Utopia part 2- the end of poverty, crime, hopelessness, and depression

[Spider-Bite]

As technology advances gradually over the next century technology will replace human workers in the work place. They can be cheaper than humans, more efficent, work harder, without tiring or complaining.

If we do nothing the middle class would disappear into poverty. There simply wouldn't be any jobs left, because machines would be doing everything. But imagine this.

50 or even a hundred years from now when this threat starts becoming reality, the government steps in. Every job than can be performed by machines is now performed by machines, and the money that those businesses would have otherwise had to spend on employees will now get taken out in the form of a payroll tax which will then be evenly dispursed in the form of a paycheck to every citizen whom is not wealthy.

Now this creates some problems and opportunities. Laziness, boredom, obesity, and unfullfillness are the problems.

This can be adressed with our education system. First we make school two hours a day longer than it is now, and we make students go to school three years longer. We introduce martial arts into the curriculum, so that students are spending an hour and a half a day studying martial arts. This will give them discipline, and the will power to complete goals in life. When they become an adult they will prefer to live active lives, and seek out goals to accomplish. They will be disciplined and less likely to commit crime. They will be healthy as well which promotes overall good feeling and happiness, as well as reduction in stress, which will effect everything they do and every feeling they have.

We also introduce a pre-emptive phychology class. Right now criminals are rehabillitated. many people feel this is a waste of time, but it's not. It only takes one out of so many intelligent people working in that field to have a lightbulb go off in their head, and come up with a new technique or idea or understanding and pass that onto other Doctors, and suddenly the science advances.

Based on advancements that come from phychology we have students study a class for a few years to protect them from depression, criminal behavior, molesting children, drug addiction, laziness and anything that would hurt them. We teach them to understand their own emotions and thinking cycles, and to understand other people, and how to raise their children better.

Right now too many people work to put food on the table and not for fullfillment. one out of so many jobs will need to be performed by humans, and many people will want to do them out of boredom. The necessary scientists will be there and so on. This way people will have more opportunities and less burdon.

We also can give tax cuts to promote succesful businesses that teach people how to paint, sing, play piano, football, or whatever.


The combination of financial security, physhcological treatment, and opportunities to choose their own desitny, instead of circumstances choosing it for you will create a very happy environement. When you combine that will parents who also had those opportunies you have a very happy home life as well, with parents who actually had time to spend with you. With parents who weren't effected by stress or lack of understanding.

Combine the fact that a kid who is growing up with that, is also surrounded by peers who grew up with that. We can totally eliminate anybody from becoming a victim of society. We can end poverty and misery at the same time and give people the power and discipline to take control over their own life.

Each generation would grow up healtheir, happier, and as better people than the previous one. I think this would bring a crime rate dramatically lower than even China's, and the would be criminals instead grow up to be happy productive members of society with a healthy social life.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Your plan is too socialist and too much big government for my liking.

 

[Abaddon]

Spidey-Bite.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Your plan is too socialist and too much big government for my liking.

Here is the problem with the anti-socialist argument. Instead of coming up with ideas for how to fix problems, you guys just say you should sit there and do nothing. if you feel there is a problem with a socialist program, then you should try to think of how it needs to be adjusted to get better results, rather than say anything the government does is just big government.

The results are what matter. Ending poverty is more important than maintaining a small government.

And besides do you have a better idea? When the time comes that humans will be replaced by machines in the work place, do you suggest we avoid any govermental social intervention? We just let everybody lose their job, and watch the complete end of consumer spending, resulting in even the wealthy losing their businesses as their investments become worthless because there is nobody with enough money to sell their products to?

 

[Darthphere]

Whatever Spider-Bite is smoking, I want some.

 

[StorminNorman]

Here is the problem with the anti-socialist argument. Instead of coming up with ideas for how to fix problems, you guys just say you should sit there and do nothing. if you feel there is a problem with a socialist program, then you should try to think of how it needs to be adjusted to get better results, rather than say anything the government does is just big government.

The results are what matter. Ending poverty is more important than maintaining a small government.

And besides do you have a better idea? When the time comes that humans will be replaced by machines in the work place, do you suggest we avoid any govermental social intervention? We just let everybody lose their job, and watch the complete end of consumer spending, resulting in even the wealthy losing their businesses as their investments become worthless because there is nobody with enough money to sell their products to?

