Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Occupy List of 40 - Consent for Governance Statement

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 11, 2011, 5:52 p.m. EST by Listof40 (233)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Hello Occupy group...

Here is my recommended List of 40 demands for the Occupy movement, including a 'Consent for Governance' statement, to address the problems and issues in current policy.

Occupy List of 40 Consent for Governance Statement

Consent for Governance by the People

"As acting citizens for country and union, sharing vision for Liberty and just government, We the People provide and grant consent for a United States government, responsible to the public and requiring assurances of fair process for such body to operate, to fulfill and ensure duties in accordance with principles of fair and justly reasoned governance, bound and created by public trust to establish and act in those interests, lighted by and acting within properly founded reasoning and judgment, to those ends.

In granting such right to governance, we require institute of oversight process, for the regulation of proper policy and protections against abuses, to ensure the public well-being and redress unjust laws, legal judgments, court orders, rulings, political process, procedures, ceremonies, appointments or any other mechanism blocking progress or fair governance by red tape or any type of institutional obstruction, inactivity, or exploitation of the political process by questionable interests.

Holding the United States government to principles to ensure and institute a more perfect Union, We the People deem responsibility for the public body being the extension and fulfillment of founded reason, to empower fair access and participation to the public, and to establish and operate with fair governance in Legislative, Executive, Justice, Defense, and Education to promote and protect the general Welfare and well-being, the Blessings of Liberty, and to provide for the Rights of Tolerance against unreasonable demands, bias, or interests.

To support these ends, we require the following 40 policies to be instituted:

  1. Corporations would not be allowed to layoff employees during net profitable year earnings in order to increase stock margins or increase executive or management salary, stock, or bonus compensations.

  2. CEOs or executive management during layoff periods would not be allowed any earnings or stock bonuses for 2 years, after any layoff incident of 50 employees or more, or until re-hire. After any incident of layoff of 50 employees or more, CEOs would not be allowed earnings from said company in any form or venue of more than $1,000,000 per annum for 2 years, excess proceeds would be held in leu to ensure employee retention or re-hiring of said employees, or until re-hire.

  3. Stock holders that vote or advocate for predatory exploitation of workers, the public well-being or public privacy interests (or against the protection of said entities) would immediately forfeit their stock, and the proceeds would be held in leu to ensure pension, employee retention, r&d, charitable local donation or re-compensation for any relevant damage.

  4. 10% of corporate stock must be retained to ensure company pension and employee retention or layoff compensation if company fails.  10% of corporate profits must be retained to ensure company viability during any future times of low profit. 5% of corporate or company profits beyond $1 million dollars must be distributed to employees (no more than 10% of said distribution to executives). 5% of corporate profits beyond $1 million dollars must be distributed to benefit the surrounding or extended community and environment (excluding religious or medical research organizations). Any corporate earnings loss will be culled from executive wages or bonuses in excess beyond $200,000 in total, per executive. Corporate executive wages, bonuses or compensation cannot exceed $10 million dollars per year.

  5. Corporations or companies cannot be purchased for the purpose of liquidating assets or employees, beyond bankruptcy proceedings.

  6. Companies are not allowed breach of reasonable privacy to customers, the public, or employees for non-essential purposes or for profit, unless given specific permission by customer or user of service, and cannot provide incentives for such breach of privacy. Companies cannot include verbiage granting them breach of reasonable privacy to users of service, customers, or employees for non-essential purposes or for profit, in any agreement regarding general terms of service. Breach of reasonable privacy would be any collection of individual information non-essential to providing core services.  Opt-out policies are prohibited.

  7. During layoff periods of 50 employees or more, stock holders would not be allowed any stock valuation earnings above 5% or any bonuses for 1 year after any layoff incident of 50 employees or more, excess valuation would be held in leu to ensure employee retention or re-hiring of said employees, or until re-hire. Stock would not be allowed to be sold during layoff periods of 50 employees or more, for 6 months.

...

Note: Because of the 5000 character limit, the remaining 33 of the list will be posted in 3 additional comment to this thread...

40 list (1 thru 7) continued...

