But you still pay taxes for your local schools. You still pay taxes for police, fire, roads, sewers, water, electricity, you name it.

How are you going to decide who is deserving of your tax money and who isn't? Are you saying that your restaurant employee shouldn't have had sex and shouldn't have had a baby? Yes, she made a choice to do that...but did she know then that the baby's father was going to split? That he wouldn't provide any support for his child? But no, you want to blame her for a choice she made years before, because you want to rationalize your own lack of compassion and willingness to throw her under the bus. You might view the matter differently if you were in her position, or had had a little more bad luck in YOUR life.

 

Oh yeah, and Afghanistan petitions for asylum to the UN went up 45% last year and now exceeds the number of Iraqi petitions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-03-23-un-afghanistan-asylum_N.htm

 

Okay. How would you propose to tell which person is eligible to vote when they come from countries that don't have official birth records? How would you get people who live in the middle of nowhere, at least two or even three day's drive to the polls to vote?

Try answering instead of insulting though.

 

I'm saying that it would be impossible to have a one world government. Or maybe not impossible, but impossible for that one world government to have any positive effects on the world's problems.

 

I'll continue to insult somebody who doesn't have a fucking clue what they're talking about.

I mean seriously, I don't even know where to begin with this. Just wow.

 

Because you don't have a fucking clue and see the world through only your sheltered eyes. One world government does not mean the currently powerful/first world countries run everything and the rest of the world is like their children; it means that every country has equal say and that the PEOPLE have say, not a handful of people from each country or some shit.

 

You could make the exact same argument about one COUNTRY government, or one STATE government, or one CITY government....it's just that you aren't used to thinking in terms of a unified planet. It could be done. It would just take a lot of effort and a lot of good will.

 

Mr. Kotter! Mr. Kotter! Oooh! Ooh! Oooohhh!! :excited:

I have an idea! Why don't we get together with our neighbors and elect a someone to arbitrate competing interests and to represent our interests to the larger body politic?

 

Hey she can have all the sex she wants. And she has the right to suffer the consequences of those choices. I see how you completely ignored the consequences of those actions. Her husband left and didn't provide any support. It was her choice to marry him and he was an asshole. Those are consequences.

My decison to fire her was taking into account consequences. Have her bring her kids to work meant that some of customers were going to have to put up with a kid running around the restaurant. Some of them could be first time customers who would base their decison not to come back on that fact. It would have made my staff seem unprofessional. If I let her take time off when she did not have a sitter, that meant bringing in someone to work in her place would be paid overtime.

I did not start that business because I wanted to provide jobs for people. I gave people jobs because it was profitable.

And you post like you think I was blessed with good luck. I was homeless a couple of years before I owned that restaurant. And I was in prison sometime before that.

 

Then instead of insulting me, please feel free to tell me where I'm wrong in my thinking since you have all the answers.

 

How would you deal with those that do not accept secular authority and instead would install a theoracracy? How would you deal with those that feel that sex outside of marriage should be dealt with death? How would you deal with those who feel that abortion is wrong on religious grounds?

We are not even close to that kind of harmony.

 

Try reading what I write. How would you ensure that "all" the people have the same access to be heard? Do you realise how dire life is in the third world countries, where they don't even have roads? The majority can't read or write, and they're lucky to get food weekly, never mind daily? How do you reach the tribes in the Peruvian jungles? The ones who have never even seen a person outside of their own tribes, let alone a white man or a piece of paper.

 

I already did. Scroll up.

 

Again, you don't seem to understand what a WORLD government means. You also don't seem to understand what I meant when I said "treat peoples as the seperate peoples that they are, restore power to those who actually deserve it, and right the wrongs that were done to them, and level the playing field", just to take a few quotes from that post.

Practice what you preach about reading what somebody writes, babe.

 

Perhaps bringing the whole thing down to the size of a city government is looking at things in too small a way. Over half the people in the world have never even heard of the term democracy. Most of the countries in the world do not have the infrastructure to roll out a democratic vote for a one world leader, nor the means to educate people enough to have the opportunity to form an unbiased opinion on who they would vote for, and what legislation they would prefer to have installed in this utterly utopian one world government. Not forgetting, of course, that the majority of the world's population can't even read and write and wouldn't know a pen from a piece of paper.

 

A one world government....sounds like someone's been watching too many hollywood movies. There's no chance it'd ever come about with the diverse cultures that makes up planet earth.

 

As someone who's worked in half a dozen restaurants over the last decade and also served as the General Manager of a restaurant for over a year: I've never worked in a restaurant environment that didn't have substantially higher degree of flexibility than the rest of the labor market. What kind of asshole runs a restaurant that doesn't allow his employees to switch shifts because of fear of overtime? My staff of 30+ averaged one absentee every two shifts and I had the lowest absenteeism rate of the 5 restaurants in my district. I scheduled around it. If I had too many people, I cut - LIKE EVERY OTHER RESTAURANT OUT THERE. One wonders why you "used to" own a restaurant...

Uh-huh. And some dumb majority decided to tax to provide for your health care while you were in the custody of the state.

 

young people will impress the preceding generation.

yes, with all the spot lite on dumb missinformed youth, this over shadows the great ones. the smart youth must be encourraged to think. and produce great things in life. keep her thinking about positive things.

 

You don't seem to realise that over 90% of the world's population has absolutely nothing. Therefore, for everyone to reach that "level playing field", the minority of the people would have to give up their riches so that the majority could attain more.

Like I said in answer to Kimiko's post, the idea is utterly utopian. The governments that are in power now can't govern or represent the small number of people they govern at the moment. How could you expect a government to be able to govern over a world, when they can't govern a country?

 

You cant be Serious !!