Youtube comments of 리주민 (@user-nf9xc7ww7m).
-
1000
-
239
-
224
-
It won't do much good now, but here are my thoughts:
1) UN created refugee centres in the country of origin, defended by peacekeepers. This means that Syrian refugees would remain in Syria, along the border in UN-run refugee centres.
2) sponsorship immigration system. Families that want to sponsor an immigrant family can sign up for such and select the family that they think best matches. If family does not get sponsor family, then they do not immigrate. This brings immigration into the personal choice and put of the hands of the state. Sponsors would be responsible for the Families sponsored. They would help the family get employment and housing, or house and employ them. Each month, they evaluate the family on integration and work (are they attending cultural festivals, are they yelling at minorities, etc) and if they wish, the sponsor can return the family. After 3 years, the county immigration agent can approve or reject permanent residency, allowing the family to stay now without sponsor.
119
-
89
-
77
-
68
-
47
-
46
-
45
-
42
-
41
-
40
-
35
-
35
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
25
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8:49
Probably a bit unpopular, but if the UN general assembly, by majority or supermajority, drafts a treaty and its member-states dont sign, then they should be suspended or expelled from the UN in its entirety. Why would we give you voting rights in the UN if you're just gonna do your own thing anyway and not follow the majority vote? Good incentive to sign a treaty, because once expelled from the UN, they are no longer officially recognised countries and are good pickings for UN members to grab land. Think even China and the US would be scared of other countries laying stakes to their respective countries and sign the treaties. How many enemies can China or the US fight at once, especially when on domestic soil?
This is not odd in international law or organizations. Its essentially similar to how NATO is supposed to operate. "An attack upon one is an attack upon us all." By refusing to sign, or acting belligerently towards another, they can be suspended, expelled, and then attacked en masse.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
32:38
Racial hatred is a social construct; race is not. Humans can tell differences between humans. We are all humans, but to discount our differences is to take away our diversity. Race is just an easier way to categorise people instead of having to describe colour, nose width, and eye shape.
Which is easier: Jumin is a person with short narrow nose, almondish eyes, straight dark hair, and a slight tanned complexion...or Jumin is Asian?
On my shelf, I have red, green, white, and multicoloured books. They are all books with names, but if I'm describing a book so someone can grab from the shelf, should I just say they are all the same book? Not if I want the person to grab the right one.
Humans categorise everything. Its only discrimination and hatred that is wrong.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
It won't do much good now, but here are my thoughts:
1) UN created refugee centres in the country of origin, defended by peacekeepers. This means that Syrian refugees would remain in Syria, along the border in UN-run refugee centres.
2) sponsorship immigration system. Families that want to sponsor an immigrant family can sign up for such and select the family that they think best matches. If family does not get sponsor family, then they do not immigrate. This brings immigration into the personal choice and put of the hands of the state. Sponsors would be responsible for the Families sponsored. They would help the family get employment and housing, or house and employ them. Each month, they evaluate the family on integration and work (are they attending cultural festivals, are they yelling at minorities, etc) and if they wish, the sponsor can return the family. After 3 years, the county immigration agent can approve or reject permanent residency, allowing the family to stay now without sponsor.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
It would be interesting to see a more federal EU. Just as the us breaking up would harm the global economy and themselves, so too would the EU breaking up. Perhaps the EU needs a Shay's rebellion to actually create a federation like it did in 1787 US (previously a confederation).
The other thing to look at is a compromise: libertarian-style minimalist govt (preferably regional, national, and EU wide). An EU that can only handle immigration quotas/border protection, monetary & fiscal policy (we've seen what happens without), and self-defence (Japanese-style article 9). Nations could handle culture & tourism promotion, zoning guides to keep the national look, and incorporation of businesses. Local govt could implement the zoning guides, education, and healthcare. As for other non-criminal(?) laws we have now, business associations and unions would need to negotiate for 3-5 year contracts on policies (some done by govt now) and could do so EU-wide as those contracts would only apply to the businesses and their workers.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
To be armed and ready to defend should not equate to bloodthirsty or war-glorification. We have seen what happens when military units go so far down this path (eg abu ghraib, recent Aussie afghan killings). War crimes were once an everyday occurrence. Armies of Rome, Assyria, and even more recent ones,, etc were expected to r-pe, pillage, and torture the enemy, including civilians of all ages. We don't want to see that come back. Bloodthirst and glory wars were the thing back then. They trained them that way and the govt had to send them out to conquer, r-pe, pillage, lest they turn on the govt.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
It won't do much good now, but here are my thoughts:
1) UN created refugee centres in the country of origin, defended by peacekeepers. This means that Syrian refugees would remain in Syria, along the border in UN-run refugee centres.
