$5 Million Prize For Reimagining Global Governance

a reply to: amazing

We're kind of already there. ...the individual players like the US< UK, France, Russia, China...etc. That's who controls and influences the world.

I agree that we're already there but don't agree with your analysis. Seems clear to me that the bankers and corporate powers rule the world by controlling national governments.

And the whole point of this contest is that the system is not working - the goal is to find other options.

a reply to: soficrow


Thanks for the post - completed my registration. I will create a post into ATS if they think I've got it right (and possibly if I didn't)

a reply to: soficrow

Interesting thread.

Whatever idea Swedish billionaire László Szombatfalvy, is willing to accept, Peace on earth is the last thing the elite will except.

The fact is, TPTB will never give up their power and greed for a better future so what is the point?

Fact is, for a new entire system for the good of the people, cannot happen until the old system is destroyed.

However, I do like the idea of a new global system that has the best interests for the people.

a reply to: Informer1958

...Fact is, for a new entire system for the good of the people, cannot happen until the old system is destroyed.

True that.

However, I do like the idea of a new global system that has the best interests for the people.

Me2.

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: amazing

We're kind of already there. ...the individual players like the US< UK, France, Russia, China...etc. That's who controls and influences the world.

I agree that we're already there but don't agree with your analysis. Seems clear to me that the bankers and corporate powers rule the world by controlling national governments.

And the whole point of this contest is that the system is not working - the goal is to find other options.

What better way than a basic copy of the USA but with some safeguards...updated constitution, to make sure bankers, corporations, get power.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: amazing

We're kind of already there. ...the individual players like the US< UK, France, Russia, China...etc. That's who controls and influences the world.

I agree that we're already there but don't agree with your analysis. Seems clear to me that the bankers and corporate powers rule the world by controlling national governments.

And the whole point of this contest is that the system is not working - the goal is to find other options.

What better way than a basic copy of the USA but with some safeguards...updated constitution, to make sure bankers, corporations, get power.

My ideas are simple....return to some of the old ways of doing things. For instance the ground fish stocks in the oceans have been depleted to a very dangerous level. One simple rule would fix the problem and never allow it to happen again. All fishing most be done with hand lines or hand nets. No mechanical fish harvesting allowed. That way more people would have the enjoyment of fishing and they could be sure of having plenty of fish to catch.

Most if not all of the problems facing humanity in regard to pollution and over harvesting could be solved by going back to old ways. Why reinvent the wheel when the wheels we had worked fine ? These ways would also foster a closer relationship with nature and a greater respect for the earth. Which is critical to the advancement of the human race. Newer technology as a general rule moves us further from a healthy interaction with nature and that IMO is never a good thing.

a reply to: HarryJoy

You do realize that most of the world does live simply, and "close to nature"?



[oops. Might be out-of-date re: urbanization. but.]

a reply to: soficrow

That may be true...but they are not the part that is running things and having the negative impact on the world. And they are most likely the happiest and most content part.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Most likely true.

But given that we can't turn back the clock and stop it, we might as well make the coming transition a matter of conscious choice.

originally posted by: HarryJoy
My ideas are simple....return to some of the old ways of doing things. For instance the ground fish stocks in the oceans have been depleted to a very dangerous level. One simple rule would fix the problem and never allow it to happen again. All fishing most be done with hand lines or hand nets. No mechanical fish harvesting allowed. That way more people would have the enjoyment of fishing and they could be sure of having plenty of fish to catch.

Most if not all of the problems facing humanity in regard to pollution and over harvesting could be solved by going back to old ways. Why reinvent the wheel when the wheels we had worked fine ? These ways would also foster a closer relationship with nature and a greater respect for the earth. Which is critical to the advancement of the human race. Newer technology as a general rule moves us further from a healthy interaction with nature and that IMO is never a good thing.

About the only way this generalized approach would become at all realistic is if se half the global population were 'disappeared'.

a reply to: soficrow

Well....we could certainly go back to whatever we wanted to. I do realize that a lot of people like technology and most businesses are pushing toward advancements in materials and design. But is it really going to give us more fulfilling lives ? We could create a system that uses a lot more aspects of the past and keeps some of the benefits of the present. Life is about sensory experience and I think the past offered more of that then the present. Mainly due to the fact that we are replacing real experiences with artificial ones. The earth is our greatest gift and technology generally takes us further away from interaction with it. Nature presents more diversity and variety than anything that man can create....and for the most part we are oblivious to it. I guess that's about all I can say about it.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Take this idea that people can only eat fish if they go out in the ocean with a boat and catch it themselves. Now only people that can afford a boat and the myriad of details that go with it will ever get to eat fish.

