[ARKLqAZ6]

The first step to solving many of the problems that United States and the people of the world faces today, is to recognize and agree to the problems. The second step is to do something to correct the problem and this is often when people will disagree. Many of the problems are constantly evolving over time into larger problems that are more complex. As the problems change and evolve so to must answers.

The American Interstate Highway System is a good example of how problems and answers evolve over time. During the 50s under President Eisenhower the main frame to the United States Interstate was created. Fifty plus years later it is costing more to maintain the roads and bridges than it did to build them. Many of the urban Interstate projects by the time of completion could not serve maximum capacity well and are in a state of gridlock today. As a society evolves and grows so do the problems and answers.

If someone could go back in time from today, so they could tell President Eisenhower the size, cost and problems of the United States Interstate System today. They might have never started to design or build the Interstate system then saying the nation cannot afford it. The point is most people today will not be able recognize the answers to our problems of tomorrow. For someone today to outline the answers to the problems of twenty to fifty years from now they would be consider nuts.

The problem as with so many things in life is time. To set-up and organize into operation takes time. Often by the time the operation is working a whole new set of problem arise changing the problems. Only by understanding the big picture of tomorrow can you start to work on the problems in the little pictures of today. As are the problems so too are answers, they are interwoven and connected to society.

My Blog http://www.globalcrier.blogspot.com/

[lungumnentibe]

So, what do you see as some of our current problems?

[surefireinvest]

Throw in some of your suggested solutions too.

This might be interesting.

[doksSirmAdods]

International Crude Oil Export Tax (OET)


The OET would be added to any crude oil that is traded between one nation and another. This tax would help in the transparency of tracking the flow crude oil dollars. It would be the financial base of a new universal origination to help and promote and finance Non Government Organizations programs that would be in the greater interest of the global community of nations at large. With crude oil being the root of so much global tension this tax could be a stabilizing factor.

Developing a universal fiscal platform helping to promote what is in the best interest of the people of planet earth. With no direct connection to any one government, groups such as the United Nations, Origination of the American States, European Union, NATO, Arab League as well as a host of others organizations will be the frame from which this new universal group will work from. Taking some of the financial pressure off the United States Government as one of the leading nation in humanitarian and social aid around the world.

With an independent source of capital to be used for what is in the best interest of the nations of the world. This will help balance some of the economic and social inequalities. By building a stronger universal platform this taking pressure off of any individual nations from having to make any unilateral moves. The OET could finance a permanent International Peace Keepers Force to be used in hot spots around the world. OET matching fund program for humanitarian projects could help finance needed programs. Working with the already existing non-government organizations in their given field, OET will network and tailor its programs to meet the needs of the international community. OET will help promote the International Department of Peace to counter balance the military industrial complex on matters of war and peace. Encouraging other government to establish a Department of Peace within there own government.
My Blog http://www.globalcrier.blogspot.com/

[uchetrip]

I postefd this as part of a larger thread under new forms of government, but unfortunitely, few made any comment at all, so this to me, is one of our biggest problems, which needs to be rectified. That of Redisrtricting:


CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING OR RE-APPOTIONMENT.

This, to me, is the most important ingredient to a Democratic form of Government. Without proper proportionment, you can throw out the one person/one vote rule, because it is non-existant. I have studied and been involved somewhat in this situation for a long time. Fair apportionment is extremely simple, and available in any stete. I know this for a fact, because::

In the sixties, I lived in Illinois, and attempted to start a new politifcal party A part of my interest was the reapportionment of the State of Illinois. The (infamous) Chicago had one District which consisted of three islands in the midst of the city with two of those islands separated by another district which was shaped like a dumbell, (two large areas on the ends, and a narrriw corridor connecting them.)
I spent the better part of three weeks, armed only with census figures, and topographical and Geo-physical maps, and SINGLE-HANDEDLY completely reapporioned the State--, (at least graphically). I succeeded to the degree that every district was designed within 2 percent of the average required population of each district
Of course it was never approved, but I was even on TV with the proposal and the completed map. I had expected the then Governor, WALKER to get behind it, but he never even responded, (I was to find out later that he was in the pocket of some very powerful local leaders who didn't like my ideas. in fact I even received three threats, to stop or else.)
I have related this only to show that it is reasonablly and simply possible. but WILL NOT BE FAIRLY DONE UNDER PRESENT CONDITIONS The leaders of those districts don't want the change. However, Under my plan, it could be accomplished by:

1. Either now, using approximate or intrim census figures, or shortly after the new census is completed. Two or more teams from each state, consisting of one person from each party (the only other condition would be their ability to perform simple mathematics) would start at either end of state and work towards each other.
2. They would be provided with appropriate maps showing current infrastructure, and geophsyical maps showing city and county limits, and geographic maps showing natuaral barriers. For instance, it wiuld make little sense the create a district on both sides of a river where there were no available bridges.
3. They would be provided with the latest census figures by city, county, and locality, but would be denied any reference to Race, Creed, Nationality, Social or economic status, political affiliation, or religius preference. In short, the only guidelines allowed would be raw population figures and the afore mentioned maps for guidance.
There are those who would disagree with the disallowance of the referenced information I would deny on the basis that that is "only right and proper". But on the contrary, that is precisely what is wrong with the present system, and why incumbents, are so ofter entrenched.
4. The teams would endevour to draw the proposed districts as compact as is possible, (for logictic reasons, if nothing else), and rather than result in the shape of one present Clifornia District which runs along the coast of very expensive dwellings and businesses and where, in the midst of the district, it narrows to LESS THAN A HUNDRED YARDS (with only enough room for the Coast highway, and the Cliftside businesses). ( do you suppose that could be the result of improper redistricting??
Further, they would draw them in accordance with appropriate city or county limits where possible, and within the percentage limits allowed for deviation from the population requirements. (For instance, One district might be one % above the limit, so the next should be below the limit to compensate). When the two or more teams come together, thay should be able to have a properly completed job.
5. Then the entire prposal would be put before the State assembly for approval, or even before the voters.