Pet Peeve

While I agree with much of your dream, I don't fully agree with the dissolution of all corporations after a 20 year max. Strong business, as opposed to strong corporations, are the backbone of our economy. What business would invest in itself, expand its workforce and add to their means of production if all assets would be auctioned off after 20 years. The structure of the business is beneficial for the protection of the business as well as tax status. In the past year, we have bought two other business and started another that stands alone. We have hundreds of thousands of dollars invested. We have tripled our floorspace as well as our workforce. The community benefits by having a strong manufacturing company, the state benefits by having more people as employed taxpayers, and the same applies to the federal government. If the entire structure were threatened with a time limit, we would have been better off taking the money out of the business and putting it in our pockets instead of reinvesting.

No private banks - I think I agree but really need to think about that. A return to the gold standard would be a move in the right direction.
Term limits - an absolute necessity
Free communication and unrestricted travel - again an absolute necessity.
Abolition of all police forces - another one that I think would need tweeking but the problem is, relying totally on self regulation and self defense may work for some in some areas but it would take generations, many generations, to convert a certain portion of our society into people who are equipped to take control of their lives.

for the most part, our thoughts travel the same road and you have given me more to think about.

 

@RightHand think about the difference between a business and a corporation. Previously, a corporation was only needed to promote large jobs, often in service to the State or Federal Government. In any case, I would be content with simply removing the legal status and many benefits assigned to a corporation.

On banking -I have to say, a gold standard does appear to be rather enticing, but keeping it from the hands of private interests would be difficult, not to mention the problem of hoarding, which is what brought us here to begin with. Every European banking dynasty has frothed at the mouth when they found a nation with a gold standard based monetary system. Also, this invites fractional reserve banking, which is a monster in and of itself. The reason I brought up a FIAT system managed by Congress is because it would be truly debt-free and could be closely monitored by the People. It's not perfect, but much better than a scheming, outdated model ripe for infiltration and manipulation. The gold standard model will always have the drawback of not being modernly scalable, too. Of course, no matter our decision on which way to lean, any monetary policy must be vigilantly watched by the People -something we're not particularly adept at.

 

Food for thought

 

I would also like to see a "disagree" button but maybe it would be too easy to just press the button without making any comment as to why you disagree which is an important aspect in most discussions. I do like the discussion/debate aspect of many threads as long as people have respect for the opinions of others. there are also problems with the "like" button although not so much on SM. I'm thinking about the site where someone posts an unfortunate event - we want to acknowledge reading and even feeling empathy or sympathy for the poster but the option of "like" is so inappropriate. I guess we've all come to understand that a "like" isn't always employed in its classic usage

 

Ignore does work (so I'm told, since staff does not have that option.) The downside is that it applies to only those posts by the ignored member which means that the thread has holes in it, should it be of interest otherwise.

As of the last forum software update, there are no provisions for "dislike."

I have to admit that "like" (and "dislike" should it ever become part of the site) are not faves with me, because any given post might contain things likeable as well as dislikeable items, and no real way to tell which part is liked.

 

I think that what ghrit was saying is the ignore button works to ignore the posts by any individual member. I have tested it myself and know that it functions as it is intended to function. Once you have selected ignore for a member, you no longer see anything they post.

We do our best to keep this a civil and friendly site that offers our members information as well as a landing zone in our busy or troubled days. Constant nit-picking at one another does not encourage common goals and camaraderie

 

When a feature works for most but not all, I automatically suspect operator error, not a software glitch. You might check your profile settings to start the troubleshooting process. That is, just in case you miss the point, intended to be helpful, not snide. We have some real experts that can help with that should you need it. I suggest starting a thread in the "Technical" forum for more detailed responses.