If you love your country, and you wish someone would kill me, vote for Scott Adams as a write-in for president of the United States. If elected, it’s a virtual certainty I’ll get assassinated, but not before I solve every problem in the United States. And by our excellent example, the problems in other countries will also be solved.
(Incidentally, if you don’t live in the United States, you can still vote in our elections, thanks to our electronic voting machines. You might need to guess a password. Try “123” or “Reagan.”)
As president, I would solve all the world’s problems by creating a reality TV show where think tanks compete for the best solutions to everything from health care to energy policy to immigration. The judges would be experts who help viewers sort the squirrel shit from the caviar, but the final decisions would be made by viewers, just like on American Idol.
I think you can see many problems with this plan. But you have to compare it to the current political process where idiots elect liars to transfer wealth to crooks. How's that working out for you?
You might think one problem with my plan is that few people would watch a show about political policies. But before the TV show Survivor came on, who predicted that millions of people would watch a bunch of assholes fighting over a coconut? Before American Idol, who predicted that a show featuring bad singers (mostly) would be a worldwide sensation? A good producer can make anything seem fascinating.
Let’s take one example: energy policy. At the risk of oversimplifying, our current energy policy in The United States involves shooting bearded people. It’s not hard to imagine better ideas coming out of a reality TV show. I’m not a think tank and I can give you a few great ideas right off the top of my head:
1. Pass a law in the United States requiring power companies to put a patriotism rating on customer bills. Depending on how much you reduce your consumption over the prior year, you earn a rating of up to four American flags. If you use more energy than last year, your bill comes printed with only one flag. And it’s the flag of Saudi Arabia, you frickin’ traitor. Energy consumption would drop like a rock.
2. Pass a law requiring all cars to have a large gas mileage label on the driver's side door, with an arrow pointing to the driver’s big ol’ head. Everyone already knows, in a general sense, which vehicles use the most gas. But if you have to drive around town with a “9 miles per gallon” label pointed at your mullet, it might make you think twice the next time you consider putting monster tires on your pickup truck.
Seriously, I’d love to watch a reality show where two think tanks argue over whether we should go balls-to-the-wall growing sugar cane and turning it into fuel. Is corn for losers? Does Brazil have it right? It’s all slightly too boring for me to research on my own, and it wouldn't help because I don’t believe anything I read. But I’d watch a reality show about it if the losers were insulted by someone witty. That’s the kind of leader I am.
Sure you will get murdered. Once the theorists descent to reality and find how their solutions affect real people, they begin to behave like politicians. Politics:'The activity through which people make, preserve and amend the general rules under which they live' . Yes. Sometimes the only ones with the guts to do this difficult job are idiots interested in power and money. That is because I always insist in voting. Elect your own idiot because it helps to counterbalance the other idiot. It has worked in the US. Don't you realize why half the humanity want to migrate to your country (land of opportunities) and the other half hate you (plain envy)?
Posted by: Ivan | October 05, 2007 at 05:20 AM
thieves44:
You and your wife decided to have 3 children and have her be a housewife. Your salary is not sufficient to comfortably allow this. Isn't that just bad planning? I do not live in the US and I do not know anything about the health care system. Wouldn't having had one child and/or your wife work have put you in a much better financial situation?
Posted by: Michael W | October 05, 2007 at 05:09 AM
Maybe the best thing for this country would be to find someone that was even worse than the current monkey, let them drive the nation straight into the ground, and then start over. Call this the AA plan, once you hit rock bottom there is only one way to go.
Posted by: James | October 05, 2007 at 05:08 AM
" A car running out of tune will produce an average of 30% MORE harmful emmissions DAILY."
and hourly and monthly and yearly. Thats how percentages work
"keep your belts lubed"
Dont lubricate drive blets, they will slip Dumbass
Posted by: simon | October 05, 2007 at 05:08 AM
" make a bit over 80k a year - have a wife and 4 kids. We struggle to pay the mortgage on a small 4 bedroom rambler. Utilities & sundries consume the majority of my remaining salary. We are able save a very small amount of money for sending the kids, eventually, to a local community college. Our own retirement looks bleak. I pay close to 1000 a month for family dental and health insurance. I do not drive a new car and have no car payment. I do not carry any credit card debt because further debt would put us into the poor house. Living expenses - mortgage costs - and health care insurance rates vary based on your geography.