Which is exactly why capitalism works. Big business NEEDS consumers, so they need people to have money. There is no way major corporations would allow unemployment to sky rocket as it would with a massive replacement of human labor to that of machines. Even if all manual labor is replaced with some sort of technology - new jobs would be created to employ the now unemployed.

Look at job out-sourcing. Yes, many jobs are leaving America and going overseas where businesses can get lower costly labor - yet America's unemployment rate has not made a major shift upwards.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Which is exactly why capitalism works. Big business NEEDS consumers, so they need people to have money. There is no way major corporations would allow unemployment to sky rocket as it would with a massive replacement of human labor to that of machines. Even if all manual labor is replaced with some sort of technology - new jobs would be created to employ the now unemployed.

Look at job out-sourcing. Yes, many jobs are leaving America and going overseas where businesses can get lower costly labor - yet America's unemployment rate has not made a major shift upwards.

actually it did make a giant shift upwards. Eventually new jobs replaced the ones that were lost, but those jobs were lower paying, resuling in a larger lower class, and a middle class with slightly less money.

Capitalism does work, but it needs congressional oversight. The government takes their desire to make profit into consideration and plans accordingly.

for example. The government does not have to spend money to find out a way for coal factories to produce energy without polluting. All they have to do is pass a law that says in 15 years no coal energy producing factory can pollute. then you pass a law that says that vehicles to be produced to be sold after 2021 will be hybrids.

Investors would see a huge demand for electricity in the near future, so they would choose to invest their own money in how to create energy without polluting, and when the time comes they would be there to sell energy without polluting and make profit.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Whatever Spider-Bite is smoking, I want some.

let's see your genius at work. people have been so pessimistic about the future for so long, that they think anything better than what we got now is too good to be true.

If I was president I would never have a bunch of cabinet members who say "I can't" or 'that's impossible." I'd have a bunch of "I can's" or "here is what we need to in order to make it work"

 

[Addendum]

You have WAAAAAAAAAY too much trust in government

 

[StorminNorman]

actually it did make a giant shift upwards. Eventually new jobs replaced the ones that were lost, but those jobs were lower paying, resuling in a larger lower class, and a middle class with slightly less money.

Capitalism does work, but it needs congressional oversight. The government takes their desire to make profit into consideration and plans accordingly.

for example. The government does not have to spend money to find out a way for coal factories to produce energy without polluting. All they have to do is pass a law that says in 15 years no coal energy producing factory can pollute. then you pass a law that says that vehicles to be produced to be sold after 2021 will be hybrids.

Investors would see a huge demand for electricity in the near future, so they would choose to invest their own money in how to create energy without polluting, and when the time comes they would be there to sell energy without polluting and make profit.

I don't want the government playing a large role in the market, it always leads to problems. The best way for the market to run is for it to be controlled by the demands of consumers.

As backlash to conventional fossil fuels continues to grow, the more you will have industries looking for alternate fuel sources. Not because it will save the planet or any such idealistic notion - but because they can reap sweet economic rewards. Oil Companies are among the largest spenders researching alternative fuel sources, they understand better than most that oil is not a renewable resource and they are undoubtedly looking towards the future. As soon as a large company can start producing and selling a realistic alternative fuel - they will do so, because of the tremendous financial upside. The Government does not need to force the hand.

As far as Hybrid cars go, they will increase in the automobile market - without government control. Why? Because they are popular. As the technology rises (making them more affordable to make), they will start making up more and more of the automobile market until eventually they are the market, or a newer, better car design comes along.

The best demonstration to show how the Free Market trumps Government Economic Control is Schools.

Public Schools in America are an embarrassment. Students are stuck in schools where they are not taught what they need to be taught and even worse, passed through grades without knowing all they should. Either that or they are in environments where a student can not concentrate as they should, and eventually become tired and bored with their current situation - leading to drop outs. The Governments answer? Though more money at it.

Private Schools on the other hand are substantially superior in nearly all levels and are generally much more efficient monetarily. Since parents get to choose the school Junior goes to, Private Schools HAVE to preform at high levels - such pressure is not put in the Public School system.

I am a big advocate for commercializing education. Every parent should be allowed to choose any school their child goes to. A Free Educational Market would dramatically improve primary education in America - as long as Government intervention is kept to a minimum.