2) sponsorship immigration system. Families that want to sponsor an immigrant family can sign up for such and select the family that they think best matches. If family does not get sponsor family, then they do not immigrate. This brings immigration into the personal choice and put of the hands of the state. Sponsors would be responsible for the Families sponsored. They would help the family get employment and housing, or house and employ them. Each month, they evaluate the family on integration and work (are they attending cultural festivals, are they yelling at minorities, etc) and if they wish, the sponsor can return the family. After 3 years, the county immigration agent can approve or reject permanent residency, allowing the family to stay now without sponsor.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Not to be a downer here, but you can attend classes remotely without an internet. My friends parents did that back in the 70s and 80s. Syllabi, books, and lessons were hard copies and sent via the mail. You read the book, followed the lessons, and replied to a professor's question or statement. For open book testing, you could do at home. For closed book testing, a non-relative could sign a form as witness and watch you take the test (this could be done in lockdown too if the person watches from the glass window).
As for elementary school, yes, a parent would be needed to stay home with the kid, but don't online schools require that too? Sure they advertise about the ease and time management, but they expect parents to be home which kinda defeats the whole point of private school (parents need to work, otherwise why pay for a glorified homeschool?).
As for movies, well, we had movie rental businesses. Stores still sell them at least. And, you didn't have to worry about speed of internet or buffering as the entire movie was on disc/cassette.
Magazines were the websites of the day and many had comments about the last week's articles (with many replies). Of course, it was big company censoring the trolls back then so the trolls today would be crying for loss of employment.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@roadrunner6224
Is it really true about the far left and right parties, though? It seems the media hypes them up. Sure, there are racists and anarchists in those parties, but isn't thst the same for the republican and democratic parties in the us too? Party leadership's ability to control or expel the fringe is important for any party. And, last time I checked, the AFD expelled a few members. Didn't the CDU have a member who said something on the same level but got to remain?
And, I may be rusty, but didn't the forerunner of the CDU cooperate with the N-zis to expelled the SPD and KPD, and were anti-semitic early on? I'm sure they have grown and expelled such members. Would the AFD and SED be more palatable if they were to do the same, even if it takes a few years, as did the other?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think, regardless of the population, I would prefer public transport to personally owned vehicles. Yeah, you have to wait (if they are serviced well, you can coordinate the shorter times), but after my vehicle got old and I keep getting worried something else is gonna burst (already lost a tyre, engine, AC, etc) and I would like to not spend money on fuel, maintenance, insurance, registration, amd other fees.
I say replace all the streets with rail roads...or at least all public transport. No traffic jams if all public.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Not to be a downer here, but you can attend classes remotely without an internet. My friends parents did that back in the 70s and 80s. Syllabi, books, and lessons were hard copies and sent via the mail. You read the book, followed the lessons, and replied to a professor's question or statement. For open book testing, you could do at home. For closed book testing, a non-relative could sign a form as witness and watch you take the test (this could be done in lockdown too if the person watches from the glass window).
As for elementary school, yes, a parent would be needed to stay home with the kid, but don't online schools require that too? Sure they advertise about the ease and time management, but they expect parents to be home which kinda defeats the whole point of private school (parents need to work, otherwise why pay for a glorified homeschool?).
As for movies, well, we had movie rental businesses. Stores still sell them at least. And, you didn't have to worry about speed of internet or buffering as the entire movie was on disc/cassette.
Magazines were the websites of the day and many had comments about the last week's articles (with many replies). Of course, it was big company censoring the trolls back then so the trolls today would be crying for loss of employment.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@院長大人想要飛
That last part is the kicker. The need to overthrow to show displeasure. Guess who has the military? It surely ain't the people--its the executive.
Multiparty elections are the safety valve to prevent revolutions. Those with free and fair multiple parties with rule of law, low corruption, and minority rights thrive, while shrewing up this formula can lead to a Mexico, Nigeria, etc. Amd yes, the us is lacking too, mostly in the Multiparty part (only 2 viable), fair (winner take all rather than proportional representation, and electoral college), and political corruption (revolving door lobbyist and "contributions" to politicians for votes).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The US Constitution (the charter of the United States of America) was drafted in secret and only ratified by each sovereign state little by little, while still under the old articles of confederation.
