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