Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 06:26:36 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Correct way to create world government  (Read 2359 times)
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
March 17, 2012, 05:52:28 PM
 #21

Oh and I'm especially not going to waste my time if you can't even see the various regulations and constraints the Bitcoin free market continually places on itself, or are you going to claim that people anonymously offering services for bitcoins somehow aren't regulated or contrained by the free market and can do what ever they like? Is SR unregulated and unconstrained? Can merchants there do what ever the hell they want?

Like I said, some of this is just plain common sense.

Bitcoins are simple. There is a limit on their population. Period. Stupid people can understand that.

Production within the biosphere is not simple. Stupid people don't understand that. Period.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481221596
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481221596

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481221596
Reply with quote  #2

1481221596
Report to moderator
hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
March 17, 2012, 05:59:16 PM
 #22

Are you are troll?

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
March 17, 2012, 06:06:49 PM
 #23

Are you are troll?

I am someone trying to provide you with more information than you currently possess within the context of your decision making process that drives your belief system. Given more information, you will be forced to put your political ideologies to more rigorous tests.

Where do you want to start? The wolf/rancher conflict? Global fish haul? Climate change? Biodiversity? Edge effects? Honeybees? Sumatran rhino horns? Riparian zones? Whaling?
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
March 17, 2012, 06:17:31 PM
 #24

Bitcoins are simple. There is a limit on their population. Period. Stupid people can understand that.

Production within the biosphere is not simple. Stupid people don't understand that. Period.

Let me add to what I said quoted above so you understand that it is not an insult, but a antecedent which leads to a consequent.

Bitcoins don't serve as a model of what happens in the real world because they are simple to understand. No matter the intelligence level of Bitcoin participants, they basically get it and so the process works.

Within the context of the biosphere which supports us, there are plenty of participants who do not understand the complexities of the processes within the biosphere which produce our natural capital. Unfortunately then there are plenty of participants who don't know when to stop, or what all the ramifications are.

Conclusion: Bitcoins do not serve as an applicable model of free markets.
BenRayfield
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 262



View Profile WWW
March 17, 2012, 08:29:00 PM
 #25

It is going to occur and we will probably see it materialize within the next 7 to 10 years.

Not 7 to 10 years. Maybe 70 to 100 years.

It has it's disadvantages and advantages. Probably the best advantage is near complete elimination of wars. If it was like the U.S., with countries acting like states, it might work.

It would result in less or no wars between countries but a certainty of a violent revolution from many of the 7 billion enslaved people. For this reason, they will pretend to be separate countries as long as possible, while still creating the same laws regardless of our votes.

A world government is something I wanted when I have still been naive too, but seriously, look at how society works. Usually smaller societies work far better than bigger.

If a small society wants to create big weapons and believe in a god that says all nonbelievers must die, or many other possible motivations to kill people, what must the other small societies do?

Quote
A world government is stupid, because  even if thinks look like they would be more efficient they are not. The opposite is true. We actually should split things.

You're thinking of a global dictatorship. That's not what I mean. In a real democracy, we could vote to give more choices to local groups.

Quote
I know that's exactly the opposite of what most of us always thought to be the truth, but simply look at sizes of countries and then tell me that bigger countries are doing better. Simply not true. Big organizations have big problems.

As we network our thoughts together through the Internet, we will find very unexpected solutions to those kinds of problems, but we have to communicate globally and have people take those global things seriously first.

Quote
Also, you are making a mistake if you think that there is something like a good politician or a good government. The thing is not only that you can't measure it in first place, but also that even if there is a politician where most of us could agree on to be good or at least not too bad it really depends on time and society. The best democrat may be the worst thing for the world tomorrow or would have been a few hundred years ago, maybe would even have prevented democracy from coming to existence.

Maybe I shouldn't have called it "government". I'll call it "way the world will start to work" instead.

The idea of a politician is the idea that someone should be above someone else. We should be 7 billion equals and organize things based on what the most people agree on. That is not any existing kind of democracy. Its not a republic or direct democracy. Its the reason Wikipedia works.

