Democracy Vs Republican System of Government

Who agrees with the federal nighwatchmen government model?

I want what works. Yes government serves the people. But if the people are wrong, which they may or may not be more often than any other form of government, for example a meritocratic technocracy, then the people don't decide.

Locksley- you seem to have totally missed my point. It may be the dictator's mantra, but what works works, and what doesn't doesn't. This is the CS, remember. We'll make it work if need be.

I do not support the nightwatchmen type of state in any way, shape, or form.

I did not miss your point.

You seem to think that the creation of the CSCS is for its own sake. The reason for the CSCS is a better life for mankind. We are trying to remove ourselves from oppressive governments, and yes I do mean the United States, Great Britain, etc. True freedom is the greatest thing we have, and no government should be allowed to take that away. The population won't stand for it.

This is a statement of fact as opposed to an argument for any belief of mine, but people obviously have stood for it, and conceivably could again if we decide so.

That's not to say I argue for that, that is merely a statement of fact. Hate to violate Godwin's law, but the Nazi's are a very good example.

We have to decide what our point in making the CS is first. As I once said,

Quote :

What is the goal of society? Is it to make everyone happy? Is it to increase freedom to the max? To maintain order and stability? To ensure prosperity? I think that this is the big decision that we have to make, then we can decide on everything else much more easily.

Increase freedom to the max.

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

One may then ask- Why?

Which brings us back down the path of morals, which we need to clear up.

But you are demanding that everything in the CSCS should be rational. Morals aren't rational.

Then they are irrelevant.

Then why don't you should be an Anarchist?

Because of my particular philosophy, which states that one is an artist, and all things a work of art. I see a certain society as ideal, and in order to get to that society, a government will be more or less necessary.

What is your aim? To keep humanity alive? To have anarchy? What is it?

Progression towards a technological singularity and the combination of humanity into one supermind.

Oh great. A Borg.

Majority opinion here seems to favour the Federal Nighwatchmen model.

Intelligence beyond imagining is and really always has been humanities goal. Technological development can bring us there very soon, and once one is inseparable from the whole, true altruism will prevail.

A true technocracy, the most efficient way to run society; In short, Utopia.

The singularity is a myth.

I don't necessarily support a singularity- a singularity meaning that beyond that point, everything becomes totally and fundamentally different. Depending on your viewpoint, that happens all of the time, or that never happens. However, AI, thought transmissions applied on a massive scale, and that kind of technology do have the power and the potential to create the utopia that the 1848 Revolutions failed to.

Commissar Ibram Gaunt wrote:

Man may have the power of gods, you'd better hope he has the wisdom of one.

A technocracy is NOT Utopia, despite how efficient it may be.

You've got to remember, we're working with baseline humans.

Why work with baseline humans? This is a clean slate, and that is far from a viable assumption.

You can do things the hard way, if you want- but history to this point has shown that to be a horrible mess. Wouldn't it be impossible to work for anything but the advancement of society as a whole if you were the equivalent of one of its brain cells?

Say we have a city of 1 million people, all connected with say 75% of all thoughts being spread throughout this larger mind. The effective group IQ would be 75 million. America, with a population of about 300 million, but where .5% of thoughts (and quite possibly less) are shared, the effective group IQ is just 1.5 million. That is 50 times more, with a population 300 times less.


Wouldn't they be able to do better?

I don't know where you are getting your numbers from, but I can't think of even two people who are sharing their thoughts 100%...

Redsand11j wrote:

Because of my particular philosophy, which states that one is an artist, and all things a work of art.

"Everyone is an artist, and everything is art"

I like this. I think that is a great philosophy. And in a way it sums up what I think is the real appeal of this whole project.

I know I talk a lot about the potential for efficient economies, better government models, and all of that. And all that stuff is absolutely fantastic.

But perhaps the real 'revolution' that a CSCS would enable is not so much the opportunity to create 'the best system for everyone', but more that everyone has the opportunity to contribute their own ideas into the system, and perhaps even create their own 'micro utopias'.

In other words, if everyone is an artists, then let them work together and create art!

So in this way the CSCS would really be a great canvas, upon which peoples of all different kinds can freely contribute and create their great works of art.

"Ask not what your country can do for you; Ask what you can do for your country"

The challenge then, is creating a system which would allow for this amount of creative freedom without allowing the system to fall apart from conflict or neglect.

Perhaps.

- Mike

Oh and let me be clear: By 'art' I pretty much mean everything that is not art. I'm not an advocate of 'arts for the sake of arts'. I've never understood the avante garde... That is not the sort of art I mean. By art I mean useful things, ideas, systems, culture... that sort of thing.

Hey have you guys heard of Edward De Bono?

Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_de_Bono

I found these pages on his site which were thoroughly interesting:

"Faults in Democracy": http://www.edwdebono.com/debono/probcont.htm

The appeal of the federal nightwatchmen system is that it allows everyone to find what's best for them, and set up their own system if that's what they need.

Mike,

Thanks for the link. He has some fantastic insights into the current issues facing Western government. I'll second Tobias's comment.

It been awhile since I have been here and it interesting to see what your responses are to the topic that I put out there.

First of all a Democracy has already been tried and it failed in Greece City States three thousand years ago. A Democracy is basically just the flip side of a totalitarian society and will ultimately degrade into totalitarian or cast society of one type or another with Kings and queens with serfs and those kind of things. Several people have already picked up on the fact that they will say, majority rules to push society into a totalitarian or death culture society. Example, Oboma's health care plan which is a rehash of Adolph Hitler's health care plan the denied people that he called useless eater. In a Democracy, you might be able to sell that plan as the best way to go, because of the cost of heath care. That the old mighty dollar is more important than a few old people or re tarted or crippled people. In a Republic, this isn't so, but the people are more important that saving money.

