>>Thank you Kemp, for describing, quite accurately, the failure of the current global socio-economic system.<<

As you quoted me as saying, I was describing problems with the morality of China, North Korea, Vietnam, and many other Southeastern Asian nations. The West's morality IS an alternative to that which I described. The west does NOT have your starving or your AIDS epidemic. Learn to read. Then read enough to educate yourself.

>>If not independent, self-sufficient, fully automated agri-complexes run by robots and nano-tech <<

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA You're hillarious kid.

>>(which I do still hold is possible within the next 20 years), <<

Nanotechnology doesn't exist. The technology that would be required to develop it does not exist. I've asked you more specific questions about our ability to manipulate individual atoms (which is pretty much zilch) because you're so factually wrong on the matter, but you just ignored those questions repeatedly.

>>if not a transition to a resource-based economy, then what?<<

A resource-based economy would only undo the major benefits of a monetary system, nothing else. It wouldn't magically create the resources we need.

>>What other alternatives would you suggest?  Anyone?<<

Getting a better education than your retarded ass so people can feed themselves and their families. You'd obviously not survive on your own.

It certainly has benefitted the economies of Western nations with these values. I think it's just morally repugnant the way many of these nations' governments treat their people. That's why a lot of people who've spent time in these nations and veterans have very strong views about their cultures. There are marked differences in the way they respect life. Or don't respect it, for that matter.

sure, xeno, count the ways for us

We need Steven Segal to come kick these faceless cooperation's ass

"In fact, the cause of the situation is governmental structures like those that you are proposing."

What part of NGO (NON Governmental Organization) don't you understand?

how are those failures of the monetary system? you think people couldnt get bribed with resources?

>>Oh wait it doesn't need taxes it will be free because we'll use free robots which will maintain themselves.<<

They won't maintain themselves indefinitely, but, as the benefits of having free food for all in need in the world becomes apparent to the world, I'm sure there will be no shortage of technicians willing to devote their time to maintaining them.  Universities and high schools could make the maintenance of these agri-bots part of the curriculum in robotics 101 or shop class.  An organization called 'Techies Without Borders' might help, too.  But first and foremost will be the proper design of these robots which will be built to have MINIMAL maintenance required, quite unlike the auto companies philosophy...

>>Nice vague equivocation. Can we take it further?<< 

Yes we can!

Ok.  looking forward to it Kemp

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> Why can't we  or how can we have robotic labor providing the foundation for the following?

(From other post):

1.  A resource-based economy, rather than a monetary-based economy.

2.  Having more electoral political power allotted to cities or regions, and less or no electoral political power allotted to a national government or the UN.  In short, a more decentralized distribution of electoral political power.

3.  An apolitical, completely independent, international, non-profit NGO responsible by a detailed constitution for providing basic resources necessary for ensuring the opportunity for survival and self-actualization of all people:

a) security via an internationalized emergency response force
b) housing via the internationalized mass-production and distribution of OGLUs (Off-Grid Living Units)
c) education and access to information via an internationalized and yet decentralized internet service provider accessible and transmissible by any and all OGLUs, as well as an online media database, an internationalized college of teachers, an internationalized student union, and an internationalized independent journalists' association
d) health via an internationalized health-care system and internationalized physicians' association whose services are distributed by the emergency response force and / or transportation system(f))
e) food and water via an internationalized distribution system (see transportation (f) below)
f) mass transportation via an internationalized mass-transportation network
<

Ok the first argument is where can I live?

This one flaw utterly defines the core of the argument against your entire thesis and offered plan. As I travel the United States I have seen the urban sprawl that defines the California Valleys, the rural towns in the desert of Nevada, the high rise (and way to many bridges) of New York City.

I do not like any of those. Yet my favorite would be the favorite of many, so many as to destroy what makes it special.

Then there is the issue of entertainment venues. Parks, Theaters, Pubs, Sports Centers, etc... Location is important for those as well, and trying to mandate certain 'requirements' there wont work, either your close or your not close.

So many factors would once again find that silly little thing I call the Human Factor, up in arms as perceiving the grass is greener in Oregon dammit, and I want to live there, why do they get to live there????

Another issue with your choices is another basic flaw in understanding. I take it your a Euro for the choice of mass transportation, or just ignorant. Mass transportation is the least effective, and most costly (A double punch to the chin) of all transportation types. Simply put it is not effective. In Europe there is a reason trains were seen as more effective than cars. This had to do with the number of nations there are in that area. Border Crossings were easier to monitor if it was via train instead of thousands of cars. This is why they lack as solid a road infrastructure than the United States.

Unions are there for their own desires now, not for the safety of their members. This is a corruption of the original goal of unions, and cannot be mended. As well as we have seen that Schools are so tainted here in the United States, due to a specific and singular union, as to make more and more parents home school or send their children to private school. This trend alarms educators, but eases my mind. When this union is broken and dismantled then this trend will reverse, until then each succeeding year makes it easier to reach that goal of destruction of that union.

Next location really is everything. Where are the robots going to be? Where will they mine for required goods? Where are the smelly animal farms going to be located at? You miss so many factors with gross over-simplification. In a true Utopia NO ONE wants that cow farm next door!!!!

You want smaller 'mini-governments' and yet an international armed forces. Who should contribute? What if one of these becomes pacifist? What if one attacks another but claims provocation? What about rampant crime in one affecting another?

Again your so over-simplifying the matter as to defy logic, there are so many factors involved with humans. For instance China will soon have 4-5 males per female. What will the result of this choice of aborting females and letting males get born have on the world in general?

Another issue you completely ignore with your vague ideals is religion. Islam cannot tolerate other religions, Christianity teaches others can go to hell for certain actions, and Satanism teaches people to do utter evil. More problems and issues exist than these vague statements... How bout the so called "Church" of Scientology? Wiccans? Hateful Atheists? Again vagueness will not help.

Tourism, recreation, competition, etc also are part of the downfall of your simple ideas.

In short there is no Utopia possible until you reach Heaven, if you do reach it, and any attempt to design such will ultimately fail.

feeding everyone is doable now. Just promise to kill anyone stealing food meant for others, and enforce it, even if you must kill 95% of a nations population to make sure that 5% get their fair share. There is no food shortage, just rampant corruption in some nations makes some people starve.

People do not starve in the US if they, or their parents do not wish to, they just do not try to get the help, and tons exists. Tons of donated food goes bad each year, meaning it's not getting used because need does not out strip supply.

> xeno syndicated wrote:

> "People do not starve in the US"

Because their government, military, corporations steal food from other poor countries?

1: Wow, where the hell did you pull that one from, considering the US also donates tons of food abroad, and exports tons of food?
2: No, it's called industrial agriculture, subsidies, having lots of farmland, fast food, food stamps, and non-government organizations.