Is bee smarter than human?

[ivconic]

WM6
Not your country, dear Morgan, your country is beautiful.
System of all country is crap.
And we all (except maybe brave Greek) are crap, because we do not resist to such crapy systems.


Funny thing; you reminded me on that problem! If some organized group of people stands up for their rights and protest peacefully than they will achieve nothing - waste of time only. But if same group stands up and try something radical (to really make some difference) than system decree that group as terorist group. Why Greeks are different? Simply because they are tired of wasting time. As long as Greeks are the only one - we will achieve nothing against the system. If we want to beat the system we must organize on global plan. Tough and hardly possible....but not impossible.
....
And yes system in all countries is crap, i agree.
I was born and lived in almost perfect society - Socialism. Than "system" came here and destroyed everything. It is time for revenge - time to destroy system!

[ivconic]

HUNG:"....Many governments make laws to make treasure hunting illegal, so treasure hunters must be pirates to find treasure.
But when the treasure is found, then all the work becomes worthwhile.
The only problem is to find a way to keep the treasure you find...."


That is true. Same situation here in my country. That's why is better each day to find one gold coin than only in one day to find 100kg hoard, because you will have to watch your back from government and mafia at the same time (aren't those also the same?).

[ivconic]

J Player:
I think governments have made laws to make the government the owner of all valuable things in their juristiction since the first governments.
A good example is taxes. Most governments collect more taxes than they need to perform the job of keeping thier country orderly.

But for treasure, Spain has made laws to say they own all treasure not only in Spanish territory, but many other places far from Spain. The most fair treasure laws I know of are in the UK, where the treasure hunter can have the joy of finding his treasure, and then will be paid a fair price to sell the treasure to the government to put in a museum. I think this is good, because it encourages treasure hunting, and at the same time it preserves the treasures for their historical value to anyone who wants to see the actual artifacts from ancient civilizations.

Best wishes,

[ivconic]

I am 43/44 years old and one thing still is not clear to me at all;
why do we have to pay taxes at all? At least in present (Capitalism) situation, why? Earlier, in Socialism i understood taxes as support for maintaining social equality. But today....? I really don't know?
Ok...i know and i understand..but i do not agree! State gives me big NOTHING so why should i pay anything to it? Ok...forget me, i was born in Socialism and now i am living in very sick verson of musty Capitalism. Let's take USA citizen as much better example. Why USA citizens must pay taxes? What USA gives back to them? What? Everything you must pay for, from your pocket. Nothing is for free. You must work like a horse whole your life to barely survive. Your house is not really yours. Your car is not really yours. You must eat junk food. You must sit on nuclear bomb (nobody asked for you to agree). You must go to war each time "they" decide. If not you, than your children must go to war ...several 000 miles away from your home. Again nobody asked for you to agree. And over all you must pay taxes!? Why? What are you exactly paying for? To watch few rich bustards everyday perversity arround you? I am asking this because i am now in almost the same position, eversince "democracy" knocked on our doors here (without asking me if i want).
So...first step to changes is to stop paying hard earned money for NOTHING.

[ivconic]

Ok...let me put it this way;

if one citizen refuse to pay taxes, he goes to jail and state takes all his goods.
But...if 200-300 millions refuse to pay taxes this year...than what?
.....
That's my idea; to rise sence to majority and to make global change in one simple move. Impossible...? Maybe not!

[ivconic]

Fred:
For you the answer ivconic..

[ivconic]

Originally Posted by Fred
For you the answer ivconic:

Yes you are right!
Bees are smarter than human! I agree!

[ivconic]

"....to rise sence to majority and to make global change in one simple move. Impossible...? Maybe not!..."

Not impossible especially in this era - era of informations, era of internet, era of globalisation.
Internet is most powerfull "weapon" in history. Look at us now; several thousand miles away from each other, yet speaking directly and exchanging ideas and experiences.
Is it impossible to "synchronize" majority of people arround the world to do the same thing in same moment? I don't think so. I think it is possible.
It can start as a funny game and end up as serious thing that can make global change.
...

[ivconic]

What to ask from majority of human population?
Money? No! Personal datas? No! Much effort? No!
Enough will be to ask something funny and unusual which involves no effort at all, no personal risks, no money....
What than?
For example: "do not buy and drink Coca Cola for one week" would be quite enough for a start!
or
"do not buy gas and do not drive a car at least 3 days" - would be more than enough!
or
"do not turn on and watch tv today, instead go outdoor and walk in some park"...
or
"do not accept vaccine against "mexican" flue, because it is fake and lie"..
etc...etc...etc..

You see my point?
:lol::lol::lol:

Beleive me or not...but if at least 50% od Coca Cola drinkers skip to drink it just for one week - Coca Cola will bust totally!
And if Coca Cola bust than USA government will not have enough money to start new war! Voila! (it is just picturesque example of main idea)

Can you see the point?
"Are you experienced!? (Jimmy Hendrix)"

[ivconic]

Point is that globalism is based on "big numbers" directly dependable of each "small number" inside it! Suppres only one "small number" and whole system will crash!

[J_Player]

I am 43/44 years old and one thing still is not clear to me at all;
why do we have to pay taxes at all? At least in present (Capitalism) situation, why? Earlier, in Socialism i understood taxes as support for maintaining social equality. But today....? I really don't know?
Ok...i know and i understand..but i do not agree! State gives me big NOTHING so why should i pay anything to it? Ok...forget me, i was born in Socialism and now i am living in very sick verson of musty Capitalism. Let's take USA citizen as much better example. Why USA citizens must pay taxes? What USA gives back to them? What? Everything you must pay for, from your pocket. Nothing is for free. You must work like a horse whole your life to barely survive. Your house is not really yours. Your car is not really yours. You must eat junk food. You must sit on nuclear bomb (nobody asked for you to agree). You must go to war each time "they" decide. If not you, than your children must go to war ...several 000 miles away from your home. Again nobody asked for you to agree. And over all you must pay taxes!? Why? What are you exactly paying for? To watch few rich bustards everyday perversity arround you? I am asking this because i am now in almost the same position, eversince "democracy" knocked on our doors here (without asking me if i want).
So...first step to changes is to stop paying hard earned money for NOTHING.

Hi Ivconic,
I think people all over the world have questions of what they get out of their government, and which is the best government method. A question I often wondered is "what would happened if the government is removed, and people left to run the country on their own"?

At first I can see some big advantages. For example, there is no longer a need to spend 30 years or longer to own a home. It would seem a person could build a home and have it completely paid for within a few years. And once you buy a car, you would be the owner without needing to take it for inspections and yearly licences. You would not pay taxes. Keep all the money you earn and don't waste time figuring out how much to pay to the government. This would work with any government that was removed.

But wait...
After a few years your car would be no good because the roads are falling apart. Time to buy a tractor to go where you want. And something funny going on at the bank. Your money is no longer there. Ok, time to go back home. What!! Somebody Burglarized my house. It would have been nice if the government is still around to keep the basic things working.

So we see there are some things that it is good to have a government for.
The question is what things are important for the government to do?

In my opinion, I don't mind paying taxes for the things I described above and other basic things to any government that is ruling the place I live. The question comes when we look at things that some people don't think are necessary, or may be a waste of money.

Most Americans talk of the greatness of capitolism and a "Democratic Government" They have lots of examples to prove socialism is not good. But I think it really depends on how the government is conducted. For example, democracy started in Greece a long time ago. Their version of democracy was not very similar to the way democracy works in the USA. The govenrment of the early Greeks cannot be compared to the modern American government because they were two very different ways to apply democracy. The same is true of socialism. I have seen examples of how it works well, and some bad examples too. In fact I know people who live in socialist countries whose lifestyle is not much different than the lives of US citizens that have a carreer in the military. The US military appears to work very similar to some of the socialist countries from the perspective of the citizen. And I don't hear those Americans complaining about how awful life is in the military. They talk about the benefits they get that non-military people must take care of on thier own.

What is the best method of govenrnment? I don't know for sure. But I do know I don't like when a government makes decisions that most of the citizens don't want. I don't like the idea that people cannot work hard and get ahead. The reason for having a government is to protect a group of people from things that destroy the quality of life. Maybe governments are responsible for the reason we have developed civilizations, and don't need to worry about things like cave men did, and we can live past an average age of 25. But if you have the feeling that all your life is spent trying to survive, there doesn't seem to be much quality of life left.

The answer?
Revolution? That has been done when enough citizens are upset enough with their government. It is not fun, but it has resulted in a better government in some cases.

Evolution? The slow change in government laws and methods is what currently happens with established governments. For some, it isn't fast enough, or the changes are lop-sided so the laws favor certain classes of citizens.

What else is there?
I guess you could go to some remote place where no government was dealing with you. Of course it would remove you from your home and things you may not want to part with.

The only real advantage to democracy I can see is not in the way it is applied, but in the principle that it is a representative form of government. That is to say it is a kind of government where the citizens can vote so we see what the majority wants to become law. If this isn't happening in a particular application of democracy, then it is not the principle of democracy that failed, it is the people who applied it.

That's just my opinion. It could be wrong, and it could change over time.

Best wishes,
J_P

[joecoin]

Yes, the Internet, initially paid for by USA tax payers dollars. USA taxpayer also enjoys a wonderful system of roads built by government, pretty good court system with checks and balances, regulation of radio/TV frequencies (no overpowering signals), wonderful National and State parks, free libraries, free 12 years education (16 years in California), free food if you are poor enough, subsidised hosing, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security pension, Police, Fire and EMS services, garbage collection, museums and Sandia Laboratories.

Yes, there is a lot of waste of tax dollars. I believe that 50% of my taxes are wasted.

[ivconic]

What effort would be to persuade one small man not to be servant of globalism just for one week (more than enough time to crash the system)?

[ivconic]

J Player what you are saying is making a lot of sence and i agree.
Removing government would lead to anarchi sooner or later and total bust of everything.
On the other side; system we have it today is everything but not human and not serving to small man at all. Todays system is serving to minority against majority.
Where is solution? Where is exit (for us - small people)?

[ivconic]

Yes, the Internet, initially paid for by USA tax payers dollars. USA taxpayer also enjoys a wonderful system of roads built by government, pretty good court system with checks and balances, regulation of radio/TV frequencies (no overpowering signals), wonderful National and State parks, free libraries, free 12 years education (16 years in California), free food if you are poor enough, subsidised hosing, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security pension, Police, Fire and EMS services, garbage collection, museums and Sandia Laboratories.

Yes, there is a lot of waste of tax dollars. I believe that 50% of my taxes are wasted.

Uhhh...if not much more than 50%!!!

[ivconic]

"Evolution?" - exit! Only possible exit as i am concerned.

Aren't we smart enough? Haven't we all the technology necessairly to live much better and more relaxed? Than what is stoping us?

[J_Player]

J Player what you are saying is making a lot of sence and i agree.
Removing government would lead to anarchi sooner or later and total bust of everything.
On the other side; system we have it today is everything but not human and not serving to small man at all. Today system is serving to minority against majority.
Where is solution? Where is exit (for us - small people)?Hi Ivconic,

You are correct. Unless a huge majority of citizens vote for some particular changes they want, they will not happen in a democracy. In the USA version, the things people can vote for must go through a complicated process before we will even see them on a ballot to vote.

What solution for the small people?
The only solution I have seen worked for a man and woman who moved to a remote part of Canada and built a log house near a stream where they went fishing and caught abundant fish, and went hunting for their food. They taught their child until he came of the age where they wanted him to have a regular education, so thier escape ended.

An alternate solution would be to look for a country that has the kind of government you like the best and become a citizen there. The problem is you need to leave your home and friends, same as if you went in the woods to live.

The only remaining solution is to make changes in the laws of your country. Maybe this can be done by voting if you have a method of government that will do what the majority of people want.

Even in countries where the majority of the people are not represented, If enough people are up in arms about things that are not right, the government will sometimes make changes to keep the citizens happy.


Best wishes,
J_P

[ivconic]

"That is to say it is a kind of government where the citizens can vote so we see what the majority wants to become law...."