Actually, the United States is a Constitutional Federal Republic based on a General Well Fare in the Preamble of the US Constitution, with the Authority to sole right to generate credit in these United States and is the only one that has the right to generate credit under the Authority of the US Constitution. The United States as a Nation was itself suppose to be a clean slate from Europe to bring the best of Europe to America where it could be perfected and then re-export it back to Europe once it been pioneered here in America.

In old Europe they have the cast system and social system of kings, queens, serfs. Where they have those land lords and financial oligarchies that rule over people lives. It was these Lambardy Bankers that Caused the 15th Century Dark Age where 1/3 of the European population died. This Capitalist system that most of the people are so proud of is actually an out growth of this private banking slave system of mankind. The basic concept of this type of system is that man is just a higher form of animal and so has no basic net worth and so can be disposed of if it serve the higher good of the majority. Adam Smith purpose was to try and sanitize this crap and make it acceptable to the masses. There selling ideal that private banking is good and represents the market forces. That a government owned Central Banking system is bad.

The Counsel of Florence where the Christian of every faction meet for two years to hammer out what Christian Doctrine should be and what they could all agree on. They also wanted to deal Black Death problem that was currently racing through Europe killing large numbers of people. This wasn't just the major Christian faction that was at the Counsel of Florence, they also had people from the Islamic World there too. It was those people from the Islamic World that brought the old Greek Culture back into Europe based on Plato writing and those Platonic Solids that Classical sciences are based on. That where they discovered why a Democracy would fail so they came up with a nation state idea of a Republican concept of government based on Natural Law. They also understood that the government had to control the money system and not those private financiers that cause the dark ages. It was the children and the grand children that led the way into the Renaissance that led Europe out of the dark ages. It was those principle that ultimately lead to the creation of the United States and it constitutional Republic.

Now as to the issue of slavery in America after the American Revolution and the signing of the Declaration and the New US Constitution. Great Britain was controlled by this financial oligarchy and they were the one that brought slavery into those American Colonies in part for the slave labor and in part to create a class society to swash the nation building tendency of the American People. After the American Revolution and the signing of the New US Constitution, the British still had there agents inside the United States and they were still loyal to there British master and to there corrupt monetary system of usury and slavery and they defended it. When the United States follows what US Constitution says, the United States prospers and when the United States doesn't honor what the Constitution says, it goes into a collapse phase and decline.

But, with the signing of the US Constitution, the United States was actually in violation of the very principle that the US Constitution represents. It been an uphill battle to try and realize in practice and in truth what that Constitution actually represent, it been against the opposition that wants to destroy that Constitution, because they hate what it does represents. This battle to have a country like the United States that suppose to represent those principle written in the US Constitution has been going on for over 500 years and counting.

Larry,

So that's who Martian is! Hello, Mr Republic

Have you taken a loom at my proposed constitution?

No, I have not taken a look at you Constitution, but it should look a lot like the US Constitution, but with a few refinements. Your basic Constitution should have these things in it.

1. The reason that it is being written and who behind it. Like the Preamble of the US Constitution that states that We the American people are behind this Constitution. The purpose of this constitution is secure a more perfect government to promote liberty and to secure prosperity for this generation and for future generations.

The rest of the US Constitution is for the expressed purpose of expediting the Preamble of the US Constitution for the American people and which has benefits to the rest of the world also. When the United States operates properly, I acts as Nations State vs an Empire which is a financial Empire that tries to function the government.

The US Government is a Presidential System of government vs Parliamentary System which is basically a throw back to the Kings and Queens period. The US Presidential System is based around three branches of Government and I would further refine it by adding a forth branch of Government that is a government function or Central Bank. We want to swash the tendency of this financial elite to commit mass murder and to oppress the masses. So we want to out law the Private Monetary system that we currently have, which is a fractional system of banking, which is owned and operated by this oligarchical elite and go to a credit system of banking owned by the Government.

2. President.
3. Congress
4. A Federal Court System
5. A Central Bank that is owned operated by the central government and has sole authority to generate credit.

With the refinement of having government owned and operated central banking system that is generating credit to fund major infrastructural projects that need to get built so we can have Martian Country and have functioning for the good of all mankind. So what we would have is a Government inspired and directed Enterprise system or economic system.

Not everything would be owned by the government and nor would everything be owned by the private sector either. There is a logical division of labor that should go to either being privately owned and operated and being government owned and operated. But, everything would have to be government regulated to keep those financial speculators stealing everything.

Larry,

To continue my statement after going to church. One of the Rothechild back in the 1800's said that he care not who in government if he controls the monetary policies of that country. Because, with the control of the monetary policies of that country, he can over rule any elected government of any country that he controls the money supply over through issuance of credit or denial of credit to certain individual or people. Actually, a private central bank that has the authority to act as the central bank of any country in a monetary system acts like a government onto themselves and separate from the elected government of that nation. You in effect have two government working in that country. The one government that supposedly is working for the people, but, will actually be subverted by the other government of the private banking system, because they have the money. So the elected government is basically neutralized by the private central banking system that has the power to generate credit.

