I have to agree with you on that one Yogi!
We've both seen the country change over our lifetimes, and in many cases, exactly what caused those changes.
Big business getting laws enacted that hurt the little businesses big time.
The thing about that is, in some cases, big business is better than small businesses, because they can do more with less waste. But then the opposite is true also in several cases. It really depends on the industry though.
Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
It seems that being a "politician" is a thankless job. But, somebody has to run the show. A country can't survive by mob rule. In fact that is how this country came into being. The settlers were running away from the tyrants in Europe and came up with a dream of their own: a republic more or less democratically represented by its leaders. That worked fine when all men were indeed mostly equal, but that's not the case today in a class based society. Some folks are better off and more powerful than others. The change that I'm referring to is that the constituency of political leaders has evolved from the individual people they represent to the corporations with all the money. Money = power, if you recall. So, yes, it often seems that the people we voted into office are crooked, but it's really more a matter of who they represent now and days. It's certainly not us little guys.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I would say 99.99999% of Poly-Tick-Ians are crooked or on the TAKE.
How does one become a multi-millionaire on a 150k a year salary, unless they are taking BRIBES.
Of course they know how to HIDE those BRIBES fairly well, that's one of the games of politics.
How does one become a multi-millionaire on a 150k a year salary, unless they are taking BRIBES.
Of course they know how to HIDE those BRIBES fairly well, that's one of the games of politics.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I guess that all depends on how you define "politician" Not all of them are millionaires and not all of them make 150k a year. Surely some are corrupt, particularly at the federal level these days, but there are more political leaders than the ones you see on Fox television. LOL
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I was speaking about Congress. More than half of them became millionaires from taking bribes.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
Come this November you and I will have the opportunity to change congress. Sadly, voting is the last recourse available to us.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I think there will be Drastic Change in Congress with all the Seats opening up!
As far as which way it will go, well that's anybody's guess.
Either way, it may be the end of the U.S. as we know it.
As far as which way it will go, well that's anybody's guess.
Either way, it may be the end of the U.S. as we know it.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I had the identical thought. In view of recent political events I no long think the change will occur in November. It's already in place.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
They need to start putting tons of these poly-TICK-ians in prison for not obeying their oath of office.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I've mentioned a few times how being older and wiser doesn't stop me from being surprised at my naivety. There are always aberrations to the norm, even very drastic departures. That's part of the law of randomness and the distribution of all possible outcomes. The normal distribution of extremists in America kept their influence below the radar, or, at least that was the view from my perspective. Our system of governance - three co-equal branches - was very well designed to keep the nut cases under control. 14% was the number of crooked politicians you could expect to be operational at any given time. While crooks are not necessarily nuts, their numbers never seemed to be great enough to affect the dynamics of the way our country is governed. You already know my feelings about the president, but he is not the problem. There were, and are, enough people over that 14% figure to allow what you see in government today to happen freely. I am continually astonished at that fact and must say I never expected it. The optimists among us say it can all change by voting them out of office, and subsequently putting them in jail. In the past that would have been the solution anticipated by the creators of the republic. My fears now are that the system is broken beyond what can be repaired by a single election.
Last edited by yogi on 14 Feb 2020, 19:30, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I have to agree with you again Yogi! The system of government has changed from 'for the people' to 'for the poly-TICK-ians pockets'. The things that go on now would have never been tolerated 100 years ago.
Instead of Governing, they now try to Rule, which is something that was never intended.
Instead of Governing, they now try to Rule, which is something that was never intended.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
The early explorers and settlers were doing just that: running away from the rulers of their country, namely the monarchy. That's why a lot of effort was put into creating what we started out being. The intent was to avoid the possibility of a tyrant taking over the place. The founders never envisioned all three branches being corrupt, yet that is where we find ourselves today. I hate to think about it, but as the British might say, it's going to come to a bloody end.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
I don't know what year it started, but a classmate of mine, after graduation, and who wasn't drafted, went and joined a commune around 1967. I suppose there are several types of communes, but this one had no leader per se, it was owned and run by all the members collectively, but they did have a board for the sole purpose of handling legal affairs, like taxes, property deeds, houses, etc.
Unlike most communes I've heard about, it wasn't one where everyone put everything into one big pot, but they did share and share alike, of what was shared. Although I knew he lived in a commune, I pictured it like one normally would, so I was surprised when he told me he and his wife lived in a house and he had two cars, this was around 1971. He did say that although the cars were his, the board held the title to them, because that is how it works there. Even so, all members are not equal, those who earn a higher income have more amenities than those who don't. However, those who cannot work are well taken care of too, better than out here in the real world.
Just like everyone else, individually we have to pay state and federal income tax on our earned income, plus we pay 20% of our income to the commune fund, which covers nearly everything from insurance to maintenance.