This is how it should be in real life. Pitty it is not like that.
One example;
i am 1000% sure that 95% of USA population are against any kind of war (except self defencing kind of a war). Still USA is starting (and causing) many wars and crises arround the world? How come?
or...
we in Serbia voted against political mafia, corruption, criminal...and many other bad things. Nowdays we have all that much more than ever!? :shocked:
I never wanted to fight (always voted against) against Croats, Bosnians and Albanians...yet we had local wars in '90.!? How come?
Voting is not enough - that's my point. Somebody behind the curtains will always fake the votes. Who? Those who don't want changes!
How to beat them? War? No! Not at all!
Simply do not give your money to them!
How?
Well....avoid Coca Cola for a start....avoid McDonalds, avoid tv news and brainwashing, avoid all the things "they" pushing you to use in everyday life.
It would be good start to global change.
Instead Coca Cola (i have nothing against, just using it as example) go and buy some juice or soda made by some small manufacturer....at least for a week or two.....
What we need is to shake main reliances of that system and system will crash easilly. No effort at all!
But we must do that fast and synchronized, all of us togather.

"Point is that globalism is based on "big numbers" directly dependable of each "small number" inside it! Suppres only one "small number" and whole system will crash!"

[Fred]

I think democracy will never really exists as long as the governments are constituted of "candidates".
I mean, as long as men fight for power, they will be bad leaders - by definition.
Perhaps the "presidents" should be sorted between men and women, (or small groups), of people having at least a certain level of education. (this is sad, but we cant afford someone with no education to rule a country)

I think the bee analogy good, after all 99% of the world is owned by a very few % of people, the bee-keepers.
the surplus of honey must be taken out so the bees continue to work hard and don´t have possibility to leave the hive-as the would naturally do if they were allowed to make reserves...:D

[J_Player]

I think democracy will never really exists as long as the governments are constituted of "candidates".
I mean, as long as men fight for power, they will be bad leaders - by definition.
Perhaps the "presidents" should be sorted between men and women, (or small groups), of people having at least a certain level of education. (this is sad, but we cant afford someone with no education to rule a country)

I think the bee analogy good, after all 99% of the world is owned by a very few % of people, the bee-keepers.
the surplus of honey must be taken out so the bees continue to work hard and don´t have possibility to leave the hive-as the would naturally do if they were allowed to make reserves...:DBees who live naturally away from beekeepers have a perfect arrangement --- No honey taxes.
They get to keep all their honey to do whatever they want with it. :)

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

"Evolution?" - exit! Only possible exit as i am concerned.

Aren't we smart enough? Haven't we all the technology necessairly to live much better and more relaxed? Than what is stoping us? Modern people have developed thier technology much farther than they developed their ability to govern themselves. If we had developed a higher universal moral and ethical standard that everyone lived by, then it would not matter much what kind of government was in place. A kingdom would work as well as a commune or a democracy. It is like the bees. They all do their respective jobs, they are happy, and everything works. They really don't need anyone to govern them.

We could also dispense with most government functions except some basic maintenance things like roads, disaster prevention and rescue, studying science for improved life quality etc. We would no longer need police or locks on the doors because there would be no need if everybody was that advanced morally. We would see all the laws were exactly what most people want for laws. Nobody would stoop to using tricks to stop the will of the majority from being put in place. We wouldn't see any wars. The military would no longer need guns because they would be busy with recue during natural disasters.

In some ways we haven't come much farther than the tribal ways of cave men morally. But most people do have ethical standards a lot higher than belligerent primitive customs. The problem is ethics are not the same for all people, so we still need to take precautions that make it necessary to have more government than the bees have.

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

I think democracy will never really exists as long as the governments are constituted of "candidates".
I mean, as long as men fight for power, they will be bad leaders - by definition.
Perhaps the "presidents" should be sorted between men and women, (or small groups), of people having at least a certain level of education. (this is sad, but we cant afford someone with no education to rule a country)...:DHi Fred,

Democracy and candidates are two different things. Democracy came from a Greek word that means "government by the people" when translated into English. Candidates are only one of many ways to implement democracy. Of course, you could change to other methods of implementing democracy that might work better in providing a government of the people.

The idea of candidates started when the USA was a new country breaking away from England. At that time there were 13 colonies that were governed by English law and paid taxes to England. The people were wondering the same things that Ivconic is asking... what are we getting for our tax money? They felt like they were paying taxes, but had no say in what the laws would be.

So they decided they would be better off starting their own country that is run by the people who live here, not by an overseas country that does not give them the laws they want. This is where we see the brilliance of Thomas Jefferson. He researched all the kinds of governments to see what he could find for the best way to get a government where the common people decide what they want. He chose democracy, and the others around him agreed. They figured this was by far the best way to get a government that allowed the people to decide what laws they want.

But how to do this when there are 13 different colonies?
Each of these colonies had thier own laws, money and customs, not much different than the European Union has countries with different laws, different money and customs (ok they finally made their money the same). The idea was to make a new country from the 13 colonies that would become separate states that still have their own laws, but follow some basic laws that new the country enforces. The way they were able to accomplish this is to allow each state to elect thier own representatives to form a congress, and to allow different political parties to provide candidates for people to vote to become a president, and preside over the congress. This actually worked very well for a long time. But as time passed, technology improved, and business interests became involved in politics. Things were beginning to change so the will of the majority of common people was not always what the government was doing.

Today, if you were to take a poll of all USA citizens, you may find that there are some government policies that do not reflect what the majority of people want. Why?
Maybe this is partly caused by the procedure of electing candidates from political parties that have specific agendas. Maybe it is caused by global business interests that have political lobbies. Maybe other reasons as well. From what I see, the early implementation of democracy worked very well over 200 years ago, but conditions today seem to make it hard for the common people to decide policies of the country exactly as they want.

So what would work better?
I don't know. Part of the problem is as you say. Politicians have a bad name in most parts of the world.
They are often considered crooks who take bribes, and cannot be trusted.

Making qualifications for presidential candidates for education?
That's an idea. It would insure leaders are educated. But what about the brilliant leader that has no education? Education does not guarantee you will get good government. It only removes the uneducated. This would eliminate potential presidents that could be great leaders like Abraham Lincoln was. If England had educational requirements for their politicians, I doubt Winston Churchill would have been able to become prime minister, and Gandhi would not have had the chance to lead his country.

If you wanted a radical departure that gets back to the principle of democracy, you wouldn't need representatives and maybe not a president. You could take a poll of all the citizens in a country. We have the technology today. Everyone can go to a computer and enter their citizen ID to make their vote for every item that is to be voted on. When all the votes are counted, then we would see the new laws put in place. Who needs politicians?

But as I said in the previous post... this all depends on the moral and ethical level of the people running the system. If you have honest people making it work, then you will see the laws are exactly what the majority of people want. If not, then you got the same as what we got now, but only with a new method to implement it.

Oh well... Back to something that works... like metal detectors.

Best wishes,
J_P

[ivconic]

"...If you wanted a radical departure that gets back to the principle of democracy, you wouldn't need representatives and maybe not a president. You could take a poll of all the citizens in a country. We have the technology today. Everyone can go to a computer and enter their citizen ID to make their vote for every item that is to be voted on. When all the votes are counted, then we would see the new laws put in place. Who needs politicians?.."

Actually...that is the main problem; representatives (politicians,politic party..).
They expect people to vote..for who? Such limited choice.
Main idea of progress is lost somewhere from single man through politic party.
Because party itself has primary task - to subsist on top by any means. Everything else comes after. Small man who voted for, usually comes to last place as party priority.

[ivconic]

"...But as I said in the previous post... this all depends on the moral and ethical level of the people running the system. If you have honest people making it work, then you will see the laws are exactly what the majority of people want. If not, then you got the same as what we got now, but only with a new method to implement it.."

Luckilly that is possible. Not SF. That's why i am so angry, because i can see such good examples that really exist. So if they can...why can't we?
Evolution..evolution of human mind and a way of thinking, that's what we need.

[J_Player]

"...If you wanted a radical departure that gets back to the principle of democracy, you wouldn't need representatives and maybe not a president. You could take a poll of all the citizens in a country. We have the technology today. Everyone can go to a computer and enter their citizen ID to make their vote for every item that is to be voted on. When all the votes are counted, then we would see the new laws put in place. Who needs politicians?.."

Actually...that is the main problem; representatives (politicians,politic party..).
They expect people to vote..for who? Such limited choice.
Main idea of progress is lost somewhere from single man through politic party.
Because party itself has primary task - to subsist on top by any means. Everything else comes after. Small man who voted for, usually comes to last place as party priority.
You are exactly right.

In the USA, a candidate does not have a chance in hell to become president unless he is supported by one of two political parties. A third independent party candidate may have a chance if there are serious problems with the two main parties. The result is there are two choices to vote for who you want to become president. And the choice is not so much about the person, but the political party idea you want.

That is the simple version. The citizen also has thier chance to vote to decide who will be the single choice for each party. But the bottom line is The USA citizen generally has a choice to vote for political party-A or political party-B to put their candidate in the position of president. Voting for anything different is useless. And this exists for the reason you gave. "The primary task of the party is to subsist on top by any means". This forces any candidate who has new innovative ideas for government to change their ideas so they conform to one of the two political parties, so they have a chance of becoming elected. Then, if they are elected, they must carry out the objectives of their party, and only if they are lucky, they might be able to enact some of thier new innovative ideas. The political pressures on elected officials is very strong, so we generally do not see much innovation other than what their party approves of. I can imagine the choices aren't much better in other countries that have this kind of representative government.

But think of the technology we have today... There are online robots watching millions of websites to see who clicks on different links, and spyware watching people's habits of web-surfing, and buying. These robots automatically report back to servers that collate all the data to make very accurate surveys of what people want so they can advise advertisers what products to expect a profit on and what products to forget about.

These robots are a lot more advanced than what it takes to find out what the majoriity of a country wants for laws.
You are correct... there is no science fiction here. We have had the technology for awhile.

So what stops us?
"party itself has primary task - to subsist on top by any means"

Best wishes,
J_P

[WM6]

That's just my opinion. It could be wrong, and it could change over time.



If you have such time? Because:

Then came a gun-men in your office and pinpoint your body.
And then came government and protect your dead golden teeth fillings.
And then came your successor and all the story is repeated.
And then came by natural lawfulness revolution.
And then came by natural lawfulness counter revolution.

Revolution is only part of evolution.

Evolution is free market for those capable to survival.

Free market is free only for strongest player, it can not be free for all.

So, Free market must fall, nevertheless by selfdestruction, by revolution, or by evolution.

Then comming gun-mans.... and .... R Hunting started ...

And then came History and Story repeated.

[J_Player]

If you have such time? Because:

Then came a gun-men in your office and pinpoint your body.
And then came government and protect your dead golden teeth fillings.
And then came your successor and all the story is repeated.
And then came by natural lawfulness revolution.
And then came by natural lawfulness counter revolution.

Revolution is only part of evolution.

Evolution is free market for those capable to survival.

Free market is free only for strongest player, it can not be free for all.

So, Free market must fall, nevertheless by selfdestruction, by revolution, or by evolution.

Then comming gun-mans.... and .... R Hunting started ...

And then came History and Story repeated.

Hi WM6,
I don't understand what you are saying or asking.
My posts are replying to the posts that Ivconic and Fred made to tell them how their ideas are seen from the perspective of a USA citizen who knows the history of events that concern the things they posted about. This is the off-topic forum where we talk about things different than treasure hunting.

Best wishes,
J_P

[ivconic]

" You are exactly right.

In the USA, a candidate does not have a chance in hell to become president unless he is supported by one of two political parties. A third independent party candidate may have a chance if there are serious problems with the two main parties. The result is there are two choices to vote for who you want to become president. And the choice is not so much about the person, but the political party idea you want.