Dave

21 Comments

21 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

The number of hours (days)(weeks) you worked on this well written well conceived list will go nowhere until Citizens United is overturned. If you seriously want massive changes like these, help us start in the beginning >>>>
Occupy opened the world's eyes
We have to stop DEMANDING that we WANT from THEM.
We must change to
GOALS THAT WE WILL ACHIEVE & WHAT WE WILL DO
to sever the wall street leash on Washington

Because of the Supreme Court's decision,
we cannot accomplish anything significant, without FIRST -
Overturn Citizens United !!!
End Corporate Personhood !!!


83% of Americans already agree on it
as stated in the ABC/Washington Post poll

In the the PFAW Poll -

85% of voters say that corporations have too much influence over the political system today.
77% think Congress should support an amendment to limit the amount corporations can spend on elections.
74% say that they would be more likely to vote for a candidate for Congress who pledged to support a Constitutional Amendment limiting corporate spending in elections.


YOUR ACTION ----> JOIN US TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE


Our only immediate goal should be to pass a constitutional amendment to counter Supreme Court decision Citizens United (2010) , that enables unlimited amounts of anonymous money to flood into our political system.
“Corporations and organizations are not a persons &
have no personhood rights”

We don’t have to explain or persuade people to accept our position – we only have to persuade them to ACT based on their own position. Pursuing this goal will prove to the world that we, at OWS, are a serious realistic Movement, with serious realistic goals. Achieving this goal will make virtually every other goal – jobs, taxes, infrastructure, Medicare – much easier to achieve –
by disarming our greatest enemy – GREED.
YOUR ACTION ----> JOIN US TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE


THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE AMENDING PROCESS The Prohibition movement started as a disjointed effort by conservative teetotalers who thought the consumption of alcohol was immoral. They ransacked saloons and garnered press coverage here and there for a few years. Then they began to gain support from the liberals because many considered alcohol partially responsible for spousal and child abuse, among other social ills. This odd alliance, after many years of failing to influence change consistently across jurisdictions, decided to concentrate on one issue nationally—a constitutional amendment. They pressured all politicians on every level to sign a pledge to support the amendment. Any who did not, they defeated easily at the ballot box since they controlled a huge number of liberal, and conservative and independent swing votes in every election. By being a single-issue constituency attacking from all sides of the political spectrum, they very quickly amassed enough votes (2/3) to pass the amendment in Congress. And, within just 17 months, they were successful in getting ¾ of the state legislatures to ratify the constitutional amendment into law. (Others were ratified even faster: Eight —took less than a year. The 26th, granting 18-year-olds the right to vote, took just three months and eight days.)


If they could tie the left and right into a success -
WHY CAN'T WE ??????????

YOUR ACTION ----> JOIN US TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE


I feel that we should stay with this simple text to overturn CU:
”corporations are not people”
for four simple reasons and one – not so simple:
1
83% of Americans have already opposed CU in the ABC/Washington post poll and the above
IS THEIR POSITION ALREADY.
2
We don’t have to work to convince people on the validity of our position.
3
Simple is almost always better.
4
This simple Amendment is REQUIRED to overturn CU.
And all other electoral reform can be passed through the normal legislative process.

5
OWS and these pages are chock full of ( mostly ) excellent ideas to improve our country.
All of them have strong advocates – and some have strong opposition.
None of them has been “pre-approved” by 83% of Americans !
Pursuing this goal – without additional specifics is exactly what Americans want.
What do we want? Look at that almost endless list of demands – goals - aims.
Tax the rich. End the Fed. Jobs for all, Medicare for all. So easy to state! Can you imagine how hard it would be to formulate a “sales pitch” for any of these to convince your Republican friends to vote for any of them?
83% of Americans have ALREADY “voted” against CU. And 76% of the Rs did too.
All we have to do ask Americans is to pressure their representatives – by letters - emails – petitions.

Wanna take your family on vacation?
Convince the 7 year old and the 10 year old to go to Mt Rushmore.
Then try to convince them to go to Disneyland.
Prioritizing this goal will introduce us to the world – not as a bunch of hippie radical anarchist socialist commie rabblerousers – but as a responsible, mature movement that is fighting for what America wants.
YOUR ACTION ----> JOIN US TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE


I feel that using the tactics of the NRA, the AARP an the TP – who all represent a minority – who have successfully used their voting power to achieve their minority goals - plus the Prohibition Amendment tactics – bringing all sides together - is a straight path for us to success that cannot fail to enable us to create and complete one task the MAJORITY.


