The criminal element hates a one world governance; that makes me for it.

[Greatest I am]

The criminal element hates a one world governance; that makes me for it.  What do you think?

Given my old criminal mind and delinquent attitude; I know that if I was my old self, I would hate the notion of a one world government.

Such a bank would prevent me from talking advantage of the white economy.

Fair taxation makes my criminal wallet lose twofold. I lose my gain and now must pay fair.

Given my reform and apotheosis, I feel it is my duty to tell all my fellow white economy taxpayers, we all pay taxes, and it is foolish not to have a fair system.

Leaving unfair advantage to the black market does not seem like a good idea.

I think I would vote for a One World Government, just to get the One World Bank.

If your government preaches against a One World Government, they are voting with the criminals who hate the idea.

Economically speaking; given that single source banking governance is easy, --- I think that moving a huge economic advantage from the black market to our white market, --- is a good idea.

You?

Regards.
DL

[Mr.Obvious]

One world governance also has a huge potential for becoming a tyranical world-wide crimnal organization, no? Power corrupts. And power unchecked... well...

I just don't believe in benevolent dictatorship. Though if it were to achievable, it might do well.

In any case. I live in a country with barely over 11 million people and 7 seperate governments.
Maybe i am biased.

[Shiranu]

The criminal element hates a one world governance ...

I'm going to need citation on that, because a one world government would be amazing for criminal organizations; it consolidates all the power into a small structure, which makes it incredibly easy to corrupt and manipulate.

It's not good for petty scammers and dealers, but it's great for those with real power.

[Greatest I am]

One world governance also has a huge potential for becoming a tyranical world-wide crimnal organization, no?

Which government is not already what you describe being afraid of?

We all live under some form of tyranny and do not seem to mind.

We are always going to have lying politicians. At least we can stop the black market economy from sucking the white market economy dry.

For us to just let ourselves feed evil by paying their fair share of taxes is immoral.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

I'm going to need citation on that, because a one world government would be amazing for criminal organizations; it consolidates all the power into a small structure, which makes it incredibly easy to corrupt and manipulate.

It's not good for petty scammers and dealers, but it's great for those with real power.

We are already run by what is basically corrupted by the criminal element.

Have noted the lack of arrests in our huge Drug War?

Politician or cartel member. I see no difference.

"because a one world government would be amazing for criminal organizations;"

Citation please.

Regards
DL

[Mr.Obvious]

Which government is not already what you describe being afraid of?

We all live under some form of tyranny and do not seem to mind.

We are always going to have lying politicians. At least we can stop the black market economy from sucking the white market economy dry.

For us to just let ourselves feed evil by paying their fair share of taxes is immoral.

Regards
DL

No, you couldn't stop black markets because black markets don't get magically annihilated under unified rule.

And governments can be corrupt, yes. Many are. Perhaps better said: all, to some degree.

But the answer therefore won't be grouping all that power into one place.
To shiranu you say there is no difference between a politician and a cartel member.
Do you not see the inherent contradiction with your idea that one world, ultimate authority government politicians would be the dread of criminals?

[aitm]

Meh, that idea is 500 years into the future.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Ain't nothing so bad that it can't be made worse.

[Greatest I am]

No, you couldn't stop black markets because black markets don't get magically annihilated under unified rule.

And governments can be corrupt, yes. Many are. Perhaps better said: all, to some degree.

But the answer therefore won't be grouping all that power into one place.
To shiranu you say there is no difference between a politician and a cartel member.
Do you not see the inherent contradiction with your idea that one world, ultimate authority government politicians would be the dread of criminals?

What ultimate authority?

It is a Bank, not God or any governments real control over their people.

We are talking our banker being made to be honest, --- so that the average tax payers all over the world, --- can stop paying to get screwed.

Screwed hard when you estimate the gains against criminals and for the rest of us honest players.

I would say 30% of your income is lost.

How much are you estimating?

Regards
DL

[Mr.Obvious]

What ultimate authority?

It is a Bank, not God or any governments real control over their people.

We are talking our banker being made to be honest, --- so that the average tax payers all over the world, --- can stop paying to get screwed.

Screwed hard when you estimate the gains against criminals and for the rest of us honest players.