Following that model, the United States of Europe (USE) proponents could draft the USE constitution and send out to each member state of the EU. Those that sign it will become USE States and drop the old EU. If France and Germany go into USE, smaller EU States may be forced to join or cobble together with a smaller GDP and loss of the giant players. Eventually, most would probably join the USE for one reason or another, perhaps with the bicameral compromise (which already exists for the EU—the Council, which resembles the Bundesrat).
As for Unanimity or consensus, I don't think it's a bad thing, as long as affected States and representatives are forced to recuse themselves, if an interested party. The recusal part could easily bypass the deadlock that occurs in the EU and even the UN security council. If agreement couldn't be reached at the federal level, nothing to stop the States from trying to pass at the state level, or even the Counties, etc.
Keep in mind, juries are unanimous. Someone long ago deemed that a major life altering decision should not be decided by a majority or even ⅔, but by all.
2
-
The US Constitution (the charter of the United States of America) was drafted in secret and only ratified by each sovereign state little by little, while still under the old articles of confederation.
Following that model, the United States of Europe (USE) proponents could draft the USE constitution and send out to each member state of the EU. Those that sign it will become USE States and drop the old EU. If France and Germany go into USE, smaller EU States may be forced to join or cobble together with a smaller GDP and loss of the giant players. Eventually, most would probably join the USE for one reason or another, perhaps with the bicameral compromise (which already exists for the EU—the Council, which resembles the Bundesrat).
As for Unanimity or consensus, I don't think it's a bad thing, as long as affected States and representatives are forced to recuse themselves, if an interested party. The recusal part could easily bypass the deadlock that occurs in the EU and even the UN security council. If agreement couldn't be reached at the federal level, nothing to stop the States from trying to pass at the state level, or even the Counties, etc.
Keep in mind, juries are unanimous. Someone long ago deemed that a major life altering decision should not be decided by a majority or even ⅔, but by all.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@valken666
Lifetime marriage makes no sense. A lifetime contract. I mean would you enter into a phone contract for life, til death do you part? And how much more important is having a spouse than a machine? Im not gonna be stuck for life with something i find out later is defective or is hacked. Maybe they don't like me.
I think term marriage should be a thing. After 1-2 year contract, both parties are free to renew, go month to month, or go their separate ways without penalty. If infidelity occurs within contract terms, then one party or the other can sue/charge for penalty fee. Both or either parties, if they want to continue, could offer renewal bonuses, such as backrubs, kitchen duty, vacation, etc to entice the other to renew.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It won't do much good now, but here are my thoughts:
1) UN created refugee centres in the country of origin, defended by peacekeepers. This means that Syrian refugees would remain in Syria, along the border in UN-run refugee centres.
2) sponsorship immigration system. Families that want to sponsor an immigrant family can sign up for such and select the family that they think best matches. If family does not get sponsor family, then they do not immigrate. This brings immigration into the personal choice and put of the hands of the state. Sponsors would be responsible for the Families sponsored. They would help the family get employment and housing, or house and employ them. Each month, they evaluate the family on integration and work (are they attending cultural festivals, are they yelling at minorities, etc) and if they wish, the sponsor can return the family. After 3 years, the county immigration agent can approve or reject permanent residency, allowing the family to stay now without sponsor.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It won't do much good now, but here are my thoughts:
1) UN created refugee centres in the country of origin, defended by peacekeepers. This means that Syrian refugees would remain in Syria, along the border in UN-run refugee centres.
2) sponsorship immigration system. Families that want to sponsor an immigrant family can sign up for such and select the family that they think best matches. If family does not get sponsor family, then they do not immigrate. This brings immigration into the personal choice and put of the hands of the state. Sponsors would be responsible for the Families sponsored. They would help the family get employment and housing, or house and employ them. Each month, they evaluate the family on integration and work (are they attending cultural festivals, are they yelling at minorities, etc) and if they wish, the sponsor can return the family. After 3 years, the county immigration agent can approve or reject permanent residency, allowing the family to stay now without sponsor.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When you compared North Korea and China, that is correct now. Under Mao, it was about the same and millions were starved in failed top-down authoritarian moves, much like under Stalin in the soviet union. Believe you said you were in canada here, but I guess you still have to watch what you say. Journalists and dissidents do still disappear.
