Kyt you remind me of some coffee/tea farmers up country. When they receive payment they start wondering 'now what will I do to spend this money? He ends up going on vacation in coast/ drinks every day. A few months down the line he's broke. But this is ok since it's your own money, imagine something like eurobond going through similar fate with its handlers.

Interesting, I like @tycho point.
But its the name calling that puts some of, I mean having a civil debate void of extreme emotions especially when it comes to ones political likes and dislike would be great, whether one is supporting the government, opposition, or the fringe players akina mk, pk, mm or dida.

It doesn't hurt listening and digging up why one's view are the way they are.

They may not be the same 'solutions'. Think about the kinds of solutions given by Jubilee before getting elected, how were they processed? What was the level of engagement with the voters? What was the level of organization? For me, it's these issues that need some scrutiny.

Different people come up with different solutions, not all of them work, not all are effective or efficient; how do we find solutions that work? Such questions call for extensive engagement between solution providers and voters. Do we have a tradition for such engagement? As far as I can recall, our elections especially during the multi-party era have been populist and highly disorganized especially on the voter-candidate interface.

Realize the position you're left standing on @mkenyan: since even @swenani's choice is full of such solutions as those offered by the others, then we should toss a coin after eliminating those who've already been tried to choose the next government. Such a position has too many blind assumptions. Besides, politics is much more complicated.

Who told you cord and jubilee are the only options? There is another option here