Society is stitched together, like a quilt, from a patchwork of social contracts. The economy totally depends on the freedom to create and break these contracts which are the so, as Adam Smith pointed out long ago. If we don’t allow for diversity of thinking we’ll end up surrounded by the fabric of fascism, Brown and Black shirts, instead of a juicy colorful riot of democratic vitality.
I'm GREATLY struck by the parallels between Pippa’s exposition about the needs and benefits of the social fabric, and Jeff Booth’s idea that the networking of our minds which emerges in cities, results in a sort of ‘supercomputer’. (Jeff is the author of “The Price of Tomorrow”, a way too-little-known examination of the importance of secular (long-term) deflationary forces.) Further on his minds-become-supercomputer idea, Jeff observes that the ‘glue’ which holds that network of minds together to form that ‘supercomputer’ is Money (the means of people peacefully, voluntarily coordinating their lives’ activities). Jeff discusses this around the 18 minute mark, in his conversation with Robert Breedlove, in Breedlove’s “What is Money” podcast episode 181, released a few days ago.
Each of these two, sort of parallel ideas, seems to me to be excellent validation of its counterpart. Great work, Pippa!
100% right. We are way way too polarized these days. And sadly, our politicians are well aware of it but let it persist as they view it a way to gather votes.
There is a new piece of fabric being added to the patchwork. The SUpreme Ciurt has agreed to hear a case that could give State Legislatures, not judges, the power to regulate elections.
The 'independent state legislature doctrine' is a longtime favorite of conservative legal thinkers and Republicans
The elections clause in Article 1 states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”
The presidential electors clause in Article 2 states gives each state the power to appoint presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”
Observing over time, I have found that the best government is that which is closest to the people it governs. Thus municipal and state governments are far better placed to be responsive to their citizens and craft policies and laws that will be well received by said. I would argue that one of the biggest problems in this, and most, countries is that the Federal, or national, level government has usurped the greatest part of political power, via taxation and expansion of its remit, and that the fractiousness that currently exists is a direct result of this situation.
in the US, a country of approximately 340 million, it is very difficult to find a policy that will be universally accepted, or even accepted by a reasonable majority of the populace.
One idea would be to alter the tax structure so that the Federal government gets the smallest piece of the pie, while more stays closer to the individual, who then may gain faith that his/her views are part of the conversation.
Alas, I fear Neil Howe and William Strauss were quite prescient and that before we can achieve a more reasonable situation, the fourth turning will need to be completed, with significantly more mayhem and probably bloodshed before it is done.
I'm GREATLY struck by the parallels between Pippa’s exposition about the needs and benefits of the social fabric, and Jeff Booth’s idea that the networking of our minds which emerges in cities, results in a sort of ‘supercomputer’. (Jeff is the author of “The Price of Tomorrow”, a way too-little-known examination of the importance of secular (long-term) deflationary forces.) Further on his minds-become-supercomputer idea, Jeff observes that the ‘glue’ which holds that network of minds together to form that ‘supercomputer’ is Money (the means of people peacefully, voluntarily coordinating their lives’ activities). Jeff discusses this around the 18 minute mark, in his conversation with Robert Breedlove, in Breedlove’s “What is Money” podcast episode 181, released a few days ago.
Each of these two, sort of parallel ideas, seems to me to be excellent validation of its counterpart. Great work, Pippa!
100% right. We are way way too polarized these days. And sadly, our politicians are well aware of it but let it persist as they view it a way to gather votes.
There is a new piece of fabric being added to the patchwork. The SUpreme Ciurt has agreed to hear a case that could give State Legislatures, not judges, the power to regulate elections.
The 'independent state legislature doctrine' is a longtime favorite of conservative legal thinkers and Republicans
The elections clause in Article 1 states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”
The presidential electors clause in Article 2 states gives each state the power to appoint presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”
Check out this article: https://www.theepochtimes.com/scotus-to-hear-case-that-could-give-state-legislatures-not-judges-power-to-regulate-elections_4569670.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge
Observing over time, I have found that the best government is that which is closest to the people it governs. Thus municipal and state governments are far better placed to be responsive to their citizens and craft policies and laws that will be well received by said. I would argue that one of the biggest problems in this, and most, countries is that the Federal, or national, level government has usurped the greatest part of political power, via taxation and expansion of its remit, and that the fractiousness that currently exists is a direct result of this situation.
in the US, a country of approximately 340 million, it is very difficult to find a policy that will be universally accepted, or even accepted by a reasonable majority of the populace.
One idea would be to alter the tax structure so that the Federal government gets the smallest piece of the pie, while more stays closer to the individual, who then may gain faith that his/her views are part of the conversation.
Alas, I fear Neil Howe and William Strauss were quite prescient and that before we can achieve a more reasonable situation, the fourth turning will need to be completed, with significantly more mayhem and probably bloodshed before it is done.