If you could have one law passed, what would you see passed?
By Phyrre
@phyrre (2317)
United States
May 24, 2009 10:09am CST
If you had the chance to pass one, only one, law without it being contested, what law would you choose to pass?
This question always makes me wonder, especially in light of the Obama administration and he's offering the promise of so much change (which I'm still waiting to see). So what changes would you like to see if you could?
I have difficulty picking that one issue that I would want to see settled. Universal health care sounds good, but I know it has both benefits and disadvantages. Still, I know lots of family members that need health insurance and can't afford it. My uncle actually LOST his health insurance because he has diabetes and his health insurance company didn't want to keep paying for his medicine and everything! That's not right.
But there are also so many other issues that need to be settled, too! So I think it would be very hard for me to choose just one if I could have only one passed. I'd do that genie loop-hole thing and pass a law that says I can pass another 10 laws...lol.
So if you had the chance to pass one law uncontested, what law would you choose and why?
1 person likes this
7 responses
@benhilo (871)
• Tripoli, Libya
25 May 09
There can only be one law (if I was Emperor or something) that should be enacted now and that is Spammers should be sentenced to deleting unwanted email for at least 16 hours a day for the life of their term, 1 to 5 years say. As a side effect of this law, spammers are exempt from the Geneva Convention with regards to torture. Minor detail but I was going for full disclosure.
1 person likes this
@phyrre (2317)
• United States
25 May 09
YES! You are officially my hero. Definite plus for torturing spammers. One of the most annoying things is to log in to your email and finding you have another 200 emails of spam overnight. I just want to crawl under a rock. I would completely support this law. :) Not that it would matter because it would pass uncontested according to the fine print, of course, but still.
@IedynRose (79)
• United States
24 May 09
I think you hit the nail on the head, one law is not enough to see the changes I want to see in this world. So the genie loop whole it is..lol.. But if I had to choose one over all others I would mandate that no rental housing shall have a rent more than 30% of the Tenants Net montly income. Tenant must be gainfully and legally employed fulltime (32+ hours per week). My law would allow for "Luxury" housing accomodations only available to those making at least 30% over the gross median income of their state, where rental rates would not be regulated by my policy. I think it is ridiculous that there is NO state in this country where a person making minimum wage can afford the cost of a 1 bedroom apartment without some sort assistance! I live in a state where we have what they call Affordable dwelling units. HHMMPPHHH! I think its a bit backwards if you ask me, affordable housing should be availabe without question, it is Luxury that one should be made to jump through hoops and work above and beyond what is considered average to attain. Besos, Iedyn
@phyrre (2317)
• United States
24 May 09
Yeah, renting is extremely expensive. There are SOME affordable housing, though. My fiance and I were lucky enough to find a 1 bedroom apartment for $425 a month, which includes utilities. However, if we didn't have two people working, we wouldn't be able to afford it. Rent uses up the majority of ONE of my fiance's paychecks, and it would take my entire month's worth of pay because I'm only part time right now (because of school).
@IedynRose (79)
• United States
24 May 09
There is some afforbale housing, but not nearly enough. It also dependant on where you live. I'd just about passout if I found an apartment for $400 or so a month. The average retal in my county is $1200 for a 1 bdr apartment. Affordable dwelling here is between 7 to 800, and to qualify for those you have make next to nothing in salary. I myself am caught in the costly middle ground of making too much to qulaify for affordable dwelling and making to little afford an average rental. I could drive an hour or so away and find cheaper rent, but then the benefit is negated by the added cost from my lengthy commute. So I rent for a private landlord, who understandsmy plight..lol. I know my situation is nothing to compared to so many others, and that is wat scares me. If someone like myself, who works everyday for a decent wage has the issues I have, I can only imagine how it must be for others. I just feel if you are legitamatley striving to take care of yorself and family that you should be able to afford housing AND save so they can prosper and progress in life.
@mac1946 (1602)
• Calgary, Alberta
24 May 09
I would pass a law that states,the government must review all laws every ten years and disgard any that are outdated and cannot make laws just to collect more money from the public in fines.
85% of all laws in the United States and Canada are for no other reason than to steal money and curtail our freedoms.
If my 10 year law were put into effect,we should be able to install those for the peoples safety only.
Great discussion.
@phyrre (2317)
• United States
24 May 09
That's a great idea. Then it would get rid of all those silly laws that are published in the books of dumb laws that have been around for hundreds of years and no longer apply. It's just wasted space, though it IS kind of amusing to see what silly laws there were at one point.
@friskimage (170)
• United States
24 May 09
I would pass a law strictly regulating the oil companies. I am sick of all of the record breaking profits and market manipulation. Every year, before summer, they reduce refining capacity in order to reduce supply. That results in prices going up every summer. In many places, gasoline is a necessity.
What would it be like if just before every Thanksgiving, the stores raised food prices. Or just before Christmas, the toy stores raised toy prices.
The oil companies should not be allowed to manipulate the market. It costs people billions of dollars that could be spent elsewhere in the economy.
@whereitgo (60)
• United States
24 May 09
One law for the world or one for the United States? For the world I would choose no nuclear weapons of any kind are allowed or weapons of mass destruction for that matter. For the United states defiantly free health care. Since United States has one of the most advanced technology in the health care field Free health care would do alot for everybody who can't afford it.
@musicmat369 (2)
• United States
24 May 09
I believe that the greatest law for the United States at this time is that all cars bought must be American. This would help our suffering economy.
@Sandra1952 (6047)
• Spain
24 May 09
I would like to see a law passed about compensation, which would need several clauses to halt the madness of the current compensation law. Anyone who has had an accident for which they were partly or fully to blame should not be able to claim compensation.
Prisoners should not be able to claim compensation for lost privileges. When you break the law, you surrender your right to privileges until you have been punished for your crime.
Legal aid should not be automatically available for people to pursue these spurious claims. I am all for anyone who has been injured as a result of someone else's negligence or bad practice being fully compensated, but the whole system is flawed. In the end, it is us, the taxpayers, who pay for all this. People should take responsibility for their own actions instead of looking for someone to blame and someone to pay. Good topic.