I would say 30% of your income is lost.

How much are you estimating?

Regards
DL

It doesn't matter how much i estimate, gia. It is a non-issue here. You seem to be trying to get me to defend the world as is, is perfect. Is fair.
I agree it isn't.
I think most would.
But just because what we have now is not particularly great, does not make your vision automatically more desireable. You propose no mechanism by which these problems would get solved. And indeed, i feel i have reason to think it would only get worse.
If you only had one bank, following your example, it would not have to be competitive to other banks, at the very least. Very rarely has such a monopoly of power been good for the people. In belgium, before the workers unionised, for example, people  ho lived in one town had often only one place they could go to work. There was only one guild of bankers they could go to. If they already were being paid in real money. For often they were paid in coupons solely to be used in shops owned by the man who owned the factory where they worked.

Now, you might say that i am being unfair. That that, in a governance situation, is not what you are proposing. Fair enough.
But that is the problem. You are not really proposing anything here, i feel. Nothing but a hypothetical.
And i won't ask how much percent of your income you would lose in such a situation as you are suggesting. Because as long as you are just promoting something hypothetical without the mechanisms to right the wrongs in place, what possibly could that answer give us of value? It wouldn't matter if you would answer 0% or 5% or 29%. So drawing the conversation to that realm on my end is useless too. We'd be talking past eachother, because i object to your belief in a seemingly magical solution.

Look. And i don't mean to be crude here.
But it feels to me as if you are about as justified in your idea of one world government fixing the criminal aspect of the world, as if living in fairy land would. With the exczption that your utopia is at least technically plausible in some way, shape or form.
But let's swap that fairy land in for a second.
One might say, wouldn't it be better if we lived in fairy land. Where criminal would be powerless and perhaps even non-existant?
I might argue, what reason do we have to think the fairies would want to stop criminals? Or aren't dicks themselves? How does situation a actually lead to outcome b? Aren't fairies considered mischievous tricksters throughout most of our history? Wouldn't their magical abilities hold potential for far greater harm than what is and how could we even defend ourselves against that?
One might reply, 'no they wouldn't'.
Then i would think 'but why though?'.
And if the only reason i that that proponent of fairly landism has to say is that he doesn't envision that happening, then i am not going to automatically accept that notion.

It is as if that fairy lander would want to be able to say: if we lived in a perfect world under fairy rule, would things not be perfect?
Technically i guess i would agree, living in a perfect world would by definition be perfect.
But that still doesn't get the fairy lander anywhere, becauwe he just tacked on fairies for no reason.
I agree that if we lived in a one world government situation that was fair and uncorrupted and subservient to the law and its citizens, then we would have a better world. But that is not an endorsement for a one world government. Because i have no reason to think that such a thing will lead to such outcomes and history teaches me to be wary of such situations.
I can see a point in being able to prevent more taxfraud by bringing all countries under one government, to be fair. Freeing up a fair bit of means that way. But that is about it. And i don't think that weighs up against the many risks and problems i would foresee and fear.

[Greatest I am]

Good points, but I still go to the side that gives us a fair tax system and ends poverty.

I estimate a 30 % increase in wealth for us when we all jump into a one world government.

I am tired of paying the taxes that the criminals do not pay.

Regards
DL

[jorgammon]

Good points, but I still go to the side that gives us a fair tax system and ends poverty.

I estimate a 30 % increase in wealth for us when we all jump into a one world government.

I am tired of paying the taxes that the criminals do not pay.

Regards
DL

I wonder what makes you so sure as to the benevolence/incorruptibility of this one-world government, my guess is some combination of hubris, naivety, and envy.

[Greatest I am]

I wonder what makes you so sure as to the benevolence/incorruptibility of this one-world government, my guess is some combination of hubris, naivety, and envy.

What incompatibility, and why should a bank care what politics puts it's wealth into a common high return pool?

Your present bank does not change if your government changes.

Stop wondering and start connecting dots.

Regards
DL 

[jorgammon]

What incompatibility, and why should a bank care what politics puts it's wealth into a common high return pool?

Your present bank does not change if your government changes.

Stop wondering and start connecting dots.

Regards
DL 

Schizo.