Saya bersalah hari ini

Seorang pegawai negeri menyelesaikan pelayanannya, dan saya memberikan dia uang. Karena biasanya dalam keadaan begitu kalau swasta yang mengerjakan saya kasi tip. Tapi dia ini pegawai negeri dan tidak seharusnya diberikan tip.

lihat http://www.kpk.go.id/gratifikasi/index.php/informasi-gratifikasi/mn-ketentuan-gratifikasi

buka tulisan "Informasi Gratifikasi" Dan download "Buku Saku Gratifikasi"

Aturan-aturan yang terumuskan

Saya mengalami sendiri masalah-masalah yang terjadi dari aturan-aturan yang tidak terumuskan.
Komunitas kadang-kadang mengalami benturan melawan individual karena individual tidak mengikuti aturan-aturan inherent.
Masalah ini mungkin lebih teratasi kalau orang-orang mau merumuskan dan mengumumkan aturan-aturannya.
Aturan-aturan yang tidak terumuskan kesannya feodal, eksklusif, mau mempermainkan orang lain, dan illiterate.

Conviction variance

Sometimes the justice system actually can't know whether somebody's guilty or not, but because a serious case has been brought up, they have to decide something.
I think there are variances of convictions:
Guilty,
Not guilty,
Safe boundaries.

When a murder has happened, there's an instance when it's not safe to let someone loose into the society even though he/she might not be the murderer. There's substantial prove even though not at 100% mathematical/quantum certainty that he / she was the murderer, to not let this guy loose.
I think in this instance the law should be able to suspend him/her from common societies for the sake of safety. But I think it's wrong for the law to convict this person guilty.
For example there were lots of witnesses saying that this guy was at a place during the night. But there were also some who said that the person was at another place.
Well it was night and some people looks the same when he/she was drunk and/or using similar make ups.
So even though there were no lawyers to present the case, judges who are rational could consider this possibility and should be undeterminant because it's just right to do so.

Points based vote

(Notice, links to external sites will lead you to different page that's not mine. They're going to collect informations from you, and would have rules to maintain their solutions. Please be respectful to their terms and condition, and read their privacy policies for YOUR POWER/your rights).

OK, now please watch these videos to become aware of what I'm talking about or if you already know politics then...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmP81NW9_O0

Now, I have an idea, why not point based, alternative voting system? One that gets rank one score 7 points, one that score number 2 get 6 points, etc?

More reason why do we have to be good?

The scarcity of the world is not of time nor energy but of mutual solutions.
We see that protection to intellectual property could lead to some more inventions, even when some might argue that current form of IP law hindered some other types of potentials but, I would say that respecting and giving thanks to the source of our mutual solutions is a crucial part of progress.

Giving thanks to sources of solutions, like planting back the forest, and not bombing the coral reefs, is the only logical thing to do.

Therefore it's not about how much sacrifice you made when creating a solution but how useful your solutions are.

Therefore little things that people do actually are very valuable beyond imagination. The fact that people held themselves from doing criminal activities like stealing, hurting other people, and rioting... the fact that people participate in the law and also good mutual values in the society. Shows that we also have to give thanks to these non-practicioners of evil and practitioners of good.

But if we were to do that, wouldn't it mean that we're to loose most of our money to these people?
Certainly yes.
But since we are also people who often or maybe for some of you always do good for people, then you too deserve thanks from the society I think.
Therefore if you do evil lifestyle, I think you owe to the mutual solutions you enjoy right now, like orderliness, peace, kindness, good prejudices, helpfulness, public facilities, public knowledge, etc... and I'm telling you and reminding myself... these are very, very, very, very, very... expensive.

Farmers' Monarchy v.04

Farmers have to be able to eat, sleep, get normal entertainment, access to internet, sanitation, life insurances, fuels, basic health treatments, other living costs, and some savings for their children's education.
Therefore the price of a sack of rice need to be increased to the point where they could do so.

New Law proposal:
1. Put a floor on price of food.
2. The floor level was based on prices of other commodities, if one commodity (other than food) gets too expensive, automatically the floor will increase accordingly.
3. All individuals should be given a land since they were born, that can't be sold. That piece of land is their "basic property right". If they want to move the location of the land they could do so, but they can't not have any land.

So the price for the sack of rice should be at about Three million rupiahs if this system was used (2012). Currently the price for a sack of rice is less than 250,000 rupiahs.

Expected results:
- Less urbanization
- Only the really skillful would work at public office, the less skillfull would choose another job. And this might leads to better synergy, less public salaries, less peers burden for the truly skillfull, less unproductive workplace politics in the supposedly people serving oriented public offices.
- Farmers have their deserved dignity, appreciation for their truly hard works, more investments and research would be dedicated for them.
- Businesses considers farmers as serious customers.
- More resistance against small group of ultra rich people to monopolize the farmlands and the ocean.
- More wealth for everybody in the long run.

I encourage this to be performed by the whole world.

Life, Freedom, Dignity

Dignity is the power to say no
If a fisherman met with a customer, and the customer offered too cheap of a price for his fish. He could say no.
Scientists, programmers, musicians, could say no to those who wanted to use their products by the help of the Intellectual Property Law.