Well they can still eat beef right? Apply your logic to they can only eat beef if they grow and butcher their own cow. Now they have to be able to afford the space and the details to grow a cow...

The people in cities, what do they get to eat? Well there are a lot of 'extra' other people around...

originally posted by: HarryJoy
a reply to: soficrow

Well....we could certainly go back to whatever we wanted to. I do realize that a lot of people like technology and most businesses are pushing toward advancements in materials and design. But is it really going to give us more fulfilling lives ? We could create a system that uses a lot more aspects of the past and keeps some of the benefits of the present. Life is about sensory experience and I think the past offered more of that then the present. Mainly due to the fact that we are replacing real experiences with artificial ones. The earth is our greatest gift and technology generally takes us further away from interaction with it. Nature presents more diversity and variety than anything that man can create....and for the most part we are oblivious to it. I guess that's about all I can say about it.

I agree. Wholeheartedly. With the qualification that there is no way to prevent automation and the removal of people from the productive economy. So another system must be put in place - either as a replacement or 'companion.'

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I said that about fishing because that would be a guaranteed way to prevent the oceans from being over fished....and in the present system there is a lot of waste and over production. How much fish do you think is thrown away every year?

I think we could create a system where everyone had the opportunity to go fishing if they wanted. We have to think outside the box if the problems are going to get fixed.

The vast majority of things being produced in the current system are totally unnecessary. If we focused on producing only those things that were necessary. There would be plenty of time for people to take trips to the oceans and go fishing.

But we have to basically start a new system that would be setup right and separated from the current system. Then we would grow the new system until it assimilated everyone from the current one. Dismantling the current one in the process.

It certainly wouldn't be an 'overnight' process but it could be done.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Yeah about the fish "Bycatch". I was watching that one shrimpboat reality show once, and was shocked all that meat they were dumping overboard.

www.npr.org...

It comes down to an industry not built for it, I guess.

When I saw it being dumped I envisioned 'good' stuff in there people would want (and possibly lesser fish for poorer folks). I also envisioned it as feed tor cats (convert the bulk of the cat food industry over to this source) possibly dogs and other 'large' pets, feed for aquaculture (fish farms), feed for livestock (hogs, alligators), and fish meal for produce farmers.

Beyond what was obvious to me, I dont know enough about the rest of the details to 'fix' it. Definitely room for improvements there.

The types of engineers that have been designing the mass scale recycling plants (where all the stuff from the 'blue bins' goes) might be the ones to set to task on this front...

But your initial concept, people in Nebraska would never get a have a fish fry. But more importantly unless we're gong to start blowing up other countries for not complying, then we need to pioneer new world industry methods that make enough sense they'd have to be morons not to follow suit.

The vast majority of things being produced in the current system are totally unnecessary. If we focused on producing only those things that were necessary. There would be plenty of time for people to take trips to the oceans and go fishing.

Or there'd be even less money floating around in the economy, thus preventing even more people the economic means to afford se canepoles, let alone even get to the shoreline.

It's not to say there isn't abdurd waste on that front, but in light of this 'fish problem' it doesn't help this new model you're pondering.

a reply to: HarryJoy

The vast majority of things being produced in the current system are totally unnecessary.

True. Looks to me like most consumer products are produced and released to suck the masses into financing the transition. After which....

I dont have time to go thru the hoops.....but for someone who does........its all about the NAME......everyone one on earth must have a NAME from birth and WE ALL MUST KNOW IT.....and that NAME has global humanitarian influence attatched to it....without these NAMES on a GLOBAL SCALE...we can NEVER PRODUCE A TRUE DEMOCRACY.......and TPTB know this very very well.......what I am saying is that if we NAME AND RECOGNISE people we PLACE VALUE ON THEM......if we know when they are born and when they die we can properly recognise and aknowledge and respect them.

Once we have the NAMES....borders become invisible baseless and history.......once we have the NAMES we can for the 1st time in recognised human history action a Global Democracy based on true humanitarian wishes....the wrinkles will work themselves out at light speed........good luck with the inventory because this disconnect is the keystone to TPTB rule over us all.

I could go on and on.....maybe some young person will get the gist of this.....lol.....I dont have time now.

a reply to: DBCowboy

All nations are to have "dance-off's" instead of wars.

No fair , everybody knows white men cant dance .

a reply to: soficrow

Let the Wookie win.

I'll take that 5 mill in cold hard cash thanks!