Join the OWS Restore Democracy Working Group at
............. http://www.nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy__
Plan details with supporting documentation at: http://bit.ly/vK2pGI
regular meetings 6-8PM @ 60 Wall St – The Attrium @ Wednesdays__


YOUR ACTION ----> JOIN US TO PASS THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

TO END CORPORATE PERSONHOOD


Whereas --

The OWS Declaration of the Occupation of New York City states that
"a democratic government derives its just power from the people,
not from corporations."

and --

the ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 83% of the entire US population
opposes the Supreme Court Citizens United decision,
which affirmed that corporations are people.

and --

by supporting the overturning of corporate personhood,
OWS clearly aligns itself with the vast majority of the American people
who support ending the fundamentally flawed and anti-democratic concept
that corporations are people.

therefore --

We support a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood.


[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Hello, and thank you for your post... and the kind comments... This approach you mention regarding reversing corporate personhood is a good point...

You may want to consider to a degree whether just going for one idea, which could take an incredible amount of time, is where you want to put all your efforts... Keep in mind i agree that corporations should not be considered an individual...

The culture of how things work, in terms of how we approach resolving issues, in society as well as the government, is what is actually determining how things are done...and whether things are improved...

While i understand that you may be frustrated with what may seem to be lack of clear direction for reform, and i share that with you... we should still be careful about how we approach these issues... We may not want to dismiss all other concerns just for the interest of getting one thing passed... even if you think that this could somehow potentially change alot... It is a simple idea regarding corporate personhood, and it has alot of merit, maybe why people can get behind it, and is a good point as to it possibly getting alot of support... But it is important to evaluate things as constructively as possible, when dealing with issues this complex... and i'm not saying that what you are doing is not a good approach... However, we can all support all good ideas, that is the whole point of addressing problems in society, there are a lot of issues that affect a lot of people in a lot of areas, and maybe we should not just dismiss those concerns in order to attempt just to get behind just one position, because alot of other problems, also have merit as well... So i am not completely sure about going for just this one thing... I support what you are trying to do, but there are a lot of other areas of concern, for alot of people... I hope this makes sense...

I support your initiative... Let's also allow all good ideas as well...

Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by hanleyj2 (7) 2 years ago

Very interesting, but could you explain, "Intellectual patents of obvious universal design principles or simple associative deductions are prohibited."?

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Hi, and thanks for the kind words....

The patent language point i was making was for unreasonable patents, like a fork, or 'phone with touchscreen' kind of vague patents which are being used for excessive manipulations and that harm free competition and the market (like pharmaceuticals patents on aids drugs, diabetics drugs, etc)... Example: My massage therapist told me her friend has ms and has to pay $600+ on prescriptions, because of patents, that block generics... Patents should not be used to profit off other's misery and difficulties, or to block or limit progress... The open source movement is a good model, working toward making things which are fundamentally beneficial to society free and not turn into profit centers... ie Wikipedia, OpenOffice, etc...

Hope this helps clarify what was kind of meant for this point... Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by hanleyj2 (7) 2 years ago

Yes, that does. Thanks for the reply. It will inherently repel profit-based greed at the same time.

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Thanks for the encouragement, and i understand what you are saying and i agree... I am glad to explain any of the specifics list, for anyone of the points, so definitely feel free to ask about any more of them! I think this is important to try to provide as much background support as we can for ideas, and this can be helpful in important discussions and to help with new ideas... Thanks! Dave

[-] 1 points by Slammersworld (210) 2 years ago

In other words a police state...where does freedom lie in this tyrannical system?

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Hi... Ok, essentially the spirit of freedom, ex. like probably envisioned by Jefferson, etc... Was for a system that did not block progress by reasonable action... The spirit of this is not for example allow for all kinds of questionable exploitation... It is up to us, anyone, to demand that reasonablility, and if elements in the system, in collusion or group even, are not acting in the interest of fundamental well-being of the people, then these actions should be questioned... I hope this kind of makes sense... Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by Slammersworld (210) 2 years ago

No, it doesn't make sense..I understand what your saying...but there is no sense to it...it's tyranny pure and simple.....a means to control human beings in an attempt (tried and failed many times) to equalize outcomes....