Now why do this POWER to say no is very important?

What is life?
What sets us apart from non living things are our ability to say no from experiencing some interactions. We could see what's coming ahead, and decide whether or not we'd like to experience it.

Therefore, freedom is not given by the government, freedom is inherent in our life. The power to say no, is essential to life. Freedom is when you have the power to reject unpreferrable interactions and chose to experience the preferred ones. Without the power to say no, we are not free, and without freedom we are not alive.

When you took somebody else's dignity, you're killing him/her.
 

Price Floor for Food

In order to lower urbanization, you got to give the farmers dignity. And they do deserve high dignities, as intellectual property owners.
Therefore the price of food should be high in comparison with other goods and services.
Maybe,
minimum 15% the price of average decent quality plasma screen tv (not the cheapest)
1% of the price of average decent quality laptops
.0001% of the price of average decent quality houses
etc

Can't be lower. If some decided to rise their price, the government must make sure that the price of food increase as well. But if some decided not wanting to lower the price then they need more competitors.
If the price of computer or handphone already very low compared to the price of houses, still the price of food can't be lowered.
The only way to lower the price of food is the lower the price of everything else. And if some commodity like oil for example still have unproportional high price over the others, then the other sellers must subsidize the providers of oil to lower their prices.

Do you really need food that bad? Until Jesus come and give us new bodies... I'm afraid yes... therefore give farmers their deserved dignity.
Hurry up before big companies replaced farmers!

 

Cicak vs Buaya

Dalam undang-undang KPK ada kata "segera".
Bukankah kata segera ini adalah amanat rakyat? Apakah MOU itu amanat rakyat? Kalau MOU hanya memperlambat, maka MOU harus diabaikan, menurut saya begitulah baru konstitusional.

(terinspirasi oleh ILC tvONE)

Beda segera dalam konteks ilahi dengan manusia. Bagi Tuhan 1000 tahun itu satu hari, itu hak-Nya, tapi Undang-Undang dibuat dalam konteks manusiawi.
Terlepas dari itu, solusi tetap bisa tercapai, kalau MOU memperlambat, MOU melawan undang undang. Kalau MOU mempercepat, MOU mendukung undang undang. That's my opinion.

Kecenderungan analysis untuk Papa v.02

Papa kecenderungan yang harus kau musuhi adalah:

Kecenderungan untuk menganggap pintar tindakan yang diambil dari sinyal-sinyal tidak resmi.

Kecenderungan yang harus didukung sebagai seorang auditor adalah:

Kecenderungan untuk hidup dalam terang, berkata resmi, bertindak resmi. Susah tapi sebuah prestasi.

Jangan terjebak, taat hukum itu susah, jujur itu susah, semakin bisa dilakukan seharusnya semakin bangga, dan semakin tidak bisa dan tidak mau seharusnya semakin rendah hati.

-----------------------------

Pada akhirnya, kecenderungan itu (musuh) akan membuat orang salah mengambil kesimpulan. Pasti

Money Politics

Pada saat orang miskin terutama yang anaknya butuh biaya belajar yang memadai menerima uang dari politikus, mereka pasti terdorong untuk membayar pertolongan tersebut dengan mempromosikan atau mencoblos politikus tersebut.
Tapi apakah ada paksaan?
Apakah politikus menyuruh mereka membawa kamera ke tps kemudian mengirim rekaman pencoblosan baru mau dibayar lebih?
Lalu apa bedanya memberi uang kepada rakyat miskin dengan membiayai makan minum tim sukses? Bukannya itu money politik juga?

Manusiawinya sih semua orang mau membantu orang miskin, kalau tanpa paksaan apakah ini mpol?

Melki's War Drum v.03

Semakin banyak orang miskin taat hukum, semakin ketidakadilan tidak berkutik
Semakin banyak orang miskin yang taat hukum merubah hukum, semakin terancam para koruptor.

The more poor people obey the law, the more power sapped from injustice
The more poor people who obey the law changed the law, the more danger for the corrupts.

Hopefully the law would change to the better, one law I'd like to change is so that people were let to spread their religion freely. To both religious and non religious people.

Peraturan Presiden mengenai Harga Jual eceran minyak jenis tertentu

Tautan

Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2012 Tentang Harga Jual Eceran Dan Konsumen Pengguna Jenis Bahan Bakar Minyak Tertentu

File PDF
Sumber: kominfo.go.id

Setelah Mengetahui sumber pertolongan (Keadilan), A mumble

Setelah seseorang mengetahui siapa-siapa saja yang sudah menolong dia. Dia akan mengalokasikan sumber daya atau solusi untuk berterimakasih. Tapi karena dunia tidak sempurna karena dosa manusia, dia harus memilih diantara orang-orang berjasa tersebut.
Hal ini tidak enak tapi terpaksa, dan kalau hal ini terjadi pada sebuah pemerintah, kira-kira prosedurnya bagaimana?
Saya mengusulkan menggunakan dadu. Biarkan keberuntungan yang memutuskan, karena hukum keberuntungan berlaku untuk semua orang. Makanya Pancasila, keTuhanan yang Maha Esa, dan doktrin manusia berdosa harus terus dijaga di Indonesia.
Tapi tentu saja sumber daya tersebut harus dibagi sampai ke tingkat minimum, jangan ada yang mendapatkan berlebihan, kalau sudah cukup ya sudah dikasih ke orang lain lagi.

