Liberal Forum

from a fractured, divided, untrusting populace?

I have contended in the past that "Social Media" is anything BUT social.
It has not brought about a homogeneous and welcoming atmosphere among the people.
Seems like the malcontents and disgruntled have only gotten a louder voice to rally their ilk.
Trust is a rare commodity in public figures and any messaging these days.

When people say "We get the government we deserve", what path are we on?
Of all the various "necessary evils" (governments), which is most likely to bring about our predicted NWO?
A totalitarian, over-reaching, tone-deaf sort with an elite group of "betters" seems about right.

Actual masses of people aren't nearly as necessary (aka useful) as we once were.
Automation, AI, robotics, miniaturization, etc. can easily supersede human usefulness in so many ways.
Artificial humans, so to speak, can edge out real humans when the latter are fractious and weak as a group.
The former don't require wages, healthcare, food, etc. Or even oxygen or empathy for that matter.

So, approaching the 9+ billion population mark, a leading form of government (whatever that may be) wouldn't want them too organized and friendly.
Complacent or compliant maybe. But cooperating? Sounds dangerous for the elites.
Political boundaries and history seem to be getting malleable. Strange days...
 
 
 

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am

I have contended in the past that "Social Media" is anything BUT social.
It has not brought about a homogeneous and welcoming atmosphere among the people.
Seems like the malcontents and disgruntled have only gotten a louder voice to rally their ilk.

...'their' ilk...   

...much of 'social media' is YOUR $hit-puppet-sucking Republic#nt monetary ignoramuses and the $hit-puppet-sucking Democ#nt monetary ignoramuses throwing $hit-balls at each other...   

 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am

from a fractured, divided, untrusting populace?

I have contended in the past that "Social Media" is anything BUT social.
It has not brought about a homogeneous and welcoming atmosphere among the people.
Seems like the malcontents and disgruntled have only gotten a louder voice to rally their ilk.
Trust is a rare commodity in public figures and any messaging these days.

When people say "We get the government we deserve", what path are we on?
Of all the various "necessary evils" (governments), which is most likely to bring about our predicted NWO?
A totalitarian, over-reaching, tone-deaf sort with an elite group of "betters" seems about right.

Actual masses of people aren't nearly as necessary (aka useful) as we once were.
Automation, AI, robotics, miniaturization, etc. can easily supersede human usefulness in so many ways.
Artificial humans, so to speak, can edge out real humans when the latter are fractious and weak as a group.
The former don't require wages, healthcare, food, etc. Or even oxygen or empathy for that matter.

So, approaching the 9+ billion population mark, a leading form of government (whatever that may be) wouldn't want them too organized and friendly.
Complacent or compliant maybe. But cooperating? Sounds dangerous for the elites.
Political boundaries and history seem to be getting malleable. Strange days...

I will raise a few points with regard to your OP:

• Your premise is: "What form of government benefits most..."  It is perhaps this statement of yours with which have the biggest philosophical problem.  As a Constitutional Conservative, I am not looking for a government that benefits me or provides me or any citizen with any benefits.  I just want a government to allow me the liberties and freedom to succeed or fail, or even attempt again to succeed should I fail.  Protect our borders from foreign invaders.  Provide us with limited, necessary just and fair laws that apply equally to every citizen, including those whom we elect to office, or hire and appoint to government office.     Make enforceable treaties with foreign nations which only benefit the Nation at large and no one individual or one company.  That is all I want or expect from Government.

 

• Necessary Evils.  I have thought long and hard about this and conclude there are no necessary evils.  There is that which is necessary and that which is evil.  And, in a nation formed upon just principles, equal application of laws to all, and protections of individual freedoms, there should be no necessary evils.  Evil has no place among the just and righteous.

 

• As for AI and Robotics, I have far more fear of human chemists capable of creating "drugs" which can and likely will be used by a malicious government to suppress its people, to kill its citizens and to subdue those who, in the elitist's minds, add nothing to their agenda.  AI might be a threat some time in the future, but the threat here among all of us goes completely ignored.

 
 

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am

from a fractured, divided, untrusting populace?