 

[Spider-Bite]

You have WAAAAAAAAAY too much trust in government

You make it sound like I support a dictatorship or something. I merely want the government to do the right thing.

I do not trust the government which is why I support many checks and balances and limited secrecy. I feel there is too much secrecy right now.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

actually it did make a giant shift upwards. Eventually new jobs replaced the ones that were lost, but those jobs were lower paying, resuling in a larger lower class, and a middle class with slightly less money.

That claim is factually inaccurate. We are at full employment, about 3-4% is unemployed, so in fact there has been no dramatic increase.

 

[Addendum]

You make it sound like I support a dictatorship or something. I merely want the government to do the right thing.

It sounds like you support a government that is involved in every person's life from birth to death, which I'm completely against.

As for the "right thing", that's purely subjective

 

[Spider-Bite]

I don't want the government playing a large role in the market, it always leads to problems. The best way for the market to run is for it to be controlled by the demands of consumers.

As backlash to conventional fossil fuels continues to grow, the more you will have industries looking for alternate fuel sources. Not because it will save the planet or any such idealistic notion - but because they can reap sweet economic rewards. Oil Companies are among the largest spenders researching alternative fuel sources, they understand better than most that oil is not a renewable resource and they are undoubtedly looking towards the future. As soon as a large company can start producing and selling a realistic alternative fuel - they will do so, because of the tremendous financial upside. The Government does not need to force the hand.

That is just naive as hell. If that was true, they would have done it already. The do invest in finding alternative enrgies. They lock up the patents so nobody can put them on the market. Vehicles can be built right now with yesterday's technology, that will make the vehicle twice as strong, and four times lighter. You know why they aren't on the market? They would also be 50% cheaper to produce, and that means even with the same profit margin, their profit would be a lot less than it is now. So we end up consuming 4 times as much gas we actually need to. Why? Because the poeple who own stock in the oil companies are the same people who own stock in the motor vehicle companies.

As far as Hybrid cars go, they will increase in the automobile market - without government control. Why? Because they are popular. As the technology rises (making them more affordable to make), they will start making up more and more of the automobile market until eventually they are the market, or a newer, better car design comes along.

They are also expensive. Hybrid motors add 5,000 dollars to the cost of the car.

The best demonstration to show how the Free Market trumps Government Economic Control is Schools.

Public Schools in America are an embarrassment. Students are stuck in schools where they are not taught what they need to be taught and even worse, passed through grades without knowing all they should. Either that or they are in environments where a student can not concentrate as they should, and eventually become tired and bored with their current situation - leading to drop outs. The Governments answer? Though more money at it.

Private Schools on the other hand are substantially superior in nearly all levels and are generally much more efficient monetarily. Since parents get to choose the school Junior goes to, Private Schools HAVE to preform at high levels - such pressure is not put in the Public School system.

I am a big advocate for commercializing education. Every parent should be allowed to choose any school their child goes to. A Free Educational Market would dramatically improve primary education in America - as long as Government intervention is kept to a minimum.

That is ******ed as hell. It would segregate society and create strong divisions. You'd end up with schools with all black students, whom most of wouldn't be able to afford the good schools. And then higher quality schools with white students.

How would that effect racial developments over the next 50 years?

Too many students would be taught by religous fanatics and so on.

Most students in private schools come from rich backgrounds. They dont' come from the ghetto or broken homes. That is why private schools get better results.

The way to improve education is by enstilling discipline in the students, as I covered in the first post.

I have gone over this plan with a lot of people. And never not even one time has somebody given me even one reason why this plan would not work. All they do is oppose it. that's ******ed. If it's going to eliminate poverty, than it is a good idea. People oppose it just for the sake of opposing big government, without one reason about how society would be effected in a bad way.

I want people working towards goals and fullfillment that they will enjoy pursuing and feel good about. I don't want people working at a job they hate, which most people do. You can say it's their own fault, but it doesn't change the fact that the overall quality of life is not as good as it can be.

If you want good evidence that a strong government can bring positive results when it's run correctly, just look at NASA, or the computer revolution. The government wanted computers in school, so they bought them in huge quantities putting them on mass production when the little man could not afford them. The result? Now they are in almost every home.

NASA? Does it really need to be explained? We get one dollar back for every three dollars we spend on it.

Embryonic stem cell research? Let's see. Federal Funding verses diabetes, cancer, heart disease and death.