I would die before living in such a system, and fight against it with all I have, and am.....even if it meant death....and I am not alone...

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Let's try to understand something... If someone gets arrested for assault, your saying that appropriately stopping inappropriate actions by politicians or individuals by policy, that this is a violation of fundamental freedoms..? Freedom is not meant to just allow all kind of corrupt practices... I'm not sure why you think stopping anyone, government officials or not, from doing things that are not in the public interest is a 'violation of freedom'... You are aware that people are already being arrested and retained already for doing things against reasonable laws, in this country of freedom, right? You think this is 'always bad' even if the action was reasonable? I stopping slavery a 'violation of freedom'? Stopping something that is not appropriate is not really a 'violation of freedom'... why? because your stopping someone else from violating the fundamental right of individuals to be treated fairly and with dignity..

Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by Slammersworld (210) 2 years ago

Look, Dave...

You can create any sort of explanation you like to frost over the inevitable outcome of your "list of 40", but it is a list of tyrannies....A list of force upon individuals...I am sure you will claim morality in your address of so-called "needs" of the "people"...which is the recipe that has always been used by the tyrants all through the ages...and maybe you even mean well, and feel like this is an attempt at "fairness"....but true "fairness" is to allow people to succeed or fail by their own efforts, and bear the responsibility and reward of their own behaviors...your list skews that, and forces on man an inorganic system of prohibitions

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

I'm not sure you are really giving this a fair evaluation... The failures of other attempts in other areas, in other times, in other circumstances, is not grounds to automatically dismiss other approaches in new circumstances or new ideas... this is reasonable right? What about when people are exploited by bad policy, you think 'fairness' is to allow people to be exploited by those who hide behind advantages they have to block reasonable policy... If we don't think about things one at a time, and put a little distance from our biases, then it is very difficult to evaluate things objectively... You may be well intentioned, but it is still important to remain objective rather than simply dismissing things without looking at things in a more measured approach... I am certainly not saying that you do not have good intentions, but there is sometimes more to it than just that... Should we step back and take the time to examine new ideas, or just be aggressive, because of our ingrained habits of thinking... this is not something that we should always have to have contention about... It should not really be difficult to step back a little and give things fair examination... We owe it to the discussion to do this, if we want to claim we have the interest of good thinking... If you would like to list a specific example, i would be glad to address it and we could examine it together... i'm trying to be helpful here, and we are all able to have good ideas and try to have good discussion, that is the whole idea... Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by Slammersworld (210) 2 years ago

Well....let's start with number one and two...

  1. Corporations would not be allowed to layoff employees during net profitable year earnings in order to increase stock margins or increase executive or management salary, stock, or bonus compensations.

So, an enterprise could not strip an unprofitable division in order to maintain profitability until that division brought down the profits of the entire enterprise into negative territory, according to this "rule" unless the entity is in loss they could not take action to maintain the value of the stock in competition with other corporations....so the stock would lose value, and executives would leave to pursue other opportunities...

  1. CEOs or executive management during layoff periods would not be allowed any earnings or stock bonuses for 2 years, after any layoff incident of 50 employees or more, or until re-hire. After any incident of layoff of 50 employees or more, CEOs would not be allowed earnings from said company in any form or venue of more than $1,000,000 per annum for 2 years, excess proceeds would be held in leu to ensure employee retention or re-hiring of said employees, or until re-hire.

What would hold the best Executive in positions, if they were not allowed to trim staffs, and if they did...were subject to be forced to work for free? and is seems like you are making the assertion that it is the purpose of business, first and foremost to provide employment..... and that the production of marketable goods and services is secondary...isn't that what you are saying?

and I find it interesting that those of you who would complain about an executive earning a salary of 10 million in a company of 100,000 employees, at $100 per employee, but never have anything to say about a small business owner earning, say $80 thousand at a business with 5 employees...at $16,000 per employee...seems like the small business is engaging in more "unethical, predatory, exploitation"...huh?

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Hi and thanks for asking about these points... These are somewhat questions regarding 'corporate culture' and how it relates to the well-being of the company and therefore its employees, of course as well..

Ok the language in number one regarding corporate practices of layoffs... What this is saying is that productive and useful departments should not have employees culled, just to increase profits by making people do double or triple as much work, and increase their stress and burn them out, to increase stock or ceo bonuses... If the work has merit, and is providing good services, then profit should not just override the well-being of the employees or their pensions, or the merit of the services...

