Here's our problem; over 6 billion people, over 178 mediocre national governments, several pathetic international organizations, thousands of competing ideologies & cultures, and an unknown time limit for life on this pale blue dot. How do we help each other get beyond mere survival? How do we progress to a more equitable system, minus the bloodshed? Otherwise, what will make this or any other system work for the majority of people? Not just the few? Just wondering?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Solve this and I guarentee you will be the next Nobel Peace Prize Winner! Hands down and no contest. Ever since we went into other forms of government beyond Despotism this has been the goal of well meaning, thoughtful, and insightful men and women through the ages. No one has come up with one single government that answers that question through the centuries. There have been many tries at it. Romans did fair, they lasted several centuries. Egyptians did very well as far as maintaining their country went though the methods of government have changed through the centuries. Best of all have been the Chinese. They have had a civilization that seems to date back forever. But their governments have also changed. Most changes of government are not quiet and peaceful events. To get everyone with the same idea in mind and a relative few percent of dissents would take a miracle. If you have a spare one in your pocket this would not be a bad place to spend it.
Simple... allow people to be FREE. Allow them to trade freely, decide their own careers and fortunes, invest their own money, have their own beliefs, give to charities they believe in, move freely from place to place...
Great IDEA. Now if we can figure out where to get these "allow" licenses to make it happen. While one group is free running around in thong bikinis, the other free group want full black dress on their women. Who is going to excercise authority over whom? And...moving freely from place to place...I love that...we did it oh! about 40,000 years ago. Don't you just miss those good old days!
Randolfo: We are working towards that goal. All we need is a wee bit help from whichever God you pray to provide us with that "Synchronicity". There are like minded people out there that have the capability to make the change. It is a slow process but we will get there.
Hahooo ... Get along little doggy! iszlq Hate to tell you this, the Old West ain't no more! So you can hang up your six-shooters and cuddle up in your little bed and dream of days that were. Sweet dreams
You can't FORCE all governments to be free. Hard to believe but SOME people believe in communism for example. Should we try to force all communist countries to be like the United States? That's a useless proposition. Nevertheless, individual freedom would lead to more prosperity for everyone. The best way to promote it is peaceful discussion, in my opinion. Strange though it may seem, many of those women in black dress wear them freely - here in the US.
FREELY??? I am hyperventilating with laughs...is that a fact or someones opinion through rose colored lenses? AND... Who is "You" ? Back to the circular logic: "....allow people to be FREE. Allow them to trade freely, decide their own careers and fortunes, invest their own money, have their own beliefs, give to charities they believe in, move freely from place to place..." WHO is going to "allow" to whom?
No, it's a fact. A tour of any culturally diverse college campus will prove it to you. What I mean to say, is that the government of one country should not attempt to force it's beliefs upon another country. In other words - the US should not invade China and attempt to force the country to become capitalist. Also, the US should not restrict trade with any country because of ideological differences. Sorry for the semantic confusion.
Then you know nothing about that culture and its relation with "Freedom" or for that matter, what a "freedom" is. I do not like to trash Randolfo's topic, let us take it to a topic on "Freedom" I just started...
What is germane to this topic though is: "What I mean to say, is that the government of one country should not attempt to force it's beliefs upon another country. In other words - the US should not invade China and attempt to force the country to become capitalist. Also, the US should not restrict trade with any country because of ideological differences." Interesting, suddenly the "You" became the US government. Now the citizens of US have the power to stop US invading China - after all we are a democracy. What prevents China to attempt to force US to become Communists? And why we can not restrict trade with any other country because we do not like them? Is not that "Freedom to choose" is all about? So, may be after we define what "freedom" is and who gives it to whom, we may comeback here to solve this survival crisis.
You disapprove of their culture, I see. Nevertheless, you are discussing an aspect of freedom which is self-imposed and therefore irrelevent to the discussion at hand. If I choose to lock myself in a small room all day and only venture out at night - am I free? Technically, I'm locked in a room... Now if you FORCE me to go outside during the day, am I free? Clearly I would prefer to be locked in a room. Which aspect of "free" is really relevent to a discussion of politics? Now, in Iran, possibly, women are not free to remove their hoods. Well, technically, they ARE able to do so, it is not without consequence - therefore we can safely use the term "not free." Agreed? This is NOT off topic to Randolfo's original question. Clearly what he objects to is oppression via FORCE that occurs throughout the world. Surely he doesn't wish to destroy differences in culture as people freely engage in them? Now, I'm sure we agree that there are oppressive governments that we, as free people, do not wish to legitimize. Nevertheless, those governments are not the responsibility of US citizens. If the citizens of those countries wish to revolt, then they must do so. One note, because I see where you are going with this: There is a caveat to freedom to choose, and this caveat is a necessary consquence of freedom itself - individuals must be free to do as they please AS LONG as they do not infinge upon the rights of others to do the same.
"You disapprove of their culture, I see." - I am from that culture. You did not see.... So, then we are back to: "what will make this or any other system work for the majority of people? "
6 billion served? Actually, I could have sworn that I heard the number 9 billion, and rising exponentially ! ! ! ! When I was in the 3rd or 4th grade, I remember the world population being somewhere in the 3 billion range!!!! 6-9 billion people??? Is that right? Jesus! Are humans the most populated form of life on Earth now? (except for insects)????? I know that it's pretty tough to to take a private piss off of one's own back porch these days, without some stupid idiot with a video camera!!!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The problem is, anytime there is a high population density with a lot of misery, nature seems to clean house with flood, pestulence, desease, and so on. The child is born every 9 months (+/-) but we can not seem to organize and manage our resources well and in time. Can we handle 30 billion people? Imagine just the sewage treatment centers. That brings back memories of Soylent Green... Do we have any agronomist in the forum to tell us if we can feed 30 billion mouths. Do we have to make laws to limit the size of human body to say 200 pounds max? with pills perhaps? Can we grow steaks on a tree? OR make the cows the size of an elephant? OR the size of a dino?
Who wants to shovel that much fertlizer? Or build the barn to house the new cow? It would be easier to manufacture the grub much the way their doing now. (Lately it has been in the news about Strawberries and Cream having no strawberries, Blueberry muffins without the advertised ingredient)
It is easy for you to say. Those "meat and potato" eaters will not settle for anything (the power of vote!) other that a thick juicy steak even if someone in third world country shovels that dino dung. Soy protein did not go very well, did it?
No but the burger chains are still passing 'em out. How about the pizza chains? Think that hamburger on the pizza is real? How dare you insult me? A true meat and potatoes dude?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Actually I am not a meat and potatoes dude. I was in my younger days. Now I am into fish and rice. The vet doctor put out 15 year old dog in a special diet low in protein due to his advanced age. My wifes girlfriend's husband is a meat and potatoes dude. He is having some health problems. So I suggested the same doggy diet. That did not go very well...But the poor guy is thinking to switch to fish and rice...
