
Implement something similar to Yang's UBI thats opt in and not predicated on a disability or poverty standard, thats weighted for COL in a given state.
Ill clarify that last bit. Lets say you have a family of 4 and live in Orange County. COL for that family size there is roughly $12k monthly, including rent / food / utilities. Youd get a monthly freedom dividend of $4k. A family of the same size in Montana where the COL is around $3k monthly, means you get a dividend of $900. Opting in would exclude you from every single other government benefit program, including unemployment.
You’re trying to sound like you’re making a compromise without actually making a compromise. You listed “unemployment,” but what I’m worried about are “disability” benefits. Why should opting into UBI opt you out of something like that?
And, in any case, isn’t this going to result in “fuckery” just as bad as tax bracketing? How do you expect normies to know whether opting into UBI will give them more money, or less money, than the other benefits programs? Isn’t the whole point of UBI to reduce complexity? Isn’t the whole point of UBI to get rid of unemployment?
Close US bases in the EU, bring troops home. End involvement in the UN. Draw a hard line with China, either they pay us for their economic infringement or we go to war and level Beijing.
Of course. I guess it’s kind of irrelevant, since the UN is just a justifier of bad practices anyway… But declaring war, once again, seems contrary to your other rhetoric. Why would you start going to war with another country while simultaneously advocating for isolationist policies? Isn’t the whole point of isolationism that it shouldn’t matter how much China “infringes” on American laws? You’re not supposed to be relying on their business anyway!
Abolish the EPA and bar trade with any countries that implement a carbon tax.
Fuck you. If the problem with that fuckery isn’t already obvious to you, then you are beyond help.
Statehood for Saskatchewan, Alberta and Quebec.
Puerto Rico first.
Increase the number of CBP and ICE. (At least as many officers in those agencies as we have in City PDs, so millions.) Finish the wall but also patrol it with drones, ramp up CBP presence on our northern borders as well.
If you want to make a credible case for walling off the United States, then you should stop trying to declare war on China, annex Canada, and set up trade sanctions for dumb reasons first. You’re making people think that your isolationism rhetoric is actually just racism.
There are credible arguments in favor of reducing international trade. It would have slowed the global spread of disease, it would prevent companies from simply setting up business in places with the least regulation, and it would prevent problems like Brain Drain from hitting small countries. But when you’re simultaneously advocating for trade embargoes as a means of coercing other countries, and going to war with China over “intellectual property” violations, you put the lie to it. You don’t want to reduce international trade. You just want to shoot at brown people.
Break up "sanctuary cities", prosecute for treason those involved with the shelter of criminal aliens.
Punish companies that employ undocumented immigrants while you’re at it.
Put quotas on EU immigrants, or totally block them from applying to enter entirely. Keep current restrictions on existing hotbed countries like Syria.
Why? What do you have against the EU of all things? Sure, they actually do have their problems, but I’d like to hear them from you.
Abolish the ATF, repeal the NFA and any regulation that infringes on an American's right to keep and bear arms.
And yes, since it'll come up, private citizens should be allowed to own Abrams tanks if they can afford it.
Your ideological platform is consistent with itself. Congratu-fucking-lations.
When a militia nut drives their tank to the theater and levels the building, I’ll be curious to see if enough voters stick to your platform to keep your ideal party elected through a second term.
Break up large, crime infested cities like Detroit, Chicago and Seattle.
Exactly how would you break them up?
Retrain existing city PD, supplement gaps with private security operators. These would be armed but unsworn enforcers. They'd maintain peace but not have the license to arrest or detain, only to use scalable force to maintain peace.
Wut.
Re-normalize the nuclear family. Build more churches and synagogues, reinforce the importance of some kind of higher calling.
This isn’t all that insane… I worry that you intend this as a cover to hate on gay people, but on its own, I actually like the idea of re-normalizing families. My only contention is that we should actually be normalizing the extended family. I like families so much, that I would like to have grandparents living with their children, and I think many of the GOP would agree with this claim.
Classify Atheists as a hate group (which they are).
… and you go into the insane territory again. How is “God does not exists” a declaration of hate?
Name specific atheist groups, and you might have a point, but on its own, this is like claiming patriots are a hate group. Some groups that call themselves patriots are, but on its own, there’s nothing in “love your country” that constitutes a declaration of hate.
Ratify the courts to oust existing judges that rule unfairly in divorce and custody proceedings.
Considering how your other rhetoric went, I’m not confident in what you consider “unfair” proceedings. Though, in the absence of specific claims, I have to mention that this statement is good by definition: of course unfair results are bad.
Abolish the DOE. School choice should be the standard.
My response to this one is going to be unfortunately complicated.
I moved from one state to another while I was a kid. I know how national education standards are intended to help; moving from one state to another, with wildly different education standards, is a pain in the ass. It makes free movement between states harder on kids than it needs to be.
But, of course, national education standards also interfere with local citizens’ ability to participate in their school district. They no longer have community control over what their school teaches, which makes schools inevitably worse. National education standards are a “least-common-denominator” solution, and their good comes from the idea that it’s important for things to be the same, even if they aren’t strictly optimal, and I can’t, in good conscience, endorse that as my opinion. There is no ideal answer here.
“Abolish the DOE” is dangerously simplistic.
Tax credits with no expiry for attending a trade school to completion.
The party of small government, everybody!
I’m not actually saying that this is bad. Just that it’s, once again, ideologically inconsistent. It ignores so many problems: now the government has to certify trade schools, now it has to keep track of who’s attending them, and this is just going to recreate all of the problems that these guys already have with the public university systems and its complex and failure-prone regulatory structure.
Start slapping heavy fines, in the millions or tens of millions on Universities and Colleges that politicize their curriculum and facilitate sex crimes (spoiler alert its most of them)
If you start subsidizing trade schools, I bet you anything that they’ll suffer from the same problems. These are Big Organization problems, and have nothing to do with universities in particular.
Voter ID as the standard. Term limits for every single elected position.
Why not just make one, singular, national ID system that everyone receives at birth? If everybody is supposed to vote, and you need a voter ID, there’s very little point in trying to claim that you aren’t just making a Mark of the Beast at this point.
Push for more states to adopt the death penalty. Apply it to more crimes, and speed up the prosecution and appeals for death penalty charges.
Are you bloodthirsty, or just stupid?
Decriminalize minor drug possession and usage.
You’ve made a mistake, here. They asked for the “GOP utopia,” and you gave them the “Libertarian utopia.” I know it’s a minor distinction, in the grand scheme of things, but this makes you look uneducated.
The high prison population is a problem. Between stemming the influx, and shrinking it via executions, we can decrease those numbers drastically.
Okay, so you have no respect for human life, and you’re also ignorant. I can’t do much about the first part, but the second is easily solvable.
http://www.usprisonculture.com/blog/2011/01/06/mississippis-very-terrible-horrible-criminal-legal-history/
US prisons are used as a source of labor. This is why the prison population is so high; powerful lobbies want their to be lots of prisoners so that they can profit off of it, and they do this by undermining efforts to reduce arrests. If you want to de-incentivize arresting people, the best way to do it is make it illegal to sell what the prisoners make, or to give the prisoners most of the profit.