the long-windedness of your ripostes
Riposte: To retort quickly
As to my "most generous" gesture, well, I believe you misread. I was simply, and clearly, stating your beautifully executed paradox. There is to
be NO welfare system, yet a welfare system is inherent i.e. THERE IS to be a welfare system. If mistakes are your kind of favors, well, I'd like to
visit your world.
Now! On to the meat!
So. You have addressed the two most important (2) issues, have you? As I have restated above, your so called 'outline' is in fact little more than
a jumbled list of related words, juxtaposed to appear intelligent. If words like "here and there" and "a few" and "maybe" sound like an
outline, then I fear for your English career as much as I do for your luck in this debate.
A welfare system requires a constant, steady stream of capital that can be used to directly benefit the masses it is trying to help. The reason it is
so hard, on simply a national level, is because it is expensive
. Here is a short list of what welfare must undertake: Poverty, Domestic
Violence, Education, Training, Benefits, Child Care, Health Care, Reform, and the move off of welfare.
Our own nation's welfare program is not exactly successful and you are suggesting a pan-national global-level program? Where the number changes from
around 30 million on welfare to billions? Once again, I underestimated you. I have, despite all my attempts, failed to grow money on trees, without
Your other 'important' issue was that people are scared of the idea of a global government. They have every right to be. A government that takes
the money that they earned, whether as taxes or as pay cuts, and gives it away. A government that brings bitter enemies closer, to confront each
other. A government that must, to succeed, in every way mimic communism, a likewise failed system of rule.
I was not challenging you to design an inherently flawed system of government. I had already guessed, correctly I see, that you would not be up to
the task. All I asked was for a plan of Government, so that we could see, for once, what it was you were trying to support.
I didn't expect you to crunch numbers, or devise a system based on actuality. I just wanted a simple outline, how this perfect society would
operate, something beyond a muddled Welfare idea.
I wanted to know how the Government would be structured. Democratic? Dictatorially? Anarchical? I'm hoping you have the insight to see that
Anarchy would fail right from the start. A Dictatorship would only fulfill my 'no rights' belief of the NWO. "Power corrupts; Absolute power
corrupts absolutely." Remember that. As to a Democracy, well how would the members be elected? More importantly, how would this not simply reverse
the power in the world? Impoverished nations like China and India, who between them have nearly half the global population, would only suck the life
out of the once powerful nations, quickly and greedily at that.
I wanted to know how the Government would stay in touch with all parts of the Earth. Would it have a number of subcommittees, which could delegate
responsibilities? This would only serve as more red tape (as if there isn't already enough) and slow the process to our current civil court system.
Would the Government have 'feelers' which would report to single body, and only that body? A perfect hole for perfect corruption. Would the
Government simply be an omniscient body, knowing what is right for each area? Dream on.
I wanted to know how the welfare system would be carried out. Taxes? Pay cuts? Printing new money, a.k.a. inflation? The first two will get you
white-collar riots. The last will get you riots of all sorts.
I wanted to know how trade would work, an issue we didn't touch on at all. Would tariffs be held in place? Would they be changed? Eliminated? Who
would regulate them? If we keep the tariffs in place, then we are back to individual nations. Maybe North America might be more communal, and Europe
would be as well, but we'd still be left with the same nations, making a profit off others. This itself would collapse the NWO. Change them? Well,
to what? Anything and you risk the first problem. Eliminate them and countries that rely on foreign trade, like Japan and China, will sink even
further, creating even more of a need for economic aid.
Finally, you mentioned the NWO as a Utopia. You know another word for Utopia? "Erehwon." Know why? It's "Nowhere" backwards - it cant
647 words. I commend you.