Prism

[Flonne]

So your plan is "first let's tear down what we have, then maybe somebody can come up with something better"?
Kind of reminds me of bogo sort...
Or, in Maple terms, "Let's cube away from these measely 21% mainstat, maybe that one cube we have will get us 30%."

A better example would be cubing a 3% offstat item.

[SaptaZapta]

A better example would be cubing a 3% offstat item.

Yeah, because having food, shelter, internet access, transportation, medical care, and so on, are as useless as 3% offstat.
Perhaps you need to visit some less-privileged parts of the world, to understand just how much you'd be tearing down just out of the fear that your government could try to take away your guns or your porn or punish you for badmouthing them on the 'net.

[Flonne]

Yeah, because having food, shelter, internet access, transportation, medical care, and so on, are as useless as 3% offstat.
Perhaps you need to visit some less-privileged parts of the world, to understand just how much you'd be tearing down just out of the fear that your government could try to take away your guns or your porn or punish you for badmouthing them on the 'net.

The countries you are referring to are +0 no slot and aren't even potentialed, so yes I realize we have it about the best in the world, but that's saying nothing when the standard is so low.

By the way, since when is the government giving everyone food, housing, internet access, transportation, and medical care? I was under the impression that all of those can just as easily be gotten with your own money, FAR superior to what they supply in every case. Unless you are referring to the fact that they even allow us to have it, which would never be the case, because aforementioned civil war would have happened long before that point.

[valhala556]

Yeah. Id like to be as optimistic as you, @Flonne; but I can't help but see @SaptaZapta; points. With the whole, if the technology exists then it will be used. But I don't want to down right accept this. Its probably bad to say but I have a hunch that America well have some kind of revolution. It will probably be small and short but the internet and its universal free speech and current Government structure can't really Co-exist. In the sense that the Government works on keeping something secret while the internet is the complete opposite of that.

[KhainiWest]

Well all this complaining certaintly got it some air time. So we'll see. I don't mind them collecting this information, if not to have a general idea of the people in your area, it's just the idea of using it as marketing/insurance. I think it's overreaching into matters that it shouldn't have privileges to.

@valhala556; My general prediction is, when the dinosaurs and irrational start to retire/resign/die and our new generations start pushing in, those who are more open to civil rights and less concerned about the Church's collar, I feel as though our society will start to modernize.

[SaptaZapta]

By the way, since when is the government giving everyone food, housing, internet access, transportation, and medical care? I was under the impression that all of those can just as easily be gotten with your own money, FAR superior to what they supply in every case. Unless you are referring to the fact that they even allow us to have it, which would never be the case, because aforementioned civil war would have happened long before that point.

The government doesn't give people those things (at least not in the USA). But the government is what makes "your own money" have any value... Not any specific government, but the institutions of the State, and various world regulatory bodies, make it so that you can sit in your home in America and order a magazine from Japan, and through the magic of international banking and intercontinental shipping, the Japanese publisher gets their money and you get the magazine, neither getting hijacked on the high seas. Or, you can buy medication and be reasonably certain that it contains what the wrapper says, and you can look it up in libraries or online and see what studies have been done on that medication. Unlike, say, various "snake oils" of the past.
In short, I'm talking about civilization. Governments come and go, but they all share the basic premise: they keep things running more-or-less smoothly for the common people, and in return the people in charge get a bigger piece of the pie.

You are talking about a complete overhaul of this "unfair" system that is as old as humanity. Hell, way older. As old as herd or pack animals, actually. You agree with me, apparently, that nothing less would make America truly "free". But, well, I'm thinking that while anarchy would be easy to create (read any post-apocalyptic story), a "better world" is quite the elusive 30% mainstat. Or even 36%.

[Flonne]

But the government is what makes "your own money" have any value...

No, the free market does that. The government has nothing to do with what a person is worth, because notes produced by a government are not the only things worth money. Assets, precious metals, and other physical commodities also count, and most tinfoil hatters such as myself possess quite a bit of that for when those notes are worthless.

[Jamesie]

Yeah. Id like to be as optimistic as you, @Flonne; but I can't help but see @SaptaZapta; points. With the whole, if the technology exists then it will be used. But I don't want to down right accept this. Its probably bad to say but I have a hunch that America well have some kind of revolution. It will probably be small and short but the internet and its universal free speech and current Government structure can't really Co-exist. In the sense that the Government works on keeping something secret while the internet is the complete opposite of that.

It's not that the government structure and the internet can't exist, it's that the internet and the government need to work together. The government wants to keep tabs on things in the internet, people want the internet to stay private. The two need to meet in the middle; the internet needs to give up some privacy, and the government needs to take the privacy it is given and use it effectively and with in reason. As Obama defended Prism, you can't have 100 percent security and 100 percent privacy. The two cannot go together.

Directed at you and @Flonne;
A US revolution is likely to have huge impacts. Regardless of what happens in the US, it will have effects worldwide and I'm not talking about inspiring other revolutions, I'm talking other political and economic consequences. Should the revolution produce the society you hope it does, who knows what could happen. Likely the US would lose a huge amount of sway in international politics, which would likely hurt the new regime. Not to mention you have to question how stable it would be afterwards. That question would linger until power has transferred two or three times at the very least. Should the revolution fail, well, I know you don't particularly care for the US now, but I'm certain you wouldn't like the US when there's Chinese hegemony instead of US.

[Flonne]

A US revolution is likely to have huge impacts. Regardless of what happens in the US, it will have effects worldwide and I'm not talking about inspiring other revolutions, I'm talking other political and economic consequence

People constantly say the US should keep it's nose out of the business of other countries, so why should we care if they get mad at us for retracting aid and resources due to the fact that we are occupied with ourselves for a time? Can't have it both ways.

