What would you do if you had unlimited time and money?

[BruceVC]

 

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country 

 

 

Well that is, of course, predicated on the idea that you know better than anyone what good governance is, which is where things start to get iffy.

 

Of course, with unlimited time on your hand, there's nothing stopping you from figuring it out better than anyone ever did.

 

 

I knew my comment would be seen in a negative light but I'm glad its someone like you who raised this type of criticism as I know you  always look at things from a logical and intellectual perspective ...and I prefer those types of debates where we leave out the emotion

 

We should debate many things like " are the millions of Muslim refugees coming to Europe going to negatively impact European culture "  or " is Capitalism good or bad "  or " when is government surveillance of its citizens suddenly a bad and intrusive action" These types of questions are subjective and can really be seen in different ways

 

But the question of good governance and do governments practice it is very well understood, its like an audit of a corporation. It isn't subjective, in all those countries I mentioned the governments of those countries have either committed horrendous human rights abuses like genocide or just are brutal dictatorships that are only concerned with staying in power at the expense of large groups of there citizens

 

Why should I accept this or not criticize it? So yes in many cases I do know what good governance is but so do you and many others 

   

 

 

 

Why i am not surprised that my vision differs from Bruce's. I would merely observe and gather information and he would control like a good ol' dictator

No My world won't be a dictatorship ....what gave you that idea?

[Guard Dog]

 

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country 

 

 

Well that is, of course, predicated on the idea that you know better than anyone what good governance is, which is where things start to get iffy.

 

Of course, with unlimited time on your hand, there's nothing stopping you from figuring it out better than anyone ever did.

 

  LOL you beat me to it. Bruce would either be hung in the streets by his own people because you can't have freedom while repressing freedom or he'll be lining them up in prison camps to avoid being hung once he found out the only way to MAKE people behave the way you think they should is with brute force.

[Darkpriest]

How is controling who is in power and who is not, not dictatorship? If you would be forcing people to think and live in accordance to your way of thinking you would be the dictator.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Darkpriest

[Namutree]

I would finally be able to implement my Utopian version of SJ, Capitalist governments that would make the world  a much better place overall

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country 

 

So yes in my world I would have removed the governments of places like Syria, Sudan, North Korea and  Zimbabwe ages ago. But of course this is not done without consideration around improvements they need to make

Bruce, in a world with unlimited resources don't you think that capitalism would kind of obsolete?

[Guard Dog]

 

I would finally be able to implement my Utopian version of SJ, Capitalist governments that would make the world  a much better place overall

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country 

 

So yes in my world I would have removed the governments of places like Syria, Sudan, North Korea and  Zimbabwe ages ago. But of course this is not done without consideration around improvements they need to make

Bruce, in a world with unlimited resources don't you think that capitalism would kind of obsolete?

 

The premise of the thread is unlimited resources for YOU

[Elerond]

If I get immortality and unlimited monetary resources then I would eventually take over world and then I probably would build inter galactic empire. Of course this would be just side product of my ultimate goal to build most superior gaming machine that can exist and fill it with most superior games that can exist, and because both of those goals are unachievable because of nature of such things my quest just fill continue forever and so will continue the rising number of collateral damage that I do (of course I will think that I am making universe better place by making it work according to my ideologies, but I am quite sure that everybody will not think that my way is best way, but what they can do I am immortal and I don't run out of resources )  

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country 

 

 

Well that is, of course, predicated on the idea that you know better than anyone what good governance is, which is where things start to get iffy.

 

Of course, with unlimited time on your hand, there's nothing stopping you from figuring it out better than anyone ever did.

 

  LOL you beat me to it. Bruce would either be hung in the streets by his own people because you can't have freedom while repressing freedom or he'll be lining them up in prison camps to avoid being hung once he found out the only way to MAKE people behave the way you think they should is with brute force.

