Unified Party

[Xilvius 32]

 

I will be accepting no salary as governor. Instead I will donate my cheque to the police force to keep them well paid without raising taxes to high levels.

Unified Party

The Unified Party is a Bipartisan political platform dedicated strictly to the creation and stabilization of a clean government choice and a thriving economy.

 

Our goal is to prevent YOUR governance to be ran by a slew of children bending to the whim of criminal networks. The Unified party will ALWAYS stand direct to the majority populace of popular favor. Our representatives will not be swayed by dirty money, backroom politics, or standardized threats.

Platform Policies

Our platform polices will be and will remain always to support small government, the lowest possible tax rate, and Marijuana legalization to stimulate the economy.

It is the right of the citizens to have the means to defend themselves against vagrant criminals. If we take the firearms out of the hands of the citizens we leave them defenseless against the criminal organizations that reign over black market economies. Where we believe in the capabilities of the police force, we also believe that an armed society, is a polite one.

We will not be concerning ourselves with things of lesser consequence, such as jaywalking, or noise complaints.

 

You won't see Draconian Laws or penalties under the Unification Party; We believe in Bipartisan policies, that benefit the community as a whole and endorse economic stimulation and growth.  Our policies will always reflect these basic values and understandings, you won't be distracted with flashy websites to disguise corruption or totalitarianism.

Sleight of Hand

Don't fall prey to the sleight of hand tactics being utilized by other "fundamentalists" parties. You do NOT require high tax rates for a safe community. The citizens have a RIGHT to protect themselves with firearms. Business' shouldn't be taxed more because they make more. We believe in flat rate taxes across the board, unlike the majority of our competition that want to increase taxes dramatically dependent on your yearly income. The successful shouldn't have to pay for the unsuccessful, nor will they under the Unified Party. Don't fall victim to false politics, corrupted deals, and high tax rates.

Unified

The Unified Party is a stand against corruption. It's a champion for the legitimate citizen and business owner. We will not stand by idly and allow competing political parties to lord themselves over the civilians. We will not settle for the lesser of the two evils.

Divided we fall, but UNIFIED WE STAND.


A personal thanks to @Jax for designing and creating our insignia and helping the campaign along since it's creation.

Edited November 5, 2017 by Xilvius

[Jax 14]

YeeeHawww!

[SupremeLeader 127]

yerr

[LuciousTimes 1,249]

I'm very confused!

[Norway174 269]

Finally something simple, straight to the point. No complicated fuzz!

And I can't think of a single thing wrong with you.  

Got my vote. If I cared enough about politics.

[BrianHamilton 214]

Very undetailed and it would appear that there was no effort whatsoever when this thread was created.

[SupremeLeader 127]

2 hours ago, BrianHamilton said:

Very undetailed and it would appear that there was no effort whatsoever when this thread was created.

But that's the entire point.

 

[gabzo 17]

Yeah, I thought the point was to know nothing and blindly put trust in someone just so you don't have to deal with the politics. 

[Jax 14]

The other lovely candidates complained about it. So we can't do that. @gabzo

Edited November 3, 2017 by Jax

[slovaceck 58]

8 minutes ago, Jax said:

The other lovely candidates complained about it. So we can't do that. @gabzo

Bravo to you man for putting up with that, I respect you man. I would have told them where to put it and walked away. Good on  you for sticking to it!

[Jax 14]

@slovaceck We were never joking, and we wont give up that easily. Thank you!

[DLimit 167]

On 11/1/2017 at 11:59 PM, Xilvius said:

Don't fall prey to the sleight of hand tactics being utilized by other "fundamentalists" parties. You do NOT require high tax rates for a safe community. The citizens have a RIGHT to protect themselves with firearms. Business' shouldn't be taxed more because they make more. We believe in flat rate taxes across the board, unlike the majority of our competition that want to increase taxes dramatically dependent on your yearly income. The successful shouldn't have to pay for the unsuccessful, nor will they under the Unified Party.

The People's Revolutionary Party argues that the hard-working labour-class deserves to attain the basic necessities to life rather than providing C.E.O.s, whom do not produce a SINGLE good and service within the company, with an extraordinary amount of wealth for merely forming an idea.

The P.R.P. does not argue that "unsuccessful people do not deserve wealth". The P.R.P. argues that the PRODUCERS deserve to seize the means of production and claim ownership, as a collective, of what is rightfully theirs... their production.