That is the simple version. The citizen also has thier chance to vote to decide who will be the single choice for each party. But the bottom line is The USA citizen generally has a choice to vote for political party-A or political party-B to put their candidate in the position of president. Voting for anything different is useless. And this exists for the reason you gave. "The primary task of the party is to subsist on top by any means". This forces any candidate who has new innovative ideas for government to change their ideas so they conform to one of the two political parties, so they have a chance of becoming elected. Then, if they are elected, they must carry out the objectives of their party, and only if they are lucky, they might be able to enact some of thier new innovative ideas. The political pressures on elected officials is very strong, so we generally do not see much innovation other than what their party approves of. I can imagine the choices aren't much better in other countries that have this kind of representative government.

But think of the technology we have today... There are online robots watching millions of websites to see who clicks on different links, and spyware watching people's habits of web-surfing, and buying. These robots automatically report back to servers that collate all the data to make very accurate surveys of what people want so they can advise advertisers what products to expect a profit on and what products to forget about.

These robots are a lot more advanced than what it takes to find out what the majoriity of a country wants for laws.
You are correct... there is no science fiction here. We have had the technology for awhile.

So what stops us?
"party itself has primary task - to subsist on top by any means"

Best wishes,
J_P "



Exactly!
Now that returns us to the begining of the story; how to beat those?
Well...first we should see who's behind the 2 main political parties.
I know, you know, everybody knows. It is not secret.
So how to beat those?
How to beat and conquer those without real fighting?
Easy.
Do not put you hard earned money in their pockets.
Do not buy thier products. Buy products made by some small independant enterprises. Mix. Change habits.
....
I will again take Coca Cola as an example (:lol: sorry Coca Cola!).
Let's take that Coca Cola has 2 million careers. So...2 millions of fees per month. 2 million taxes. Each employee has familly. Usually 4 members of that familly. So 2*4= 8 millions. 8 millions people are affected if something goes wrong with Coca Cola!! Right?
So...
if 50% of Cola drinkers change their habit and void to buy that product...at least for 2 weeks...! What should be overall losses?
Because Coca Cola must spare significant funds on monthly bases to cover all the expenditures.
Coca Cola will bust. 8 million destinies will be affected. Politic party which was financed from those money will also shake!
......
Take a list of all the daily products you've been buying. Analyze which products were made by which company. Analyze which company is financing which political party.....and you will have complete picture of real situatuon.
Once you do that you will find out the best possible way how to beat the system. Easy and with so less efforts.
System will crash.
What we need is only to synchronize and start acting at the same time.
:lol::lol::lol:

[WM6]

I don't understand what you are saying or asking.

This is the off-topic forum where we talk about things different than treasure hunting.



Dont worry J_P I am posting off topic too.

If you fear of a revolution, be on her side and you get a monument in bronze. For your monument will have the government confiscate all bronze and copper coin findings. So started counter revolution. Do you understand?

[Fred]

Hi J_P,

I know there is a difference between candidates and democracy , IMO it is precisely in that difference that resides the problem: as long as you are a candidate, you are willing to obtain power thus you cannot be a good president (or whatever)
I know it is utopia but maybe it could work like this: the leaders of each departments could be sorted between a sample of population of different ages,(higher % of new people if we want evolution :D) and between each group decisions would be voted.
Similar in a way to obligatory military service of ~1 year that was active in many European countries.
Of course when i talked education i didn´t mean high grade,( i don´t really believe in education either), but just a minimum level that will allow the "chosen" to comply their task. (reading and righting correctly for example :rolleyes:)

And about bees i don´t see many places in the world where they can work without a beekeeper stealing their honey... they are all counted...

[ivconic]

Hi J_P,

I know there is a difference between candidates and democracy , IMO it is precisely in that difference that resides the problem: as long as you are a candidate, you are willing to obtain power thus you cannot be a good president (or whatever)
I know it is utopia but maybe it could work like this: the leaders of each departments could be sorted between a sample of population of different ages,(higher % of new people if we want evolution :D) and between each group decisions would be voted.
Similar in a way to obligatory military service of ~1 year that was active in many European countries.
Of course when i talked education i didn´t mean high grade,( i don´t really believe in education either), but just a minimum level that will allow the "chosen" to comply their task. (reading and righting correctly for example :rolleyes:)

And about bees i don´t see many places in the world where they can work without a beekeeper stealing their honey... they are all counted...


That is descent but won't work.
As long as we have large powerfull (private) companies we will have to obey their will.
Obama for example; educated, good, very descent, human, with nice intentions. Once he became president he simply must "play" as "they" want.
Why? Simply because "they" hold the money (power).
Once he start to play against their interests he will end up like JFK.
Hopefuly this will never happen!
But point is that as long as politic is dependable on money - that long we will have same situation.
Politic is bussines. Bussines is politic. To own large and succesfull company you must be politician 100%. Those 2 are inseparable in todays occurences.
........

"And about bees i don´t see many places in the world where they can work without a beekeeper stealing their honey... they are all counted.."

Oh don't worry, they can! It is just a matter of ruined natural conditions at some areas. In areas where nature still exist, bees can work and live much better and much easier without beekeepers!

P.S.
I live is such area - untouched nature. While walking through the forests, mountains, fields (with my detector) i oftenly meet wild bees. Plenty of those!

[J_Player]

Dont worry J_P I am posting off topic too.

If you fear of a revolution, be on her side and you get a monument in bronze. For your monument will have the government confiscate all bronze and copper coin findings. So started counter revolution. Do you understand?Not really.
I have no fear of revolutions or counter revolutions. I am answering Ivconic's questions from the viewpoint of of a person who knows the history that led to changes in the way democracy is implemented. I listed revolution as one possible solution among many, but fear of revolution is not really what we are talking about. Ivconic is talking about what is a good way to remove corruption from government. Democracy, in particular.

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

Hi J_P,

I know there is a difference between candidates and democracy , IMO it is precisely in that difference that resides the problem: as long as you are a candidate, you are willing to obtain power thus you cannot be a good president (or whatever)
I know it is utopia but maybe it could work like this: the leaders of each departments could be sorted between a sample of population of different ages,(higher % of new people if we want evolution :D) and between each group decisions would be voted.
Similar in a way to obligatory military service of ~1 year that was active in many European countries.
Of course when i talked education i didn´t mean high grade,( i don´t really believe in education either), but just a minimum level that will allow the "chosen" to comply their task. (reading and righting correctly for example :rolleyes:)

And about bees i don´t see many places in the world where they can work without a beekeeper stealing their honey... they are all counted...Hi Fred,

The idea of having leaders to represent different groups is similar to the congress and senators representing different states. But your suggestion is they are no longer elected, and changed more often. I guess this is in hopes they will not be owned by political parties or business interests. It would be nice if everyone could read and write correctly -- not just politicians. Maybe this is the purpose of requiring basic school attendence in most countries.

Interesting about bees. Last year I was involved on a construction project where we had some concrete forms stacked up at one side of a large plot of land. These forms were 4 ft x 8 ft and were like a shallow box or tray that was 4 inches thickness so when you stack them you have a series of 4 inch hollow air spaces. Each one had a number of holes the size of your finger in the edges. One day we noticed some bees coming out of the holes. Nobody paid much attention or cared. But after a few months there were a lot of bees coming out. It finally got to a point that you could not walk near those forms, or a swarm of bees would chase you away. Eventually we sent somebody with a bee suit to take a tractor to unstack the forms. What we found is one of the hollow spaces was completely full of honeycombs, and two others were more than half full. There was enough honey combs that could fill maybe a 55 gallon drum. Nobody was stealing their honey, but they found a convenient home. They were removed because nobody wanted to work at that construction site with bees chasing them away.

Best wishes,
J_P

[ivconic]

"...or a swarm of bees would chase you away..."

:lol::lol::lol:
Oooh! I had simillar experiences many times! Once i fall over Troy X3 shaft and broke it on half!
Wild bees are more agressive than "domestic" ones.
That's why i don't worry about bees, they can manage very well without human help!
...
But their organisation is splendid! Perfect society! I reffered title of this thread exactly to that. Man can learn much from those.

[Fred]

Hi,
First of all my reference to bees was an analogy with us, we are the bees ruled by the "beekeepers". Our honey is the money we can keep, taxes are adjusted so we need to work hard enough and don´t have too much time to think, except to watch TV so we can watch adverts.and most important to profit to the beekeepers.
when you take the honey from a (real) hive, you cannot take it all and must let part of it for the bees to survive ...

[/color][/i]

That is descent but won't work.
As long as we have large powerfull (private) companies we will have to obey their will.
This is why by making a group o average citizens over a period of , say, 1 year, (as a civic duty), we could avoid that.Even if some could get influenced, they are not alone and the effect would be averaged.


Hi Fred,
... But your suggestion is they are no longer elected, and changed more often. I guess this is in hopes they will not be owned by political parties or business interests.
J_P
-Not changed all at a time, but progressively substituted on a rolling basis.
-Yes, not owned , and the most important in my point o view not serving teir own interests. I think this is (unfortunately) the reason for many politicians to candidate .
Resuming, anyone as long as they are not volunteers. If they are, by definition they will suck.

[J_Player]

Hi,
First of all my reference to bees was an analogy with us, we are the bees ruled by the "beekeepers". Our honey is the money we can keep, taxes are adjusted so we need to work hard enough and don´t have too much time to think, except to watch TV so we can watch adverts.and most important to profit to the beekeepers.
when you take the honey from a (real) hive, you cannot take it all and must let part of it for the bees to survive ...


This is why by making a group o average citizens over a period of , say, 1 year, (as a civic duty), we could avoid that.Even if some could get influenced, they are not alone and the effect would be averaged.



-Not changed all at a time, but progressively substituted on a rolling basis.
-Yes, not owned , and the most important in my point o view not serving teir own interests. I think this is (unfortunately) the reason for many politicians to candidate .
Resuming, anyone as long as they are not volunteers. If they are, by definition they will suck.Interesting idea.

Just think of those bees. They all have the same idea. And they all work to take care of the hive. Can you imagine what would happen if one bee got the idea to hoard extra honey for himself? I doubt he would survive long when the other bees saw what he was doing. Maybe this is where people are not the same. Humans prize thier ability to have different interests and points of views. It requires discipline to conform to laws and rules of our own volition. And people tend to want laws to be favorable for their interests. So we devise ways to make a government that allows the most people to have their interests served such as voting. But the bees have no need to vote, or need for representatives, because they all want the same thing.

But what about the civic duty you suggest to become a representative of a group? As an individual who is representing others, suppose you don't agree with what your group wants. What is to stop you from adding some of your own ideas to what your group asks for? Maybe the records are kept public, so you can't cheat. And then, suppose your group has no opinion of what they want. For example, a group from a religious order that declines political opinions. Or maybe you are representing a group that are mostly criminals who want you to vote for some corrupt policies. Somehow you will need to turn in a vote as a representative, even if you don't agree with what you are doing, or don't even know what your group wants. Maybe you are right, that these are a few cases that will be averaged out in the larger numbers.

But how much simpler for bees. No representatives, no voting, and all have the same idea.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

Interesting idea.

Just think of those bees. They all have the same idea. And they all work to take care of the hive. Can you imagine what would happen if one bee got the idea to hoard extra honey for himself? I doubt he would survive long when the other bees saw what he was doing.
I understand your point, but try to stop paying taxes and see what happens...
And i am not even sure if there is or no individualism of some sort in a hive.


But what about the civic duty you suggest to become a representative of a group?
My idea is not an individual to be representative of a group, it is the whole group that takes decision by submitting them and voting .
As the individials are chosen randomly , there is almost no chance of finding a group with the same religious (for example) convictions.and even if there was, it would change soon, as in a group of 12 one person would change each month.
And by the way, there politic by itself would no longer exist.
[/quote]


But how much simpler for bees. No representatives, no voting, and all have the same idea.
Best wishes,
J_P

In a hive when the queen dies the workers quickly modify the food given to a few larva, as long as the size of their alveolus .Just by doing this they will transform would-be regular workers in queens, and the firsts queen to be born, if healthy, will be kept, and all others killed.
:)

[J_Player]

I understand your point, but try to stop paying taxes and see what happens...
And i am not even sure if there is or no individualism of some sort in a hive.