"
I make about 70k ( 35,000 uk pounds ), get free healthcare , and free dental for myself and my aprtner and my 3 kids. Drive a new car , have a motorbike, employer pays 5% pension. when my kids go to uni, they get an interrest free loan to cover the costs.
Im also protected by a minimum wage and a legal requirement for paid leave
And my house is worth 12% more than last year.
Until now I wanted to work in the US
Posted by: simon | October 05, 2007 at 05:04 AM
I think the password on Diebold machines is "W".
Posted by: Wolfger | October 05, 2007 at 04:53 AM
While I think its a good idea in principal you have to admit within one series the 'think tanks' would be replaced with people judged 'more entertaining' by the producers.
Give it two years and there will be a complete lack of intelligence and instead a couple of flagrantly gay people (More gay than any normal gay person would be) a couple of complete foul mouthed c*nts who start trouble and talk bollox, a couple of airhead blondes who make idiots of tehmselves nationally but hold a captive audience incase for a split second in 4 months of programs they accidentally let a breast escape and an old man who spends the entirity of the series trying to get into either or both of the blondes knickers.
http://yorksocial.evolutiondirectory.com
http://ramblingsofanofficeworker.blogspot.com
Posted by: Oli | October 05, 2007 at 03:44 AM
"UK's big brother show spread quickly round the world. (Apologies on behalf of UK for that)"
It isnt a british based show, it came from mainland europe where it didnt censor 80% of the conversations an 90% of anything interesting, did involve fights, sex copious nudism and all in all was far more interesting.
http://ramblingsofanofficeworker.blogspot.com
Posted by: Oli | October 05, 2007 at 03:38 AM
If you give me some usernames and URL for the election voting, I will vote for you from abroad (hack hack, I am not US citizen).
Posted by: Dramenbnejs | October 05, 2007 at 03:16 AM
I misread your post and thought your reality TV show involved regular Tanks (rather than the thinking variety) competing to solve the worlds problems. In my mind this became an awesome Gladiators type show where Tanks competed in contrived games to "solve" world problems:
"...and now Sherman will compete against Humvee in WALL SMASH to solve Global Warming...."
Posted by: Mick | October 05, 2007 at 02:26 AM
Great Idea. Americans, please post your unused passwords for us poor un represented Europeans.
On an audience participation debate show a woman was defending Fayed for spending £10M on getting to the truth about his son and Diana’s death. "He can afford it and he has the right to have the truth - he deserves the truth" she said. Over and over she said it while the pundits kept replying - "but it's your money, you are paying for it through your taxes, and he's had the truth, twice now..." It wasn’t until the host pitched in, made everything quiet and said to her in level tones - "He has had two inquests, and it is the taxpayer who is paying the £10M, not Fayed." Her reply - "Yes, I understand that but he can afford it and he deserves the truth." Can't we cut the public out of this whole voting thing? The TV companies in the UK certainly did with other shows and they are being hammered for it weekly with new fines and sackings.
Posted by: Andrew | October 05, 2007 at 02:05 AM
OK guys, I just tried and the password is 'Crawford'.
Took a while to guess.
Posted by: pierre | October 05, 2007 at 01:26 AM
Wasn't a matter of pride in US to overconsume?
I would have expected earning Patriotism Flags by consuming MORE instead of LESS...
But then again I'm a terrorist-lover European.
(Not that here we don't like to overconsume...)
Impressive post Scott, but then again, I don't really see the difference with our (western) system.
Seriously: we already have think tanks competing for being loved by the people, doing the most enteratinement-wise choices suported by "experts"...
Posted by: Francesco Orsenigo | October 05, 2007 at 01:22 AM
Scott, on this platform I'd elect you in an instant!
Wonderful post!
Posted by: Elisa | October 05, 2007 at 01:05 AM
Don't think that American Idol is a worldwide sensation. It's amusing to watch how fascinated Americans get over such trivia. On par with the Euro-song "competition".
Posted by: Alan | October 05, 2007 at 12:59 AM
Hallo, frant gif ad monk tre ølsa gritfit.
Foly sambo nörd äsba fjord. Ha ha ha ha!