I have contended in the past that "Social Media" is anything BUT social.
It has not brought about a homogeneous and welcoming atmosphere among the people.
Seems like the malcontents and disgruntled have only gotten a louder voice to rally their ilk.
Trust is a rare commodity in public figures and any messaging these days.

When people say "We get the government we deserve", what path are we on?
Of all the various "necessary evils" (governments), which is most likely to bring about our predicted NWO?
A totalitarian, over-reaching, tone-deaf sort with an elite group of "betters" seems about right.

Actual masses of people aren't nearly as necessary (aka useful) as we once were.
Automation, AI, robotics, miniaturization, etc. can easily supersede human usefulness in so many ways.
Artificial humans, so to speak, can edge out real humans when the latter are fractious and weak as a group.
The former don't require wages, healthcare, food, etc. Or even oxygen or empathy for that matter.

So, approaching the 9+ billion population mark, a leading form of government (whatever that may be) wouldn't want them too organized and friendly.
Complacent or compliant maybe. But cooperating? Sounds dangerous for the elites.
Political boundaries and history seem to be getting malleable. Strange days...

people who can't be used as puppets have become a liability...
 

Skans » 09 Jun 2023, 8:22 am » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 8:22 am

I will raise a few points with regard to your OP:

• Your premise is: "What form of government benefits most..."  It is perhaps this statement of yours with which have the biggest philosophical problem.  As a Constitutional Conservative, I am not looking for a government that benefits me or provides me or any citizen with any benefits.  I just want a government to allow me the liberties and freedom to succeed or fail, or even attempt again to succeed should I fail.  Protect our borders from foreign invaders.  Provide us with limited, necessary just and fair laws that apply equally to every citizen, including those whom we elect to office, or hire and appoint to government office.     Make enforceable treaties with foreign nations which only benefit the Nation at large and no one individual or one company.  That is all I want or expect from Government.

• Necessary Evils.  I have thought long and hard about this and conclude there are no necessary evils.  There is that which is necessary and that which is evil.  And, in a nation formed upon just principles, equal application of laws to all, and protections of individual freedoms, there should be no necessary evils.  Evil has no place among the just and righteous.

• As for AI and Robotics, I have far more fear of human chemists capable of creating "drugs" which can and likely will be used by a malicious government to suppress its people, to kill its citizens and to subdue those who, in the elitist's minds, add nothing to their agenda.  AI might be a threat some time in the future, but the threat here among all of us goes completely ignored.

Your have to take some of what I said literally.
The "form of government" to which I refer would be the type beyond any control from the populace.
A deep state situation seeking an autonomy from the people. Separate, wholly on its own.
What would best suit that entirely indifferent bureaucracy? That was the entity I meant.
An as-yet nonexistent form perhaps.

Not literally:
"Necessary evil" is just an old way of saying "nothing's perfect no matter what your preference".
If your choice is either bad or horrible, you generally choose bad. Horrible is worse.

The geeks in computer sciences have already frightened themselves with some AI experimentation.
Speculation came about that once unleashed, there is no "cure".
No reasonable hope for any "herd immunity" as there might be with some new bug.
Mass "stupid drugs"? You're right. We could be eating, drinking, breathing the **** right now.
Both of these nightmares are in early but fast maturing stages.
Which will try to destroy life as we know it first? Tomay-to, tomah-to.  
 
 

For China and Russia their forms of govt seems to working great.
A huge social safety net domestically and the economic policies
are part State-Capitalism and part Free Enterprise.

The forms of govt not working well are the ones where

they are vassal slaves of the US....aka...the entire EU/England

is in a deep recession. Plus demographically they are

dying - the only growth is from immigration. The #1 boy name in England...Muhammad       
 

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 12:26 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 12:26 pm

Your have to take some of what I said literally.
The "form of government" to which I refer would be the type beyond any control from the populace.
A deep state situation seeking an autonomy from the people. Separate, wholly on its own.
What would best suit that entirely indifferent bureaucracy? That was the entity I meant.

 

A deep state government is very dangerous indeed.  I wholeheartedly agree with you on this.  We, The People, should always have the direct ability to dismantle any part of it we so choose with a supermajority vote of 65% - that is what I believe.  We should have this ability during every 4-year election cycle. 
 