The main difference is we do not work for the commune, as is how most communes are run. Most of us have jobs at area businesses and factories, and a few own their own businesses, some outside the commune and a few inside the commune. If you build a house or a business inside the commune, the deed is held by the commune, even though technically it is your property. The reason for this is because it can only be sold to another commune member, or to the commune if they want to buy it to lease out, the proceeds of a lease go back to the commune members, as does any unused budget excess.
Unlike outside our commune where you elect representatives to handle some voting on things for you, inside we have to vote on every little issue, no matter how big or how small it is. Let's say I want a new vacuum cleaner for my house, I can go out and buy one, either from outside or inside the commune. But if Mary needs a new vacuum and cannot afford one, she can request one from the commune fund. She can say she wants an upright or canister, or whatever. She includes the square footage of her living area, and submits the request. The size of the vacuum will be in accord with the size of her living space, and a budget amount will be determined by the board. Then we all have to vote on whether we agree with the pre-determined budget amount or whether it should be a higher or lower amount. There are also other factors to consider, such as, is their a store in the commune, or does the commune have the type of vacuum she desires in donated inventory. If they have such a vacuum in donated inventory, Mary can request it without requiring a vote of the members, which is often what happens, or she may opt to accept the lower of the pre-determined budget amounts to buy a new one.
He said sometimes having to go vote on so many things can be a pain in the neck. But they tried a representative board for a year and it didn't work out very well.
In any case, around 1979 he left the commune, not because he didn't like it, but he had a job offer that would take him to another state. He had no problem selling his house or both of his cars to other commune members, and buying a van to move some of things, the rest he donated back to the commune.
I'm not sure, but I think several folks left the commune for one reason or another, and they decided to end the association. Sold everything and divided the money up between the remaining members, with the elder members getting slightly more than the younger members, by age, not by how long they were members. A nearby city was elated they decided to shut down, not because of problems, but they wanted that land back to expand their city.
I have no idea what I read in the original post that made me remember this.
Sorta reminds me of a small Missouri town they named New Memphis, which only lasted for about four or five years.
Based on what went on there, I would say the state shut them down for discrimination.
Which makes one wonder why they didn't shut down the Village of Country Life Acres for the same reason.
Unlike most communes I've heard about, it wasn't one where everyone put everything into one big pot, but they did share and share alike, of what was shared. Although I knew he lived in a commune, I pictured it like one normally would, so I was surprised when he told me he and his wife lived in a house and he had two cars, this was around 1971. He did say that although the cars were his, the board held the title to them, because that is how it works there. Even so, all members are not equal, those who earn a higher income have more amenities than those who don't. However, those who cannot work are well taken care of too, better than out here in the real world.
Just like everyone else, individually we have to pay state and federal income tax on our earned income, plus we pay 20% of our income to the commune fund, which covers nearly everything from insurance to maintenance.
The main difference is we do not work for the commune, as is how most communes are run. Most of us have jobs at area businesses and factories, and a few own their own businesses, some outside the commune and a few inside the commune. If you build a house or a business inside the commune, the deed is held by the commune, even though technically it is your property. The reason for this is because it can only be sold to another commune member, or to the commune if they want to buy it to lease out, the proceeds of a lease go back to the commune members, as does any unused budget excess.
Unlike outside our commune where you elect representatives to handle some voting on things for you, inside we have to vote on every little issue, no matter how big or how small it is. Let's say I want a new vacuum cleaner for my house, I can go out and buy one, either from outside or inside the commune. But if Mary needs a new vacuum and cannot afford one, she can request one from the commune fund. She can say she wants an upright or canister, or whatever. She includes the square footage of her living area, and submits the request. The size of the vacuum will be in accord with the size of her living space, and a budget amount will be determined by the board. Then we all have to vote on whether we agree with the pre-determined budget amount or whether it should be a higher or lower amount. There are also other factors to consider, such as, is their a store in the commune, or does the commune have the type of vacuum she desires in donated inventory. If they have such a vacuum in donated inventory, Mary can request it without requiring a vote of the members, which is often what happens, or she may opt to accept the lower of the pre-determined budget amounts to buy a new one.
He said sometimes having to go vote on so many things can be a pain in the neck. But they tried a representative board for a year and it didn't work out very well.
In any case, around 1979 he left the commune, not because he didn't like it, but he had a job offer that would take him to another state. He had no problem selling his house or both of his cars to other commune members, and buying a van to move some of things, the rest he donated back to the commune.
I'm not sure, but I think several folks left the commune for one reason or another, and they decided to end the association. Sold everything and divided the money up between the remaining members, with the elder members getting slightly more than the younger members, by age, not by how long they were members. A nearby city was elated they decided to shut down, not because of problems, but they wanted that land back to expand their city.