I cannot say too much when comparing with China, as america did ethnically cleanse the natives, discriminated and enslaved the blacks, and discriminated and relocated japanese. However, history should be learned from. I can publicly decry the evils of this, but Chinese cannot decry Mao and his actions.
That being said, I believe we should be open to china in at least trade. Smith et al stated that trade has tamed the warrior spirit. We no longer go to war nearly as much as we used to. Global trade has made it so that going to war usually hurts our own country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not to be a downer here, but you can attend classes remotely without an internet. My friends parents did that back in the 70s and 80s. Syllabi, books, and lessons were hard copies and sent via the mail. You read the book, followed the lessons, and replied to a professor's question or statement. For open book testing, you could do at home. For closed book testing, a non-relative could sign a form as witness and watch you take the test (this could be done in lockdown too if the person watches from the glass window).
As for elementary school, yes, a parent would be needed to stay home with the kid, but don't online schools require that too? Sure they advertise about the ease and time management, but they expect parents to be home which kinda defeats the whole point of private school (parents need to work, otherwise why pay for a glorified homeschool?).
As for movies, well, we had movie rental businesses. Stores still sell them at least. And, you didn't have to worry about speed of internet or buffering as the entire movie was on disc/cassette.
Magazines were the websites of the day and many had comments about the last week's articles (with many replies). Of course, it was big company censoring the trolls back then so the trolls today would be crying for loss of employment.
1
-
1
-
Not to be a downer here, but you can attend classes remotely without an internet. My friends parents did that back in the 70s and 80s. Syllabi, books, and lessons were hard copies and sent via the mail. You read the book, followed the lessons, and replied to a professor's question or statement. For open book testing, you could do at home. For closed book testing, a non-relative could sign a form as witness and watch you take the test (this could be done in lockdown too if the person watches from the glass window).
As for elementary school, yes, a parent would be needed to stay home with the kid, but don't online schools require that too? Sure they advertise about the ease and time management, but they expect parents to be home which kinda defeats the whole point of private school (parents need to work, otherwise why pay for a glorified homeschool?).
As for movies, well, we had movie rental businesses. Stores still sell them at least. And, you didn't have to worry about speed of internet or buffering as the entire movie was on disc/cassette.
Magazines were the websites of the day and many had comments about the last week's articles (with many replies). Of course, it was big company censoring the trolls back then so the trolls today would be crying for loss of employment.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
13:05
I don't understand. Scotland is part of the nation-state of the UK. They have a right to be upset at the vote and to organise a referendum. The Caribbean countries are not part of the nation-state of the UK. They are as independent as canada and australia, having their own sovereign parliaments, prime ministers, and governors-general (de facto head of state, de jure is the Queen, but she is queen of Canada, Queen of Barbados, etc in her own right and not in the UK/Britain's right--they are just members of the commonwealth, an international cultural organization comprised of former British colonies. Former.
Caveat: overseas territories are up in the air. So, ok. Nevermind--peehaps he should have gotten a say. The US has overseas territories that can't elect congress or the president either--can the british overseas territories elect British MPs or only local?
My point still stands on the commonwealth, however.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
15:40
Just mandate all news broadcasters who use the radio waves (which are under control of the FCC) to give equal time to all parties who can get signatures to get on the ballots for their respective office. Failure to do so would mean fines, suspension of television license, or even the taking of license and reselling to a (potential) broadcaster who will follow the rules. Local elections and debates would be shown as well.
Also, all news, be it Fox, CNN, OAN, NBC, etc would have to have neutral media and commentary would have to state such (eg "this is my opinion, but..."). Also, commentary would have to show all sides (imagine bill o'reilley coming on right after Lawrence O'Donnell). News panels should show contrarians and not just those that agree 99% with the host. I have seen countless times, regardless of the channel, that all the commentators say the person they are talking about is guilty without a question and they are instead discussing how such a thing could happen and his punishment.
The FCC already has mandates for broadcasters and the airwaves have been considered public. This would in no ways mean a takeover.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lincoln Quotes on race:
Segregation:
"I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. "
Send back to africa:
"It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and in their places be, pari passu [on an equal basis], filled up by free white laborers."
Coexistence:
"Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man."
