It's the president's decision

We are in the twenty-first century, and countries are still playing war games. Imagine investing all the military budget into education. How many lives and assets could education save? Wealthy countries aren't rich because of their natural resources, but because of a well-educated population.

We are in the twenty-first century, and politicians haven't still skin in the game. If the president's children were the first ones obligated to go to the war, conflicts would be resolved in a few days. Why do we never see politicians at the frontline?

We are in the twenty-first, and a single president can condemn another country to his desires. If we create a system to prevent a single man from making decisions based on his power position, we could avoid wars. Why do citizens don't make decisions over a threshold budget collectively?

We are in the twenty-first century, and media adds fuel to the fire. Media is biased and earns more money when they have more views (attention). They are incentivized to exaggerate news and create click-bait content. How can we create a system that incentives media to get less attention? We should forbid ads for a better society and create a media ranking. Media quality should be verified by the relation between hits and total news numbers.

$P_{true} = \frac{N_{hits}}{M_{news}}$

We should create a media companies ranking and their probability of being right. The correct news should be provable. If the media can't prove the news, the relation between hits and the number of news decreases. That should incentivize the new's quality. If two media companies have the same probability of being correct, the one with more published news should rank higher. We need to incentivize long games.