 

 

 No I doubt that would be the outcome, the reality is my ideal world is much more complex than what I explained in a few lines, I just highlighted the premise 

 

Remember there would be strong SJ elements so no bigotry and more equitable delivery of strong social  services like the Scandinavian countries  but of course you can't legislate economic development so I would rely on the private sector to do that 

How is controling who is in power and who is not, not dictatorship? If you would be forcing people to think and live in accordance to your way of thinking you would be the dictator.

No I wouldn't control what people think, you can think what you want and say in private what you want . You just can't go onto a news network and say things like " I hate gay people and they should all die "  and I wouldn't allow certain hate speech against the government like what  we saw in the UK  with those Muslim anti-Western clerics who stirred up anti-Western sentiment

 

In my world I would welcome refugees but they would have to abide by certain rules ....not at all unreasonable but logical 

 

And as for replacing dictators why do you think they have a right to govern if they are destroying there countries?

[Keyrock]

I would become a nomad and travel the world, moving from region to region, country to country, and eventually, planet to planet, never staying in one place for more than a year or two.

 

Also, I would behead all the other immortals because there can be only one.

 

 

Any excuse to post a Queen song is a good excuse. 

Edited December 28, 2015 by Keyrock

[Gfted1]

I would build an impenetrable fortress inside a volcano. Then I would create an overwhelming drone military and subjugate everyone of differing viewpoints. Because I know best.

 

I probably need to work a harem into those plans too.

[Darkpriest]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country

 

Well that is, of course, predicated on the idea that you know better than anyone what good governance is, which is where things start to get iffy.

 

Of course, with unlimited time on your hand, there's nothing stopping you from figuring it out better than anyone ever did.

LOL you beat me to it. Bruce would either be hung in the streets by his own people because you can't have freedom while repressing freedom or he'll be lining them up in prison camps to avoid being hung once he found out the only way to MAKE people behave the way you think they should is with brute force.

No I doubt that would be the outcome, the reality is my ideal world is much more complex than what I explained in a few lines, I just highlighted the premise

 

Remember there would be strong SJ elements so no bigotry and more equitable delivery of strong social services like the Scandinavian countries but of course you can't legislate economic development so I would rely on the private sector to do that

How is controling who is in power and who is not, not dictatorship? If you would be forcing people to think and live in accordance to your way of thinking you would be the dictator.

No I wouldn't control what people think, you can think what you want and say in private what you want . You just can't go onto a news network and say things like " I hate gay people and they should all die " and I wouldn't allow certain hate speech against the government like what we saw in the UK with those Muslim anti-Western clerics who stirred up anti-Western sentiment

 

In my world I would welcome refugees but they would have to abide by certain rules ....not at all unreasonable but logical

 

And as for replacing dictators why do you think they have a right to govern if they are destroying there countries?

Why do you think they are destroying? History is full of monarchs and emperors who advanced their societies and countries.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country

Well that is, of course, predicated on the idea that you know better than anyone what good governance is, which is where things start to get iffy.

 

Of course, with unlimited time on your hand, there's nothing stopping you from figuring it out better than anyone ever did.

LOL you beat me to it. Bruce would either be hung in the streets by his own people because you can't have freedom while repressing freedom or he'll be lining them up in prison camps to avoid being hung once he found out the only way to MAKE people behave the way you think they should is with brute force.

No I doubt that would be the outcome, the reality is my ideal world is much more complex than what I explained in a few lines, I just highlighted the premise

 

Remember there would be strong SJ elements so no bigotry and more equitable delivery of strong social services like the Scandinavian countries but of course you can't legislate economic development so I would rely on the private sector to do that

How is controling who is in power and who is not, not dictatorship? If you would be forcing people to think and live in accordance to your way of thinking you would be the dictator.

No I wouldn't control what people think, you can think what you want and say in private what you want . You just can't go onto a news network and say things like " I hate gay people and they should all die " and I wouldn't allow certain hate speech against the government like what we saw in the UK with those Muslim anti-Western clerics who stirred up anti-Western sentiment

 

In my world I would welcome refugees but they would have to abide by certain rules ....not at all unreasonable but logical

 

And as for replacing dictators why do you think they have a right to govern if they are destroying there countries?

