|
|
Post by Caylus Ark on Jul 28, 2016 9:33:31 GMT
4) do not apply capitalism to biology (big food corp and big pharma should NOT be allowed to make people sick based on free market principles, and children should not be prescribed antipsychotics because psychiatrists are subsidized by pharma and insurance to prescribe psychoactive meds instead of expensive behavioral therapy)
|
|
|
|
Post by OYE on Jul 28, 2016 9:33:33 GMT
What are 3 ways to make things better? 1) abolish the two party system 2) abolish tenure for public school teachers that allow really shitass teachers to never be fired 3) stop allowing corporations to fund political campaigns through 'political action committees' You are not thinking Grande enough babes |
|
|
|
Post by Caylus Ark on Jul 28, 2016 9:40:02 GMT
1) abolish the two party system 2) abolish tenure for public school teachers that allow really shitass teachers to never be fired 3) stop allowing corporations to fund political campaigns through 'political action committees' You are not thinking Grande enough babes What would your three things be? |
|
|
|
Post by OYE on Jul 28, 2016 9:46:15 GMT
You are not thinking Grande enough babes What would your three things be? Let me sleep on it.. and I will provide a real good answer tomorrow I really want to think about it |
|
|
|
Post by Caylus Ark on Jul 28, 2016 9:47:13 GMT
What would your three things be? Let me sleep on it.. and I will provide a real good answer tomorrow I really want to think about it Fair enough brosky |
|
|
|
Post by OYE on Jul 28, 2016 9:48:11 GMT
Let me sleep on it.. and I will provide a real good answer tomorrow I really want to think about it Fair enough brosky Cheers.. you really weren't drinking tonight were yah |
|
|
|
Post by OYE on Jul 28, 2016 9:51:33 GMT
Here is my answer..
1. Currency System based on Merit
2. Incentives based on rewarding behaviors to built society towards the new society (this answer gets very detailed)
3. Controlling Time/Dimensions/Frequencies of Earth
|
|
|
|
Post by Harold Stevens on Jul 28, 2016 9:55:23 GMT
4) do not apply capitalism to biology (big food corp and big pharma should NOT be allowed to make people sick based on free market principles, and children should not be prescribed antipsychotics because psychiatrists are subsidized by pharma and insurance to prescribe psychoactive meds instead of expensive behavioral therapy) Those are 4 pretty good answers. (got any more?) Who would pay for expensive behavioral therapy (or part of your theory is that better fundamental teaching and societal awareness would lessen the existence of behavioral problems? Also #3 Why should corporations not have a major say in government? What is more important than the well being of corporations? The well being of corporations is nessacery for the well being of individuals and therefore the nation; most value in the world is produced by corporation |
|
|
|
Post by Eric on Jul 28, 2016 9:59:16 GMT
Let me sleep on it.. and I will provide a real good answer tomorrow I really want to think about it Fair enough brosky What are you drinking, and what are your favorite drinks? |
|
|
|
Post by Caylus Ark on Jul 28, 2016 10:26:15 GMT
Harold Eric Stevens, I'll answer your questions tomorrow. I'm quite tired, it's like 3:25am here. hehe. And yes Alex I was drinking, but, sobered up pretty quick in light of the conversation. Lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by :-) on Jul 28, 2016 10:30:51 GMT
Harold Eric Stevens, I'll answer your questions tomorrow. I'm quite tired, it's like 3:25am here. hehe. And yes Alex I was drinking, but, sobered up pretty quick in light of the conversation. Lol. Sweetest dreams |
|
|
|
Post by Therin on Jul 28, 2016 10:33:56 GMT
Harold Eric Stevens, I'll answer your questions tomorrow. I'm quite tired, it's like 3:25am here. hehe. And yes Alex I was drinking, but, sobered up pretty quick in light of the conversation. Lol. Good night, Imperatrix. |
|
|
|
Post by Rufus Duntschmear on Jul 28, 2016 22:01:31 GMT
4) do not apply capitalism to biology (big food corp and big pharma should NOT be allowed to make people sick based on free market principles, and children should not be prescribed antipsychotics because psychiatrists are subsidized by pharma and insurance to prescribe psychoactive meds instead of expensive behavioral therapy) Also #3 Why should corporations not have a major say in government? What is more important than the well being of corporations? The well being of corporations is nessacery for the well being of individuals and therefore the nation; most value in the world is produced by corporation |
|
|
|
Post by Caylus Ark on Jul 28, 2016 22:04:46 GMT
The reason corporations should not have a major say is simple. It is called "conflict of interest". A government can represent its people, the public, that is the commonwealth - or it can represent its "shareholders" - that is, the vast minority of very wealthy elite, the 1%. But it can't represent the interests of both, fairly. It is very, very important that there is enough transparency for the public to have the ability to determine when its government is no longer representing it. Now, there is no choice for the commonwealth. All who run, run on behalf of the "machine". Our system of checks and balances have failed us. Do you want to know how much money is allotted for the government bureau representing the interests of corporations? As if they were people? Billions. And look up the amount given to the bureau that looks into the interests of consumers. It is absolutely paltry. The conflict of interest here, is very obvious. What is best for the shareholders, the stockholders, is NOT necessarily what's best for the vast majority, the public. We are largely not stockholders, and the health of the stockmarket does not mean there is high quality of life for us, low unemployment, or high social mobility. Still, there is a tiny group of people leeching the life out of extremely powerful assets which back them legally and make them even more money by draining the economic and natural resources of our country and others. Does that tiny group represent the public's interest? Does that tiny group care about the destruction they cause the commonwealth? I very much doubt this, but those who want an oligarchy already have one. Me, I believe the shareholders of a government should be the public, rather than having our government devolve into a stock exchange whether the vast majority of power is held by those with ownership of the shares, ie the wealthy elite. Politics is not a commodity, and bad things happen when you treat people like objects. Economics needs to be kept in its proper arena, like biology does. |