The average C.E.O. will profit from the blood, sweat, tears, and labour of the working-class citizen while the average working-class citizen will struggle to survive within "The Unified Party"'s political system. Why should subjects that sit within an office and engage in business meetings profit from the labour of the average working-class citizen when the average working-class citizen produces 100% of the commodities and services within society? It is an exploited system that must be abolished.

Workers of the world, unite under The People's Revolutionary Party!

Edited November 3, 2017 by DLimit

[Xilvius 32]

49 minutes ago, DLimit said:

The People's Revolutionary Party argues that the hard-working labour-class deserves to attain the basic necessities to life rather than providing C.E.O.s, whom do not produce a SINGLE good and service within the company, with an extraordinary amount of wealth for merely forming an idea.

The P.R.P. does not argue that "unsuccessful people do not deserve wealth". The P.R.P. argues that the PRODUCERS deserve to seize the means of production and claim ownership, as a collective, of what is rightfully theirs... their production.

The average C.E.O. will profit from the blood, sweat, tears, and labour of the working-class citizen while the average working-class citizen will struggle to survive within "The Unified Party"'s political system. Why should subjects that sit within an office and engage in business meetings profit from the labour of the average working-class citizen when the average working-class citizen produces 100% of the commodities and services within society? It is an exploited system that must be abolished.

Workers of the world, unite under The People's Revolutionary Party!

If it wasn't for those CEOs no one would have a job. We're not going to take from the entrepreneurs and give to people who won't do for themselves.

[DLimit 167]

18 minutes ago, Xilvius said:

If it wasn't for those CEOs no one would have a job. We're not going to take from the entrepreneurs and give to people who won't do for themselves.

According to one's logic, a job would not exist without a C.E.O. Thus, nurses, doctors, Law enforcement officers etc... exist due to bourgeois-capitalists rather than the state.

Ideals could be produced by the people, alongside with the commodities and services, indicating that it should be owned by the people.

Hypothetically, if a child trick-or-treats for candy within it's mother's bucket, the mother should possess the Right to own 100% of the child's candy, correct? Not at all. The labourer deserves to reap the rewards of their labour, not the opposite.

[DLimit 167]

Capitalist logic: I've produced an idea that involves producing a shirt with a logo on it. Thus, I deserve the majority of the wealth that is generated by my employee's labour. You know, the black shirt with the symbol of a check-mark? I had invented the check-mark. Thus, the inventor of this idea deserves to profit from the labour of it's workers, even though the workers had produced 100% of these shirts.

Communist/Socialist logic: The workers produced 100% of the goods and services. Thus, the goods and services must be distributed equally amongst the workers.

Edited November 3, 2017 by DLimit

[Xilvius 32]

9 minutes ago, DLimit said:

Capitalist logic: I've produced an idea that involves producing a shirt with a logo on it. Thus, I deserve the majority of the wealth that is generated by my employee's labour. You know, the black shirt with the symbol of a check-mark? I had invented the check-mark. Thus, the inventor of this idea deserves to profit from the labour of it's workers, even though the workers had produced 100% of these shirts.

Communist/Socialist logic: The workers produced 100% of the goods and services. Thus, the goods and services must be distributed equally amongst the workers.

Business owners have the long term goal of having their business run by other people while they collect the profits because it is THIER business. Their employees didn't put up the funding money, didn't start from the bottom. They were hired on and paid to do their job, they shouldn't just be given all the profits to someone elses business.

[SupremeLeader 127]

3 hours ago, DLimit said:

Capitalist logic: I've produced an idea that involves producing a shirt with a logo on it. Thus, I deserve the majority of the wealth that is generated by my employee's labour. You know, the black shirt with the symbol of a check-mark? I had invented the check-mark. Thus, the inventor of this idea deserves to profit from the labour of it's workers, even though the workers had produced 100% of these shirts.

Communist/Socialist logic: The workers produced 100% of the goods and services. Thus, the goods and services must be distributed equally amongst the workers.

Your logic makes absolutely zero sense.

It's not the workers that take the risk of creating a start-up, putting the money up-front to support and fund an idea that can potentially make a lot of money. This idea that the workers should be given an equal distribution for taking a ridiculously smaller risk is going to kill innovation, and the motivation to create something new and revolutionary.

 

This is where Capitalism is an actively better system of economics in which people can thrive on their own accord, with the will to be successful in a free and open market.