Why do you think they are destroying? History is full of monarchs and emperors who advanced their societies and countries.

 

And those monarchs would be permitted to rule...as long as they don't go through years of abuse of power of there citizens 

 

There is nothing positive the leaders of any of those 4 countries have done that benefits the majority of there citizens 

 

I tell you what, you tell me some positive things any of them have done and we can discuss how legitimate they are? And to say 

 " well they are the presidents of sovereign countries is not enough "  

[Guard Dog]

 

  but of course you can't legislate economic development so I would rely on the private sector to do that 

That would be the same private sector you are taxing out of existence to pay for all your social programs? Sure, can't see any problems there!   

 

To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher all that will work great until you run out of everyone else's money.

[Sarex]

I would build an impenetrable fortress inside a volcano. Then I would create an overwhelming drone military and subjugate everyone of differing viewpoints. Because I know best.

 

I probably need to work a harem into those plans too.

 

A harem of drones perhaps?

[Darkpriest]

So Bruce. What would you do with China. Easiest example of a country that does not really give a damn about SJ and.even human rights yet it has propelled society and economy into a dominant world powwr that can threathen the position of US and the West in one human lifetime.

[Keyrock]

Bruce gaining unlimited money and immortality sounds like the backstory to many a dystopian future movie.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Keyrock

[Gfted1]

 

I would build an impenetrable fortress inside a volcano. Then I would create an overwhelming drone military and subjugate everyone of differing viewpoints. Because I know best.

 

I probably need to work a harem into those plans too.

 

A harem of drones perhaps?

 

 

Well, fembots would accent the décor...

[Woldan]

Off the top of my head

 

* With my unlimited money I'd found my own space agency, hire all the international professionals and accelerate space exploration by 1000%.

* I'd send a cruise missile into Kim Jongs face. 

* I'd pump my unlimited money into cancer and genetic diseases research. I'd make it my personal goal to rid the world of that crap once and for all ASAP. 

* I'd establish high security schools in poor countries to boost education. 

* I'd reorganize the EU parliament and send certain politicians into a Russian labor camp for the rest of their lives where they can try to make amends for the damage and suffering their greed / stupidity has caused. 

* I'd resurrect the Looking Glass studio so they can make worthy successor games of Thief. Oh they would get tons of my money. 

* I'd pump tons of cash into the marketing of Strongman competitions to help them get big. Really big. Big as soccer or football. I'd make it become a national sport. 

* I'd buy huge junks of the alps and rain forests and make them national parks. 

[BruceVC]

 

 

  but of course you can't legislate economic development so I would rely on the private sector to do that 

That would be the same private sector you are taxing out of existence to pay for all your social programs? Sure, can't see any problems there!   

 

To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher all that will work great until you run out of everyone else's money.

 

 

Yes you right, I have a fairly good knowledge of economics so I can go into more detail about this in my ideal world

 

I can't have both....wealthy corporate like American companies and yet high taxed Scandinavian countries

 

I have to chose the American corporations as I don't think we should inhibit the pursuit of excellence or how people can grow companies but things like a national health care would be mandatory in every state. But then lets take the whole gun debate, I wouldn't  force the NRA to close down. I would simply have  government funded factual programs on every channel for a period of time explaining the facts about why more control is a good thing, I'm sure most people would realize its benefits when faced by the facts. I would then have a referendum...simple as that. That would decide the outcome....its Democracy in its finest moment

So Bruce. What would you do with China. Easiest example of a country that does not really give a damn about SJ and.even human rights yet it has propelled society and economy into a dominant world powwr that can threathen the position of US and the West in one human lifetime.