My idea is not an individual to be representative of a group, it is the whole group that takes decision by submitting them and voting .
As the individials are chosen randomly , there is almost no chance of finding a group with the same religious (for example) convictions.and even if there was, it would change soon, as in a group of 12 one person would change each month.
And by the way, there politic by itself would no longer exist.


In a hive when the queen dies the workers quickly modify the food given to a few larva, as long as the size of their alveolus .Just by doing this they will transform would-be regular workers in queens, and the firsts queen to be born, if healthy, will be kept, and all others killed.
:)Ok, I see.

You are suggesting that a person is selected to vote for awhile, and whatever he votes will be counted for a larger number of similar people from his predefined group to be all the same votes as he made. Then after some time passes, they will switch to a new person from his same group to make the sample vote.

It sounds similar to sampling methods used in laboratories to determine the composition of a substance by taking random samples from within the substance.

In your example, all people in every group will eventually have their vote counted, but not all at once like current election methods.
Their votes will be staggered so only one member of a group is counted at any one time.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

Ok, I see.

You are suggesting that a person is selected to vote for awhile, and whatever he votes will be counted for a larger number of similar people from his predefined group to be all the same votes as he made. Then after some time passes, they will switch to a new person from his same group to make the sample vote.
J_P
I wish i could express myself better :lol:
In the group ( which responsibility is similar to the charge of a minister in a government), everyone will vote .
Members of the group will change at regular intervals, depending of the number of members of course.
the main ideas of this whole thing are that :
-The group is constituted of any one of any class of society.
-The individuals are randomly designed.

[J_Player]

I wish i could express myself better :lol:
In the group ( which responsibility is similar to the charge of a minister in a government), everyone will vote .
Members of the group will change at regular intervals, depending of the number of members of course.
the main ideas of this whole thing are that :
-The group is constituted of any one of any class of society.
-The individuals are randomly designed.Ok I think I got it now :lol:

Of course, some people may wonder why everyone does not have the right to have their vote counted when a legislative decision is to be made. Logically it would seem that if we polled every person each time there was something to vote on, then we would end up with the average of what most people wanted. But I can see a lot of ways that wouldn't always work.

If you want to test how well any particular government accomplishes the objective of doing what most people want, just start asking citizens if they think their country is doing what most want done and see what the majority tell you. I was surprised to find that their answers are not always what theoretical logic would suggest you should expect. The way you proposed may actually be found to work very well.

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

Hey, as long as we're in the off-topic forum, then I guess it's ok to make an off topic post to the posts we see here. So here goes:

Have you seen the Remote Sensing forum thread about the OKM Bionic 01?

They are arguing about whether it detected a shovel or gold with lots of proofs involving videos and Mineoros, along with trying to prove Esteban's pistols are the same as ordinary VLF RX. But they waste all their time with all these arguments and stories.

All they need to do is to move up to the geophysics section and click on OKM to find it works with magnetometers arranged as a gradiometer with a learning circuit connected. They will see the photo of exactly what they are paying for, and what makes it beep. No need to try to prove what a video shows. Of course it does not work to scan horizontally... the magnetic north pole destroys the stored heading of the pistol's gradiometer. I lost all interest to prove whether it detects the shovel or not, now that I know what powers it. Also, I think Ivconic is right... not necessary to pay the price of a new Mercedes Benz. $150 plus maybe $200 more for some very nice PIC and program to connect complete with display, leds laser pointer and star wars plastic pistol.

Funny how people from geophysics field don't tell stories about amazing "phenomenon".

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

I am surprised, i thought it was only a level, after all it´s more sophisticated :lol:

[J_Player]

I am surprised, i thought it was only a level, after all it´s more sophisticated :lol:Sure...
For 10,000 euros, you get two tiny magnetometers that don't work as good as the one you can build from the free plans. But that's not all... you get the pistol complete with advanced beeps generator and laser! :shocked:

So what are you waiting for?

:lol: :lol: :lol:


Best wishes,
J_P

[WM6]

Thank you guy for bees and systems debate.

There are simple ethic and moral criteria to prove sistem suit to human been or not:

System that allowed some people acquired to itself so much wealth, that can be used to buy even the freedom of other people, is the criminal system.

Capitalism mean end of human freedom and end of democracy.

Capitalism is the criminal system par excellence.

[joecoin]

Thank you guy for bees and systems debate.

There are simple ethic and moral criteria to prove sistem suit to human been or not:

System that allowed some people acquired to itself so much wealth, that can be used to buy even the freedom of other people, is the criminal system.

Capitalism mean end of human freedom and end of democracy.

Capitalism is the criminal system par excellence.

Capitalism rewards those who are not lazy.

[J_Player]

Thank you guy for bees and systems debate.

There are simple ethic and moral criteria to prove sistem suit to human been or not:

System that allowed some people acquired to itself so much wealth, that can be used to buy even the freedom of other people, is the criminal system.

Capitalism mean end of human freedom and end of democracy.

Capitalism is the criminal system par excellence.This may be true. At least it appears to be true in today's world of global corporate power.

The idea of capitalism begins with the idea that a person should be able to get ahead financially if he produces more than others. This idea begins as an idea to solve the condition where people don't bother to put out a good performance because they know they will be rewarded the same whether they are productive or not. But if we want to reward the people who are more productive by allowing them more profit, then we want capitolism in the basic sense.

As some people continue to profit, and their companies become large enough, they can become a strong economic force on local levels, or even gobally. There have been controls put in place to prevent single companies from becoming so powerful that they destroy all competition from other companies. These controls are not perfect, but they usually serve to allow for other competitors. But what about the controls for their influence in politics? Of course there are controls, but are they working?

When people complain the common people can't get the kind of government they want, it sounds like democracy is not working, regardless of what you call the government. And if the problem is traced to corporate influence in the government, then maybe corporate influence is the area to address.

Maybe the problem is in the motives of capitalism and democracy.
The motive of capitalism is the profit motive, while the motive of democracy is to serve the common people. We could say it is a difference of two different classes: large conglomerate class against the common person class. But the problem is the common person also wants the basic motive of capitalism. He wants to know he can get ahead of he produces better than others. As long as this condition exists, capitalism will never be completely gone.

If you look at the example of the bees, none of them have the profit motive. They all have the service motive and nothing else. Everything they do is for the benefit of the hive. There is no chance they will create any institution that stops them from doing what they want to do. In order for something to upset the order they want, it requires an influence from the outside.... like the bee-keeper. He is only able to take their honey because they are not smart enough to understand that they were robbed. They simply see the reserves are deficient and they need to fill them up again.

The realities of life don't allow people to work with only the service motive. They can provide service only to the extent that they will be compensated enough to at least survive. So the profit motive (capitalism) is a built in part of survival at a human level. Capitalism as a motive is here whether we like it or not. Maybe the motives of capitalism are not what is at fault, but the business practices of the companies that are meddling in politics, and social engineering.

In any case, it looks like (to me) that the problem is one of ethics, not the motive to profit. That kind of problem is usually addressed by making and enforcing laws.

Best wishes,
J_P

[WM6]

In any case, it looks like (to me) that the problem is one of ethics, not the motive to profit. That kind of problem is usually addressed by making and enforcing laws.


J_P

Yes, "by making and enforcing laws."

Because if I came out of simple ethic and moral criteria to prove sistem suit to human been or not and say:

System that allowed some people acquired to itself so much wealth, that can be used to buy even the freedom of other people, is the criminal system.

this not mean that I am against competition, private property, profit and controlled free market. No, these are systemic instruments, that make system work. The problem is who and how to manage this system instruments.

We have country governments and even, say so, world governments (UN). Country and world authorities have to manage systemic instruments in such a way that could not be possible that someone is enriched to the extent that they can buy, not only someone work, but also the freedom and beliefs of other people.

There can not be real democracy if freedom and beliefs of people are goods for sale. This can only mean a negation of democracy.

Capital is no more satisfied with the purchases only of our work, now he wants to buy our human essence, freedom and belief, since that is the only way to make perfect slaves of us.

Country governments, which we are voting for, by all means help capital to this end, rather than restrict it and protect voters human dignity. Yes, as you say, "by making and enforcing laws."


This is the essence of present criminal neo-liberal world capitalist system.

[J_Player]

Yes, "by making and enforcing laws."

Because if I came out of simple ethic and moral criteria to prove sistem suit to human been or not and say:

System that allowed some people acquired to itself so much wealth, that can be used to buy even the freedom of other people, is the criminal system.

this not mean that I am against competition, private property, profit and controlled free market. No, these are systemic instruments, that make system work. The problem is who and how to manage this system instruments.

We have country governments and even, say so, world governments (UN). Country and world authorities have to manage systemic instruments in such a way that could not be possible that someone is enriched to the extent that they can buy, not only someone work, but also the freedom and beliefs of other people.

There can not be real democracy if freedom and beliefs of people are goods for sale. This can only mean a negation of democracy.

Capital is no more satisfied with the purchases only of our work, now he wants to buy our human essence, freedom and belief, since that is the only way to make perfect slaves of us.

Country governments, which we are voting for, by all means help capital to this end, rather than restrict it and protect voters human dignity. Yes, as you say, "by making and enforcing laws."


This is the essence of present criminal neo-liberal world capitalist system.The problem is still ethics.
You cannot blame capitalism for people who have bad ethics.
Capitalism is the motive to profit, not the decision to destroy the rights of others.

Capitalism does not have bad ethics.
The people who operate companies to take away peoples rights have bad ethics.
Capitalism is not the enemy, unethical people are.

You stop unethical people by enforcing laws.

Best wishes,
J_P

[WM6]

You stop unethical people by enforcing laws.

J_P

People are so much corrupt and unethical as the system allows, not more - not less.

What system allow such a situation? Capitalism.

Capitalism not only destroy human ethic, they destroy human life too, they destroy health care systems, they destroy Social Welfare system, they destroy Pension Insurance systems, they destroy humanity, and at the end they destroy himself, I hope.

Making law and enforcing law are only part of capitalst crime sistem and giuded and controled by this crime sistem and can not be changed without change system alone.

System can be changed anly by us all togheter.


Here, each converted: what will win and what will be lost.

Changes will occur when the majority will have nothing to lose.


Therefore remains only password: far worse - much better.

[J_Player]

People are so much corrupt and unethical as the system allows, not more - not less.

What system allow such a situation? Capitalism.

Capitalism not only destroy human ethic, they destroy human life too, they destroy health care systems, they destroy Social Welfare system, they destroy Pension Insurance systems, they destroy humanity, and at the end they destroy himself, I hope.

.....
Changes will occur when the majority will have nothing to lose. Any system can allow such a situation.
Capitalism can
Communism can
Democracy can
Representative government can
Dictatorship can
Socialist systems can.
Kingdoms can
Any kind of system can.

Any system can be run by people who don't have the ethical standards to stop them from taking away their citizens wealth or any number of other bad policies.
Those systems are not the problem.
Poor ethics are the problem.
The quality of government depends on the ethics of the people who operate the government.


When people have nothing to lose, we see revolution.
Has this happened in capitalist systems? I think so.
Has it happened in communist systems? I think so.
Has it happened in democracies? I think so.
Has it happened in representative governments? I think so.
Has it happened in a dictatorship? I think so.
Has it happened in socialist systems? I think so.
Has it happened in a kingdom? i think so.

Why would it happen in all these different systems?
Could it be somebody running those systems did something unethical that resulted in the citizens becoming so unhappy that they decided to revolt?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

Yes it is obvious to me that the weakness of any ideology is the human beings applying it.
Call it capitalism or communism or whatever, as long as some individuals can find a way to profit, they will.
Communism is a good ideology but it will never work because of human nature.Capitalism too but it is unfair for the same reason.
When Joe said it rewards those who are not lazy,maybe we could also say it rewards those who are greedy.
I don´t think following an ideology can lead somewhere, life is too complex for that.

