Of course they stole it. This shows how stupid you are . You can do the same thing. Take your billions and create a bank---so you can rob it later. And, the US of A Government will help you. They'll make your robbery perfectly legal by not being able to prove anything or find any evidence or witnesses. It just takes a little under the table money,  called "palm grease" (google it) . Get smart Vastet, and after you"stole" all that money (which you really didn't need anyway) from millions of poor floks world wide---the president of the US of A will appoint you and one of your comrades Secretary of the US of A Treasury.  (Secret-ary- is eggszackle right-right, got it    winlk wink). I'm not as dumb as you becasue I'm working hard to come up with my billions so I can do the same thing, and not just sitting around and complaining. I'm doing something about it. I recommend it for everyone. So, Get off your ass and get busy, there's millions of floks in the world that are prime for the taking---if you know how to do it. It may take me a while but by God I'm gonna make it. Ahhhh just think of it, I'll die someday with billions in the bank, even trillions maybe. As the saying is--he who dies with the most toys wins---right. So wise up.You have a right to rob your own bank just as well as the next guy.

My ethics forbidding me from playing the system has absolutely nothing to do with my intelligence or capability.

Supply and demand requires flexibility in the workforce, and no system can function with stability and longevity without supply and demand.

No more or less than they do already. Competition is a necessity for growth, so just slapping the same government lables on everything would be counterproductive. There would still be a need for corporate-like structures. These structures would simply be handed to those who proved their capability instead of those who simply had large bank accounts.

Many shortage problems could be prevented by adequate planning. Otherwise supply and demand requires increasing prices. Rationing would only be an issue for necessities of life like clean water.

Quite the opposite. Political parties ban free speech. And nothing about banning political parties prevents people with similar political interests from working with each other.
Right now people who were elected to one party can be kicked out of the party for refusing to vote with the party. That means a very few people in each party control the entire party. That's unacceptable.

Don't be taking my post seriously. But if robbery is the method of life for the day why are we standing around poor.

I'm just being brief and blunt with my responses here, so don't assume I've been insulted or am insulting. Your previous statement is one I've heard many times from people who were being serious. That's the only reason I quoted it actually.

As in all things, some people are better skilled at lying and stealing than others. I happen to be exceptionally good at both. But I only use such skills as survival mechanisms. I'm too well tuned to the psychology of others to be able to use those skills gratuitously.

Perhaps that's why I so easily recognise the inherent flaws in the workings of society today. I know how it works and I'm quite skilled at working it, I just recognise the unnecessary suffering that is the inevitable result, and cannot abide supporting such. Because I'm emotionally divested from the system I have sufficient motivation to seek a new system.

My only problem is I seem to be alone in that.

If you go to our website you'll find what we propose for an economy.

Every economy we looked at or could reason out didn't work. We find economies cannot work. We always ended up creating an ant hill. An ant hill works very well for ants but not for people. Ants don't have much for emotion and reason, so they don't need social security etc. At a certain age they die and are replaced by the queen ant. But the queen ant only reproduces the number needed to sustain the hill. They don't feel sorry fo sufferers or those that fall by the wayside. Ants are more clonish then people. the produce replicas of the last generation. There;s the one main problem with people economies, the system tends to create a genaric person (artificial person). You mention those with better skills etc, that's another problem economies don't take into account. We all don't have the same level of aptitudes.

Different levels of aptitude disallow creating a genaric person. In a monetary economy if there will be those with a higher aptitude for making money. We find (here's a real problem) people who are less compasionate have a higher aptitude for money, those more compassonate---less money. Money making then requires less regard for others. Eventually, as we see today, a few end up with the most money. I(n order to solve all these problems it takes and ant hill society. This (in terms of economy) creates social problems. government intervention in peoples lives leaads to an ant hill,, and no one wants to be an ant. Ants don't have rights, so i9f the government wants an ant hill it has to be a fair one, but there's little fairness that can be acheived in an ant hill.  If your old in an ant hill---you have to go--guess where. On one hand the gov trys (unknowingly) to create an ant hill, on the other no one wants to be an ant. Then there's capitalism, the predator. Some have a better aptitude for being a predator, the best prdators alway win, as "again" we can see today.

We could get no economy to work except the ant hill. We end up with the one we have on the website, but you have to get rid of governemnt and religion for it to work. We found also, that the econo0my on the website really doesn't work either, but it can be re-set every year ot periodically. A money economy cannot be re-set---so it just has to faile bringing drastic consequences. In a money economy the rich won't allow it to be reset, becasue all money has to be made worthless eliminating the rich who have to start over. In an ant hill economy everything and every one has to be controlled---like in the ant hill. No one has enough brainery to do the job.

And, governments do not like smart people that are not under its control. So, one has to be deliberatly dumb to get along with government. Government people would rather make mistakes (this is why they have to lie so much) and have the people suffer the consequences then be out done by lessor who are smarter then they. That';s why they search the colleges to find the smart ones. They want them under government control. Guys like Snowden are just as smart as any government guy, very likely smarter. That's why there is the sayinf---it dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. IE-that's why the whistle blower program is for catching wistle blowers, not  government wrong doers.

We found that one factor alway remained. If there's government or religion around they'll ruin the economy. Economy has to be founded for the sake of need, not greed. Greed is a destroyer, it eventually even destroys the greedy.

An economy is a necessary prerequisite for society. You literally cannot have society without an economy. Even ants have an economy.

