It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How would you fix the world?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:07 AM
Ok I'm putting the age old question out their. As we come to the end of the year 2011, what mechanisms could we put in place to make the world a better place?

To get the ball rolling.

1. Bell Curves Wealth and Bell Curve Income

Normal / Natural distribution curves appear everywhere in nature. Suppose this was applied to net wealth as well as net income for every person on the planet? Every person within a country would be between 4 sigmas of the average wealth in the country. Every person would also be within 4 sigma of the average income in their country.

Advantages: removes unlimited greed, yet doesn't make the mistake of a uniform distrubution curve where everyone gets the same even if they don't contribute as much, or they are lazy. It pegs the most powerful people in the country (decision makers, CEOs etc) to share the pain of rising costs of living.

I'm fairly certain, the normal distribution curve could be used to drive the human race forward. Though my only question to the ATS folks out there, how would you decide who gets to be in the 3 sigma to 4 sigma bracket? What do we value the most? What are the key drivers (set of criteria) that we should be looking at to determine who are the highest paid members of society?

2. Education of Women.

The education of women is apparently the most effective way to reduce / slow down overpopulation. Women can go on to further education, get a career, experience life and then latter on in life settle down and start a family (that hopefully is not as big).

But how do you get the governments of the world to invest more in this. For instance by reducing military spending? (or at the very least a 5% of military spending).

Anyway, will be very interested to find other peoples ideas to fix the world?

edit on 28-11-2011 by superbuker because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:08 AM
I haven't read your entire post yet but - Education of women to stop over population? I mean, I guess that makes sense if they were being educated about over population but I doubt that birth rates would slow down just because the typical american women has now become "busy".

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:16 AM
with the earths limited resources and our population rising faster than ever i think we're screwed.
to save humanity we need to start colonizing our solar system now......whoops too late, we're screwed.
i dont think there is a way to quick fix our world, we're all victims of our own and other peoples greed and paranoia.
edit on 28/11/2011 by listerofsmeg because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:31 AM
The problem is, and believe me I'm not trying to be sexist is that when women entered the workforce in large numbers in the eighties it really changed the economy in a big way. For the next twenty years duel income families were pulling in twice as much money as was required to pay for living at the time.

This caused a few problems

1. The filling of jobs faster than they can open leading to higher unemployment.
2. Income inequality. Duel income families made more than single income families.
3. A battle of the sexes in the workplace that still rages on to this day.

I'm not against women in the workforce in general but the problem overall is we need to correct certain things in the way income is distributed.
Now it is required to have two incomes in household or else it is next to impossible le to make ends meet. This creates problems for a few reasons.
1. Single parents cannot afford to live, even if their income is sound.
2. Single income families have a harder time obtaining mortgages, credit and loans
3. Many families cannot obtain a second income due to high unemployment.

Most duel incomes families have higher incomes and usually they have less children. This is all fine and good but its been well documented that most of these families are under more stress and generally higher rates of family/relationship issues.
single income families are barely able to survive. Single parents can barely get by.

I say we go to a system where you are only allowed one income per household. Doesn't matter if it is the man or women. Its whoever can make more. The other parent can take care of the errands and housework and raising of the offspring.

Some of the problems currently facing society is because if the duel income bubble in the eighties. Children are getting less guidance from their parents. Many kids leaving home knowing how to do absolutely nothing for themselves. Many never get to observe their parents in a proper family setting and have no idea how a family is supposed to interact. Many observe unhealthy family settings due to the increased stress from two working parents and tons of people from the last few generation observed the massive numbers of divorces that has been popular in the last few decades.

Basically the newer generations have no idea how to do housework, do finances, deal with family issues properly, care for a child, deal with responsibility etc. These are all skills that the majority of people knew by the age of eighteen just a few decades prior. I think this is largely due to there being an absence of parents at home.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:36 AM
A benevolent dictatorship.

This means:

1. One ruler until death.
2. The ruler only acts as a spokesperson for the country. The people are the ones that decide.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:42 AM
Go ahead and get ww3 out the way. Then start fresh.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 08:50 AM
reply to post by WarJohn

Honestly that's what I was thinking.

We have too many useless eaters in society that cost hundreds of billions of dollars yearly to keep these people alive.alive. many of these people (not all) then contribute to other money wasting things such as crime, drug induced lifestyles etc.

The other problem is peoples mindsets. Many people feel there is nothing wrong with the world. Many people are heavy wasters of resources. Many conduct their lifestyles in counter productive ways. There is no hope to cure even a small percentage of this behavior. If we all the sudden were forced to correct certain bahaviours in society it would cause more problems than we are trying to fix.

I just don't see and real way out of this unless we
A. Start fixing the mindset of the newer generations from birth or
B. Destroy a huge chunk of human population

The problem is we can trust human beings enough to be responsible to set the new generations on a good path so option B seems like the only viable one.

Humans who are set in their ways will never change them. Its impossible at this point. We have let it go for far too long.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 09:02 AM
In the words of ozzy Osbourne

"I don't want to change the world, I don't want the world to change me"

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 09:15 AM
Wipe out ALL of humanity...
And yes, i'm being serious

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 09:25 AM
How about we stop trying to deal with symptoms, and treat the underlying cause of our predicament - the market/monetary system. It needs to go. It's long since out-lived its usefulness and has now become a veritable cancer that will, without a doubt, destroy the human family.

