If we do not turn our love of self to our hate of self, we are bound for our near extinction.

If we do not turn our love of self to our hate of self, we are bound for our near extinction.

Science has shown that the good in us, our love side, is dominating us via our selfish gene.

Science is also showing us that we are in a major extinction event that may well include a vast number of people. I doubt that our full extinction will come to pass, but we will be reduced to such small numbers that we will likely revert to a less sophisticated system and city states.

If we do not turn our swords into plows, and devastate the worlds populations with war, our environment will do the deed and near extinct us.

We love our governments and gods. That is why we have let them bring us to the brink of extinction. We follow them so closely that we all have our heads stuck into the ground.

I think, given the incompetence of all governments and gods; we should let our great love for what leads us and turn it to hate, as we should, to insure the survival of people right here and right now. Start to hate the systems that got us all to this pitiful place in time.

We presently elect our incompetent governments and gods for a variety of reasons. We are all tribal and belong to a religious tribe or a government tribe. We all follow their ideologies, theologies or philosophies. We are all the same in this.

Surely, given that we are basically all humans, who wish to love more than hate, can hate those things that are putting us all in peril long enough to do something about our head long leap to near extinction.

The environment is under political control and they are killing our bodies. Our bodies harbor our souls to the physical world where our children live.

I think it is time for a god to take over.

I don’t care if it is a pedophile protecting Pope or a united Christianity, or newly elected Khalif of a newly united Islam, but a god must step up, as our political side has failed humankind completely.

Our politicians are not uniting the world and should be made to step down so that some form of religious system, chosen by the masses, so that we can try uniting under a newly elected god.

Jesus prophesied that that would become a necessity, and so did Socrates before him. Both were right in thinking that such a system would be the best possible end for political theories.

I urge the vast majority of the world, the religious, to have a final battle in the ongoing god wars, which involves our political gods as well. Let their hate out by debate and elect a new god of peace so that our current incompetent batch of leaders might find the best one.

My love of the religious has let loose my hate against our incompetent political leadership and I think we all should, elect a new god and save us from our own near extinction.

We have the means; do we have the will?

Regards

DL

 

The solution is simple. (1) People must end this persistent belief that they need a leader/governing body to make decisions for them, and (2) they must acknowledge the fact that our species has no need for a monetary system. This great scam (authority + money) perpetrated on the Many by the Few has been the reason humanity has, over millennia, continued to repeat the same mistakes.

Humans are not by and large a violent & warlike species. However, our trusting & gregarious nature can place us at a disadvantage if we're careless and do not question the will of others who appear & attempt to position themselves above others. For millennia, an extremely ambitious & shrewd FEW have been successfully exploiting this human nature through systematic social terraforming...that is, by imposing an environment of chronic fear through deprivation, desperation, ignorance, false pride, and mental illness upon the masses.

If we can deprogram ourselves from our hypnotic slavery to authority & money we can stop playing the "victim" role and take responsibility for ourselves & our actions. Then we can finally accept & embrace our individual abilities, talents & creative powers. The new (logical) thinking would lead by example & simple non-participation rather than by force. Then those of like-mind can gather and grow in numbers as the old ways weaken & die out.

 

Our system of civilization has been twisted into a machine designed to self-destruct. An agenda to condense populations into hives where disease spread is unmanageable was always innevitably going to collapse a finance and resource distributin structure that was likely to innevitably collapse under its own debt anyway.

The answer imo is in spreading civilization out and localizing autonomy. This will allow small areas to fail without causing the rest of them to fail. Centralization and globalism have caused this catastrophe. We can no longer suffer a system in which we're all dependent on the whole for success. In trying to turn the many into one, we now risk dying as one.

 

While knowing where you are coming from, I cannot agree.

All money is, is a convenient way to hold wealth and buying power. A chicken farmer cannot carry enough chickens to buy a car.

That example should be enough to show you that even if we got rid of money, we would have to replace it with something else. We can no longer live with a barter system, although we can go cashless any time we choose to go electronic.

You said we are not war like, but that is belied by our 5,000 years of almost constant war.
​

I agree that our systems stress us needlessly. Poverty, for instance, is produced by our tax system and could be eliminated today if we had the political will.

I hope you are corrct in our losing our slavish ways. I think you are wrong though as we are a hierarchical species and want a guy at the top. Nit all of us have stopped trying to be the fittest humans and those will always compete in our hierarchical systems.

The many meek will never inherit the earth as spoken of by some prophets. The French Revolution showed that a hierarchy is required for good tribal governance.

Nice to see a thinking mind my friend, even if I disagree. My arguments are there for your refutation.

Regards
DL

 

Which is why we must unite the word ASAP.

If the one, all of us, are on the trail to death as you see, then all of us moving in the same direction is the cure.