Skans » 09 Jun 2023, 12:38 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 12:38 pm

A deep state government is very dangerous indeed.  I wholeheartedly agree with you on this.  We, The People, should always have the direct ability to dismantle any part of it we so choose with a supermajority vote of 65% - that is what I believe.  We should have this ability during every 4-year election cycle.

I cannot see how that would be any worse than where we've come to at this point.
I'm of the mind that there should be a mandatory requirement for a sunset clause on every piece of legislation signed into law. If there is need to strike that requirement from a new bill, showing just cause must be paramount prior to its passage.

I think that fits with your notion nicely.
Yours dismantles after the fact, mine sets conditions for expiration before the fact.

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 12:49 pm

I cannot see how that would be any worse than where we've come to at this point.
I'm of the mind that there should be a mandatory requirement for a sunset clause on every piece of legislation signed into law. If there is need to strike that requirement from a new bill, showing just cause must be paramount prior to its passage.

I think that fits with your notion nicely.
Yours dismantles after the fact, mine sets conditions for expiration before the fact.

I like it.  That's what happened to the Assault Weapons law.  I think it could work.
 

Murica is a

TWO-PARTY OLIGARCHY

90% of Russians are taxed at

ONLY a 13% flat rate. Simple and very fair.

[img]blob:688c2b6f-9c07-4121-abae-ffcb3fe50846[/img]
https://rall.com/wp-content/uploads/202 ... 24x801.jpg
 

Mrkelly » 09 Jun 2023, 1:24 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 1:24 pm

[img]blob:688c2b6f-9c07-4121-abae-ffcb3fe50846[/img]
https://rall.com/wp-content/uploads/202 ... 24x801.jpg

I would only change the last caption to..""For The Oligarchs""
 

Deezer Shoove » 09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 4:43 am

from a fractured, divided, untrusting populace?

I have contended in the past that "Social Media" is anything BUT social.
It has not brought about a homogeneous and welcoming atmosphere among the people.
Seems like the malcontents and disgruntled have only gotten a louder voice to rally their ilk.
Trust is a rare commodity in public figures and any messaging these days.

When people say "We get the government we deserve", what path are we on?
Of all the various "necessary evils" (governments), which is most likely to bring about our predicted NWO?
A totalitarian, over-reaching, tone-deaf sort with an elite group of "betters" seems about right.

Actual masses of people aren't nearly as necessary (aka useful) as we once were.
Automation, AI, robotics, miniaturization, etc. can easily supersede human usefulness in so many ways.
Artificial humans, so to speak, can edge out real humans when the latter are fractious and weak as a group.
The former don't require wages, healthcare, food, etc. Or even oxygen or empathy for that matter.

So, approaching the 9+ billion population mark, a leading form of government (whatever that may be) wouldn't want them too organized and friendly.
Complacent or compliant maybe. But cooperating? Sounds dangerous for the elites.
Political boundaries and history seem to be getting malleable. Strange days...
 

Instinctive honesty is always the best policy against speculation that promises better tomorrows than genetics supplied current ancestries occupying space now.

Sumela » 09 Jun 2023, 1:16 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 1:16 pm

90% of Russians are taxed at

ONLY a 13% flat rate. Simple and very fair.

I've never claimed any sort of economic prowess. I like simple and transparent.
There are posters that would strongly disagree with your post. I am not one of those.

I read an article by some economics professor long ago.
He claimed that our current system is so skewed and been around so long that people have lost sight of simple, fair taxation.
He proposed that we could start out with a 15% flat tax without loop holes. Apply it to EVERYONE.
No exceptions at all.
That percentage would balance the budget more quickly than people realize and in a few short years we could reduce it to about 4%.
That flat tax without exceptions would easily float our entire budget and probably have a surplus.

That's how much money this country has... or maybe had...  

Granted that old fart is most likely dead now but the notion should still be examined.
Flat tax is simple.
SJConspirator is for "land value" tax.
RayJ touts "Fair Tax" (whatever that is relative to flat tax).