[MauriceClinton 32]

Edited November 4, 2017 by MauriceClinton

[SupremeLeader 127]

@MauriceClinton you rn

 

[LuciousTimes 1,249]

8 hours ago, SupremeLeader said:

Your logic makes absolutely zero sense.

It's not the workers that take the risk of creating a start-up, putting the money up-front to support and fund an idea that can potentially make a lot of money. This idea that the workers should be given an equal distribution for taking a ridiculously smaller risk is going to kill innovation, and the motivation to create something new and revolutionary.

 

This is where Capitalism is an actively better system of economics in which people can thrive on their own accord, with the will to be successful in a free and open market.

He believes something along the lines of  "free market makes the rich richer and the poor poorer"!

[LuciousTimes 1,249]

That's my impression!

[SupremeLeader 127]

7 minutes ago, LuciousTimes said:

He believes something along the lines of  "free market makes the rich richer and the poor poorer"!

Those who are capable with the will to succeed always make it one way or another. Not this bullshit where "everyone gets a even slice of the pie".

There are people on top, and there are people on the bottom. That's how the world works, and that's how the world has always worked.

 

His interpretation of the world is disgustingly naive.

[DLimit 167]

8 hours ago, SupremeLeader said:

Your logic makes absolutely zero sense.

It's not the workers that take the risk of creating a start-up, putting the money up-front to support and fund an idea that can potentially make a lot of money. This idea that the workers should be given an equal distribution for taking a ridiculously smaller risk is going to kill innovation, and the motivation to create something new and revolutionary.

 

This is where Capitalism is an actively better system of economics in which people can thrive on their own accord, with the will to be successful in a free and open market.

One presumes that capitalism is the direct cause towards innovation when the majority of inventions and discoveries were conducted due to pure curiosity combined with the application of the scientific method. One produces such arguments with the idea that the Soviets did not invent the first cellular phone, did not transport the first living creature into space, and did not launch the first orbital frequency-based satellite into space. Innovation is determined by one's curiosity and labour, not "risking one's wealth for profit". In fact, discoveries are often stifled within a capitalist system if such ideals do not contribute towards profit, which results in inventing cellular phone applications via micro-transactions rather than legalizing one out of the numerous cures for cancer.  

History has proven that capitalism does not promote a meritocratic system considering that the income-inequality gap between the rich and the poor has increased dramatically since the 1960s through the formation of Neo-Liberal economic globalization. 

The risk would not even exist within a socialist system considering that industries would be formed according to the needs and desires of the people. In fact, through Universal education, skilled labourers with critical minds shall be more likely to contribute towards inventions and discoveries in order to enhance the human development of humanity rather than utilizing one half of their entire life selling their labour power to a bourgeois-C.E.O. that merely profits from one's labour.

"Makes zero sense"...

An individual labouring for fourty years in order to merely attain the basic necessities to life is a greater risk than any investment conducted by a C.E.O.

[DLimit 167]

12 hours ago, Xilvius said:

Business owners have the long term goal of having their business run by other people while they collect the profits because it is THIER business. Their employees didn't put up the funding money, didn't start from the bottom. They were hired on and paid to do their job, they shouldn't just be given all the profits to someone elses business.

The majority of employers did not even start from the bottom considering that their wealth was inherited from their ancestors. 

 

Their business is based on exploiting the labour power of working-class citizens for profit, without even contributing more than a small percentage of towards the business. Within a Socialist state, one is not expected to be wealthy in order to contribute their inventions or discovery towards a system. Instead, values shall be determined based on one's ideas rather than their wealth.

[DLimit 167]

14 minutes ago, SupremeLeader said:

Those who are capable with the will to succeed always make it one way or another. Not this bullshit where "everyone gets a even slice of the pie".

There are people on top, and there are people on the bottom. That's how the world works, and that's how the world has always worked.

 

His interpretation of the world is disgustingly naive.

The expanding income-inequality gap between the rich and the poor suggests otherwise.

"There are people on top, and there are people on the bottom. That's how the world works, and that's how the world has always worked" - You

Your traditional fallacy clearly displays the inability to progress beyond the oppressive ideals of history. "Philosophers have INTERPRETED the world in many ways. The point, however, is to CHANGE it." - Karl Marx

 

Your argument sounds identical to stating "Women have been oppressed as second-class citizens throughout the ages. Thus, it must remain that way... how naive of you to state otherwise."

Analyze "Dialectical/Historical Materialism" prior to jumping to conclusions with claims indicating that the average Marxist is unaware of the history of the world:

Edited November 4, 2017 by DLimit