An unproductive or 'un-useful' department should be restructured... A company that is making billions should not just can everyone and outsource the work to increase stock bonuses, or play games with the employees and operations by slashing good services and departments...

For the point about CEOs.... CEOs should enjoy reasonable wealth for their work... instead of making companies a revolving door for networking elites, companies should be focused toward making quality useful products and services and not playing slash and burn for bonuses and profit... If executives do not want to be reasonable with how they manage the well-being of employees and the company, then there are plenty more people would have more appropriate intentions that are available and these should be the ones that are requited or promote...

Hope this info makes sense and is helpful... Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by Slammersworld (210) 2 years ago

no...still makes no sense, as in the "sane and realistic attitude to situations and problems" definition...it's interesting, in a demonstration of flawed thinking ....but make no sense....it's almost like a few pages out of Atlas Shrugged

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

I haven't read this book Atlas Shrugged but it looks like a somewhat interesting look at the dynamics of society.. i'll have to look into it... but again i myself am not sure much about of this specific reference...

However, I would also be glad to discuss any ideas of reasoning fallacies or problems of perspective, if this is what you mean by the reference, in terms of how you think this would apply to the points or discussion...

Thanks, Dave

[-] 1 points by Slammersworld (210) 2 years ago

Dave, in all honesty...it might be an interesting discussion if we were to sit down with a bottle of scotch and discuss the finer points of our respective philosophies...but, for a discussion of that depth....this really is a difficult forum in which to engage in it fully...

I can say I disagree with almost everything on your list of 40, on principle, but I applaud your attitude

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Hi, ah yes, this is interesting isn't it... how we can often get into discussions about all kinds of things... but how hard is it to actually get to the point where the 'internal references' that we are using, to found our conclusions, actually get looked at... because these very often influence our discussions the most... This can be looked at how we approach ideas, very often we are motivated by our intentions, which makes sense and in many ways is a good way to approach our ideas... but what if this can be problematic in some areas... For example, we can be influenced greatly by situations where something we saw or heard, rubbed us the wrong way... We can become motivated to revisit what we had disliked, if not sufficiently resolved to our liking earlier, but by introducing into new ongoing areas, maybe to kind of take the discussion back to what we wanted to address before... So these things could affect how we engage in other areas... I actually don't think that really anyone is not open and willing to sit down and look at a variety of important areas with good intent to be constructive, but it is also a matter of convenience, which i think you may have been alluding to or mentioning... Looking at many common areas of interest or concern could require a different approach than just maybe certain ways of evaluating things, or whether a more in-depth approach would help resolve some collective areas of difficulty, even in society... You seem to be someone who like to articulate your points, and i admire that... I think maybe some of the areas that we may all struggle with, is kind of cultural... like how much to we want to delve into things, with all the distractions we have, and do we often feel its worth it, or have the time, or when discussions can sometimes feel like a win or lose situation... Anyway, all constructive discussion can lead to better ideas and can be good for looking at things in new ways...

Thanks... Dave

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

40 list - Part 4 - (34 thru 40) continued...

  1. Inhumane conditions for animals or humans in farming or factory operations is prohibited.

  2. Company or farming practices which cause significant toxicity to humans or animals, or to the environment, including groundwater, rivers, oceans, lakes, air, or soil is prohibited.

  3. Entering into foreign occupation without providing non-propaganda programs and initiatives to teach government officials, the public, or opposition forces of said foreign country how to reason, to identify proper reasoning, and to foster understanding and appropriate practices, is prohibited. Entering into foreign occupation without providing reasonable medical services and protection from hostile parties or human trafficking operations for innocents or children is prohibited. Entering into foreign occupation without providing weekly publicly broadcasted reports on the accurate status of reasonable medical services and protection from hostile parties or human trafficking operations for innocents or children is prohibited.

  4. Products which show tendency to cause birth defects, or unnecessary developmental or genetic harm are prohibited from being manufactured. Products which cannot reasonably demonstrate that they do not show tendency to cause birth defects, or unnecessary developmental or genetic harm are prohibited from being manufactured.