Quote
Its also a bad option in an evolutionary sense. More small, individual, independent countries mean more experiments on government technology or in a biological sense a bigger gene pool.

Also it is the extreme form of centralization and I think most of us can agree that that's bad.

Agreed, variety is good for evolution. That is a problem of monopolies and cartels (the weaker form of monopoly). We'll get rid of those ways of organizing things because its not useful to the Human species overall. Governments as we understand them today are the most extreme form of monopoly so far, and we can't allow them to monopolize all the power on Earth into a dictatorship. Instead, we should spread power between we-the-7-billion-people.

Quote
Also, if you have to care about the whole world you will act way too abstract which of course is really bad in a lot of ways.

I have some plans on a practical level too, which I saw the need for from my years of abstract thinking. They involve networking our thoughts together with the help of artificial intelligence.

Also, you need people who think very abstractly toward a better world for everyone instead of their own (or their country's, or their global dictatorship's) pockets and try to convince others its a good idea instead of motivating them with threats as governments do.

Quote
A better alternative would be the emancipation of people weakening the need for a government, so it at least has less to do.

Thats what this thread is about, but if I didn't call it "government" then most people wouldn't understand that its a replacement for how the world is organized now.

Quote
People work better on making the world better, when they are not bound to anything, be it the world of politic, time, money or whatever.

Yes. Its 1 of the reasons open source works, and things like the "Global Decentralization Process" which I wrote about here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=59897.0

The great think about the way bitcoin works is that people have to participate in the process to be rewarded.  But those that are rewarded are not guaranteed a reward.  They more mining someone does then the higher the probability of that person being compensated with bitcoins.  The political process should be the same way.  The more work a person puts into the process the more likely they should be chosen to make the decisions for the process.

Lets think about applying that to some processes to see how it would work:

Governments have been taxing everyone for all of recorded history, so they should continue to get to choose how we are taxed instead of, what was that thing... oh yeah, democracy, government by the people.

A stalker is involved very much in the process of someone else's life. That stalker should get to make some of their choices for them.

The central bank system was involved very much in the recent near global economy crashes, so they should continue to get to make choices for the global economy.

Clearly putting in time and work isn't the way it should be measured. Instead, measure it by who improved things the most.

Within the context of the biosphere which supports us, there are plenty of participants who do not understand the complexities of the processes within the biosphere which produce our natural capital. Unfortunately then there are plenty of participants who don't know when to stop, or what all the ramifications are.

Conclusion: Bitcoins do not serve as an applicable model of free markets.

This gets to the root of the problem with money. It amplifies the motivations in people toward locally and short-term improvements at the cost of long-term and large scale improvements which would be more efficient overall for the Human species if people didn't keep defecting in variations of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma in the many ways the world works. This doesn't mean we should or should not get rid of money, just that we should be aware of what it causes so we can better design new ways for the world to work.

All my writing, here or anywhere else, permission granted to copy.
check_status
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


Web Dev, Db Admin, Computer Technician


View Profile
March 17, 2012, 10:59:27 PM
 #26

3
It is going to occur and we will probably see it materialize within the next 7 to 10 years.

Not 7 to 10 years. Maybe 70 to 100 years.
I calculate that number from the return of Jesus Christ, which will occur in 2034'-2036'.
14 years of government before the return, and that leaves 7-10 years from 2012.
David Rockefeller has been planning a single global currency since the 30's, if his father hadn't been before. You wouldn't plan a global currency without a global governance.

It has it's disadvantages and advantages. Probably the best advantage is near complete elimination of wars. If it was like the U.S., with countries acting like states, it might work.
How does a single ruler or group of rulers from a global government put down insurrection when it occurs on a country wide scale? It will be war. A world governance sending troops to quell the rebellion.

IMO, the world government rule will likely be a socialist style dictatorship, an imperial rule, if the likes of David Rockefeller and others of his ilk are successful. They are staunchly anti-christian, in fact, much of your perspective matches their views. Christianity will most likely suffer like it did during the rain of Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. 1/3 of the population of the world are christians, so a lot of room to make room.