And yet no one is calling for his monument to be torn down. Double standards?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The US Constitution (the charter of the United States of America) was drafted in secret and only ratified by each sovereign state little by little, while still under the old articles of confederation.
Following that model, the United States of Europe (USE) proponents could draft the USE constitution and send out to each member state of the EU. Those that sign it will become USE States and drop the old EU. If France and Germany go into USE, smaller EU States may be forced to join or cobble together with a smaller GDP and loss of the giant players. Eventually, most would probably join the USE for one reason or another, perhaps with the bicameral compromise (which already exists for the EU—the Council, which resembles the Bundesrat).
As for Unanimity or consensus, I don't think it's a bad thing, as long as affected States and representatives are forced to recuse themselves, if an interested party. The recusal part could easily bypass the deadlock that occurs in the EU and even the UN security council. If agreement couldn't be reached at the federal level, nothing to stop the States from trying to pass at the state level, or even the Counties, etc.
Keep in mind, juries are unanimous. Someone long ago deemed that a major life altering decision should not be decided by a majority or even ⅔, but by all.
1
-
I wonder if tricameralism, quadracameralism, or even pentacameralism is 🔑 🗝 🔐. Continental, "national", state, county, and even possibly district (smallest contiguous area, containing towns and surrounding country) is federated together. Continental Diet = 500 MPs (directly elected by population), "national" council = 27 national councillors (represents the former nations within the USE), states council = 117 states councillors (representing the states within each USE "nation"), county Assembly = 3300 assemblymen (counties within each USE "nation"), and district diet = 10000 dieters(?) (Subcounty districts within each "nation").
1
-
The US Constitution (the charter of the United States of America) was drafted in secret and only ratified by each sovereign state little by little, while still under the old articles of confederation.
Following that model, the United States of Europe (USE) proponents could draft the USE constitution and send out to each member state of the EU. Those that sign it will become USE States and drop the old EU. If France and Germany go into USE, smaller EU States may be forced to join or cobble together with a smaller GDP and loss of the giant players. Eventually, most would probably join the USE for one reason or another, perhaps with the bicameral compromise (which already exists for the EU—the Council, which resembles the Bundesrat).
As for Unanimity or consensus, I don't think it's a bad thing, as long as affected States and representatives are forced to recuse themselves, if an interested party. The recusal part could easily bypass the deadlock that occurs in the EU and even the UN security council. If agreement couldn't be reached at the federal level, nothing to stop the States from trying to pass at the state level, or even the Counties, etc.
Keep in mind, juries are unanimous. Someone long ago deemed that a major life altering decision should not be decided by a majority or even ⅔, but by all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
1
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
1
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
1
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
1
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
That being said, I think using the UN rather than the US would be better. Being back the Trusteeship Council to serve where the US was as above.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Education must be tailored for nationalism/patriotism as opposed to ethnic groups. The key is humanistic education.
This is why, if you want to do nation building, you must start by controlling the top office.
Perhaps start with a military governor appointed by the nation builder (in this case, the US), along with an advisory body comprised of Afghan tribal delegates and legal experts. Use US troops and US-paid and trained Afghans under the same command to establish order.
After order established, establish schools and universities--once a citizen graduates, they may vote. The US military governor would be swapped out for a civilian US military governor-general. The advisory body would remain but reform into a Senate. The citizens would vote for the Assembly--the lower house.
After a few years of progress, the Afghans could be given responsible govt with the Assembly choosing its prime minister, whom the governor will accept (background check first of course).
After a few more years and progress, the Afghans can choose their own governor-general. If this sounds familiar, it's analogue to Canada and probably Australia too.
And last I checked, Canadians and Australians are not fleeing to airports to be airlifted out as anglo/native/metis terrorists seek to return to an earlier society with shackled women and rights.
Hmm...although, american settlers should greatly outnumber the native Afghans or face a British India, Rhodesia, or South Africa incident.