[J_Player]

Communism is a good ideology but it will never work because of human nature.Actually communism already has worked well for certain conditions. For example, it did work well in tribal conditions where a small group of people could benefit from sharing their work to survive in a wilderness. This also worked in some isolated areas of the colonies during the USA pioneer times. On larger scales in more highly developed civilisations, I saw problems with abuse in the system. Maybe this is because it was not used in the same condition as a small group where everyone knew each other and could easily see if there was any abuse obvious or hidden.

The seeds for abuse of communism or any other system are built into the integrity of the people who run the system. Any system can be just as bad as another depending on how it is applied. Today, the only thing significant that changed from systems in the past is we have more technology and more people. It is the technology that allow more people to be supported in the same amount of space as fewer numbers from the past.

But while we spent some centuries making some great advances in technology, we did little to advance in the moral standards that were attained at the beginning of civilisation. If our moral standards had advanced, then we would not need to make laws to stop people from abusing political systems or economic systems.

This is why I think our technology has become more advanced than our ability to govern ourselves.

Best wishes,
J_P

[ivconic]

All of you have good points. I simply can not disagree.
Main problem is in human mind. What we need is evolution of human mind. Any society based on social equality is good, yet it also can turn bad because of reasons you mentioned in your posts, those related to human mind.
I was born in Yugoslavia, multiethnical, multinational, multireligion and Socialist country. Life was very good than. Criminal rate very very low, living standards high, each man had a job and could descently live from salary.
Than what happened? Tough to say in one sentence. Many bad things happened togather, parallel. First it was appearance of corruption, than inflation and last was national and religic antagonism between people.
And in just few years country busted and took a part, country which was built up for 50 years. Now we have 6 smaller countries, poor banana republics. Nothing solved. Everything is much worse than it was. No more Socialism. Worse kind of musty Capitalism is now here in all 6 republics.
No one from those 6 republics can not say that today is better. People realized that in last 10-15 years, but it is too late to turn all back. Late and impossible. Rough and rude Capitalism came here. No jobs. People are starve. Crimial rate very high! Everything busted. Damn politicians are replacing in circles. Each "new" pigface is from the old team. No changes at all.
...
Yugoslavia was very dangerous example for the western world , for the Capitalism. Because any middle class american could come here and see that ordinary people are living much better than in USA. It was like that before 1990. So as any middle class from UK, Germany, France, Spain..etc..etc..
So Yugoslavia was very dangerous example for the western (Capitalistic) societies. Because western propaganda claimed for decades Socialism (and Comunism) as worse possible constitution, which actually it was not at all.
It was more rich and more human than others. I was born in such society and i lived for 20 and more years in it, so i cleary remember how it was.
So...dangerous example, why? Because middle class in western societies could rise, stand up and ask for simillar changes. That was a big threat for western capitalistic (and pretty reactionary) society.
Something must be done than! What? CIA,MI6 and few other had infiltrated hundreds of agents here and started special war, long before 1990/91.
How to bust multinational and multireligional comunity? Simply! Insist on differences! Tell to Crats that Serbs are bad. Tell to Serbs that Croats are bad. Tell to bosnian Muslims that Serbs and Croats are bad. Tell to ortodox that catolic is bad. Tell to catolic that ortodox is bad. Tell to Muslim that christians (catolics and ortodox) are very bad! Warmongering all arround, between everybody against everybody!
And that kind of situation lasted from 1982/3. up to 1991. Than exploded!
Conquer and rule = succesful formula!
We locals (Serbs, Croats, Muslims and Slovenians) were stupid enough to bite that decoy very hard!
Rest...i guess you all know.
And Yugoslavia was destroyed. Socialism busted. Every western middle class citizen now can be sure that it was bad and unsuccesfull system.
Not only that, now NATO has few bases here, few nuclear stations. They can do whatever they want. They are now closer to "dangerous" Russia.
They can defend "democracy" now much better, from Russia and China.
And we...locals...we lost everything (partially thanks to our stupidity).
Each country with NATO bases on its teritory should know one very important fact (keeped as top secret); that each NATO base is cover for nuclear stations with missiles pointed to Russia and Asia. Some of NATO bases are serving as storages for dangerous nuclear waste.
This was kept as ultimate top secret. Even majority of NATO officers are not awared of that. Especially nonamerican NATO members.
Secret was at the moment disclosed in Italy a while ago. Than everything was stifled very fast. Some officials were removed very fast and dissapeared.
Like nothing happened.
People from countries which host NATO bases are living in tough Capitalistic conditions. They do not have time to use brains and think. They must struggle each day to survive. "Chicken memory" developed at majority of those people. Living from today until tomorrow. So nobody is really paying much of attention about real (and horrible) situation.

[ivconic]

One thing is to live in some western society and to listen and watch very good prepared propaganda, each day - and quite another thing is to live in country out of that system (like i do) and to see facts from very different perspective. Especially if man is old enough (like i am) to remember very good what happened during last 30 years.
So..
we must talk,talk and talk. We must introduce us to each other much better. Because, now, we all are in same "pot". Nobody is safe today. It is not american vs serbian anymore. Now is we against "them". We - ordinary, descent peopple from arround the world against "them" - capitalists that holds all the power. Because we are sharing (or will share in closest future) the very same destiny.

[ivconic]

"Same destiny" is mexican flue. "Same destiny" is horrible earthquake on Haiti. "Same destiny" are floods in north Europe. "Same destiny" would be eventual war against Iran. Capitalistic (run for money) way of dealing totally destroyed planet Earth. "They" have more chance to survive than us. Because they are holding power and they decide who will live and who will die in future.
No matter; American, Serb or Iranian...if man is middle class or poor - he will bust the same.

[WM6]

I don´t think following an ideology can lead somewhere, life is too complex for that.



Humanism have to be our ideology, because only humanity lead to better society, to real freedom, to real democracy.

But humanism is a negation of wanton capitalism.

Is there another alternative?

[ivconic]

"...I don´t think following an ideology can lead somewhere, life is too complex for that...."

That is very dangerous point of view. Could easilly slip into anarchi!
...
But wait for a moment; first we must define term "ideology", for use among us.

If you by "ideology" mean "marxism", "leninnism", "satanism", "ocultism", "nazi socialism", "scientology-ism", "sai bubba-ism" and simillar ideologies - than i AGREE with you 1000%.

But if you by "ideology" mean "Socialism" ...than i can not agree with you.
Because Socialism is not ideology, it is real human constitution based firstly on social equality. Comunism (not the one we know from hollywood movies) is one step further from Socialism. Also should not be ideology. Yet...Comunism left in our minds as just that - sick ideology. Why? Simply because those who claimed to be Comunists actually were not! Stalin claimed to be comunist..while real truth was that he was worst dictator in history. Killed 20 000 000 people during his reign. That was not Comunism. Human mind was not developed enough for Comunism. Ha! It is obvious that it is not developed yet neither for Socialism. Long way to that.

So...we must agree about term "ideology" first, to void any confusion.

Religion could be ideology too. But i would rather skip to mix religion with other ideologies.

Regards!

[ivconic]

Another (funny) example;
metal detectors subjects (electronics) are a kind of ideology - my ideology. I go to sleep and in the morning wake up with same thoughts - metal detectors. Last ...let's say 10 years (although i am in this for over the 20 years) i am thinking only on metal detectors. I subjected each element of my life to that ideology. Nothing else exist for me. 25 hours per day i am in toughts on that subject. So...you may say that is also kind of ideology? Right? Than i will agree with you on that.
So..as you see; many things can be understood as "ideology".

[ivconic]

"...But if you by "ideology" mean "Socialism" ...than i can not agree with you.
Because Socialism is not ideology, it is real human constitution based firstly on social equality...."

Although not constituted as "Socialistic" there are few countries today just a step away from real Socialism. Sweden, Finland, Norway...which else? Japan was pretty close once...China also was pretty close at some moment...
Although not constituted as "Socialistic" those conuntries have very strong and very advanced elements of real Socialism. We may say those went far away already.

[ivconic]

There is interesting anecdote closelly related to this subject!!
Happened in Finland!
One car driver crossed red light. 100 meters away policeman stopped him and penalized that driver with 1 000 000 euros penalty!???
2 hours later another driver also crossed red light. Again policeman stopped him and penalized that driver with 500 euros penalty!??

Second driver was middle class working man, driving 8000 euros car.
First driver ..... ahahahahah....
first driver was stockholder, partner in NOKIA, driving 400 000 euros car!
Ain't that REAL SOCIALISM? I think it is!

[Fred]

Yes i define as ideology the one we try to "implant" in your head.
I agree Theology could be one too.

first driver was stockholder, partner in NOKIA, driving 400 000 euros car!
Ain't that REAL SOCIALISM? I think it is!
I am not sure, this is very dangerous.You give policemen too much power :D
As soon a equality no longer exists, everything is possible.For example the rich driver will give 10 000$ to the policeman so he will give only a small penalty.You see, we are back to the beginning

[ivconic]

Yes i define as ideology the one we try to "implant" in your head.
I agree Theology could be one too.


I am not sure, this is very dangerous.You give policemen too much power :D
As soon a equality no longer exists, everything is possible.For example the rich driver will give 10 000$ to the policeman so he will give only a small penalty.You see, we are back to the beginning

No,no. It only looks like that but it is not.
Policeman can not decide nothing there. There is law which is defining clear border between social groups of people. If man belongs to one social group than he will have to pay one penalty, and other from other social group another penalty. Pretty fair, isn't it?
In other countries...my country...your country....both drivers will pay same penalty. But it is not fair. I have (for example) 200 euros monthly incomes and 500e penalty is total bust for me. Nokia stockholder has (for example) 100 000e monthly incomes and 500e penalty for him is a joke!
See?
He can affrord to break such law often because he can affrod to pay, i can not! See? Great phylosophy and pretty fair is if both of us are divided in separate social groups and we pay different penalties, suitable to our status.
That kind of constitution is more fair. Both drivers are equaly prevented to break the laws.
In that case i (poor man) would not be resentful on fact that next to me there are crazy rich people, doing whatever they want, because the should not be able and allowed in such constitution.
In other countries (with equal penalties) rich people can do freely what they want, can afford to do - and poor people can not cose otherwise they will be busted and lost forever.
I think it is splendid example showing pretty fair relations in good constituted society. Socialism means equal rights but not total equality. Socialism allowing rich people to be rich. But also obligates equal rights between all social groups. So for me; equal right is when rich people are paying more than poor people in same situations; penalties, taxes, public services etc...etc...

[ivconic]

Good organisation and clear division on social categories. We all are not the same. We do not have same possibilities. We all do not have same chances. So...we don't need to be the same at all. So penalties, taxes, various expenses also must be divided by social categories too. See? That is social equality.

[ivconic]

'"...For example the rich driver will give 10 000$ to the policeman so he will give only a small penalty.You see, we are back to the beginning..."

I missed this. Yes you are right. But that's why we need evolution of human mind. Until than there is almost perfect control; so if policeman accept 10 000$ he will lose his job and go to jail. And if Nokia stockholder offer such sop to policeman he is risking even more! There are cameras covering whole the traffic, connected to survey system and main database.
We already have such advanced technology. It is not a big deal to control such things at all.

[ivconic]

Great example could also be UK hooligans! In the near past those presented HUGE threat for sport and sport events in UK. Where are those today? :lol::lol::lol:
Look today's stadiums in UK. No more steel fences!? How come? :lol::lol::lol:
Point is; until our minds evolute, there are many "transition" methods to overcome some bad occurences...

[J_Player]

Great example could also be UK hooligans! In the near past those presented HUGE threat for sport and sport events in UK. Where are those today? :lol::lol::lol:
Look today's stadiums in UK. No more steel fences!? How come? :lol::lol::lol:
Point is; until our minds evolute, there are many "transition" methods to overcome some bad occurences...

In USA the penalty is the same for all drivers. But the rich man cannot continue to pay penalties because after 4-5 times making traffic violations his driver license will be suspended or revoked, exactly same law for poor man.