For Bitcoin to be a true global currency the value of BTC needs always to rise.
If BTC became the global currency & money supply = 100 Trillion then ⊅1.00 BTC = $4,761,904.76.
P2Pool Server List | How To's and Guides Mega List |  1EndfedSryGUZK9sPrdvxHntYzv2EBexGA
BenRayfield
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 262



View Profile WWW
March 17, 2012, 11:57:30 PM
 #27

A one world government is the agenda of the mega wealthy, not individual countries or their populace. When you are mega wealthy it is costing you money to keep track of international laws to ensure your businesses continue to earn without interference or incurring more costs. A one world government would have one set of laws for all, one currency for all, and therefore improve their bottom line. A fascist dictator as a ruler they control to do as they please is their ideal, while an American style republic is anathema to their goals. It is about more control not more freedom.

That's why we have to make sure a majority of people agrees that the people are above government and government only gets to make laws, fight wars, or anything else they do, if we the people approve of it. This is why we need free open source peer to peer (no central authority) secure technology (like Bitcoin, plus some identity hardware) to count votes in anything we want to vote on. We tried letting governments control what we're allowed to vote on, and they constantly abuse the power.

I calculate that number from the return of Jesus Christ, which will occur in 2034'-2036'.
14 years of government before the return, and that leaves 7-10 years from 2012.

No prophecies are needed to see whats happening globally.

While I don't know what happened those thousands of years ago, anyone waiting for Jesus to come solve their problems for them should remember that he said (not these exact words but this was the general idea) we are all in gods image and that everything he has done we will learn to do. Either way, we can solve our own problems.

All my writing, here or anywhere else, permission granted to copy.
anu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


P2P Everything


View Profile WWW
March 20, 2012, 01:48:54 PM
 #28

Umm, if we don't like this world government, we can just leave, right?

There is no way to put it any better!

Zero Reserve - A distributed Bitcoin Exchange

Install - Getting Started - BitcoinTalk Thread - Github Source
BenRayfield
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 262



View Profile WWW
March 22, 2012, 12:51:41 AM
 #29

If we don't like how Interpol and other international organizations now act as departments in our world government, we can just leave Interpol, right?

The question isn't if we want world government or not. The question is why haven't we been asked to vote in it?

All my writing, here or anywhere else, permission granted to copy.
hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
March 22, 2012, 01:37:31 AM
 #30

Vote? Nice joke.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHToX01ITno

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
Kettenmonster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


bool eval(bool b){return b ? b==true : b==false;}


View Profile
March 25, 2012, 10:02:25 AM
 #31

... we are all in gods image and that everything he has done we will learn to do. Either way, we can solve our own problems.
For the moment (a very short moment in the sense of global history) the majority believes in at most one god. So we can learn how to eliminate each other until there is at most one left.

The paining (sic!) is done with the QPainter class inside the paintEvent() method.
(source: my internet)
neptop
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 314


View Profile
April 03, 2012, 03:09:22 PM
 #32

The nice thing about world governments, the reason why I once liked that idea is that it is about working together.

However, I don't think something would be stable. If it was it would prevent political advancement and probably be very corrupted, people with lots of powers tend to become great idiots. Besides this it lacks a plan B. Would this require a world-revolution if something goes wrong?

Also if this fails and becomes a dictatorship it would probably lead everyone saying "working together sucks". See what happened to various -isms.

I think it would be better to do the opposite. Shrink governments (maybe ultimately to the size of individuals) and instead use modern technologies to work together in more efficient ways. See Bitcoins.

It would maybe be good to have government research in the form of seasteading to try out new stuff and well, again: Focus on communication. The Internet, probably Esperanto, etc. Make tools that allow people work together efficient, so you can more easily build great stuff, prevent wars, etc.

Maybe one could even combine old, failed ideas with modern technologies. Just like for example Apple revived the tablet. Well, generally more efficient communication would allow people to bring together stuff that together changes the world.

BitCoin address: 1E25UJEbifEejpYh117APmjYSXdLiJUCAZ
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!