[Jamesie]

People constantly say the US should keep it's nose out of the business of other countries, so why should we care if they get mad at us for retracting aid and resources due to the fact that we are occupied with ourselves for a time? Can't have it both ways.

Two parts:
1) Not every country wants us out. I don't think Ethiopia would be particularly excited if they lost aid, especially since we give them a whole lot of it.
2) As you seem to have missed, US/Western hegemony is better than Chinese hegemony. You would not be particularly fond of a world where China was in everyone's business and China set the standard, especially if you value your freedom.

[KhainiWest]

The government doesn't give people those things (at least not in the USA).

Generally they actually do. Internet is still being sorted out but they plan to make broadband a necessity.

You are talking about a complete overhaul of this "unfair" system that is as old as humanity.

I think he's more enraged by the restrictions we continuously get that spawn from a number of things. So I wouldn't go as far as stretch this as rage towards our bartering system. I think anyone here can agree that our voice has been diminished when corporations have a more direct influence in our countries policies.

@Jamesie;

If we cannot suppor ourselves, we should not be throwing money at other countries, just like we shouldn't be acting like world police. Plus majority of those "aid" funds end up funding the enemies anyway.

[Flonne]

2) As you seem to have missed, US/Western hegemony is better than Chinese hegemony. You would not be particularly fond of a world where China was in everyone's business and China set the standard, especially if you value your freedom.

Didn't miss, just ignored. China has no chance of taking the US over; even if they were to try and forcefully regain all the assets we owe them, our government would make that side of the earth a large smoking crater before giving up power to them; even in the middle of a revolution, they will still have control of the majority of nuclear armaments...they can't use them on targets so close to them, but China is nice and far away, making them a perfect target to vent some frustration at a civil war even occurring on their watch, if China decides to make themselves a target. I don't necessarily disagree with this government in terms of foreign policy, just internal policy; I think they will protect us from that, even if only indirectly and to keep themselves in positions of power.

Not necessarily fair that we won't pay them back and they know it, but one problem at a time; our government is just about the least efficient machine that has ever existed. The debt speaks for itself.

[Jamesie]

Didn't miss, just ignored. China has no chance of taking the US over; even if they were to try and forcefully regain all the assets we owe them, our government would make that side of the earth a large smoking crater before giving up power to them; even in the middle of a revolution, they will still have control of the majority of nuclear armaments...they can't use them on targets so close to them, but China is nice and far away, making them a perfect target to vent some frustration at a civil war even occurring on their watch, if China decides to make themselves a target. I don't necessarily disagree with this government in terms of foreign policy, just internal policy; I think they will protect us from that, even if only indirectly and to keep themselves in positions of power.

Not necessarily fair that we won't pay them back and they know it, but one problem at a time; our government is just about the least efficient machine that has ever existed. The debt speaks for itself.

That's not how international politics work and you know it.

[KhainiWest]

That's not how international politics work and you know it.

Although our response wouldn't be to nuke them, if you know anything about international politic's there are plenty of ways of avoiding paying up when called to do so.

[Jamesie]

Although our response wouldn't be to nuke them, if you know anything about international politic's there are plenty of ways of avoiding paying up when called to do so.

China can overtake the US in two ways: become the largest economy (which it is projected to become) or have the US fall. China would not overtake the US by calling on its debt, especially given how if it wanted to get ahead it could (and probably should have) by now. If China does become the largest economy, it is possible for Western hegemony to remain. After all, the Western bloc is larger than the Chinese bloc. However, it would be significantly more difficult (especially if China strong-armed other Asian countries into agreeing with it). I really can't comment too much on the fall of the US since I really have no idea what type of government system Flonne's free country would be. But the US is slowly falling behind anyways (a great book on this is The Clash of Civilizations-- but it's also hella controversial and may make you throw it at the wall multiple times). Regardless, a revolution would really hurt the US position in the world.

[KhainiWest]

China can overtake the US in two ways: become the largest economy (which it is projected to become) or have the US fall. China would not overtake the US by calling on its debt, especially given how if it wanted to get ahead it could (and probably should have) by now. If China does become the largest economy, it is possible for Western hegemony to remain. After all, the Western bloc is larger than the Chinese bloc. However, it would be significantly more difficult (especially if China strong-armed other Asian countries into agreeing with it). I really can't comment too much on the fall of the US since I really have no idea what type of government system Flonne's free country would be. But the US is slowly falling behind anyways (a great book on this is The Clash of Civilizations-- but it's also hella controversial and may make you throw it at the wall multiple times). Regardless, a revolution would really hurt the US position in the world.

even if they were to try and forcefully regain all the assets we owe them,

You didn't elaborate on this point, so I assumed this is what you were referring too. I'm aware how it can happen, although my "optimism", deems it unlikely.

[Jamesie]

You didn't elaborate on this point, so I assumed this is what you were referring too. I'm aware how it can happen, although my "optimism", deems it unlikely.

Well then yeah, we would easily avoid paying for the most part.

[hadriel]

I'd rather/prefer not comment on something not directly pertaining to me... but I'm going to note that the notion of "free" [or related words e.g. freedom, free market] needs to be seriously reviewed. Not by you, not by me, not by Obama, not by US, but by everyone.

I've seen both sides of the world [but not exactly both poles of the magnet], and I'd say that to me it's just black and white. To me, this feels like people saying that black should not exist in white.

Hope you get what I mean here.

Hadriel

[Sardines]

[Tay]

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -Johann Wolfgang von Goethe