 

Yes you have asked a good question but I have considered most aspects of my ideal world and China is one of them

 

There are certain countries that despite there questionable human rights records or systems of governments would be left alone

 

Russia is one of them   because of Putins popularity at home and China is another because I don't want to deal with a culture so foreign as the Chinese....I'm not so arrogant to think I know best for all countries

[Guard Dog]

 

 

 But then lets take the whole gun debate, I wouldn't  force the NRA to close down. I would simply have  government funded factual programs on every channel for a period of time explaining the facts about why more control is a good thing, I'm sure most people would realize its benefits when faced by the facts. I would then have a referendum...simple as that. That would decide the outcome....its Democracy in its finest moment

Ok assume then you referendum does not go the way you hope. After all there have been a number of mass shooting in the US and we (the majority of voters at least) are more against gun control than ever before. If the vote goes against you would you, who is in power with unlimited money and resources and a grand vision for a "just" society just say "oh well the people have spoken" and let it go? Or would you use that power to make that which you know to be right happen?

 

I'll bet many if not most of the dictators who have committed the worst atrocities thought they were doing the right thing.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Guard Dog

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 But then lets take the whole gun debate, I wouldn't  force the NRA to close down. I would simply have  government funded factual programs on every channel for a period of time explaining the facts about why more control is a good thing, I'm sure most people would realize its benefits when faced by the facts. I would then have a referendum...simple as that. That would decide the outcome....its Democracy in its finest moment

Ok assume then you referendum does not go the way you hope. After all there have been a number of mass shooting in the US and we (the majority of voters at least) are more against gun control than ever before. If the vote goes against you would you, who is in power with unlimited money and resources and a grand vision for a "just" society just say "oh well the people have spoken" and let it go? Or would you use that power to make that which you know to be right happen?

 

I would absolutely respect it, in my ideal world something like gun control for citizens of a country like the USA has to ultimately decided by a referendum...this type of issue is not something I would be prepared to kill citizens for in a case of Feds coming to your farm to take your guns and you refusing to hand them over

 

Remember my ideal world is not a dictatorship you guys think it is 

[Guard Dog]

 

 

 

 

 But then lets take the whole gun debate, I wouldn't  force the NRA to close down. I would simply have  government funded factual programs on every channel for a period of time explaining the facts about why more control is a good thing, I'm sure most people would realize its benefits when faced by the facts. I would then have a referendum...simple as that. That would decide the outcome....its Democracy in its finest moment

Ok assume then you referendum does not go the way you hope. After all there have been a number of mass shooting in the US and we (the majority of voters at least) are more against gun control than ever before. If the vote goes against you would you, who is in power with unlimited money and resources and a grand vision for a "just" society just say "oh well the people have spoken" and let it go? Or would you use that power to make that which you know to be right happen?

 

I would absolutely respect it, in my ideal world something like gun control for citizens of a country like the USA has to ultimately decided by a referendum...this type of issue is not something I would be prepared to kill citizens for in a case of Feds coming to your farm to take your guns and you refusing to hand them over

 

Remember my ideal world is not a dictatorship you guys think it is 

 

  Just checking. Actually to have total gun control in the US would require a Constitutional Amendment not a referendum. It will never happen. Heller v Washington DC affirmed the originalist argument that gun ownership is an individual right. It did leave room for regulation which end the end is what we are all arguing about. How much we'll permit and what it will look like. If the government ever tried confiscation it would either Constitutional crisis, civil war, or both.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

I would finally be able to implement my Utopian version of SJ, Capitalist governments that would make the world  a much better place overall

 

Yes there would be increased moderation and censorship but it wouldn't be inordinate. I would have a global system where if a certain government is irredeemably corrupt or abuses its people then yes they get removed and replaced by someone who actually understands good governance. This new person should ideally come from within the country 

 

So yes in my world I would have removed the governments of places like Syria, Sudan, North Korea and  Zimbabwe ages ago. But of course this is not done without consideration around improvements they need to make

 

Bruce, in a world with unlimited resources don't you think that capitalism would kind of obsolete?

The premise of the thread is unlimited resources for YOU

And you could give everyone else unlimited resources because your supply is unlimited.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Bruce gaining unlimited money and immortality sounds like the backstory to many a dystopian future movie.

Bruce=Dunkelzahn

[Darkpriest]

Then the value of it would be zero and we all would go crazy and kill each other for land. The only real value in that scenario.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Why would you need to kill over land if you had access to all the food and shelter you need?