I've taken it into account.

Which can be dealt with by limiting the size and influence of corporations and governments. By limiting the ability of those with efficient but non-compassionate personalities to hold power over personnel. Someone who is good with money but an inconsiderate ass to people would never hold authority over people.

Not possible. And not necessary. Ants use government (dictatorship), by the way. There's no such thing as a social species without some form of government. It has never happened and will never happen. They are inseparable concepts.

Religion isn't necessary but it can't hurt, and isn't going anywhere soon anyway.

Because governments are not democratic institutions obligated to follow the will of the people. The government I speak of is, and would welcome intelligent people.

That's the nature of the universe. Everything ends. Entropy absolutely guarantees it. You can't fight entropy, so it's pointless to seek a system that can last forever. What you want is a system that can last a long time, that is as fair and compassionate as is possible to be. The moment you start concerning yourself with forever you've made your job impossible.

I already mentioned that.in post 56:

The same way it happens now: public opinion.

Actually recent research suggests that all animal life is conscious and self aware on at least some level. So there's no evidence to suggest there is no reasoning in an ant colony.

The goal of the system is to support a sustainable society, not to limit ideas or beliefs.

we predict an economy will last 30 years before breakdowns begin and have to be adjusted. Or, a reset factor should be put in, which menas a "start" over point/process before catasrophic breakdown.

Also consider-Ant colonies don't always have the same number of ants every year. That means the queen doesn't repopulate for some reasons. It could be the area of need runs out of food and the colony suffers a lose of inhabitants. Think abouit incorporateing a restart mechanism of some sort.

 

 

Vastet nor I are trying to save America. I for one know damn well it's almost over. The whol;e I dea of America wasn't an expeiment, it was a farce. The founders themslves broke the constitution the day they signed it. The idea (as it turns out) is America was "supposed to" produce a free person, with the right to owm one's own property. to be secure in there persons and effects. That's not what the founders believed becasue they didn't do it. I'm not even refering to slavery. They didn't respect each others rights. They didn't reason that to overtake/power others removes the rights they established. Economies thus far require the giving up of rights to belong to one.

We're conversing about ecomomy of which there is nothing of mention in the constitution. This is about economies working or not.

 

I particularly like you idea of "compassonate economy". I think I called that right. there has to be some way to make up for shortfalls and nonworking situations that are unavoidables and not a persons fault. I;d say you have that covered. As recent history has it, predatorism has to be controlled. It makes no sense for someone to have a billion bucks when they can never spend that much. And as seen they can deliberatly become a detriment to economy. Economies also have to be fair, and you have that covered. What I basically mean by Ameria is almost over is, if this deal we have going now isn't changed it will be over. We're looking at the rich in high rise luxury and eveyone else is in the darkages. America brags that it is the prime mover in the world and supposed to be some new thing in the world. If the constitution was adhered to maybe so. For now it's turned itself into the worlds largest banana republic. The brits have more going for citizen respect the the US. If you use your free speech the gov calls you a nut case.

Every democrat should write in Bernie and bypass Hillary. The billaries were never more then shyster lawyers anyway.

No. The system isn't vulnerable to population shifts. Besides, birth rates will fall as education levels increase, and gaining admission via immigration would not be a quick and easy feat.

No they won't. Canada is at least 3x better a place to live than the US, and 100x better than anywhere in Africa or the Middle East (Israel included), yet the whole world isn't trying to live here.

If the system works, and the system is sufficiently superior than the previous system, then the system will be replicated elsewhere. Much like how the West took the French's lead on justice, and the Greeks lead on government.

You can't compare a city to a nation. People from all over the US can flock to San Fransisco at will. Not so easy to do when crossing national borders.
Also, rent is absurdly high no matter where you go.

False. Noone in all of human history has ever implemented even a substantial fraction of what I propose.

A dictatorship cannot resemble a democracy. And Venezuela isn't remotely comparable either.

Nope.

What?

Criminals will go to prison as they do now.

Nope. The US barely did anything in either world war. In fact, the only thing the US did of true substance in either war was the greatest terrorist strike in human history. I'm not inclined to pay any attention whatsoever to the words of war criminals.

But the world was already capitalism friendly. Hitler wasn't a socialist, regardless of what his party was called. Only Russia, China, and a few inconsequential smaller nations have ever made any attempt to challenge capitalism, and none of those actually got rid of capitalism. They just changed which lake the river of wealth drained into.

The US didn't like Russia because Russia defeated the Nazi's, and the US wanted to take credit for that. The US has spent 70 years trying to pretend they won the war single handedly, despite doing absolutely nothing to end the war against the Nazi's.
Russia also wasn't willing to let the US take over the world anymore than they were willing to let Hitler do it, which meant the two countries were destined to be enemies.

The Americans are the beligerent party in US Russia relations. They always have been. It's amazing that the Russians have taken it for so long without doing anything drastic.

If you're referring to spies and saboteurs from other countries, that's a problem today as well, under any system. I'd let my spies and saboteurs take care of it.

ISIS is irrelevant. In every possible meaning of the word.

The government didn't and doesn't have sufficient access to corporate records in the current system to prevent such things, but in my system everyone in the country would have full and unfettered access to any and all information which does not constitute a major national security risk.

Wall Street isn't a concern. There would be no way to implement this system in the US without completely deconstructing the system in place: which would require either the support of a vast majority of American citizens, or an outside force conquering the country. Neither of which is feasible at this time.