Loopholes and special circumstances piss people off.
Thousands of contradictory rules suck too.
 

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 5:51 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 5:51 pm

I've never claimed any sort of economic prowess. I like simple and transparent.
There are posters that would strongly disagree with your post. I am not one of those.

I read an article by some economics professor long ago.
He claimed that our current system is so skewed and been around so long that people have lost sight of simple, fair taxation.
He proposed that we could start out with a 15% flat tax without loop holes. Apply it to EVERYONE.
No exceptions at all.
That percentage would balance the budget more quickly than people realize and in a few short years we could reduce it to about 4%.
That flat tax without exceptions would easily float our entire budget and probably have a surplus.

That's how much money this country has... or maybe had...  

Granted that old fart is most likely dead now but the notion should still be examined.
Flat tax is simple.
SJConspirator is for "land value" tax.
RayJ touts "Fair Tax" (whatever that is relative to flat tax).

Loopholes and special circumstances piss people off.
Thousands of contradictory rules suck too.

My point was more aimed at showing they have a low tax rate for the average person.
But this is due to having a population of only 150 million
and oil/gas companies taking on the 50% of the tax burden.

Every country has to figure out their specific taxation system
based on population size and size of economy.

Norway has a great system because they have loads of
petroleum and a tiny homogenous population.  I think their
flat tax is only like 10%.  Norway has money to burn.

I dont have much of a disagreement with the
American tax system.  The problem will hit when
one day WASH DC cant just print money to 
cover up all the over spending and/or the
petro dollar loses its power.  
 

Sumela » 09 Jun 2023, 8:18 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 8:18 pm

My point was more aimed at showing they have a low tax rate for the average person.
But this is due to having a population of only 150 million
and oil/gas companies taking on the 50% of the tax burden.

Every country has to figure out their specific taxation system
based on population size and size of economy.

Norway has a great system because they have loads of
petroleum and a tiny homogenous population.  I think their
flat tax is only like 10%.  Norway has money to burn.

I dont have much of a disagreement with the
American tax system.  The problem will hit when
one day WASH DC cant just print money to 
cover up all the over spending and/or the
petro dollar loses its power.

I have a couple problems with our tax system.
Way too complex. Purposely so, it seems.
And everybody seems to have their personal ox gored.
Marriage tax, death tax, depreciation, etc, etc.
A flat tax, as I mentioned, if involved NO write-offs disincentivizes building/investing in your own business.
So, that would have to be managed in some way, as an example.

I know it cannot be dead simple. Nothing in life really is...
 
 

DeezerShoove » 09 Jun 2023, 8:28 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 8:28 pm

I have a couple problems with our tax system.
Way too complex. Purposely so, it seems.
And everybody seems to have their personal ox gored.
Marriage tax, death tax, depreciation, etc, etc.
A flat tax, as I mentioned, if involved NO write-offs disincentivizes building/investing in your own business.
So, that would have to be managed in some way, as an example.

I know it cannot be dead simple. Nothing in life really is...

Cui bono? ...who benefits from not having
a very simple flat tax system?

Im also in agreement with Hungary, Serbia, and Russia
for reducing greatly the tax burden and for other monetary
incentives for having kids.  But dam...no way they would work here.
That only works in mostly homogeneous populations.


 

Sumela » 09 Jun 2023, 8:35 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2023, 8:35 pm

Cui bono? ...who benefits from not having
a very simple flat tax system?

Im also in agreement with Hungary, Serbia, and Russia
for reducing greatly the tax burden and for other monetary
incentives for having kids.  But dam...no way they would work here.
That only works in mostly homogeneous populations.

Our healthcare system was "fixed" for us.
Bammy had a two year window during which the economy was caving in on us.
His party controlled both the senate and the house.
But instead, he slammed a 1000+ page document into law.
It had 30,000+ pages of supporting documentation.
I'm not sure who in the **** this helped in the long run.

Caving economy be damned. Opportunity to play politics with "health care" was way more important.

My point is that if there's a will, there's a way.
A tax code gutting is long over due but the **** status quo is a good money maker apparently.
There is no will...