The place where the rich man is equalised for penalties is when it is time to pay taxes for his earnings. Of course the rich man must pay more tax because he receives more money. But more percentage of his earnings is taken as well. For a man who earns $1000/month, he may end up paying $200 depending on circumstances of how many children and expenses. But for a man who earns $100,000/month, it is probable he will pay $50,000 for tax. So rich man pays 50% when poor man pays maybe 20%. And a man who earns no money can get free food from the government and other private charities.

The funny thing is there never was any tax to pay to the USA government for the money you earn until 1913 when they made a law for all people from every state to pay tax. This would be similar to the idea of the European Union making a law that all people who live in countries that are members of the EU must pay taxes directly to the EU depending on how much money they earn.

The idea of paying tax to the federal government of the USA is only one of many changes that moved the USA away from a government by the common people toward government by somebody different than the common people. The original idea of the people who started this country was to get away from somebody else deciding how the people must have their laws. They even made laws that the common people had the right to use guns to protect themselves in case the government was not doing what they wanted, and sent military after them. Their original idea was to give all the freedom to the common people so they could have their own laws and their own country. But slowly many of these laws have been changing to more similar laws as socialist laws. People here don't seem to notice too much because they were not there to see the problems that caused the first rules to be made for the country. And if you ask the average USA citizen about this history, they usually don't know too much about the details other than some important names and dates.

In the former Yugoslavia, I remember the 1984 Winter Olympics were shown on TV. I remember the beautiful modern city of Sarajevo that was shown. The reporters made many interviews of USA athletes and a few interviews of athletes from other countries. I was wondering why we did not see very many interviews of citizens or even athletes from Yugoslavia. It seemed obvious the news stations here only wanted to show the USA athletes, and a few other athletes who won medals from other countries.

But I was interested to see more of the people from Yugoslavia, and some more details from this country. I knew it was considered a communist country that broke away from the Russian version, and I wanted to see more of the people who built this great city. It is as you say, there was not much focus on the city or country at that time.

What is interesting is Tito's part in bringing Yugoslavia to the level of civilisation they achieved. He was one of the great leaders who decided to break away from the Russian version of communism to use his own idea of representative socialism instead. And this was after years of rebuilding the country following WWII. While he was controversial in many parts of the world, I remember he was mostly responsible for rebuilding the country in a way that gave the citizens the kind of laws they wanted. And at the same time, he encouraged other countries to do the same, especially small countries. Funny how the problems you talked about didn't start until after he was gone.

Best wishes,
J_P

[WM6]

One example of Equallity, probably known to all, but worth to repeat (even for funny):

The "Not Raising Hogs" business
Honorable Secretary of Agriculture
Washington D.C.

Dear Sir:

My friend,Ed, over at Wells Iowa, received a check for $1000 from the
government for not raising hogs. So, I was wondering if i could get
into the "not raising hog" business next year.

What I want to know is, in your opinion, what is the best kind of
farm not to raise hogs on and what is the best breed of hogs not to
raise? I want to be sure that I approach this endeavor in keeping
with all governmental policies. I would prefer not to raise
Raserbacks but if that is not a good breed not to raise then I will
just as gladly not raise Yorkshires or Durocs.

As I see it, the hardest part of this program will be in keeping an
accurate inventory of how many hogs I have not raised. My friend,Ed,
is very joyful about the future of this business. He has been
raising hogs for 20 years and the best he ever made on them was $422
in 1968, until this year when he got your check for $1000 for not
raising hogs.

If I get $1000 for not raising 50 hogs will I get $2000 for not
raising 100 hogs? I plan to operate on a small scale at first,
holding myself down to about 400 hogs not raised which will mean
about $80,000 the first year. Then I can afford an airplane.

Now, another thing. These hogs I will not raise will not eat
1,000,000 bushels of corn. I understand that you also pay farmers
for not raising corn and wheat. Will I qualify for payments for not
raising wheat and corn not to feed the 4,000 hogs I am not going to
raise?

Also I am considering the "not milking cows" business so please send
me any information you have on that, too.

In view of these circumstances you understand that I will be totally
unemployed and plan to file for unemployment and food stamps. You can
be sure you will have my vote in the coming election.

Patriotically Yours,


P.S. Would you please notify me when you plan to distribute more
free cheese?
------------------------------------------------
What do you mean about "NOT DETECTING TREASURE" business?
------------------------------------------------

[ivconic]

"..Funny how the problems you talked about didn't start until after he was gone..."

Bravo! You have very good observation here! It was exactly like that.
He died in May 1980. And first problems started in 1981. Yet, country was strong enough, so we noticed rice of problems much later...maybe in 1987/88.
Tito was "strong hand" leader, yet far away from being any kind of dictator.
That's because he was very smart leader.
There are some people saying Tito was "soft" dictator. In some period he removed many politicians from their functions. But if we make detailed analyze now, we will see that those removed politicians were wrong at some point, made mistakes somewhere. One party system...hmmm...could be bad but also could be good. Today we have hundred small parties and it is complete chaos! Democracy is also kind of utopia - good idea, but not possible in reallity, at least not yet. Again it is up to human minds and evolution. Tito's era is real proof that one party system could be very good transition solution. Today it is not possible anymore.

[ivconic]

One example of Equallity, probably known to all, but worth to repeat (even for funny):

The "Not Raising Hogs" business
Honorable Secretary of Agriculture
Washington D.C.

Dear Sir:

My friend,Ed, over at Wells Iowa, received a check for $1000 from the
government for not raising hogs. So, I was wondering if i could get
into the "not raising hog" business next year.

What I want to know is, in your opinion, what is the best kind of
farm not to raise hogs on and what is the best breed of hogs not to
raise? I want to be sure that I approach this endeavor in keeping
with all governmental policies. I would prefer not to raise
Raserbacks but if that is not a good breed not to raise then I will
just as gladly not raise Yorkshires or Durocs.

As I see it, the hardest part of this program will be in keeping an
accurate inventory of how many hogs I have not raised. My friend,Ed,
is very joyful about the future of this business. He has been
raising hogs for 20 years and the best he ever made on them was $422
in 1968, until this year when he got your check for $1000 for not
raising hogs.

If I get $1000 for not raising 50 hogs will I get $2000 for not
raising 100 hogs? I plan to operate on a small scale at first,
holding myself down to about 400 hogs not raised which will mean
about $80,000 the first year. Then I can afford an airplane.

Now, another thing. These hogs I will not raise will not eat
1,000,000 bushels of corn. I understand that you also pay farmers
for not raising corn and wheat. Will I qualify for payments for not
raising wheat and corn not to feed the 4,000 hogs I am not going to
raise?

Also I am considering the "not milking cows" business so please send
me any information you have on that, too.

In view of these circumstances you understand that I will be totally
unemployed and plan to file for unemployment and food stamps. You can
be sure you will have my vote in the coming election.

Patriotically Yours,


P.S. Would you please notify me when you plan to distribute more
free cheese?
------------------------------------------------
What do you mean about "NOT DETECTING TREASURE" business?
------------------------------------------------

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Same situation now in Serbia! Somebody is crazy. We onle need to find which one of us here in this country!? :lol::lol::lol:

[WM6]

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Same situation now in Serbia! Somebody is crazy. We onle need to find which one of us here!? :lol::lol::lol:




This mean Free Market: anyone can raise and sell whatever they want.

Obviously this only applies to landmines.

[ivconic]

"...In USA the penalty is the same for all drivers. But the rich man cannot continue to pay penalties because after 4-5 times making traffic violations his driver license will be suspended or revoked, exactly same law for poor man.

The place where the rich man is equalised for penalties is when it is time to pay taxes for his earnings. Of course the rich man must pay more tax because he receives more money. But more percentage of his earnings is taken as well. For a man who earns $1000/month, he may end up paying $200 depending on circumstances of how many children and expenses. But for a man who earns $100,000/month, it is probable he will pay $50,000 for tax. So rich man pays 50% when poor man pays maybe 20%. And a man who earns no money can get free food from the government and other private charities.

The funny thing is there never was any tax to pay to the USA government for the money you earn until 1913 when they made a law for all people from every state to pay tax. This would be similar to the idea of the European Union making a law that all people who live in countries that are members of the EU must pay taxes directly to the EU depending on how much money they earn.

The idea of paying tax to the federal government of the USA is only one of many changes that moved the USA away from a government by the common people toward government by somebody different than the common people. The original idea of the people who started this country was to get away from somebody else deciding how the people must have their laws. They even made laws that the common people had the right to use guns to protect themselves in case the government was not doing what they wanted, and sent military after them. Their original idea was to give all the freedom to the common people so they could have their own laws and their own country. But slowly many of these laws have been changing to more similar laws as socialist laws. People here don't seem to notice too much because they were not there to see the problems that caused the first rules to be made for the country. And if you ask the average USA citizen about this history, they usually don't know too much about the details other than some important names and dates...."


There are some good moves that USA already did on social plan. I am ocasionaly following situation there. Personally i don't like to much freedom at some points there and to few at others.
But certainly USA has gone far already solving some social issues.
Main objection i could put only on USA foreign politics and behavior. To much attention oriented outdoor while indoor there are still much issues to be solved.
"To defend our democracy"....right, i agree. But who's attacking it? Nobody as i see. Nobody have slitest wish to attack and mix in inner USA affairs.
USA finds to much enemies where they actually don't exist.
I would respect USA much more if those turn to themselves and deal with own affairs, rather than to mix in anything out of USA borders.
But problem is not in people there. Many smart and good people there.
Problem is in those ultra rich and powerfull companies and trusts who own real power there. Those are real creators of USA politics. To maintan and multiply capital, those must go further out of USA borders. To much millitary power, to much guns, to much mixing and interfering in others lives.
That is bad.
Instead investing such money in science and bettering human life, those are more ready to invest in wars and crises.
War for oil? Why? There are much better ways to provide energy. Much cleaner and less hazardous for nature. Who need oil anymore? Todays knowledge and technology is quite enough to give alternative solutions.
I've seen documentary on tv showing experimental solar plants in Mexico, established by some German company. One whole city is powered by solar plant and everything works perfectly well. Energy collected from that plant is more than sufficient for their needs. They don't need wood, coal and oil anymore! :)
So why fighting so much over oil resources? Money, habit, not ready for changes yet...
Main USA (and world) problem is in that group of ultra rich and powerfull trusts and companies. Those must change or dissapear.

[ivconic]

Ha! Hear this!
It is not secret anymore that USA started campaign in Afghanistan not to catch Usama but to provide distant (out of public attention) free area to grow poppy! :lol::lol::lol: No..i am not joking! It is true!
Whole operation was generated by CIA.
Today, huge occupied area in Afghanistan is very well secured and conducted by US army. Afghanistan people are working there for very small fee. Huge areas covered with poppy plantations, kept as secret as possible.
Why poppy? Drugs!
It is already well known that CIA's subsistence was financed from drug bussines for several decades. All operations and activities are also financed from such money.
You may laugh on this because it looks like sf (those counted on that), pitty it is not.
That is also the answer on question why USA occasionaly mixing in South American affairs. Cuba, Panama, Columbia....
Answer is DRUGS! Money! Power!
...
Does ordinary USA citizen know these facts?
I don't think so...

Now is Iraq on the "table". We will see what will grow there! :lol::lol::lol:

And in near future is Iran on the "table". Unless EU do something to prevent that war.

[WM6]

Bourgeois (capitalist) revolution was initiated following the motto:

Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité
where is now Liberté?
where is now Egalité?
where is now Fraternité?

[ivconic]

"Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité" !!! :razz::lol:
What's that? Hippy parole? :lol::lol::lol:
Mary Ann is nice girl!

[WM6]

"Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité" !!! :razz::lol:
What's that? Hippy parole? :lol::lol::lol:


No, it is motto of the Next Revolution.

You know: history repeats itself!

[J_Player]

No, it is motto of the Next Revolution.

You know: history repeats itself!Sure, history repeats itself.
The same companies will sell you weapons for your next revolution that sold weapons for last revolutions for the past 100 years.
Then they will sell you fast foods and mine detectors when your revolution is over.