Now this private banking system of the Monetarist System as stated before, function as government onto itself and to the people that own other private banks or run those other private for the like of the Rothechild, Rockefellows and other. Having control over the central banking system and the right to generate credit, give these fellows access to a lot of financial resources which a lot of it is being diverted to there own accounts. Rothechild supposedly have 150 trillions of and Rockefellows have maybe 45 to 50 trillions of dollars of financial resources. This bail out of over seven trillion dollars so far to these rich people to pay there salaries and give them large bonus and then saddling the American people with the debt is part of this corrupt system of private central banking or Monetarism. It is a transfer of wealth from the poor people to the rich people in the largest welfare program on the entire planet. This worthless paper generating scam that they have pulled on the American People and the world at large is said to exceed over one quadrillion dollars and counting. Most of that quadrillions of dollars or more isn't worth the paper that it is written on and is worthless and has no real value at all.

Most of the people that you will be arguing with, will defend this system or will defend this system on some level, because they were trained like a circus animal to perform for there food and so they do there trick for there food. So how do they train the Americans to act like circus animals? By miss-educating Americans in the school system. There has been a subversion of the American education system over a hundred years now and counting. The also control the US News Media, by buying it up with there worthless money that they generated by owning those banks that own the Federal Reserve Bank and other. They also are buying up private business so they will control that too, along with the farms so they control the food supply also.

So when you talk to the American People, you are more or less talking to a brainwashed people that don't know that there a brainwashed people and will argue against you if you say they are a brainwashed people.

This is important, because there are two aspects of the US Constitution and whether the United States can function as a sovereign nation state that committed to the General Welfare of the American People and the rest of the world getting the overflow of it benefits into there lives also.

They are:

1. The Constitution itself that provides the guiding light to keep us on course and so we don't lose our way.

2. It the American People themselves and there understanding of what the Constitution stands for. Or an educated American Population and one that is committed to promote that general welfare for All American and the world at large also. They man is in the image of God and has creative nature and so is important. Which go contrary to the opposing view that man is just a higher form of animal.

To prove this second point. All you need to do is get Americans of different ideas like Like the Libertarians, the conservatives, the liberals and a whole lot of others with different view points and ask one or two question after having them read the US Constitution.

1. What did you read and how do you interpret this constitution?

2. Why doesn't your interpretation of the conform to what the Constitution actually says or what it actually means?

I am talking about getting people from every political viewpoint that believe they are the defenders of the US Constitution and there proud of it too, because it the greatest document written by man.

If the US Constitution is so great and I do believe it is a great document, the why do they go bouncing off in all different directions when they answer those two questions?

You will get all kinds of weird answers and hear all kinds twisted logic to get the US Constitution to conform to there world view or political ideas instead of changing there minds to conform to what the Constitution actually says. They will mostly be all wrong too, which ever view they have.

It because, they have been miss-educated. They know the US Constitution is a great document, but they don't know why it a great Document or the principles that it is based on.

So the structure of the rest of the Martian economy should look like this.

It would be easier to backtrack as to what I think we should do down hear and then project it onto Mars new economy with any refinement that you might make. They are:

1. Centrally own Government banking system that funding both government and private infrastructural projects that are beneficial the physical economy of either the United States or Mars is that where we are at.

2. We want the government to own and operate the water, sewers department, electric power grid, roads, super trains, subway system, air port or space ports, ect. If we are on Mars, the the government needs to own the life support system like the air supply and Geodesic Dome that covers the city and sees to it maintaince also.

3. The government need to be in the business of building other cities on Mars with government generated credit to expand the human habitat on the planet Mars.

4. I support a single payer system paid for Health care by the US Government vs a private insurance company. Over half the Americans that go bankrupt, go bankrupt because of medical bills. Also HMO's are very inefficient in that over 30% of the cost go for administration cost. In a Medicaid and Medicare system only about 3% goes off for administration cost. I would also Nationalize the drug industry too, because there in the business to sell you over priced drugs and drugs you don't need so they can make huge profits and cash in on drugging America. Between the Federalizing of the Federal Reserve System and the take over of these drug manufacturing companies, we would be able to get rid of 99% of all the dangerous and unneeded drugs that Americans are currently taking. I am not talking about drugs that Americans do need for some reason, they should continue to get those drugs that are legitimately need by the American People. Drugs like Riddlin would be outlawed out right or give the physician the time to get children who are on it off of it. I would also go back to the Hill Burtan Act to replace the HMO's that we are throwing out.

5. We also want to save Social Security both down here in the United States and set on up on Mars to take care of the people in both places when they get old and so they can continue to be cared for.

6.The needs to fund private interest that engage in the productive sector of Mars to both establish it and to expand it once it been put into place. The private sector that we want to fund would be, family farms, manufacturers or factories, mining concerns and private carriers of freight and passengers from the Earth, Mars or other places.

7. The Shop keepers, Grocery Store, Hotels and such would be getting there financing form the private banks that would be also setting up under the Federally owned banking system under either the US Government or the Martian Government that has been or would be set up for that purpose.

This give you a snap shot of what we want to do and how we intend to do it and what we intend to see happen. The only thing that is missing is some major government to pick this thing up and run with it. But, it this is going to get done, this is the way it will get done or it wont get done.

Larry,

The state level is adequate to fund a healthcare system. Same for social security.

Personally, I think it should be up to the states as to whether or not they decide to implement social security. That way, it still leaves the people with a choice as to whether they want to pay for social security or not.

In the example of a Mars city, basic life support would be the responsibility of the federal level, as they are basic needs.