We have the technology and know-how to live in a world of abundance. We need to start working together, and stop this useless competitive mindset where we all have to chip off of each other to survive. It's ridiculous. Our technology has far surpassed our antiquated social constructs.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 09:48 AM
If I could I would ...

make an announcement to the world that-

America is pulling all of it's military back home and leaving all countries to deal with their own affairs.

Urge all the other countries of the world to do the same. If they do, thats cool, if they don't thats cool.

The point is to set an example.

At that point, address the American people that for the first time in History we are going to make a push from a country in a state of war to a state of peace. Tell them that the transition will not be easy.

Sink all the money that we had been spending on defense into green and renewable energy, space exploration-not weaponization, paying off our debts, even if its only a little at a time, its that the world sees us making an effort...

I think that would be a good start.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 10:46 AM
reply to post by Jepic

A country mascot with no power? And that fixes the problems how?

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 10:55 AM
Put everyone to sleep for say 3 days inside and outside Earth why keeping them intranced they will feed off of parna energy provided then capture ALL the evol leaders of earth in the hidding locations observed from SOL distance and take them somewhere to, Discuss their energy mismanagment. Once complete awaken everyone with a mental message embedded into their conscious to WORK as a EARTH FAMILY the previous Earth inhabitant caretakers are
-DISCUSSING- in another realm of existence.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 11:23 AM
reply to post by MedicWithUber

This. Stop wasting huge amounts of wealth and manpower on pointless wars. Let them even have the A-bomb. Last military thing I would do is to build ICBM shield that will protect the whole western world from eventual nuclear strike (from Iran and Israel, which may get angry, since we will stop any help to them until they dont stop the oppression of palestinians), slash the military spending and then start a policy of complete non-interventionism and isolationism (but that goes both ways - no more mass immigration into the western world from the third and arab world allowed, until they leave their extremist religion and backwards culture).

Then we will phase out fossil fuels by fast development and deployment of the LFTR and IFR nuclear reactors and electric cars or synthetic fuels. This expensive and large Moonrace style program would also fix the economic crisis, along with other economic and legislative reforms all over the world.
Renewables may also contribute, but I doubt they will be enough for more than a fraction of our energy needs, especially when fossil fuels need to be phased out.
After that, expand into space.

edit on 28/11/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 11:32 AM
How would I fix the world?

I would pretty much cut the loses and have countries be isolated from each other till they can play nice with one another. That means that while some countries would end up languishing in suffering, others would explode and excel. Isolationism, would force a country to deal with its own problems first, before dealing with others. Countries like the Eurozone would go the way of the dodo.

No more too big to fail concepts, if it fails, it fails or succeeds on its own merits, not fail and be supported by the general public. Start encouraging partnerships, and limited ownership of businesses, to limit the risk to the society on a whole. Would also mean that people would have greater job security.

And go back to some of the lessons from the prior generation about doing for ourselves, and doing things, like growing our own food, rather than rely on someone else to do such.

Bring back competition in the workforce and society. And focus on agricultural aspects, where food production is as important as technological innovations.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 11:50 AM
I would talk the CEOs the inventors and artists to go on strike, the REAL people that keep society moving that fraction of 1%

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 11:54 AM
Although the right to assemble peacefully seems beneficial, such assemblies easily turn into mobs which become violent from the instigation of a few troublemakers. These protests- Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Oakland, etc.- likely serve as premonitors of future anarchy when people become really angry about the deterioration of US society. There are some 80 million Boomers, and when they discover that Social Security and Medicare are not there for them as they expected they will be irate.

Of greater importance than the right of assembly is the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. But first people must determine what, exactly, they are aggrieved about: A disparity of wealth? Nothing unusual about this. In the so-called "Banana Republics" of South/Central America, 10% of the population have 90% of the wealth, and the other 90% have the remaining 10%. For a society to be healthy there must be a large middle class which is upwardly mobile. Due to greed, which seems to characterize U.S. society in particular, we are turning into a Banana Republic: the middle class is being wiped out- the larger percentage is downwardly mobile. Blame it on an ignorant/gullible electorate, career politicians and intrusive government: the bottom line is DEMOCRACY DOES NOT WORK.

What is ludicrous about the elective process was the recent popularity of Herman Cain (now fading fast), whose "999" proposal for a national sales tax would hit the middle class the hardest. It wouldn't surprise me if he is out of the race by the end of the year.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Jepic

A country mascot with no power? And that fixes the problems how?

Well can't you see how?
No more corruption, no more wars, no more poverty, etc... unless you the people decide otherwise.

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 12:18 PM
Some good thoughts in this thread.

I think the solution is exchanging ideas through Public Forums

posted on Nov, 28 2011 @ 12:19 PM
Round up all the top-key banksters, politicians, cfr, trilateral commission members with any one who has ever attended a bilderberg or bohemian grove meeting and drop them off on a remote island, preferably Bikini Atoll.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in