  5. Any news organization which claims to provide vital or essential news information to the public, and that intentionally fails to provide reasonable information of what negatively affects the fundamental well-being of the public, through censorship that serves corporate, religious, social, philosophical, or political interests will be investigated for breach of public trust, and have their assets frozen to assess improper gains.

  6. Any legal or political case that involves concerns regarding the well-being of the public or environment, or to individuals of the public, are prohibited from having the details of said concerns being sealed during any case resolution or settlement.

  7. Any whistle-blowing case that involves concerns regarding the well-being of the employees, public or environment, requires the protection of the reporting individual through case assessment. Case Assessment Agency will determine the merits of reported incident and the reporting individual is to receive temporary compensation if loss of employment occurs from report of reasonable merit. If case is determined to have proper foundation and responsible company engages in unreasonable intimidation, cover-up, or economic threat or abuse to reporting individual, the company will be required to reimburse any temporary compensation and to pay 5 years of wages to individual. Individual will also receive $50,000 bonus provided from public protection fund. Companies and management in such cases will be be investigated for breach of public trust, and have their assets frozen to assess improper gains.

40 list - Part 4 - (34 thru 40) - end...

Please post any comments or questions... You guys are doing great, good job!

Dave

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

40 list - Part 3 - (17 thru 33) continued...

  1. Any individual or organization that repeatedly uses fundamentally false statements or repeatedly fully asserts fundamentally unsubstantiated statements during exercise of public or private instruction or advocation in any political, educational, religious, or scientific arena will be suspended in any held position for 2weeks, in addition may have assets frozen for review for improper gains, and/or be prosecuted. Any educational revisionist activity to distort, over-emphasize, de-emphasize or omit historical, current, or scientific facts for social, political, financial, educational, or religious interests is prohibited.

  2. Any military or police official who repeatedly uses fundamentally false statements during exercise of public facing statements to the public, disregarding any endangering or potentially endangering case or reconnaissance or strategy intel, in their directly relevant specific duties will be suspended for 2weeks, and after 3 occurrences would forfeit their positions and be prosecuted.

  3. Corporations, companies, collectors or auction houses would not be allowed to profit off artist’s work beyond 40% of those proceeds in sum being provided to the artist, per each artwork.  If artist is no longer living, 50% of artist proceeds beyond $500,000 will be retained for the support of artist programs and artist assistance programs, per each artwork.

  4. Companies that generate profit from the work of artists or contestants without reasonable non-exploitive compensation for said entertainment, is prohibited.

  5. Full work week is 8.5hours x 4 days = 34hours and compensation in co-measure of previous 40 hour week or salary. For companies that would have financially viability reasonably impacted may appeal for exemption and have work week at 8hours x 5 days = 40 hours. Minimum of 4 weeks per year of vacation for full time employees.

  6. Any educational or medical institution or practice is not allowed to exploit political or financial programs for excessive profits at the expense of students or patients.

  7. Any testing or procedure that causes injury or toxicity in animals (that is intended as non-beneficial to the animal or species) is prohibited.

  8. Hurting or injuring humans, or hurting or injuring animals, for the purposes of entertainment is prohibited, including boxing, blood sports, or any non-necessary hunting or fishing.

  9. Production or use of environmentally toxic or dangerous chemicals is prohibited, where reasonable alternatives are available, which includes change of process or technology (alternatives not to be excluded on purely financial grounds).

  10. Intellectual patents of obvious universal design principles or simple associative deductions are prohibited.

  11. Department of Reason, Integrity and Anti-Incompetence will be formed that oversees all political members of the federal government.  Duties include removing from office any individuals who are not acting in the interests of the fundamental well-being citizens, or not acting consistent with truth, reason, and fundamental fairness.  Duties also include removing policy or rulings which are fundamentally in opposition of the well-being of citizens or are generally incompetent, or are not consistent with truth, reason, and fundamental fairness.

  12. Department of Education of Reason will be formed to provide programs to teach government officials and the public, including initiatives to foreign countries, how to reason, identify proper reasoning, and to foster understanding and appropriate practices.

  13. Reasonable bonuses to employees is required for all companies during years of reasonable profit.

  14. Prohibited for any charity to provide donations to organizations or activities that cause injury or toxicity in animals (that is intended as non-beneficial to the animal or species).