>>>The state level is adequate to fund a healthcare system. Same for social security.<<<

No, the States don't have adequate funds to fund health care, nor do the have the funds to fund social security either, nor should they even try to fund those too items. The General Welfare mentioned in the Preamble of the Constitution was to the US Government and not to the States. FDR setup the Health Care and Social Security during the Great Depression in the 1930's. At that time, only the US Government could have pulled something like that together and they did.

>>>Personally, I think it should be up to the states as to whether or not they decide to implement social security. That way, it still leaves the people with a choice as to whether they want to pay for social security or not.<<<

As to turning over the Social Security to the States or even having them fund the Health Care, currently about 40 states are on the edge of going bankrupt and are even talking about cutting those benefits because they don't have the money. I personally would like to see both Social Security and Medicaid, Medicare or some variation of this put into a Constitutional Amendment and signed into law for the express purpose of protecting the American people. Over half the people that file for bankruptcy, file for bankruptcy because of medical bills and not for any other reason. To solve this problem, I would like to go cancel the HMO's and go back to Hill Burtan Act that FDR put into place. I would like to go to a single payer system with the US Government being the primary payer for that health care. I expect the US Government to be the primary driver of these two things and the state can support it if they like to or can help to administer both programs with the US Government supporting it. It really needs to be a Federal Government initiated plain or it will probably fall apart down the road somewhere or some Americans will get left out loop or fall through the cracks and not be able to receive there benefits, which I believe should be a Constitutional Right.

The United States is currently under attack from primarily internal enemies of the United States and not from external enemies of the United States. These enemies of the United States, they usually attack the weak, crippled and financially oppressed people of the United States, because they can stamped them and get Americans to make rash decisions that give them an opening to destroy the United States. This plan serve two very important needs, Americans that need health care can get it and get the money for those people who have worked all there lives and are now at the end of there lives so they can depend of at lest a base line of existence without having to beg for help. The second benefit is, that it slams the door in the fact of the enemies of the United States that are trying to destroy the United States, because they can't use this issue as a pry bare to achieve there evil goals. Those people that would destroy the United States, use a strategy of divide and conquer or of play one group off against another for there own selfish interest and against the other members of that group and destroying everyone involved as they fight each other and doing the bidding of the people that started the fight in the first place. We want to thort such an effort by these would be destroyers of the United States, then we do exactly what I am saying that we should do and our would be destroyers, will have to find another strategy for destroying the United States, because this strategy for destroying the United States has been Constitutionally outlawed.

>>>In the example of a Mars city, basic life support would be the responsibility of the federal level, as they are basic needs.<<<

It nice to know that you understand the need to have a federal level of government and that it need to be the ultimate authority on Mars of control over the infrastructure and for the financing of that infrastructure. What you don't seem to understand is, that same principle works down here too and it that same principle that is the primary reason that we have a modern society today and not because of Capitalism, which is basically a rip off scam.

Not everything should be privatizes and run by private business. There are some things that are best left in the hands of government and that should never be privatizes or as I like to put it Piratized it.

There are things like water, sewer, subways, the electric power grid, roads to mention just a few things that should be left in government hands. At which level of government that it should be left in, is negotiable, but it needs to be left there and not privatized and put into private hands.

Larry,

But what if the person doesn't want to have government healthcare, instead paying for their own health insurance? It isn't right that they should be forced to pay for a government one.

I am, and will likely remain, a Nighwatchmen Federalist. The sole purpose of the federal government is to defend the basic rights of the people, and to represent the states at international meetings. Everything else can be done at a state level or below.

Quote :

As to turning over the Social Security to the States or even having them fund the Health Care, currently about 40 states are on the edge of going bankrupt and are even talking about cutting those benefits because they don't have the money

The Federal government is going bankrupt as well. It's alreadt saddled with several trillion dollars of debt, and that number is set to rise. The federal government doesn't have the money either.

I see you still don't really understand what the United States is as a Nation and what kind of Authority that the US Constitution gives to the United States. I suppose the best way to explain it to you is to take sections of the Constitution out and post it on this board and then explain what it is and how it suppose to be used.

Let start off with Preamble of the US Constitution and that lay the foundation for the rest of the US Constitution and what the laws of the United States should look like.

Here the Preamble of the US Constitution.

We The People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I am going to do quick review of the Preamble before going to the two other sections of the Constitution that I really want to show you.

1. We went from thirteen colonies to a loose Confederacy government. There it is, the Article of Confederation, which is a very weak Central government. Matter of fact, the Central Government of United States was more like thirteen countries instead of one country with thirteen members in it. Each of the thirteen states had there own money, could sign treaties with one or more of the other states or with foreign powers. The Central Government had to ask for donation to run the Central Government, because they didn't have the power to tax or do much of anything else that a Central Government should have the power to do.

With the signing of the US Constitution, we went from a weak Central Government that virtually didn't exist or only marginally exited to a very strong Central Government of Federal Government. We basically went from being thirteen nations with a loose confederacy called the United States to a Country Called the United States with thirteen members in it.

2. Skip down to the: "promotes the General Welfare" section.

Is powers given to the Federal Government of the United States to take care of the best interest of the American People where it deem things need to be done for the American people and to regulate along with promoting commerce and promote the development of the sciences and a whole host of other things that might come along in the future also.

In the next two section of the US Constitution that I put out there, I will show you that this is suppose to be so, if the United States is operating under the guild lines that are laid down by the US Constitution. If we have people in office who choose to honor the US Constitution instead of committing treason against that Constitution.