[WM6]

Then they will sell you fast foods and mine detectors when your revolution is over.



Then we changed to LRL and go fishing in minefields.

[J_Player]

Then we changed to LRL and go fishing in minefields.LRL is religion, not fishing system.

[ivconic]

LRL is religion, not fishing system.

Pretty close and tied to Ocultism! :lol:

[WM6]

LRL is religion, not fishing system.

Pretty close and tied to Ocultism! :lol:

How pistols can be religion? Ok, maybe fetishism like Money.

[J_Player]

How pistols can be religion? Ok, maybe fetishism like Money.Sure is religion --- believe without seeing.

[WM6]

Because western propaganda claimed for decades Socialism (and Comunism) as worse possible constitution, which actually it was not at all.



Sometimes we forgot that economic system in former Yugoslavia was not plannig system as in Soviet Union. In Yugoslavia was accepted free market system adopted to socialist social system.

It was not Wild West Free Market System, as we have now, but controled Free Market System (e.g.: differences between the salaries were limited to a ratio no more than 1:5 to 1:7 depending on the area and period - mean capable and good mechanic can under some condition earn even more as a director).

Dont ask what is the ratio between sallaries now, between workes that for months do not get anything and directors in the same factories that per month taken 15,000 and even 30,000 euro (about 50.000 USD per month), not to mention those criminals which by different financial fraud robbed all social and state property and become millionare, and at the same time destroy industry and all social wellfare systems.

How can be free those which for month, despite hard work, can not earn nothing? How can be free their families? Where is their freedom? Can those do free switch to an other employer? No, because there is no work for them in destroyed industry. Those can only hard work and hope to final become their shamefully low sallaries. There is no freedom for the masses. But at the same time apologist of free market argue that the free market can only exist if provide complete freedom of all operators. Which freedom? Freedom to die of hunger or freedom to suicide in despair?

We have our country states and our governments, voted by us and now in the service of capital. What are the tasks of the government if we accept the free market system? To serve capitalist? No they know how good care of himself. Government have to serve his voters, to serve citizens. In case of free market system mean that government have to assure real market freedom to his voters as to others free market entity.

Voters, workers and a citizens should not be afraid to be left hungry or homeless: if they will quit with the employer which is not payable, or if their works fails, or if in a dispute with the employer receives notice. Government should assure to voters the opportunity to really choose freely in the labor market, to guarantee all this not only declarative but also material. This means that government should in any case provide citizens material minimum to survival.

In present system condition, the best way (and maybe only) to assure freedom to workers as most vulnerable entity on free market represents so called guaranted "Citizen's Basic Income", (known and applied even in USA/Alaska too).

Please read more about subject "Citizen's Basic Income" on web, par example you can start here:
http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=974 and here http://www.usbig.net/index.html

Conclusion: If capitalist want free maket system, they have to pay fo it. Nothing is free, neither free market system. This means that government should in any case provide citizens material minimum to survival. Price for this is "Citizen's Basic Income" - bill charged to capital.

[ivconic]

WM6 although you live in Slovenia, you just explained exact situtuation in Serbia, and i can only justify, it is like that.
No freedom of course. Only freedom we have here is freedom to die, whenever we want and however we want! :lol: That is only freedom we have now.
"Opening" domestic market for foreign stock just ruined domestic economy. Domestic companies busted, people lost jobs etc...etc...
Politicians are telling us everyday stories about joining EU.
To join EU, for such small and nonimportant country, means only one thing; to stay as thirdparty country, thirdparty market etc..etc.. Only major EU countries have profit from EU. Small countries don't.
So generally i am not so happy with EU and eventual joining. It was better in the past when Serbia was "closed" market with good import/export control.
People had jobs, we bought our domestic products and most of those products were high quality, comparing to nowdays imported junk from EU, especially i mean this when talking about alimentary products, food, drinks etc...
EU is administering some "high" standards and rules for such products. So paradox is now in fact that their products which obey those standards are actually PLAIN JUNK comparing to our domestic products. And paradox continue in importing their expensive JUNK by hot prices and conditions and at the same time exporting our products by some low, funny prices and charged with some additional, extra conditions made by EU also!!
Now...this is obvious proof that EU servers good only for major countries and their economies.
So generally i am against EU and i think it is nonsence. It is good only for huge companies and very bad for small, middle class, working citizen (majority in EU).
I am sure EU will bust and take apart in next 10-15 years (with or without horrible local wars).
So...why joining something that have no future?

[WM6]

No freedom of course. Only freedom we have here is freedom to die, whenever we want and however we want! :lol: That is only freedom we have now.




Present neoliberal Wild Free Market Capitalist System offer only declarative democracy.

Declarative democracy can not assure human rights and freedoms to all people, but only for those capable to pay for human rights and freedoms.

Present capitalist system on the perfidious manner denied human rights and freedoms and in such way obscuring its nature of a crime.

Present capitalist system is a crime system and must be changed.

[ivconic]

"...Present capitalist system is crime system and must be changed...."

Last moments to change.

Huge majority suffers from small minority. Tough to understand. People acts like sheep. For how long more?

[WM6]

"...Present capitalist system is crime system and must be changed...."

Last moments to change.

Huge majority suffers from small minority. Tough to understand. People acts like sheep. For how long more?


So started, declarative, capitalist revolution. Have to be started again:


Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen


Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen de 1789




Approved by the National Assembly of France, August 26, 1789

The representatives of the French people, organized as a National Assembly, believing that the ignorance, neglect, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole cause of public calamities and of the corruption of governments, have determined to set forth in a solemn declaration the natural, unalienable, and sacred rights of man, in order that this declaration, being constantly before all the members of the Social body, shall remind them continually of their rights and duties; in order that the acts of the legislative power, as well as those of the executive power, may be compared at any moment with the objects and purposes of all political institutions and may thus be more respected, and, lastly, in order that the grievances of the citizens, based hereafter upon simple and incontestable principles, shall tend to the maintenance of the constitution and redound to the happiness of all. Therefore the National Assembly recognizes and proclaims, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, the following rights of man and of the citizen:
Articles:
1. Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good.
2. The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.
3. The principle of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. No body nor individual may exercise any authority which does not proceed directly from the nation.
4. Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law.
5. Law can only prohibit such actions as are hurtful to society. Nothing may be prevented which is not forbidden by law, and no one may be forced to do anything not provided for by law.
6. Law is the expression of the general will. Every citizen has a right to participate personally, or through his representative, in its foundation. It must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens, being equal in the eyes of the law, are equally eligible to all dignities and to all public positions and occupations, according to their abilities, and without distinction except that of their virtues and talents.
7. No person shall be accused, arrested, or imprisoned except in the cases and according to the forms prescribed by law. Any one soliciting, transmitting, executing, or causing to be executed, any arbitrary order, shall be punished. But any citizen summoned or arrested in virtue of the law shall submit without delay, as resistance constitutes an offense.
8. The law shall provide for such punishments only as are strictly and obviously necessary, and no one shall suffer punishment except it be legally inflicted in virtue of a law passed and promulgated before the commission of the offense.
9. As all persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty, if arrest shall be deemed indispensable, all harshness not essential to the securing of the prisoner's person shall be severely repressed by law.
10. No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law.
11. The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.
12. The security of the rights of man and of the citizen requires public military forces. These forces are, therefore, established for the good of all and not for the personal advantage of those to whom they shall be intrusted.
13. A common contribution is essential for the maintenance of the public forces and for the cost of administration. This should be equitably distributed among all the citizens in proportion to their means.
14. All the citizens have a right to decide, either personally or by their representatives, as to the necessity of the public contribution; to grant this freely; to know to what uses it is put; and to fix the proportion, the mode of assessment and of collection and the duration of the taxes.
15. Society has the right to require of every public agent an account of his administration.
16. A society in which the observance of the law is not assured, nor the separation of powers defined, has no constitution at all.
17. Since property is an inviolable and sacred right, no one shall be deprived thereof except where public necessity, legally determined, shall clearly demand it, and then only on condition that the owner shall have been previously and equitably indemnified.

http://www.textes.justice.gouv.fr/art_pix/09bour.jpg

[ivconic]

Joining EU....Ha! What a swindle!
I know very well situation in Chech Republic (how it was in last 15 years). I also know very well situation in Malta (lived there in 2004/5). And logically i know situation in Serbia.
So...when Chech Republic joined EU it was commonly thrill arround citizen!
Next 7-8 years seems everything went better there. Huge German (mostly) companies bought everything there. Imported products...opened new jobs...etc...etc.. It lasted only 7-8 years and saturated very fast. Nowdays huge problems in Chech Republic. Nobody buying nothing, no jobs, standard is going down. Major Chech companies busted. I remember TOZ - giant. Today...what was "TOZ" ???
Malta...joined EU in 2004. Again commonly thrill ...lasted 5-6 months! :lol::lol::lol:
Per diem dropped from average 30-45ml to 22ml in just first 2 months. Next 2 months dropped to 18-19ml (those are without over time)!!!!
All of the sudden major companies closed and replaced to China! :lol::lol::lol:
There were 19 major electronic companies on Malta until joining EU. Motorola, Thompson...etc..etc.. All closed their production lines there and replaced to China! :lol::lol::lol:
I think Thompson is still there but with much reduced capacity and with production replaced.
So from 19 comapnies to 1 left, in few years...!:lol:
How many jobs lost?
Malteze citizen lost thrill very fast. Nowdays those are damn the day they joined EU....
...
I have spoke with old people there. Most frequent reactions were in manner: "It was much better to stay as UK colony!" And i agree.

[WM6]

Malteze citizen lost thrill very fast. Nowdays those are damn the day they joined EU....
...




EU is not a State that is still primarily an economic community.

Economic community mean capitalist community, establish according interest of capital and driven by interest of capital.

Eu is a school sample of neo-liberal capitalist system, which will be destroyed by neo-liberal capitalist system himself.

Unless something radical does not change in the direction of humanism.

As long as something try to change only brave Greeks, there is no hope of serious changes in the EU.

More likely to be repeated story of the bourgeois capitalist revolution, when the changes are taken so late, that was regullary pre-defeat by violence.

[ivconic]

I am also affraid so!

[Esteban]

LRL is religion, not fishing system.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Is a fishing system for metals too!!! :lol:

[Esteban]

Capitalism is a monster that consumes all the resources at their disposal and every day requires more... Politicians and government structures are growing every day, then it is "important" to create new taxes and raise them. They also "studying" what groups of people include them for his purposes. In the end, citizens pay taxes and politicians make wars. In wars are killed those who pay the taxes, that holds politicians and other "people".

[WM6]

Capitalism is a monster that consumes all the resources at their disposal and every day requires more... Politicians and government structures are growing every day, then it is "important" to create new taxes and raise them. They also "studying" what groups of people include them for his purposes. In the end, citizens pay taxes and politicians make wars. In wars are killed those who pay the taxes, that holds politicians and other "people".

At the ends I can fully agre with you Esteban.

But explanatios are just first step to freedom.

[ivconic]

Capitalism is a monster that consumes all the resources at their disposal and every day requires more... Politicians and government structures are growing every day, then it is "important" to create new taxes and raise them. They also "studying" what groups of people include them for his purposes. In the end, citizens pay taxes and politicians make wars. In wars are killed those who pay the taxes, that holds politicians and other "people".

Correct.
Bustard politicians (ministers, government) are seaching each day for new methods to take taxes. One day we will have to pay taxes on air.
If we are such sheep than we deserve even worse destiny.
I've been in local wars for decade. I had enough. Especially knowing the fact that all those wars were for nothing and brought no improvements at all. Neither to one of the sides.
I asking myself how to solve this present misery than? Wars again? I don't think so.
I think best way to overcome this misery is to gather majority of people and to start various peacefull but drastic actions.
For example we can gather and negotiate to start synchronized actions at the same time and in massive response. We all can simply refuse to pay taxes.
I am wandering what they gonna do than? Nothing!
I also mentioned few other examples at the begining of this thread.
We all can stop to buy some products from the list. We can make list of all products made and offered by main "enemies" and simply we can stop buying those. Instead of those we can buy and use alternative products made by other, small and independant manufacturers.
We can stop using some of "their" services also.
We can enlarge and spread out boycott on many other fields.
In month or two that sick system will crash for sure.
...
Or....we can start wars. But to fight against who? To fight against domestic army, police..? Than they gonna claim that we are terorists. If we act in a small groups than it is sure they gonna say that we are terorists. So we must act in huge groups as global movement and we must act synchronized.
....
I am not for war and fight. I am for peacefull but global actions.