Keputusan MK atas pembayaran Lapindo

Saya sangat tidak setuju atas keputusan MK menghalangi pembayaran pemerintah atas bencana Lapindo kepada masyarakat porong dan sekitarnya.
Pemerintah harus membayar kepada rakyat! Karena kekayaan alam harus dipergunakan sebesar-besarnya untuk kemakmuran rakyat. Dan terhadap bencana seperti ini, Pemerintah yang seharusnya mengganti rugi kepada rakyat terlepas dari apakah PT. Lapindo akan diwajibkan membayar kembali kepada pemerintah atau tidak.

I don't support America!

I'm an Indonesian Christian, saying this to the world.
Do not support American's policy of war and destruction!

Saya orang Kristen menurut konstitusi di Indonesia.
Saya tidak mendukung Amerika yang suka berperang dan merusak.

666
616 

Traffic Law improvement, my idea.

Ok, let me try to propose this idea, it might worked really well if I'm right.

So we have this problem of traffic jam. But traffic jam is not always occured in both sides of the road. When the left side of the road was jammed, those that are on the right that are coming from the opposite direction, should be allowed to cut through the jam if they wanted to turn right.
I mean it should be guidelined to be so, currently if I were to follow the law, I must go around to the back of the que. But if it were regulated that its ok for few cars or bikes to cut through traffic jam once in a while then unnecessary blocks could be avoided.

The existence of the guidline would also prevent too many cars and bikes cut through the jam.

Illustration:

The Law said, during normal circumstances traffic flow would be free of some regulations but people were given guidelines so that when confusion occured they'd knew which and which to be prioritized and done.

During extreme circumstances the police could announce for the activation of the guideline as laws, and during that condition everyone must follow the law otherwise fined or jailed.

The guideline said, drivers should carry a sign and show it whenever they wanted to cut through traffic jams to get to the other side of the road. Only 5 people with the sign should be allowed to came accross at one time. If vehicles saw the sign, and decided to stop moving to give way, then the requestor could came in front of the vehicle to come accross, and other vehicles should give way to the crosser.
But after five crosser vehicles passed, there should be no more crosser to be let in. They would have to ask again to vehicles behind the previous giver, or wait for 1 minute.

Prevention Oriented Law Enforcement

After listening to Robert LeFevre's podcast at mises.org "What is the right amount of Government?"( http://mises.org/media/1186/What-is-the-Right-Amount-of-Government?ajaxsrc=audio, accessed 19th of April 2012), I'm reminded about the issue I thought about a while ago. The problem of jobs that in nature gained salaries or payments from the existence of human problems.

Professions such as doctors, armies, police, etc. They got paid out of our sufferings, and this is not good. Can we make them attempt to eliminate these problems in more permanent ways from our lives?We should create a scheme where these people would keep on getting paid, and would get less payments if we ended up being sick, or at war, or experienced criminal problems, etc.

I propose a system where we kept on paying these people generous amounts of money every month, but depends on the level of reports of occurence of problems, we would reduce our generousity.
For example, if a lot of people got sick, they got paid minimum wage, but if a lot of people were healthy they would get the full amounts of the generous amount.

Ofcourse in order to prevent them from refusing reports, we set up an independent bodies to accept reports. And these independent administrators checked the validity of the reports, and then announced the results online and directly to the major, or governors.

Matthew 11: 22 - 37

After reading this passage I realize, there are laws that are good and there are laws that are bad. Order is not always lovely, disorder could interact with order creating destructive administrations.
What I'm saying is, I need to pick which order is lovely, which is not. Our constitution, UUD'45 says that poor people and abandoned children should be taken care off by the country, Indonesia.

I believe that its good to support our constitution, even though maybe not all of laws within it is lovely. Some laws ban people from giving to the poor on the streets, I think this is not lovely. Poor people need food as fast as possible, short term, in this case education is not more important than charity. If its illegal to prevent people from dying just because we want our city to be more orderly, what's the point of achieving that?

Instead of having this law, lets create a special site for poor beggars to gather, the site should be in strategic places so that people could really see what's happening in their city.

How to attract people more to participate in the Law v.02

What we can do is to give special privileges to different people. For example Mr. A is free to open up stores on some street corners for free for a year and/or to give license to other people to do so.
Mr. B an elder, could drive on his village without any driver's license for 2 weeks. Mr. C have 50% discounts on his home purpose electricity bills for two weeks... and could transfer the right to another address. 

Do this to a lot of people and maybe the law would become more popular and would receive more investments in terms of money and intellectual richness.

Terhambat KKN di Makassar? Panggil Ombudsman

Lembaga Ombudsman Makassar