Right?

Regards
DL

 

I don't think so. I'd like to think that we could collectively move away from collectivism. But I'm not confident we could avoid the corruption that such movements always seem to attract and generate. Not any time soon, anyway. I see success and prosperity far more likely coming out a 'lead by example' dynamic, where we do something that works so well that it get immitated on its own merit.

If unity arises out of it, great. I just think making unity the goal in itself is always going attract evil people who will guide it to -and use it for- control.

 

Corruption will exist regardless of what systems we follow and to deal with the eco system, we all have to be on the same page.

I E. China continues to dump more plastic into the oceans than we are taking out. That is stupid and without an international pressure and help, it will continue if we are all doing our own thing.

I am pleased that you like the notion of a united world. If we went to such a system, hopefully the new leader would demand transparency and if the proper legislation is put, corruption would vanish because incomes would be tracked. A united world could set it's socio economic demographic pyramid to what is wanted instead of the chaos and corruption we presently have.

Regards
DL

 

Unity is innevitable over a long enough timeline. But it has to occur naturally, voluntarily. Which also means very slowly. Yes, corruption is also innevitable. But if unity is coerced, it will be co-opted by the corrupt.

 

Corruption becomes impossible in a socio economic demographic pyramid as it can be treated as a fixed system where all the wealth is tracked and income levels set by all of us. Treating it as a given form makes corrupting it impossible. Even outright thief would disappear because the thief would be found by his spending pattern that exceed his given wealth.

You would have to try to visualize the internal manipulation of the wealth in our pyramid.

Look at this graph and note how little shifting of wealth would be required to set our pyramid to a more moral and equitable form , even if we ended poverty altogether. We could easily do the right thing if we had the political or even religious will.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Regards
DL

 

How do you track all the wealth?

And who can be trusted to do so?

 

Exactly the way they did to come up with that graph.

Likely better given that it would be used in real time whenever we choose to make changes to it.

As to trust. in an open and transparent system where everyone knows what everyone else is worth., there is no place to hide and no place to steal from.

Any and all transfers of wealth are earned and cannot be gained through other means. This would not stop the gamblers on Wall Street, but they are just gamblers so who care which one of them screws the other.

Regards
DL

 

If it won't stop gamblers on wall st, wall st will become the new center of the black market. Also, even if it decones possible to track all currency, barter will continue to be profitable. How will the barter of evil that goes on now (guns for drugs for sex slaves for political power) be eliminated? These are all billion or trillion dollar industries that will continue to facilitate the continuance of corruption. The elimination of the availability of a common currency will not hinder them in any meanigful way. An abducted child or a stolen gun will always be worth some amount of heroin to folks with no morals...

 

Much of the crime we see is due to the fact that cash can be laundered and hidden. Take that out of the equation and much of the corruption will also be taken out.

Further, crimes of all types are at the best levels that we have ever enjoyed. Especially on the drug side as more and more countries legalize what should never have been illegal in the first place, given that prohibitions have never worked on that type of product.

Cash, for many of us is almost a thing of the past and I can see that soon all transactions will be electronic. Sure barter will continue but who cares which criminal ends bartering with another criminal?

It is the honest super majority that is of importance.

Regards
DL

 

It undermines the entire purpose of this massive control grid you're proposing. You say its to end corruption, but go on to say it doesn't. Which means it will be run by the corrupt. They will use it to rule us.

 

Not likely as we can see who of our politicians or religious are getting paid off.

As to your last, the corrupt are ruling us now with tons of loop holes that a new system would plug.

Pay offs are worthless when they cannot be spent or hoarded.

Bringing our socio economic demographic pyramid to a more equitable shape and ending poverty will be worth whatever small bit of corruption still exists.

Further, the massive grid you speak of is already with us. The many grids we now suffer in disunity will only be the one with unity.

Regards
DL

 

No system can ever prevent hoarding of certain resource. Power, influence and even certain materials will never be reliably trackable, and thus will remain the 'currency' of the corrupt. Your proposed system does not prevent this.

I agree a new system is needed. But we can plug the big loopholes merely by simplifying the tax code. Massive command and control is neither neceassary nor will it be effective.

Lets try it from this perspective: how is what you're proposing different from what China does?

 

Hoarding is a medical condition and you are right that hoarding will continue. All hoarding of wealth does is take it out of circulation and a system like mine does not care, given that we would know who has it. Open secrets are not secrets.

I am not sure what kinds of materials you are referring to so cannot comment on that. As to power. What is wrong with someone having power. If they do gain it, it is because he has shown others better ways to do whatever and my system would be quite happy to recognize his worth and increase his wealth. I reward innovation. I do not punish it, as long as it is legal.