The US Constitution Article 1 section 8

Section 8 The congress shall have power,
To lay and collect taxes, duties, impost, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises, shall be uniform throughout the United States:
To borrow money on the credit of the United States:
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states and with the Indian tribes:
To establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subjects of bankruptcies throughout the United States:
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures:
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post-offices and post-roads:
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Skip the rest of section 8 and skip section 9 and down to Article 1 section 10.

Section 10 No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque, and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts; or grant any title of nobility.
No state shall, without the consent of the congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports of exports except that may be absolutely necessary for executing it inspection laws; and the net proceeds of all duties and imposts, laid by any state on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United States;and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the congress. No state shall, without the consent of congress, lay any duties of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war, in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

Without going over every point that I can go over. I will just list them below and then you can read over the section of the US Constitution that I typed above and see for yourself if what I am saying is actually what what written in the US Constitution.

According to the US Constitution the congress has this authority>

1. Congress and the US Supreme Court have the Authority to take things through bankruptcy and re-organization.

They have the authority to take individual, companies and the entire financial system through bankruptcy re-organization is they deem it necessary.

2. Only the US Government and pacifically mentions congress has the right to generate credit.

No other state, county, city or private bank or anybody else has the authority under the US Constitution go generate credit and is referred to as Counterfeiting and they have the authority to put you in jail or what ever punishment them deem necessary.

3. Set the weights and measures or regulate standards as they deem necessary. They have the authority to set the value of things if it serve the general good of the American people.

4. Promote the arts and sciences or promote those areas that promote development and new technologies.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea of where I am going with my argument. Now there is a reason that those four things are in the US Constitution. There many other things that are in the US Constitution, but the rest of this post, I am going to be dealing with those four things only.

In your last post you mentioned the problem of bankruptcy of the US Federal Government and indeed it is almost bankrupt. But, under the US Constitution The US Government can take everything everywhere into a court ordered bankruptcy re-organization process. They can take the Federal Reserve System into a bankruptcy re-organization. Those big banks into bankruptcy re-organizations while keeping them open for business, because we need a functioning banks to take care of business. The US Government also has the right to take those big corporations like GM into bankruptcy re-organization and/or put them under government protection if there deem necessary for rebuilding the US Economy, which they are.
The reason that the US Government was given that power was because of debter prison for people that could not pay there debts from some one that they barrow money from. These bankruptcy laws grew up around that power given to the US Government in the Constitution to protect people who owe money to other individual or businesses. It was later expanded into everything else also as the need arose and the need did arise to do so.

In the last few post I have stressed the difference between a Monetary System vs a Credit System. I think it was either second or third complaint that our founding father made against the King and British banking system that ruled over those colonies. Though the control over the money system, those financier were able to break down those thirteen colonies and reduce them to being just a resource colonies vs the colonist desire to be nation builders of a new republic or at least based on republican principles. What became the Massachusetts colony, originally had there own right to generate own credit in the charter before they even left Great Britain, which they started doing. The Massachusetts scrip is what was use to finance the build up of the Massachusetts bay colony. At some point, they were even had a more productive economy than Great Britain had. Great Britain decided that they could not have that, so removed the right to for the Massachusetts bay colony to generate there own credit and then handed it over to those private financier to control there credit. Then with the right to generate or restrict credit back in there hands, those financier bankrupted most of those Massachusetts bay colonies businesses and generally oppressed the people of Massachusetts. This happened about forty years before the American Revolutionary War. So it was the children or grand children that fought in that American Revolutionary war and explains why they fought so hard against there British oppressors to achieve there independence. The government credit and banking system of the old Massachusetts bay colony was the model of the United States Central Banking System after the signing of the New US Constitution that made us a Federal Republic. The First National Bank was a Government owned and operated bank that was managed Alexander Hamilton in President George Washington Cabinet as the first Treasury Secretary of the United States.

It was Alexander Hamilton the laid down the foundation for funding these great Federal Government projects that built up the United State. It was Hamilton that created the self extinguishing debt. Most debt today is rolled over into another debt, but Alexander Hamilton would let some of those debt notes expire and go to zero value of net worth. This worked out real well when he wanted to fund major government infrastructural projects for building the United States up as a nation. There are certain benefits to generating your own credit out of thin air vs letting some private institution generating credit out of thin air and then charging you interest on it.

The US Government also has the right to set prices on goods and services also. A few years ago Enron came up with a plan to deregulate California Electric Power Grid and let the price float or go anywhere the market would take the price of electricity. It was Enron that actually wrote those laws that deregulated the electricity in California. Also, Enron was one of those energy companies that was buying up the power generating capacity from the state of California too. They were spreading BS all over the place about how the market forces will keep the cost of energy down and even make electricity cheaper than what it was then. With no government regulations to stop them, Enron and those other energy Pirates increased the price of electricity ten and even a hundred fold. They even spiked it over a thousand fold increase in the price of electricity and California went from having one to two billion dollars surplus to ten to twenty dollars deficit problem in just a few month. Under the US Constitution the US Government has the right to set weights and measure to keep something like this from happening and they should too and they have the right to prosecute people that engage in such activities such as this too.

You been on this site or New Mars site very long, you would have read some of my post where I say we need to make NASA a science driver, which also conforms to the US Constitution. Go back up and check it out. It in Article 1 Section 8, that congress should promote arts and science along with giving both the artist and inventor the right to benefit from those items for a time, before it becomes part of the public domain stuff.

