Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (79564)	9/13/2011 3:43:04 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Respond to of 218881

"Democracies are surprisingly successful" doesn't mean they are perfect, or even really good. The way to dramatically improve them is to offer citizens Tradable Citizenships. Then people would really start voting for more sensible things because they would see the changes in value of their personal property [their citizenship] depending on electoral outcomes. Democracies are successful compared with the alternatives, in most instances, though not all. < Democracies are on the whole proving to be failures in this regard. The larger and more complex the democracy, the less successful, or so it seems. Which countries do you consider to be successful democracies? > Most of the non-African ones. Maybe the African ones are better than the African dictatorships which means they are successful. Compare democracies with states which are not. The problem places are those places which are not democratic. South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Australia, NZ are democratic and successful. China, Vietnam and others are not though China is recovering somewhat from the worst of communism. Indonesia is giving democracy a run: time.com The first country to make citizens the owners of the state, rather than the reverse [the citizens are owned by the state] will see phenomenal success. The USA constitution went part way but kept basic communist principles of the state above all. Nobody could sell their share in the state and leave. That's how Hippie communes run - everyone puts their bit in and the ownership is collective. Because individuals can't escape with their share of what they have put in by selling to a new member, they limit their efforts to make it good and the commons is depleted. If they leave, they start again with nothing. Hippie communes don't work and neither do Hippie countries [all democracies]. Mqurice

To: carranza2 who wrote (79564)	9/13/2011 3:49:11 PM
From: THE ANT	Respond to of 218881

At least if there was a break up of the USA we would all have more choices

To: carranza2 who wrote (79564)	9/14/2011 9:45:12 AM
From: dvdw©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218881

Your comment: "The problem with this system is that it tends to grow unchecked and become complex. And complex systems are fragile systems" Complex systems require multi valued logics to understand and to communicate with. The constraints faced by democracy are mostly imposed by inadequate logics. Inadequate logics acts as roots, about which SuperSystems exploiting its own self interest, are routinely extrapolated. insert enough bought and paid fors, equipped with the limiting tools contained in simple logics, and all complexity becomes, is a field for pick pockets, instead of a dynamical system driven by phase changing innovation . Growth will happen as Pensinger wrote below, Von Hayek time-shapes here replace the idea of multiple universes falsely attributed to Hugh Everett's paradigm-bursting notion, “relative-state”. This means there are different “phases” (e.g., in simile to solid, liquid, gas, supersolid, superconductor, et cetera) of capital, risk, and exchange-value, that these three -- like massenergy -- cannot actually be created or destroyed, only undergo phase changes or be transferred through supersystem-system-subsystem composite by topological operations of temporal curl.