A simple tax system would be nice. It is complicated today because our oligarch owners wrote them to their advantage and the detriment of the rest of us. That would end wit an across the board income tax and no regressive sales or value added tax that governments now use to ding the lower incomes and reward the higher ones.

Regards
DL

 

You keep saying your system will track all the wealth. But it doesn't. Wealth isn't just currency. Its resource and power. If you can't track who has gold, who has dirt on politicians and CEOs, who is brokering weapons and drugs and slaves trade, then you're not tracking the bulk of the market of corruption.

This system you're proposing will only be useful in controlling the noncriminal element.

 

We all have a net worth. Plug that in as a starter then show income and you have all the wealth represented. This is not rocket science. It is demographics. If we have a problem, Forbes will guide us. They know how to measure wealth.

What do you have against people having power? We are a hierarchical species who seek power naturally. Do you not think we should know who is the fittest and try to emulate and learn from them?

BTW, if we have a minimum income law, which we would, there are no slaves. A side benefit that slaves will like.

Regards
Dl

 

Power is a zero sum game, relatively speaking. The more someone has over you and I, and the more we have over eachother collectively, the less you and I have individually over ourselves.

How is this system going to know how much gold I have? How is it going to know how many home-made firearms I have? I have more than 0 of both, and should they become my only means of trading untraceably in a scenario where something I need is restricted in official channels, their value increases, as does my incentive to participate in black market (untrackable) trade. If my power of choice becomes too much restricted, that will be my avenue of self empowerment. You understand this given your mention of the failed war on drugs.

Minimum income is a theatrical game. Its meaningless so long as currency can be inflated/deflated in a renter economy. Specifically, housing rent is always going to scale to the max that renters are able to pay. UBI just makes landlords and banks richer.

Also, you never addressed my question regarding China. Obviously theres a lot of corruption, oppression and inequality in China, despite their adoption of the very system you're advocating for here, at least afaict. What is it that China is doing wrong?

 

If I am manipulating a demographic pyramid, I don't care what you have hoarded. Why would I care?

If you are driving a black market expensive car instead of the Chevy your income is supposed to provide, I don't care, even if it took your hoard of guns to buy it.

I am concerned with the movement of wealth within the pyramid only.

To some extent, sure.

The m

inimum income is what is presently set below the poverty line. I would bring it over that line and end poverty.
​

I did not speak of China particularly because the conditions you show for it exists in all nations.

Do you not see the corruption, oppression and inequality in the U.S. and most all countries?

Regards
DL

 

Then you're not concerned with corruption and only concerned with controlling how the noncorrupt interact. That is authoritarianism for its own sake. Why would anyone want that?

Then the poverty line will rise. Using rent as a good example (though its certainly not the only applicable dynamic), landlords will increase rent to whatever renters are able to pay. Landlords will end up with more of the income, renters will still be impoverished, and you'll have to raise it again. And again...[/QUOTE]
​

Of course. But China does as you're suggesting we do, yet they still have all the problems you suggest doing so will fix. They are proof your proposed system is no better than the one we have. Unless you can explain how yours is different and will have better results.

 

I did not say I was not concerned. Corruption would be reduced under my system and like we treat prostitutes today, governments do not care that their trade is illegal. They only care to have them pay taxes. If people are going to be such hypocrites, I cannot change that. My demographic pyramid would treat them as just another guild of workers whose position and income is tracked and taxed just like all workers.

No. It would vanish.

[/QUOTE]

Rent increases are controlled these days and renters would be subject to the same % of income rise as everyone else. They would have to bite the bullet like everyone or lose their businesses to those who do have a geared to income POV. If renters want more, they, like today, would have to offer more.

Mine has better results as it stabilizes all economies and that make it more profitable for all, as it increases security, which tends to calm markets and makes for better long range planning.

A united world is better than a divided, especially given the massive relocation of people because of climate change. We will have to decide if we want to pay for and support a bunch of unproductive refugee camps, or if we want the mobility of the work force to be increased so as to keep eco refugees to a minimum without scaring their new host country in terms of them losing their jobs to uncontrolled immigrants. That problem already exists to some extent in some countries even with the smaller numbers of refugees we now suffer.

We all have to start seeing each other as citizens of planet earth and not so much of individual nations and peoples.

We make all kinds of noise about free trade and how we should all seek that, and that works a lot better if our workers are also free to work anywhere.

Regards
DL

 

I thought I told you before, but that might've been someone else, if you want to continue a discussion with me, please dont edit my responses for content. If you need to emphasize or specify a particular portion, emboldenning, italicizing or underlining are all great ways to do that without decontextualizing my comments.

Or continue to edit me if you would like me to go away and leave you with the last word. Your choice

 

I don't think that word salad came out right.