That being said, I think using the UN rather than the US would be better. Being back the Trusteeship Council to serve where the US was as above.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, there are alternatives to Australian law for multinational corporations: US law, British law, French law, EU law, Russian law, etc. Us poor blokes don't have that luxury. Also, if you or I were to kill a person, even by accident, be likely jail time. If corporations kill, they are fined. Perhaps corporate suspension (no business allowed for a set time-prison, if you would) or dissolution (corporate death penalty) is in order...or the reverse (people are fined for killing people, etc). What's good for the goose...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dariuszwojtulewicz2759
And the north Korean constitution is on paper more democratic than any other western democracy. I dont see your point. There are many federations which are success stories, such as canada, Australia, and the us (though its the presidential systems strong man cult of personality that is the issue for that country). The USSR was a communist dictatorship. The eu, us, Canada, Australia are not. Sure, those other countries have committed atrocities, but domestically it was decades ago, and centuries ago on a closer scale to the soviet union. I hardly think a federal EU will start rounding up Czechs or Romas anymore than modern day Australia would start rounding up the kiwis.
Should the EU govt structure be altered? You bet. Modelling it on Switzerland would be good for the Federal Council (7-member coequal executive appointed by the federal assembly). The european council and council of ministers could be merged as a council of states where the relevant minister would be present for voting, acting as an upper house with direct member-state input (eg bill for the environment would have the ministers for the environment from each member-state present). The lower house would be directly elected as is now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Meanwhile, Taiwan, Japan, and south Korea (all Asian countries) have also spent 3000 years doing the same.
If you say that they were influenced by Western capitalist and democratic philosophies, you should recognize that China (PRC) was also influenced by Western thought - just from karl marx, russia, and communism.
Prior to those Western influences and older Western imperialism, Asia was dominated by imperial powers and vassals (eg Ming China, Shogunate Japan, Jeoson kingdom korea). Might makes right is the default human govt, not bound to any particular culture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kingdavid8178 that ones a bit tricky. The bible says to submit to authority, and to serve as a servant to his master. Even nonviolent marches and sit-ins may not be possible according to that law. Unions didn't exist back then. If you didn't serve the master according to his will, you were fired and thrown out. The only way not to obey the authority (even that of brutal dictators (like the caesars whom jesus even said) is if doing so would violate gods law. Freedom of speech, guns, and property even are not covered. If police would say bow down and serve us as your God, then yes, then according to the bible, you can refuse.
However, the law of the land is the constitution. As such, we can follow that and be submitting to authority (at least in one point of view). The constitution gives us the right to speech and assembly (including peaceful protest). If laws written in contrary to the constitution, the we should say so just as one would have asked for clarification of orders in the old days. The supreme court would be final arbiter.
Dictatorships that have no constitution or that have no provision for speech and assembly, cannot according to the bible, protest as the authority does not permit them. It can get funny in north Korea and China though as their constitutions as written give them more freedoms than the us or other liberal democracies. Not that they follow them, but the authority was given so perhaps the bible says they're good to go there.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It would be interesting to see. Just as the us breaking up would harm the global economy and themselves, so too would the EU breaking up. Perhaps the EU needs a Shay's rebellion to actually create a federation like it did in 1787 US (previously a confederation).
The other thing to look at is a compromise: libertarian-style minimalist govt (preferably regional, national, and EU wide). An EU that can only handle immigration quotas/border protection, monetary & fiscal policy (we've seen what happens without), and self-defence (Japanese-style article 9). Nations could handle culture & tourism promotion, zoning guides to keep the national look, and incorporation of businesses. Local govt could implement the zoning guides, education, and healthcare. As for other non-criminal(?) laws we have now, business associations and unions would need to negotiate for 3-5 year contracts on policies (some done by govt now) and could do so EU-wide as those contracts would only apply to the businesses and their workers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
160 planes really isn't that impressive. That's like me saying my army has a total force of 500 soldiers. It's quite impressive.
Should have at least 500,000 aircraft, split between 200,000 fighter jets, 50,000 support aircraft, 50,000 intelligence aircraft, 100,000 bombers, and 100,000 cargo/troop aircraft, imho.
1
-
1
-
160 planes really isn't that impressive. That's like me saying my army has a total force of 500 soldiers. It's quite impressive.
Should have at least 500,000 aircraft, split between 200,000 fighter jets, 50,000 support aircraft, 50,000 intelligence aircraft, 100,000 bombers, and 100,000 cargo/troop aircraft, imho.
1
-
1
-
160 planes really isn't that impressive. That's like me saying my army has a total force of 500 soldiers. It's quite impressive.
Should have at least 500,000 aircraft, split between 200,000 fighter jets, 50,000 support aircraft, 50,000 intelligence aircraft, 100,000 bombers, and 100,000 cargo/troop aircraft, imho.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1