I have no idea what I read in the original post that made me remember this.
Sorta reminds me of a small Missouri town they named New Memphis, which only lasted for about four or five years.
Based on what went on there, I would say the state shut them down for discrimination.
Which makes one wonder why they didn't shut down the Village of Country Life Acres for the same reason.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
There are people in powerful places who are trying to destroy our system of governance and thus increase their own influence over world affairs. There is no doubt that we here in America have been the must successful nation since the time of Julius Cesar. That's not to say our way is the only way or the best way. Perhaps my lamenting about the apparent transformation going on in our politics brought your thoughts to some of those alternate systems of living.
Life in a commune, or communism, as your story describes it has some attractive features. Like our own system the communal life works on the premise that all people are created equal. That certainly is the case when we leave the womb in all our nakedness. After that our paths diverge and some humans become more equal than others. Great thinkers such as Plato figured the best way to deal with this inequality is to purge the weakest out of the population. Only the best of the best remain to forge the future of that society. Many of the concepts in Plato's Republic are sound but his Republic is flawed in much the same way as other systems of governance are also flawed; that is to say, it's only workable for a small population. When the number of citizens increases to beyond 100,000 (so it is theorized) things start to become unmanageable. Some of those less equal denizens become restless and the more fortunate ones become corrupt with power. It's all downhill from there.
My understanding is that the current thinking in Washington is that democracy is a failed system because it inevitably results in a corrupt power establishment. Those out of power become divided to the point of anger and strike out against each other. The chaos becomes so intense that only a strong authoritarian leader is capable of saving the day. None of that is true, of course, but that is the alternative being pursued these days.
Life in a commune, or communism, as your story describes it has some attractive features. Like our own system the communal life works on the premise that all people are created equal. That certainly is the case when we leave the womb in all our nakedness. After that our paths diverge and some humans become more equal than others. Great thinkers such as Plato figured the best way to deal with this inequality is to purge the weakest out of the population. Only the best of the best remain to forge the future of that society. Many of the concepts in Plato's Republic are sound but his Republic is flawed in much the same way as other systems of governance are also flawed; that is to say, it's only workable for a small population. When the number of citizens increases to beyond 100,000 (so it is theorized) things start to become unmanageable. Some of those less equal denizens become restless and the more fortunate ones become corrupt with power. It's all downhill from there.
My understanding is that the current thinking in Washington is that democracy is a failed system because it inevitably results in a corrupt power establishment. Those out of power become divided to the point of anger and strike out against each other. The chaos becomes so intense that only a strong authoritarian leader is capable of saving the day. None of that is true, of course, but that is the alternative being pursued these days.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
A true Democracy doesn't work very well, which is clearly evident in many of our cities.
A Democratic Republic is better, which is why it was chosen for our country by the founders.
Where it failed is when they began allowing our Representatives to vote on their own issues and not just issues regarding the citizenry.
Had they never allowed that to happen, our system of governance couldn't be beat by any other system.
Our states are trying to become independent countries and totally ignoring the laws that bind our country together.
And that is going to be the downfall of our nation!
A Democratic Republic is better, which is why it was chosen for our country by the founders.
Where it failed is when they began allowing our Representatives to vote on their own issues and not just issues regarding the citizenry.
Had they never allowed that to happen, our system of governance couldn't be beat by any other system.
Our states are trying to become independent countries and totally ignoring the laws that bind our country together.
And that is going to be the downfall of our nation!
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
Not too long ago I saw a hypothetical map of what America is in reality instead of in theory. There are several cultures operating simultaneously. The east coast being urban and liberal while the southern states tend to be conservative and rural. The Midwest culture is closest to the ideal of a little bit of everything, while the western states are wide open and free. Then there is California which is in a universe of it's own. The map proposed making it official and breaking up the current 50 states into something more representative of reality. At first thought it seems counter intuitive, but there is in fact enough resources in each of those segments of our country to be self sustainable. Amassing people of similar mindsets would also eliminate a lot of the conflicts inherent in what we have today. It would seem like a waste of resources if each of these 5 pseudo countries would have their own military and own currency and the like. The answer to that would be something akin to a domestic NATO aimed at protecting the interests of the entire continent. Heck, in that case even Canada and Mexico could get involved.
Well, that map was somebody's dream, but it served to point out the deepness of the diversity we embrace here in the United States. It's a miracle that we got to where we are given all the differences. Back when this place was given birth the conditions were different. All the states back then had a common interest and benefited from mutual aid to each other. The founding fathers knew it would be a problem eventually and came up with a pretty good solution in the democratic republic concept. I think there is still great potential for the system. I also happen to think we are under attack at the moment (an undeclared WW III of sorts), and I'm not sure anymore about the outcome.
