China Permits Local Elections, but Bans Independent Candidates

According to this story, on June 9, the Chinese government ruled that independent candidates are not allowed in elections for county and township office. The article is not too clear, but it seems that “independent candidate” in China means someone who desires to be placed on the ballot, without going through some sort of nomination process that involves being vetted by various groups.


Comments

China Permits Local Elections, but Bans Independent Candidates — 10 Comments

  1. Hmmm.

    Having ANY contested elections in the China regime is rather amazing.

    I.E. — the commie only candidates on the ballots somehow has been changed ???

    See the EVIL old time U.S.S.R. fraud so-called elections — ONLY commie candidates.

    Dare to strike out the name of the candidate on the ballots — and get a visit from the commie secret police at 3 AM.

  2. Pingback: China Permits Local Elections, but Bans Independent Candidates | ThirdPartyPolitics.us

  3. Demo-Rep. I found you.

    Since you did not answer my last comment under the post heading of “Gatewood Galbraith Now Has 5,000 Signatures on Petition to be on Kentucky Ballot for Governor this Year,,” I’ll repost her my comments (with a couple of minor editing changes) and give you opportunity to respond again. And if others reading also want to respond – to prove my economic theories will not work, please by all means do so. You just might make a Libertarian out of me – or at least a Constitutionalist – in the CP vein. (I also hope – and will appreciate – if Richard will allow this lengthy comment to be accepted.)

    Demo Rep, please, why can’t you get this silly notion out of your head that “Only delusionial utopian statists want to control the EVER-changing economy…” Yes, Communists might – and some Socialists might. But real believers in a genuine Free Enterprise System know the difference. There is nothing wrong with a so-called “capitalist” system, as long as that system is not allowed to gouge and manipulate the consumers – making the capitalists richer and the consumers poorer. Permanent Price and Wage controls would correct this. For a real capitalist to make more money, he or she simply expands their business activities – not increase their prices – just because there is more money in circulation – or cut wages of his/her employees so they will have more profits.

    And yes paper money would be limited in increased ciruclation under and through a National Banking System. But it would be “loaned” to those entrepreneurs who want to build businesses or factories to create jobs and help the overall economy. It also would be loaned to couples wanting to build or buy their “dream home” paying back only the principal – not with compounded interest – to be paid back over time, and only a “user fee” of say no more than $10 per thousand in loan paid back for administrative costs. No longer would private banks get filthy rich from compounded interest.

    If the government needed, for example, an extra 5 trillion to shore up Social Security and Medicare, it would create (coin) it solely for that purpose. But any potential inflation caused by that extra 5 trillion in circulation would be controlled by the same permanent Price and Wage Stablization Board. This 5 trillion would never have to be paid back – it would be left to circulate in the economy and would stimulate the economy in many ways.

    Yes, the monetary system would have to be carefully managed – but by Congress – not the Federal Reserve System as we have today. There would always be sufficient money for commerce, and unexpected government expenditures. Wages would be stablized positively by “income stipends” from the federal govenment to assist those employers who qualify and who honestly cannot pay a living wage to their employees due to the limits placed on it by the Price and Wage Stablization Board or other uncontrollably factors.

    And yes, there still would be taxes – but it could be a Flat Tax, a Federal Sales Tax, or whatever tax system that was needed nationally, or a sales tax for whatever was needed in the states or locally. As citizens, we still have an obligation to pay taxes – fairly accessed taxes – as we all have a duty to help with the general expenses of our governments – whether national, state or local.

    I know this sounds “fairy tale” to many, but it would work. And there are many other facets of its operations too detailed to be covered here. But Entrepreneurs would still have the “motivation” to invest and create jobs. People could still become millionaires if they worked hard. And the working people would have “living wage” salaries to take care of their families, whether it be for their education, health care, or for whatever.

    Again, Demo Rep, why can’t you understand this? Or do you understand it, but just think it is “just part of the free enterprise system way” for businesses under the so-called capitalist system to exploit the consumers with unnecessary increased prices, and the private bankers to gouge the common people with compounded interest? Which is it.

    I’ll be waiting for an answer from you or whomever wishs to opine.

  4. #4 Again – this is ballot access blog.

    NOT a general politics or money or economics or statism blog.

    Start your own blog about whatever.

  5. Demo Rep. Typical response that I might expect from someone who cannot defend his own philosophical positions. You probably don’t even know why you hold such – probably because some “self-annointed” Libertarian doctrinaire told you this is the “truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”

  6. I’m delighted that I came upon this weblog. Finally a decent site, which we can come back to regularly. Thank you for sharing this with us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.