Answers to Freedom ERP questions

This thread contains the answers to the questions posed by Freedom ERP in an Podcast. Other Candidates are welcome to post there answers here.




Well they finally got around to appointing the right military commander who is running the show in Iraq. However even he cant create a greater number of troops out of thin air. See my Iraq poilcy for an full outline of my plans.






I would probably wouldn't go thou patents because I think that could be an unproductive approach to the problem and that's putting other legal issues aside. My approach would to developing alternative energy sources why would to implement Government - Private sector relationships. This wouldn't mean government hand outs funding would be tied to progress or the likely hood of an technology becoming an feasible alternative energy sources.

The aim would be to have an situation in the future where two or three alternative energy sources are competing in the market place in order to keep prices down for the consumer.





Well I say this if you don't vote you have no right to complain about what the elected ATS president does. If that isnt enough to make people vote then I'm afraid there isnt an whole lot that can be done.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by xpert11]

A very good idea xpert,since it makes it easier for people to find out the varying
candidates views on the things asked.

I will answer the questions raised in freedom ERP's Podcast here.






I would have to say no, I don't agree with either option.

What we need to do is set-up a timeline of three to five years with benchmarks and
possibly rewards for completing said.
We also need to focus lesson offense and more on Defence and training the Iraqi's to be
able to fight for themselves.


And no, I don't think any generals are capable of option one, since continual fighting
until some mythical obscure 'victory' is won is not possible regardless of whom is in charge.





Basically, yes, I would, in fact I would go farther to.

If any company was found to be purposefully not allowing progress by restricting the use
of the technology or techniques in the patent, apart from having their patentship completely
revoked, they would be fined 30% of their total yearly profit, which would than go to helping
develop the technologies and techniques in the former patent(s).





Honestly, I really can't do anything except encourage and ask them to.

Voting is'nt compulsory, so people will only do it if they want to, though why they would'nt
I don't understand, since apart from being important and a way to show what you think
on a broad scale, it's fun to do.