|
|
|
Post by Caylus Ark on Jul 28, 2016 22:11:21 GMT
4) do not apply capitalism to biology (big food corp and big pharma should NOT be allowed to make people sick based on free market principles, and children should not be prescribed antipsychotics because psychiatrists are subsidized by pharma and insurance to prescribe psychoactive meds instead of expensive behavioral therapy) Those are 4 pretty good answers. (got any more?) Who would pay for expensive behavioral therapy (or part of your theory is that better fundamental teaching and societal awareness would lessen the existence of behavioral problems? Also #3 Why should corporations not have a major say in government? What is more important than the well being of corporations? The well being of corporations is nessacery for the well being of individuals and therefore the nation; most value in the world is produced by corporation I believe that the influx of children with complex mental disorders is an unnatural product of a society highly over stimulating and over saturated, and if society were fixed, we would not have this problem. Also, I believe mental illness can be treated with a change in perspective, understand its nature systemically as the process of a natural system gone haywire rather then a fundamentally diseased person who needs their biochemistry altered to be 'normal'. |
|
|
|
Post by Caylus for pres on Jul 28, 2016 22:16:23 GMT
The reason corporations should not have a major say is simple. It is called "conflict of interest". A government can represent its people, the public, that is the commonwealth - or it can represent its "shareholders" - that is, the vast minority of very wealthy elite, the 1%. But it can't represent the interests of both, fairly. It is very, very important that there is enough transparency for the public to have the ability to determine when its government is no longer representing it. Now, there is no choice for the commonwealth. All who run, run on behalf of the "machine". Our system of checks and balances have failed us. Do you want to know how much money is allotted for the government bureau representing the interests of corporations? As if they were people? Billions. And look up the amount given to the bureau that looks into the interests of consumers. It is absolutely paltry. The conflict of interest here, is very obvious. What is best for the shareholders, the stockholders, is NOT necessarily what's best for the vast majority, the public. We are largely not stockholders, and the health of the stockmarket does not mean there is high quality of life for us, low unemployment, or high social mobility. Still, there is a tiny group of people leeching the life out of extremely powerful assets which back them legally and make them even more money by draining the economic and natural resources of our country and others. Does that tiny group represent the public's interest? Does that tiny group care about the destruction they cause the commonwealth? I very much doubt this, but those who want an oligarchy already have one. Me, I believe the shareholders of a government should be the public, rather than having our government devolve into a stock exchange whether the vast majority of power is held by those with ownership of the shares, ie the wealthy elite. Politics is not a commodity, and bad things happen when you treat people like objects. Economics needs to be kept in its proper arena, like biology does. Bravo |
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 29, 2016 0:34:28 GMT
The reason corporations should not have a major say is simple. It is called "conflict of interest". A government can represent its people, the public, that is the commonwealth - or it can represent its "shareholders" - that is, the vast minority of very wealthy elite, the 1%. But it can't represent the interests of both, fairly. It is very, very important that there is enough transparency for the public to have the ability to determine when its government is no longer representing it. Now, there is no choice for the commonwealth. All who run, run on behalf of the "machine". Our system of checks and balances have failed us. Do you want to know how much money is allotted for the government bureau representing the interests of corporations? As if they were people? Billions. And look up the amount given to the bureau that looks into the interests of consumers. It is absolutely paltry. The conflict of interest here, is very obvious. What is best for the shareholders, the stockholders, is NOT necessarily what's best for the vast majority, the public. We are largely not stockholders, and the health of the stockmarket does not mean there is high quality of life for us, low unemployment, or high social mobility. Still, there is a tiny group of people leeching the life out of extremely powerful assets which back them legally and make them even more money by draining the economic and natural resources of our country and others. Does that tiny group represent the public's interest? Does that tiny group care about the destruction they cause the commonwealth? I very much doubt this, but those who want an oligarchy already have one. Me, I believe the shareholders of a government should be the public, rather than having our government devolve into a stock exchange whether the vast majority of power is held by those with ownership of the shares, ie the wealthy elite. Politics is not a commodity, and bad things happen when you treat people like objects. Economics needs to be kept in its proper arena, like biology does. Tried to get into stockmarket gambling once. Failed miserably. I rather buy Krugerrands. Been debt-free since three years now. But I pretty much had fun with the excess monnies. |
|