Posted by: Erasmus Montanus | October 05, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Oh, one thing more about my idea... you'd probably ask what about running US then? Leaving it still to Bush?
Well, who cares? I think average american cares a lot more about having a good TV-show than about whether some bearded people get shot or not. Doesn't he?
Posted by: Väike televaataja | October 05, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I don't think that will work in US. Think about what should Bush do then? Be the host of the show? No, I don't think he will agree.
But maybe it will work out for my homeland, Estonia. In a bit different way, so that Estonia is run by a reality-show aired in US. And is produced in Estonia and all the revenue goes to Estonian state. Of course, no estonian would like the idea that their country is run by american reality show.... but as the profit of the show would probably be about the size of budget of Estonia, noone will protest.
Americans get their show and estonians get the money, everyone happy.
Posted by: Väike televaataja | October 05, 2007 at 12:11 AM
I hope I'm not restating someone else's post, but...
I have been advocating biofuels for some time, and hoping that we would be able to lick the efficiency problems given time, commitment and economies of scale. Sadly, my bubble burst this week when I read an article in a chemistry journal on the subject. My own mild superpower is chemistry, and having seen the numbers in the article, I have to conclude (as the experts and well-informed people already have) that the so-called first-generation biofuels (ie bioethanol and FAME/RME/biodiesel) will not be able to make a spectacular contribution to making road transport carbon neutral. Don't get me wrong, they're trying to get us moving in the right direction, but they need too much agricultural land to be viable as a complete replacement strategy for all fossil fuel. The second generation biofuels, where instead of starches or oils being commercially grown we elect to grow cellulose-producing species and use enzyme technology to produce the fuels and feedstocks seems to be the next best hope, as some of these species can be grown on less productive land, thereby not placing strain on the food production systems. The solution moves some years into the future, and needs more research, but it sounds like we have learned from the first generation and moved forward. Yay chemists!
Posted by: Utopian | October 05, 2007 at 12:07 AM
Reality TV show already implementet. It's called Switzerland. We currently reelect our parliament and discuss on whether or not to ban smoking in public spaces. We therefore pass a law, effectively outlawing smoking in bars, too, except if they are able to proof that they cannot implement the ban without significantly changing their establishment... The Show is on for over 150 years now. Initially, it was great, but it's getting boring for both the viewers and the participants. Lukily you only have a 4-year term...
Posted by: Thomas | October 04, 2007 at 11:45 PM
Easy with the gas guzzler bashing, mate; your M3 isn't exactly a tree-hugger's wet dream.
Posted by: Columbo | October 04, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Dilbert cartoonist for US presidential bid.
News sources indicate a new development in the political arena with Dilbert cartoonist entering the fray. With a rather unlikely running candidate Mr.Adams chooses his cat to be his VP. Much is to be seen if he can spell DOOM for the famous democrat/ rep candidates. Mr.Adams perhaps is already ready with fighting points for the presidential debate vowing to do away with nutcases fighting over coconuts among other things and would not necesairily include the shooting of bearded people! This is going to be 'turtle heads unlimited!!'
Political analysts point out Mr.Adams has a reasonable chance of winning the debates thanks to his extensive vocabulary and the inclusion of sheesh kababs and ganbataar.
Financial support is welcome. Payment by credit cards accepted. Bewildered supporters asked where they would have to swipe the cards...till Mr.Adams said..."thats easy.."and bent over!
Scott, it would surely be good news if you entered the political arena. I'd love to hear what the USA would have to say about a cartoonist president.
P.S. Is it true that Americans have a bias to voting for a 'non-bald' candidate?? Whats the mane got to do with elections??
Cheers
Posted by: Venkatdeep | October 04, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Fantastic, that would be an exhibition of true democracy and freedom, and no-one could possibly be against freedom, ergo you already win. Congratulations Mr President.
Posted by: Matt | October 04, 2007 at 10:36 PM
Brilliant writeup. One of your funnier posts in recent times. I think you might be onto something here. I think the future policies will be decided based on Online voting and sms polls. But some sneaky bastard will find a way to break that system to loot the country.
Posted by: Sreeram | October 04, 2007 at 10:13 PM
"Our current energy policy in The United States involves shooting bearded people."
Yeah. Those rustic Canadians and their tar sands are next.
Posted by: Reepekg | October 04, 2007 at 09:54 PM