Next you republicans will say the government shouldn't be printing money. That it should be commercialized.

We aren't privatizing the military either so don't go there.

 

[Spider-Bite]

That claim is factually inaccurate. We are at full employment, about 3-4% is unemployed, so in fact there has been no dramatic increase.

Where were you for the first 6 years of Bush's presidency? It went up dramatically. during Bush's first few years the country lost 3 million jobs. As I said we got them back. You even quoted me saying we got them back, and then pointed to today's number as evidence we never lost them in the first place.

Even though we got them back, they are lower paying than the ones we lost.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

That is ******ed as hell. It would segregate society and create strong divisions. You'd end up with schools with all black students, whom most of wouldn't be able to afford the good schools. And then higher quality schools with white students.

The most segregated schools in the country right now are public schools. Usually Private Schools actually end up worrying about things like diversity as they see it as a way to pull from a larger customer base. Black parents would like to see other black kids at a private school before sending their child there. Therefore, if you've ever even been to a Private University/School, you'd realize that these schools actively attempt to recruit blacks.

How would that effect racial developments over the next 50 years?

Over the last 50 years [currently] we've seen public schools go from highly integrated to highly segregated.

Too many students would be taught by religous fanatics and so on.

Not necessarily, and those that were I doubt would be very successful in the secular working world.

I have a friend who occasionally hires Bob Jones students to work for him, he says there religious upbringing makes them unable to work with secular people and he has to fire them.

Most students in private schools come from rich backgrounds. They dont' come from the ghetto or broken homes. That is why private schools get better results.

Scholarships and vouchers could be an easy way to remedy this.

The way to improve education is by enstilling discipline in the students, as I covered in the first post.

How exactly. Through the Government, because don't think they don't try.

I have gone over this plan with a lot of people. And never not even one time has somebody given me even one reason why this plan would not work.

Or you just refuse to listen to any constructive criticisms

All they do is oppose it.

That ought to be a red flag right there.

If it's going to eliminate poverty, than it is a good idea. People oppose it just for the sake of opposing big government, without one reason about how society would be effected in a bad way.

I can think of a few, namely communism. That was big Government that attempted to eradicate poverty, and ended up causing 200% inflation and imposing a hoard of dictators and madmen upon itself.

I want people working towards goals and fullfillment that they will enjoy pursuing and feel good about. I don't want people working at a job they hate, which most people do. You can say it's their own fault, but it doesn't change the fact that the overall quality of life is not as good as it can be.

And I want Jennifer Connelly and Jessica Alba to double team me, but sadly it's not going to happen. Get your head out of the clouds.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Where were you for the first 6 years of Bush's presidency? It went up dramatically. during Bush's first few years the country lost 3 million jobs. As I said we got them back. You even quoted me saying we got them back, and then pointed to today's number as evidence we never lost them in the first place.

Even though we got them back, they are lower paying than the ones we lost.

Bush 41 lost re-election because of his piss poor economic policies. Hence what you talk about is actually indicative of a strength in our system.

 

[Spider-Bite]

The most segregated schools in the country right now are public schools. Usually Private Schools actually end up worrying about things like diversity as they see it as a way to pull from a larger customer base. Black parents would like to see other black kids at a private school before sending their child there. Therefore, if you've ever even been to a Private University/School, you'd realize that these schools actively attempt to recruit blacks.

If the entire education system was commercialized, the vast majority of blacks would only be able to afford the worst schools, and the majority of whites would be able to afford better ones. Not to mention other divisions as well. People would want their schools to be taught by gay haters, or religoius people or so on.

Racist parents would also not want their kid at schools with kids from other races.

Over the last 50 years [currently] we've seen public schools go from highly integrated to highly segregated.

yeah maybe in bizarro world. 50 years ago it was against the law for them to go the same school. As opposed to today where your district is chosen for you, and whites and blacks are forced into the same classrooms, creating friendships and relationships between whites and blacks before they get old enough for the suptidity of racism to catch up with them.

Not necessarily, and those that were I doubt would be very successful in the secular working world.

I know religous extremists. They are successful.

I have a friend who occasionally hires Bob Jones students to work for him, he says there religious upbringing makes them unable to work with secular people and he has to fire them.

I don't know for certain, but I have a feeling that your friend might be prejudice against religous people.

Scholarships and vouchers could be an easy way to remedy this.

