Comments by "john" (@Pistolita221) on "William Spaniel"
channel.
-
7
-
@tmnvanderberg well, the geography has been very beneficial. Yes, we stopped Mexico and Bolivar from forming powerful nation-states of their own but the reality is the USA has lots of fresh water, lots of flat land inside a defensible series of mountain ranges, a lot of deep water ports, natural storm breakers along the coasts, the mississippi, the most navigable river in the world. He have generally favorable climates for humans. We have a lot of geographic advantages, and yes, a majority were won through conquest, but whos borders changed without conquest, bruv?
6
-
5
-
@menin84 Thank you! It's such a shame how quickly those lofty principals were abandoned by the governing class in America. And thanks, I agree they were geniuses for their time, but their time was before the engine, before cell phones and telecommunications, before mass production. When the constitution was written, in order to break up a monopoly on housing, food, medicine, clothing, etc. all they had to do was manage land rights, to make sure people could make their own. Now, we need regulations to protect a complex interconnected market, no government in the world is really set up for this. But Mexico nationalizing oil is some forward thinking, especially back in 1938. imo, I think electing the board of directors of Pemex (1 elected member per state) would be ideal. We are much more alike than we are different, I'm glad not everyone thinks we're all 'ugly americans'. 💯 we should understand each other.
2
-
@menin84 I agree with you about pharmaceutical companies, I think at least 1 pharmaceutical company should be nationalized in every nation, that way there is a generic option that's produced with the purpose of keeping people healthy for cheap. That would increase the tax base, by increasing how many people are healthy workers.
Corporations in markets where people die without access to service need a nationalized option, where the board of directors are elected by the people. Representatives were never meant to regulate domestic business transactions, only foreign policy and domestic land rights. We need to separate those powers, into a new, democratically elected branch of government so we know what we're voting for. I think one of the biggest issues in politics.
"In Mexico, this might be a drug cartel. Couple a merger of the government plus media in bed with it, and you can effectively control a large segment of public opinion. Preferably, the ones upholding the facade of a democracy rather than demanding real change or alternatives." This is so true!! I have seen this sort of thing in the USA, I know how connected they are. They're at my local airport, too. In suits and stuff.
I hope someone does get to expose what's happening, but honestly most of it is too insane to believe if you're not already informed. AI could be helpful, but I really like "the division of power and elected representatives" I think we haven't gone far enough with it, anywhere in the world. Stalin was not elected, no one was elected in the USSR, and I don't want a fully state run economy, but probably around 20-30%, and they should be elected. Information about the candidates and election should be broadcast by an independent federal agency, without any sponsors or donations to the broadcasters, organizers, candidates or affiliates. And the board members need to be paid enough they don't want to risk getting caught and losing their post, which would be north of a million annually. It's still cheaper than modern campaigning. And after your 3rd term, the minimum % for being re-elected should increase by 10%, and then 5% every time they run for re-election until we reach 75% approval. Make them work for US! Let us know what we're voting for!
2
-
1
-
1