So why is that in the US Constitution?

They understood the process of increasing the productivity of the work force because of those new arts and sciences being brought forward. For example we had 3 million people during and just after the American Revolution and 1 1/2 million of them were farmers. Today we have 300 million people and with a properly functioning family farms, we only need between 2 to 3 million farmers to grow all the food we need. That a hundred fold increase in the farm labor that generated that increase in productivity. That the advantages of developing new technologies. Our founding father understood this principle and that why it in the US Constitution.

"Boy oh boy", they were smart fellows went they?

Now back to the present.

With the current crises of economic melt down and who can save us from this pending new dark age?

The United States of course!

Under the Authority of the US Constitution, the US Government can:

Can write off bad debts, re-organize bankrupt institution, can choose to build important infrastructure that needed to keep the US functioning as a nation like subway, super trains, nuclear power plants, water projects, cities on Mars and fund the whole thing with Government generated credit.

This is the kind of power that the US Government has under the US Constitution and as far as I know, no other government or institution on the entire planet has that kind of authority given to them.

So how were go going to keep the United States out of this thing, Nighwatchment Federalist?

And if we can get the United States acting in accordance with it Constitution or can get people who are committed to honoring the constitution, then why would you want to keep the United States out of the business?

Larry,

We aren't trying to recreate America here. The idea behind the Nightwatchmen Federation is that people can find/create the government that is best suited to them.

Bailouts are unconstitutional.

I agree with you Locksley, bail outs are unconstitutional. Beside that, they don't work either and all they do is increase the size of the debt that will have to be bailed out next time or written off. The US Government has absolutely no business bailing out anybody, especially Wall Street and those big banks.

The method of choice that is constitutional is to put them through a bankruptcy reorganization process according to the US Constitution. We would not miss Wall Street if it disappeared and was never seen again, because they don't anything productive that serve the interest of the American people and really has no right to exist. Wall Street is basically, just of crooked crap table for the expressed purpose of giving resources to the rich elite and transfer that money from the poor.

However we do need a functioning banking system, so after the bankruptcy reorganization of those banks under a revived Glass-Segule Act, the Federal Government should fund those banks or use it power to generate credit to fund them.

Now these states that are in trouble, the US Government needs to come to there defense, by providing temporary funds until the US Economy can be put through a bankruptcy reorganization process also where the tax base has rebounded and can provide those tax revenues to the states again. Only the US Government can do this under the authority of the US Constitution.

But, this twenty four trillion or what ever it was, the US Government had absolutely no business doing that and they should take it back from them.

Larry,

Why are we discussing the American system in such a way that has no bearing on the CSCS?

If we had a Federal Nighwatchmen system, Larry could set up his system in one f the states.

You make a very good point Tobias...

The trouble with the system that Larry is suggesting is that it makes people pay for something they might not want or use. A Federal Nighwatchmen exists for the sole purpose of maintaining the basic rights of it's citizens and residents. Larry's system tries to go beyond that.

NoMoreLies, I am suggesting a lot of things besides a Constitutional Amendment to make both Health care and Social Security a constitutional right for the American People have. Failure to demand and get health care and Social Security is tantamount to committing mass murder against the American population. NoMoreLies, I use to use those same arguments that you are currently using justify almost those same policies that you are currently pushing.

I ask question of myself so that I can reason things out and sort out what is and isn't true or what is right or wrong. The questions go like this.

The first Question:

What happens if millions of Americans are denied health care, because of these slashes in the health care budget?

The Answer to first Question:

Millions of Americans will die and result of not recieving health care they need to stay alive or have there lives shortened by those heal Care cuts.

The Second Question:

What would happen if we take Social Security away for those people who have retired and depend on this Social Security as there primary source of income to servive on?

The Answer to second Question:

Millions of Americans will be denied their Social Security Check that give them the money to buy food, pay utilities and such and so they will die.

The Third Question:

What were the Nuremburg trial all about and what did they exicute meny of those Nazi criminals for?

The Answer to third Question:

They were put into prisons or exicuted for denying health care or rashioning there healt Care and food below the level that needed to be provided to those people to sustain there lives. Most of those people that were exicuted for mass at the Nuremburg Trials were exicuted for denying either Healt care when it was needed or for denying a sufficient amount of food sustain people and keep them healthy. They basically starve them to death.

Most of those being tried at the Nuremburg Trials weren't tried for taking a gun out and shooting inocent people. They were tried for the denying of access to the resources to sustain lifes of people under there care. There defense was that the order to kill people wasn't given and it it was, then they would have refused to honor that command and so there not guilty of committing mass murder. The judgment was, that they either knew or should have known, that these policies would kill people and therefore they are guilty of mass murder.

I am a Christain and there is a Biblical version of this Nuremburg trial senario from what I believe to be God view of this issue is. It goes like this:

A man put his coat up for callateral and he could not pay the man back and now another man rightfully owns his coat. But, the scripture reminds the man that owns that other mans coat, that he can only have his coat during the morning and has to give it back to him in the evening when it get cooled or he will be responsible for causing that other mans death, because he didn't have his coat to protect him from the cool during the night. Therefore he can only have that mans coat during the day time hour and has to give it back to him during the night so he doesn't die. So he may as well, give the man back his coat and tell him to keep it or be responsible for causing the wrongful death of that man, because he didn't have his coat.