Your either A, talking about socialism, or B, assuming that schools will do this on their own free will. That would be like McDonalds giving out free food.

How exactly. Through the Government, because don't think they don't try.

You did not read even read my plan, which you are opposing A big part of it was a way to enstill discipline.

Or you just refuse to listen to any constructive criticisms

Nobody is offering any. Constructive Criticism would by obstacles my plan would encounter. Or telling me 'hey this is why it wont work" or "maybe if you adjusted the plan like so." You aren't even talking about my plan.

That ought to be a red flag right there.

of partisan views. Just because it's socialism, that doesn't mean it's bad. A socialism policy can be good or bad.

I can think of a few, namely communism. That was big Government that attempted to eradicate poverty, and ended up causing 200% inflation and imposing a hoard of dictators and madmen upon itself.

That's perfect. We can look at what they did it wrong, and do ours differently. It took Thomas Eddison over 1,000 different designs for a lightbulb before he got it to work. He says he never failed. He just found 1000 ways not to make a light bulb.

And I want Jennifer Connelly and Jessica Alba to double team me, but sadly it's not going to happen. Get your head out of the clouds.

Give me even ONE reason why my plan wont work. I'm all for it. I try to criticize my own plan all the time, so i can take obstacles into consideration and modify my plan so that it will work in spite of those obstacles. You haven't even given me one reason why it wont work. You just oppose it anyways for the sake of opposing socialism.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Bush 41 lost re-election because of his piss poor economic policies. Hence what you talk about is actually indicative of a strength in our system.

A shrinking middle class?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Give me even ONE reason why my plan wont work. I'm all for it. I try to criticize my own plan all the time, so i can take obstacles into consideration and modify my plan so that it will work in spite of those obstacles. You haven't even given me one reason why it wont work. You just oppose it anyways for the sake of opposing socialism.

People are self-centered.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Here are your stats by the way on Public v Private.

Table 3: Rates of Integration in Public and Private Schools​

​

Measure

Public​

​

Private​

​

Index of Integration (IOI)

49.7%​

​

63.5%​

​

IOI, Adjusted for effect of city, seating restrictions, school size,
student grade level

42.5%​

​

78.9%​

​

IOI, Adjusted for effect of city, seating restrictions, school size,
student grade level, and income

49.9%​

​

67.5%​

​

Progress toward desegregation in U.S. public schools is being steadily reversed, according to a study by researchers at the Graduate School of Education (GSE). The findings were presented at a conference in Atlanta sponsored by the Southern Education Foundation, The Civil Rights Project, and the Harvard Project on School Desegregation on April 5. The conference brought together educational leaders, civil rights experts, community representatives, and researchers to discuss school desegregation and the status of the law across the U.S.

 

[Spider-Bite]

People are self-centered.

that's the reason my plan needs to implemented. i really do not think you read it. read it. and if your going to give half ass answers than explain your reasoning.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Here are your stats by the way on Public v Private.

Table 3: Rates of Integration in Public and Private Schools​

Measure

Public​

Private​

Index of Integration (IOI)

49.7%​

63.5%​

IOI, Adjusted for effect of city, seating restrictions, school size,
student grade level

42.5%
78.9%​

IOI, Adjusted for effect of city, seating restrictions, school size,
student grade level, and income

49.9%​

67.5%​

we've had a rehearsal during the Bush administration's reign. That's hardly evidence we need to segregate our schools.

 

[StorminNorman]

That is just naive as hell. If that was true, they would have done it already. The do invest in finding alternative enrgies. They lock up the patents so nobody can put them on the market. Vehicles can be built right now with yesterday's technology, that will make the vehicle twice as strong, and four times lighter. You know why they aren't on the market? They would also be 50% cheaper to produce, and that means even with the same profit margin, their profit would be a lot less than it is now. So we end up consuming 4 times as much gas we actually need to. Why? Because the poeple who own stock in the oil companies are the same people who own stock in the motor vehicle companies.

Naive? Hardly. Believing large companies are looking out for the good of the world and its consumers is naive. Believing that a government could successfully control the market is naive. Believing that an industry will do its best to come up with the next form of energy everyone is going to be dependent on, in order for them to make a killing, is hardly naive.

It is not the companies job to look out for the good of mankind as a whole, it is their job to look out for themselves. If a company has the ability to make affordable, environmentally friendly cars that would rely on a new form of energy they can create and sell - they would do so. The world would benefit from this greatly, but the company and its investors would benefit even more.