  15. Any advertising that implies health and well-being to consumers while engaging in intentional, or internal, practices that cause environmental toxicity or toxicity in humans or animals is prohibited. Any company initiative or campaign for health and well-being fundraising or awareness which is simultaneously involved in intentional or associative practices that cause environmental toxicity or toxicity in humans or animals is prohibited. Any initiative that campaigns for health and well-being fundraising or awareness which involves testing or research initiatives that cause injury or toxicity to animals (that is intended as non-beneficial to the animal or species) is prohibited.

  16. Prison sentences for personal use of drugs or trivial distribution of drugs is prohibited.

  17. Reasonable protection for inmates from abuse, assault, or intimidation from other inmates or guards must be provided for all prison and jail facilities, and will require oversight by independent agency.

40 list - Part 3 - (17 thru 33) continued...

Dave

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

40 list - Part 2 - (8 thru 16) continued...

  1. Corporations would not be allowed to outsource work overseas at predatory worker exploitation wages… if work was outsourced, or if company moved operations to another country, it would require fair wages to the worker of no less than 60% of the equivalent U.S. wage that was replaced. Corporations would not be allowed to contract with, or engage in, overseas operations which exploit workers financially or environmentally to provide services for, or product manufacturing for, said corporation.

  2. Any lobbyist, member of congress, judicial member, executive member, consultant, or attorney who engages in any legal process to exploit the well-being of citizens or non-citizens (environmentally, financially, or to limit fair opportunity) for profit or to serve predatory private or corporate interests would forfeit their positions and be prosecuted. Any overseeing entity that obstructs or fails to reasonably prosecute said concerns would forfeit their positions and be prosecuted.

  3. Any corporation, lobbyist, consultant, member of congress, judicial member, or executive member, attorney, or member of political office, who is found to have engaged or advocated in any legal process in the present or past to exploit the well-being of citizens or non-citizens (environmentally, financially, or to limit fair opportunity) for profit or to serve predatory private or corporate interests will have assets frozen for review, to assess improper gains.

  4. Any corporation or individual in banking management, banking regulation, financial stock brokerage, pension fund management found in the present or past to have engaged in the exploitation of the well-being of citizens or non-citizens financially for profit or to serve predatory private or corporate interests would will have assets frozen for review, to assess improper gains.

  5. Any executive in banking management, banking regulation, financial stock brokerage, pension fund management is not allowed salary or bonuses in sum beyond $10 million per year. Any executive in banking management, banking regulation, financial stock brokerage, pension fund management found to have had bonuses in the past beyond $10 million dollars per year will have assets frozen for review, to assess improper gains. Any executive in banking management, banking regulation, financial stock brokerage, pension fund management, or financial fund insurance found to have had bonuses during periods of financial loss or government bailout, in the present or past, will have assets frozen for review, to assess improper gains.

  6. Any lobbyist, member of congress, member of political office, judicial member, executive member, or attorney who uses fundamentally false statements to any significant degree during exercise of their directly relevant specific duties will be suspended for 2 weeks, and after 3 occurrences would forfeit their positions and be prosecuted.

  7. The practice of using fundamentally false public statements to any significant degree during political campaigns will disqualify candidates from political office. The practice of using fundamentally false public statements to any significant degree, with directly responsible advocation thereof, during political campaigns will disqualify political consultants from political activity compensation in any form for 3 years.

  8. Any individual, organization, or company that actively (or indirectly with intent) egregiously obstructs progress toward what is fundamentally fair or just, for political, religious, philosophical, or financial interest, will have assets frozen for review, to assess improper gains. Any individual, organization, or company found to be engaged in any conspiracy to exploit the well-being of citizens (environmentally, financially, or to limit fair opportunity) or to obstruct progress toward what is fundamentally fair or just, for political, religious, philosophical, or financial interest, would forfeit their assets and be prosecuted.

  9. Individuals cannot be protected from firing because of policy, seniority, or tenure in cases of poor performance or questionable contribution in educational arenas (excluding non-egregious tardiness or trivial grounds). Grounds for termination can not include: failure to practice superficial politeness or ‘likability’, failure to conform to superficial or unreasonable social, political, religious, financial or philosophical interests, or for engaging in reasonable idealistic or alternative activity to benefit students, individuals, or society.

40 list - Part 2 - (8 thru 16) continued...

Dave