[WM6]

For example we can gather and negotiate to start synchronized actions at the same time and in massive response. We all can simply refuse to pay taxes.
I am wandering what they gonna do than? Nothing!

I am for peacefull but global actions.



Yes, global mysery we can overcomming only by global actions.

Taxes are special problem. You cannot to buy something without to pay taxes at the same time. Taxes are incorporated in present system of exchange goods.

We need paralel system, paralel economy (money, production, exchange system) to not to buy inside current system and by this not to pay taxes.

Paralel economy is not only science fiction, but it is repeatedly tested model of colective survival. Please read more about this subject here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Exchange_Trading_Systems

Not easy way to act global, but capital is working for us according to the principle: far worse - much better.

First step: global explanation - anyone not convinced by the activity of capital, need to be convinced by us. Maybe long way. Only goal: better human society is important.

Nevertless, as you say, we can devalue some capitalist mascot as CocaCola start acting now.

[ivconic]

"...First step: global explanation - anyone not convinced by the activity of capital, need to be convinced by us. Maybe long way. Only goal: better human society is important...."

That's first and most important step. Luckilly we have internet nowdays. Forums like this one can be the initial places people to gather and talk. Each member of forum can proceed idea to next 10 people he knows. Next 10 people can proceed idea to next 100 people...etc...etc...
Process could last for years and dilute, but with good organisation and strong resolution process can last just few months using internet.
We can design new forum (here or out of here) specialized for this idea.
What we need are more "starters" - people who will anticipate in starting that action. Even better if those "starters" do speak different languages, so we can add to that forum multilingual threads.

[WM6]

".

We can design new forum (here or out of here) specialized for this idea.
What we need are more "starters" - people who will anticipate in starting that action. Even better if those "starters" do speak different languages, so we can add to that forum multilingual threads.



Good idea. Perhaps such a forum already exists? I did not research. If there is nothing like, then I'll be happy if I can participated in such a forum, as you now iniciate, and where you will be, I hope, master admin.

What you mean obout MD as major Off Topic theme there?

[ivconic]

Good idea. Perhaps such a forum already exists? I did not research. If there is nothing like, then I'll be happy if I can participated in such a forum, as you now iniciate, and where you will be, I hope, master admin.

What you mean obout MD as major Off Topic theme there?

No. I would like to void that. We need admin with English as native language, mother language. That's first. Second we need a group of pretty literate and intelectual people to start, establish and lead the forum.
I would be happy to join there and post what i have to post (not much more than i posted here).
But i am affraid that so few people will understand this seriously. But than again, that will depend of people who's appearing to present the idea to wide public.
Yes there are numerous simillar "antiglobalism" forums arround the net.
All of those started good and in time diluted...:lol:
Obvious proof that people are ready only to talk but not to act....
...
I am affraid we will have to prepare us for worse solutions than...
Wars, pandemias, earthquakes, floods......etc...etc...

[WM6]

Obvious proof that people are ready only to talk but not to act....
...



You are right.

But a words also have a hidden power, which ultimately could change the world.

Remember Bible:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

[J_Player]

Perhaps such a forum already exists? I did not research.There are hundreds of forums all over the internet to discuss better government and economic systems.
This is Geotech forums, made for the purpose of studying technical aspects of metal detecting, and only one small forum for things that are not metal detecting.

Look here in google to see some examples of forums for politics and government: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&rlz=1I7ADFA_en&ei=ntBYS_OYC4a-NvC95OIE&sa=X&oi=spellfullpage&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQvgUoAA&&q=government+systems+politics+capitolism+socialism +forum&nfpr=1

Best wishes,
J_P

[ivconic]

"...that are not metal detecting...."

Everything is "metal detecting"! Therefore this forum is good enough to cover many more subject!
Why?
Because themes which were processed in this forum are good for "sharpening" our brains generally. Once man join here and read posts, debates and opinions (especially conflict between "beleivers" and "skeptics") he will learn very good how to think on different way than common people do.
Once man get free from usuall prejudices, he is ready to better understand politics and economy too.
Major conclusion would be that "everything is lie" on this planet (until proven the oposite). Things are not what thay appearing to be, in common world.
....
Problem with all those forums we talking about, is in to much phylosphy and no real actions.
People like to talk from their comfortable chairs but are not ready to go outdoor and do something...pitty!

[Esteban]

Correct.
Bustard politicians (ministers, government) are seaching each day for new methods to take taxes. One day we will have to pay taxes on air.
If we are such sheep than we deserve even worse destiny.
I've been in local wars for decade. I had enough. Especially knowing the fact that all those wars were for nothing and brought no improvements at all. Neither to one of the sides.
I asking myself how to solve this present misery than? Wars again? I don't think so.
I think best way to overcome this misery is to gather majority of people and to start various peacefull but drastic actions.
For example we can gather and negotiate to start synchronized actions at the same time and in massive response. We all can simply refuse to pay taxes.
I am wandering what they gonna do than? Nothing!
I also mentioned few other examples at the begining of this thread.
We all can stop to buy some products from the list. We can make list of all products made and offered by main "enemies" and simply we can stop buying those. Instead of those we can buy and use alternative products made by other, small and independant manufacturers.
We can stop using some of "their" services also.
We can enlarge and spread out boycott on many other fields.
In month or two that sick system will crash for sure.
...
Or....we can start wars. But to fight against who? To fight against domestic army, police..? Than they gonna claim that we are terorists. If we act in a small groups than it is sure they gonna say that we are terorists. So we must act in huge groups as global movement and we must act synchronized.
....
I am not for war and fight. I am for peacefull but global actions.




No war I want. I said that politicians send you in the front and they live and rich with your taxes. If law is equal for alls –this is the most important aspect of democracy, I think–, then, the politicians must go in front as the simple citizens wich died in wars created by the politicians. So, law is not equal for alls.

[ivconic]

Better nobody go to war! No wars anymore! War is worst thing that people can do. I am totaly against any kind of a war!

I undesrtood you Esteban. I already judged you as descent man (except LRL things !!!:razz:) and i know that we are sharing same attitude upon many things.
Cheers!

[ivconic]

Capitalistic "humanism" can also be seen through this example:

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16267

First it was horrible war campaign to that poor country. Innocent civilians were victims mostly. "Collateral damage"...as "they" also explained 1500 killed civillians in Serbia, during NATO air raids and 78 days of agression, in 1999.

Back to Iraq;
Than bogus bomb detectors also sold to those poor people, by very hot prices! Killing continues!
Porsche Cayenne on one side and dead people arround on another.....poetry! Isn't it!

[ivconic]

Let nobody tells me now that LRL charlatan was alone, selling bogus bomb detectors!!
Neither a tiny fly can not cross to Iraq without "their" permission and full control.
It's all about money. Over the dead bodies if needed.

[ivconic]

Earthquakes in Haiti.
Horrible!
I am shocked!
It is fresh and "touchy" to talk about that.
In huge respect to victims i will not assume nothing here.
I will only say that those earthquakes are result from many years of nuclear undergound experimenting.
I am just wandering; we had chance to use most advanced geoseismic technology to predict such disaster, right?
Why didn't we?
Who are those "destiny creators" which decide who will live and who will die?
Future will give us many answers.

[ivconic]

I strongly recommend this movie to watch:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_Can_Fly

[ivconic]

The American government -- which we once called our government -- has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called "economic royalists," who choose our elected officials -- indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.

This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment's hesitation, they took our money -- yours and mine -- to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don't care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as "useless eaters."

But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?

"A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street."
There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: "And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis -- the Great Depression -- was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy."

This is nonsense.

The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did -- knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) -- was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.

Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight -- and we've all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.

Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.

Obama's failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.

Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:
"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Read Rockefeller's words again. He actually admits to working against the "best interests of the United States."



Need more? Here's what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order." They're gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.

Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn't enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.

The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here's what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father's conquered."

We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists' attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays' Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America's farmers.

Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks' predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: "A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Perhaps it's time to consider that option once again.

I'm calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.

Let's set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn't effective -- if the politicians ignore us -- we do it again. And again. And again.

The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It's time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.


Larry Flynt
Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate

[ivconic]

I don't beleive what i retreived randomly browsing the internet!

This Flynt guy is actually saying exactly what i told you before, here on this thread!?!?

Now i know i am not alone! Good to meet people with exactly the same opinions and ideas!

Bravo Larry! :)

P.S.
I just watched (again for the 5th time) movie about this guy. After the movie finished i wanted to search internet for details about this man and first thing i retreived was text from previous post!? What a coincidence!??? I simply do not beleive!

[ivconic]

"...If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. ..."

Again big truth! :)
My theory about "big numers" closely dependable on "small numbers".
To crash the system; we don't need to do nothing "big". Nothing fatal.
We need to do one, small and simple thing. But we must do that all togather, synchronized at the same time - that's the point. Flynt understand this very well. It is in his words.
"Mexican flue" vaccine is very good example! Look now how "they" are shaked! Majority never accepted their "truth" about pandemia!
I am only affraid of chance that they now can release some more dangerous virus to teach us a lesson!
So something must be done fast.

[Esteban]

I remember how the theme of avian flu occupied all spaces in the press. But the diarrhea does not have (or had) the press as the flu. Diarrhea kills 5,000 children every day in the world, excluding adults. But diarrhea is not important news, because it is disease of the poor.

[grungymike]

I've been off line for a few months, taking care of personal business, so I missed the start of this thread. I hope it hasn't died of neglect, here's my few cents worth...

1) Any successful society works on a mix of capitalism and socialism. Neither philosophy in it's purest form is healthy, there must be a mix of perspectives to address all aspects of social well being.

2) The problems usually arise not from flaws within a given social system, but from the influence of control freaks who try to use the "system" for personal advantage, instead of gaining wealth and status by actually contributing to society. Best example I can think of is the catastrophic effects an unregulated Wall Street has had on the U.S. economy. To quote a radio talk show host I like listening to, "capitalism doesn't need regulating, but the capitalists sure as hell do".

3) Taxes are a necessary component of any technically advanced society. As long as they are used effectively, there isn't a problem, but this requires the population to ride herd on the government. A complacent population is a herd of "sheeple" begging to get fleeced.

4) Ideally a government exists to maintain the physical infrastructure deemed necessary for the peaceful pursuit of "life, liberty, and happiness". The reality is that all government structures will start to prey on the society being governed, unless held strictly in check by an alert and aggressive population.

5) As for excessive taxation, the answer is to participate in the local "black market". when practical. All nations have one, and the smarter governments leave it alone.

6) In my opinion, the biggest threat to freedom and well being worldwide is the rise of corporate globalism. This crowd is the source of the "one world government" concept. And I'm ashamed to say that it is my country that has created this monster. Study up on the activities of the Monsanto corporation sometime, but be ready to be sickened, horrified, and angered to the point of violence.

7) The most powerful tool the human race has to maintain freedom is the Internet. I can't think of a single government structure (including the one I live under) that isn't terrified by the prospect of people freely and peacefully exchanging ideas and information. I find it ironic that the "net" started life as a U.S. Dept. of Defense intranet of university computers, used for weapons design. If they'd had any idea what they had really created, I bet they would have shot the engineers and burned the buildings. Thankfully, the desire for more effective ways to control people clouded their vision.

8) The sad fact is that freedom is nourished by the blood of free men and women. That is the price we pay...
To quote the Moody Blues- "and keep on thinking free".

gm

[ivconic]

:frown:

[Saturna]

:p

[detectoman]

:) :((

[ivconic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpUYjpKg9KY&feature=related