I took this to mean that when you make policies that either knowing or unknowing kill people than you will be held responsible for there deaths, by the Almighty God. But, if you malishiously make policies for the intent of killing people, then you will be held accountable for murdering them. You don't have to take direct action against some like shooting them to be considered a murder by the Almighty God or by that judge and the Nuramburg Trails that judged those War Crimes in Nazi Germany.

NoMoreLies, do with what I have written as you like, but if you were held to those same standard that the Nuramburg Judge held those that were judged by him, then the policies that you endorse and support, would demand that you also go to jail and/or exicuted, because of the crimes that you committed against humanity also.

Larry,

Health care is not a natural born right. It requires labor input, whether your own or some else's.

Equating health care to a natural born right is similar to saying food should be a "right." By that logic, farmers, grocery stores, etc. who make money from food are "criminals" by charging money for a "right." Obviously this is abject nonsense.

Godwin's law, Larry.

Locksley, I have two question to ask you.

Do you personally think it is alright to in effect murder someone, because they can't pay for the medical treatment that will save there lives?

Do you believe that only people who can pay for health care are the only one's that deserve health care and everybody else can go die in a ditch somewhere for lack of health care?

My solution to the problem of people that people need health care and those that provide the health care need to be paid, is to have a government bought and paid for health plan. That way the one's that need health care get and those that need to be paid, get paid for there services.

Larry,

Larry, it would be tantamount to murder if the doctors refused to treat someone because they didn't have enough money. However, they take an oath when they become doctors to treat anyone who needs it, regardless of whether that person has the cash to pay.

Healthcare is a right, but it isn't a basic right. Basic rights are ones which the federal government is responsible for maintaining. Additional rights are the responsibility of the state.

Please, justifiy why you think it is okay to force someone to pay for someone elses healthcare, who they don't know.

And here where your idea fall apart at, Those doctors and hospitals don't have the money to provide the health care to all Americans everywhere that need this health care to save there lives. Locksley is basically correct as far as he went when he said that we can't expect those doctors to foot the bill or offer free medical service without charge. We are talking about tens of billions and maybe a hundred billion dollars of cost to take care of the poor or the uninsured people that need health care. To say that they took an oath to give health care to everyone that needs whether they can pay or not. That sound real good until we ask the question are those doctors suppose to pay for the nurses, drugs, hospital rooms to provide that health care that those people need? I don't think so and they couldn't even if they wanted too. That an unfair burden to put on those Doctors and that why I would prefer a single payer Federal Government Health Care plan. Many hospitals have been put out of business, because they could not pay there bill, because they had so many non paying patients that they took care of. That why we need a health care plan that viable for all parties involved in this thing, from those who need health care, to those that give it and a way to pay for that health care plan also.

And just what are those basic right that your talking about?

I assume that your counting the rights that are mentioned in the US Constitution as part of those basic right.

Am I right to assume that that is what you mean?

Rights like:

The bill of rights the first and everything that mentioned in those amendment like:
The freedom of speech, the First Amendment.
The right to bare arms, the Second Amendment.

And the list goes on, but we will stop here.

How about if I add into this mix from the US Declaration of what some of the motivations for fighting the American Revolution were and why it add credence to my viewpoint. They weren't fight to get there liberty, they were fighting to keep there liberty.

The American Declaration Independence put it this way:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the the pursuit of happiness.

If you take away people health care, you can kill them. This wipe out this concept of you having a right to life and that it unalienable too.

If we can infrenge on there right to life, then we can stamped people that need health care into giving up there liberty to save there lives. This wipe out the this concept of you having a right to liberty as an unalienable right, because they can force to give it up liberty to save there lives.

If they don't have to honor the right to life and liberty then why do you think they have to honor your right to the pursuit of happiness either.

In the Preamble of the US Constitution these concepts are bundled up into two word the General Welfare one of the primary reasons for having that Constutiton written in the first place and it necessary to have this New US Constitution written.

Here something that you might be interest in, web video that goes over the difference between a credit system vs a monetary system.








Larry,

Let try it again:




Larry,

Quote :

Locksley, I have two question to ask you.

Do you personally think it is alright to in effect murder someone, because they can't pay for the medical treatment that will save there lives?

Do you believe that only people who can pay for health care are the only one's that deserve health care and everybody else can go die in a ditch somewhere for lack of health care?

Let me make it clear, I am not against poor people getting health care. Far from it. I believe everyone should be able to obtain it. But this doesn't make it a right, or a basic right, or whatever.

When the government steals money from hardworking citizen's, to run an ineffective, inefficient bureaucracy, that's when I get upset. Those jobs that are created are wasteful, unnecessary, and valueless. As are the vast majority of government jobs, which should be carried out by private organizations.

Private charities and donations from caring people should cover health care. Not the government stealing from it's citizens for something they have no business getting involved in.

I do not support this HMO's of health care which was a privatization of a government health care plan from days gone by. This HMO's system is a make those insurance companies rich at the expense of the American people. The also got there portion of this bail out money to provide less efficient and more costly while delivering less health care to the people that need it and there by causing there premature deaths. There also is about 30% overhead cost going to those insurance companies that sell those HMO's to the public or were slipped into the Medicaid and Medicare Programs to pad those insurance companies at our expense. Then we also have inflated drug prices by 200% or 300% or more of what it cost to produce those drugs, which is also a scam too. These insurance and Drug manufacturing companies are using the Health care system as a cash cow for making all kind of money contrary to our best interest.