They are also expensive. Hybrid motors add 5,000 dollars to the cost of the car.

Exactly. So if you FORCE companies to only make Hybrid cars - then you are going to drive up the price of automobiles as a whole and thus hurt millions of people who now have to make the choice of having to spend thousands of dollars on the cheapest car on the market - or spend that money on something else...like food...or shelter.

That is ******ed as hell. It would segregate society and create strong divisions. You'd end up with schools with all black students, whom most of wouldn't be able to afford the good schools. And then higher quality schools with white students.

Bull. The Government would still be paying the bill. A School gets X amount of money (I believe $3000) for every student that attends a public school. In a free educational market, the government would not be the ones to decide which school that money goes to -- the parents would. The current system SCREWS minorities, it SCREWS the poor. Their children are stuck in underperforming schools - and they can not afford to go else where. My system would save them, they would now have the option of sending their children to the same schools - or schools of equal quality - as everyone else.

If there is an inner-city area where all of the schools are bad, someone would open a school that demands high standards. Why? Not because they want to help educate the children of this neighborhood (though I am sure that would be a factor), but because then they would the most students, and thus the most money. It rewards success and punishes failure.

How would that effect racial developments over the next 50 years?

Read above, it would PROMOTE equality.

Too many students would be taught by religous fanatics and so on.

If a parent wants to send their children to a religious - who are you to tell them they can't? If you are a parent and wants to send your children to a school that promotes atheism - who are they to tell them you can't? The decision would be put in your hands, not the governments and not anyone elses. Thats the key.

Most students in private schools come from rich backgrounds. They dont' come from the ghetto or broken homes. That is why private schools get better results.

No, there are many private schools that operate in low-income areas who have very low tuition rates and yet still have very high results. If it was simply a case of "rich kids = better results", then how do you explain the public schools of other countries performing substantially higher than the public schools of America?

The way to improve education is by enstilling discipline in the students, as I covered in the first post.

LOL. You force discipline and you make rebells. You increase tensions between students and faculty. You make the problem worse. My School Board imposed a new school uniform policy - increasing discipline. Instead of lowering violence and increasing school unity, it divided the lines between teacher and student even more with no decrease in school violence.

I have gone over this plan with a lot of people. And never not even one time has somebody given me even one reason why this plan would not work. All they do is oppose it. that's ******ed. If it's going to eliminate poverty, than it is a good idea. People oppose it just for the sake of opposing big government, without one reason about how society would be effected in a bad way.

I want people working towards goals and fullfillment that they will enjoy pursuing and feel good about. I don't want people working at a job they hate, which most people do. You can say it's their own fault, but it doesn't change the fact that the overall quality of life is not as good as it can be.

I disagree with your idea completely - yet I have never simply said, its bad - period. I am showing you the flaws, or at least what I see is flaws.

If a person wants to be an actor more than anything, and will be unhappy unless he is an actor - do you force an industry to give him work, just because he would be unhappy anywhere else? No.

People have to determine would is most important to them. If it is their careers - then they have the chance to rise. It will require sacrifices - but it can happen.

If people place a higher importance on family, then they have to be willing to work a job they may not love for the good of their family.

Thats life.

If you want good evidence that a strong government can bring positive results when it's run correctly, just look at NASA, or the computer revolution. The government wanted computers in school, so they bought them in huge quantities putting them on mass production when the little man could not afford them. The result? Now they are in almost every home.

NASA? Does it really need to be explained? We get one dollar back for every three dollars we spend on it.

Embryonic stem cell research? Let's see. Federal Funding verses diabetes, cancer, heart disease and death.

Next you republicans will say the government shouldn't be printing money. That it should be commercialized.

We aren't privatizing the military either so don't go there.

I am not saying the government does have its place in the lives of its constituency -- however I don't want a government playing a large role in my life. If the government wants to increase spending in a certain area (say embryonic stem cell research), fine. But allow companies to bid for that funding - do not have the government itself do it.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

that's the reason my plan needs to implemented. i really do not think you read it. read it. and if your going to give half ass answers than explain your reasoning.

Nooooo....that's the reason your "plan" is going to go the way of the Soviet Union, which by the way was Socialist. And you think that's a diverse area with lots of internal stryfe, try living in the world.