Well, that map was somebody's dream, but it served to point out the deepness of the diversity we embrace here in the United States. It's a miracle that we got to where we are given all the differences. Back when this place was given birth the conditions were different. All the states back then had a common interest and benefited from mutual aid to each other. The founding fathers knew it would be a problem eventually and came up with a pretty good solution in the democratic republic concept. I think there is still great potential for the system. I also happen to think we are under attack at the moment (an undeclared WW III of sorts), and I'm not sure anymore about the outcome.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
What kills me is with all the laws we already have on the books, why do poly-TICK-ians think they need to come up with another 20,000 every single year?
Once someone is elected to an office, there should be no more mention of a Party affiliation.
They work for the people, not a party, or they are supposed to anyhow.
But instead, they all work only for themselves. Sad, very sad.
And this is a good year to get rid of most of them!
Once someone is elected to an office, there should be no more mention of a Party affiliation.
They work for the people, not a party, or they are supposed to anyhow.
But instead, they all work only for themselves. Sad, very sad.
And this is a good year to get rid of most of them!
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
There are so many laws on the books that nobody can possibly be aware of them all. I recall a few times in my distant past where there was a drive to sunset many laws, i.e., after a certain number of years they would expire unless they were voted upon again. Well, that went over like a lead balloon. It turns out that a lot of the laws are designed to protect the interests of influential people and corporations. Serving the good of the common people was a secondary consideration. It was all under control until they revised the way political campaigns are financed. Now there are super PACS and companies which apparently have no limits to the money they can send to their sponsors. I do believe that the campaign financing laws are at the root of most evils we see today. If the playing field was level, then political party affiliation would become moot because power would be equally shared. The other alternative would be to have a three (or more) party system instead of the current two parties. It's a lot harder for a single party to take control and keep it when more than two parties exist. At least that's what I observed in many European countries.
I can't agree with you more in saying this is the critical year in our political system. I also feel that it will take more than an ousting of the criminal legislators because some of the roots of our system have become rotten. It will take time to rebuild. And that is what I feel needs to be done by the way. We should not return to the old ways of doing things. It's time to modernize up our fundamental institutions.
I can't agree with you more in saying this is the critical year in our political system. I also feel that it will take more than an ousting of the criminal legislators because some of the roots of our system have become rotten. It will take time to rebuild. And that is what I feel needs to be done by the way. We should not return to the old ways of doing things. It's time to modernize up our fundamental institutions.
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
When I was going to college in Canada, there was a common question that seemed to be asked most often about the US.
Why are the individual states allowed to be democratic when the country at large is a republic.
Other comments were things like, a democracy is nothing more than a bully-ship, and will usually fail.
By fail they meant it will become divided between the haves and the have-nots.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!
For the past several decades, poly-TICK-ians have continually voted opposite to the will of the people!
And sadly, those who support their evil ways, keep voting for them again and again.
What a different world we would have if states were required to have a republican form of government!
Why are the individual states allowed to be democratic when the country at large is a republic.
Other comments were things like, a democracy is nothing more than a bully-ship, and will usually fail.
By fail they meant it will become divided between the haves and the have-nots.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!
For the past several decades, poly-TICK-ians have continually voted opposite to the will of the people!
And sadly, those who support their evil ways, keep voting for them again and again.
What a different world we would have if states were required to have a republican form of government!
Re: Installing Ubuntu - Part 2
Democracy vs Republic is a debate going on longer than Windows vs Linux. LOL Neither debate has a clear and compelling answer. The working solution to the former debate is a congress with dual representation. In the House of Representatives everybody is represented by population numbers and in the Senate each state has equal representation. The electoral college is based on the same concept. Any laws must pass both houses of congress to be enacted. Even then the government administration branch has to agree and approve too.
The inevitable corruption of an elite establishment is an argument that has become popular in recent years. The flaw is that it is being applied to a single political party to advance the cause of the opposing party. The proposed solution is an authoritarian dictatorship, who hopefully is not one of the corrupted elite establishment members. I beg to differ with you if you think that is better than what we have had for the previous 244 years.
A test of our constitution is in progress and will be concluded in November of 2020. The powers which are left standing after that election will carry this nation forward. That's always been a theory in every national election in America. This year it is coming to a practical resolution.
The inevitable corruption of an elite establishment is an argument that has become popular in recent years. The flaw is that it is being applied to a single political party to advance the cause of the opposing party. The proposed solution is an authoritarian dictatorship, who hopefully is not one of the corrupted elite establishment members. I beg to differ with you if you think that is better than what we have had for the previous 244 years.
A test of our constitution is in progress and will be concluded in November of 2020. The powers which are left standing after that election will carry this nation forward. That's always been a theory in every national election in America. This year it is coming to a practical resolution.