Yes, I think that I can safely say that both Locksley and NoMoreLies like this system of health care and I don't like it either. Matter of fact, it a muti tens of billion or over a hundred billion rip off scam that kill a lot of American so that fat asses of an excutives, in those insurance companies can get there bonus.

What I support is the Hill-burton Act that FDR put into place and it will:
1. Set the number of hospitals and number of beds in each community or county in America so they have a hospital close by if they need one.
2. It will be a single payer system backed up by the US Government. It has just a 3% cost of overhead for price of the health care that is being provided to the American Peoples instead of the 30% overhead in the private insurance sectored HMO's system for the same basic health care.
3. Put government regulation to place to drive down the price of those over priced drugs that are we are currently buying from them. Do a drug test study to see which drugs don't belong out there in the Market Place and then remove them. But, if some of them are adictive, then they will need doctors supervision to get them off those drugs.

If we do this, then the health care cost will drop like a rocket, because we got most of that overhead cost, over priced drugs and drugs we don't need out of the system.

But, if we need some health care services for what ever reason whether for broken bones or for some cronic deazes that need long term doctors care, we got it.

My problem with your plan Locksley and with NoMoreLies is, the problem is bigger than the solution that either you are suggesting that we use can deal with. Neither one of your plans will work, because, both those doctors and Private Charities and private donation from caring people are insufficient funds to both pay for that health care and doctors that can afford to donate most of there time to such a non paying venture. When they run out of money and/or run out of doctors or time they can commit to such a project, then anybody else that need health care will be denied health care. Now if anybody else need that critical doctors treatment in the health care system, then they die, because there only limited amount of money and doctor time available and it been use up already. We are talking about thousand, tens of thousand, hudreds of thousand or even millions of American dying because there not getting the health care they need.

Locksley, you and NoMoreLies are basically preaching and pushing for a genecide policy that your peddling as a Health Care policy of choice. Locksley, neither you nor NoMoreLies totally understand the scope of the problem when it comes to the health care problem.

Let run a few numbers so you can see just how big this problem is:

The United States has a population of roughly 300 million people, but we will figure that only 150 million Americans are in the work place or can be gainfully employed, because some of retired and other are children.

Now 10% of the possible people that can work are on Unemployment insurance, because they have lost there jobs or that 15 million people unemployed.

But, that only about 1/3 of the totally unemployed that are unemployed in America, because either they don't qualify for unemployment insurance or there unemploment insurance has run out on them. So now we have 30 million American that recieve no money at all that are starting to fill up these tent cities across America.

We also know that 60% percent or there abouts has absolutely no health insurance at all, because there under employed or there employer does not provide health care for them or that 90 million Americans that don't have any health care at all. 45 million of this number are the unemployed. Now these people that do work are low wages and there just barelly making it or there about to go over the edge too and they can't afford the health care insurance, because it too expensive for them to buy it. Now these people also have dependents and other people that will be with them or them with those other people. So now we have 90 million depend that are part of this packaged deal of the 90 million Americans that are unemployed or the ones that have low wages, but they all have no health insurance. So now we have a 180 Americans that have absolutely no health insurance. If these people need health care in sufficient number more than these Private Charities, caring people can donate and coupled with voluteer doctors can provide, then they will die and they will die in large numbers too.

You push your health care plan and if you could get it adopted and be the only Health Care plan out there, then you will see millions of Americans dying for lack of this health care they need to keep living and it will be in the million that will die.

Larry,

Quote :

es, I think that I can safely say that both Locksley and NoMoreLies like this system of health care and I don't like it either. Matter of fact, it a muti tens of billion or over a hundred billion rip off scam that kill a lot of American so that fat asses of an excutives, in those insurance companies can get there bonus.

What I support is the Hill-burton Act that FDR put into place and it will:
1. Set the number of hospitals and number of beds in each community or county in America so they have a hospital close by if they need one.
2. It will be a single payer system backed up by the US Government. It has just a 3% cost of overhead for price of the health care that is being provided to the American Peoples instead of the 30% overhead in the private insurance sectored HMO's system for the same basic health care.
3. Put government regulation to place to drive down the price of those over priced drugs that are we are currently buying from them. Do a drug test study to see which drugs don't belong out there in the Market Place and then remove them. But, if some of them are adictive, then they will need doctors supervision to get them off those drugs.

The only reason a government plan would have low overhead is because it is subsidized by tax dollars... In other words free money.

Before you accuse some one of advocating a "genocidal" policy, I would prefer you did your research. First off, only 47 million Americans are uninsured. Of those, nearly 10 million are illegal aliens, while 17 million have incomes above $50,000 but choose not to get health insurance. That leaves 20 million uninsured. If Medicare/Medicaid/Social security were eliminated, trillions of dollars would be available to the general population to help pay insurance, or to provide donations to charities.

The high cost of health care is directly related to the corporate/government/special interest triangle. It's a "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" policy which is ruining our country. Legislation is passed to help certain sectors and companies in the marketplace (i.e. AIG) who donate money to political campaigns, and then receive billions of dollars in bailout money.

Medicare and Medicaid are also to blame. They consistently underpay health care providers, forcing them to charge more for those who are insured with a regular insurance company.

In short, let the free market function as it's supposed to. Remove the government/corporate/lobbyist ties, and this will eliminate virtually all corruption.

But let's try and relate this to a Clean Slate, if at all possible...

Under the Federal Nighwatchmen model, people would be free to move to a state which promises government run healthcare. If they choose to live in a state without one, then it's their choice.

I don't see what the problem is.