Stopping well short of communism, I support unification. The idea of geographical states squabbling over lines in the dirt is stupid. The so-called "kings" a thousand years ago constructed stone castles and claimed all that they could see, but on the other side of the horizon was another king shouting just as loudly about his territory.

Conquerers like Alexander the Great, Qin Shi Huang, Trajan. They tied thousands of miles of territory to a unified leadership. They gave an identity to the lands they claimed to own and helped people understand their role in the greater picture.

During the expansion of the United States a hundred and fifty years ago, settlers pushed east and took lands. Took them from being Mexican and Indian territories and created a set of boundaries and rules that created safety and security for most.

Sure, there have been stumbles and hiccups along the way.

Hitler felt that his idea of manifest destiny in and around Europe was for the good of mankind. He was a passionate leader who turned a country who was essentially a buffet platter for those around it into a world superpower in a relatively short amount of time.

He was also irresponsible and had no respect for humanity.

The same with the Americans during the pre-civil war period. The same with the British in India. Blah blah blah.

Unification is what our planet has been working towards since early civilization. It may not be perfect at first, but knowing what we know now, and with careful planning it could almost be.

There won't be such a thing as a "New World Order" and oppressive slavery for the common man. People won't stand for it. People don't stand for shit. Selma, Alabama. The Boxer Rebellion. Hell, the Boston Tea Party if you want to get technical.

Don't be afraid of it. No one in the EU lost their identity. They just stripped down useless borders and barriers for the common good.

I, for one, support the common good.


Of course, stopping well short of communism.

i believe your statement to be a slight glorification of the idea, to say the least. these are not the times you spoke of. the 21st century is a very, very different place

Ironic, no?

Saying something "the 21st century is a very, very different place" isn't going to help anyone. If anything, people with those ideas and beliefs are holding us back because all you're doing is putting up excuses and complaining. While providing absolutely no solutions or alternatives. It is easy to say why something sucks and how it won't work and much more difficult to help find a solution.

I say vote for change, do something unconventional, break a social norm!

solution to what? what's the problem?
and how was i complaining?

The whole change in time idea and that things aren't like they use to be in the good ol' days.

now you're just putting words in my mouth.
i never said they were "the good ol days". just said they were different

LOL wasnt this shit in zeitgeist

In the end, this is primary reason why I would support it.

a "solution" would take much more than unifying a divided continent, IMO. that is, assuming we both have an understanding of what the problems are.
you can start by doing away with the monetary system which has been the ultimate division of mankind. it is doubtful that we will ever see that day, as it has already regressed our civilization to an almost unrepairable state
i really am ill equipped to partake in an argument of the matter. was really just more interested in hearing LB's views on why he thought the NAU was a good idea. i could see he was itching to spill them

Yea, I got sidetracked with Civic Blues. Almost a year waiting to shoot that one out.

And I agree with you on the monetary system, but its the best we can do for the time being. Its much better than our old system of "The strong ones get the food and the breeding while the weak ones stay outside in the old"

But then again our savage ancestors huddled around campfires drawing on cave walls couldn't've imagined that we'd be using crafted pieces of metal to kill each other in the streets over slips of paper. At least when those sloping forehead, unibrowed, hunchbacks killed each other it was for survival purposes.

Eliminating money comes close to Communism. Communism is dangerous because it carries the weak and unwilling on the same chain as the hard working and motivated. It may have been good for Marx and Lenin, but too much exploitation of the system is possible.

The native people knew little of individual ownership. Everything was shared and everything went to building the community. Good idea, but then again short of capital punishment or at the very least exclusion of the weak, it can't happen. I agree with you, welfare, on the monetary idea tho.

Heh. Ironic name, considering the topic.

shamefully, the notion of expelling the monetary system would be near impossible. unraveling the ideology that we've been bombarded with for centuries will probably never happen as long as this civilization exists. maybe in the next one.
it is said that there may have been utopian societies long ago which would be nearly undetectable to us. reason being is that in a true utopian society, or at least there ideology of one at the time, almost no remnants, aside from bones and utter necessities, would be left behind. they probably had a different image of what success and progress were. one based less on power and more on knowledge, wisdom, individual gift, and humanity. sometimes i feel that the more we think we have progressed in this society, the more detached we have actually become from what it really is to progress as humans.
an interesting fact off the top of my head. do you know how many plastic surgeons there are employed in this country compared to medical surgeons? i can't remember exactly, but i assure you the number is staggering. it's sometimes to the point that it can really get you down. i know it sounds arrogant, but i used to feel that the general population was just a lot of ignorant, easily manipulated, brainwashed fools. i realized that was obviously not a healthy way to think and simply not true. you meet people. talk to people. people with genuinely good hearts who are interested in the same things. the arts, sciences, history, math. the beauty of all of it combined. you realize that maybe there is hope for humanity. i apologize for rambling on about issues that may or may not have any bearing on the topic.
communism definitely does, IMO, hold some very positive attributes. interesting how the very mention of the word would have us jailed less than half a century ago.
makes you wonder, why were our democratic leaders so hell bent on keeping us from even the thought of it?

I wanted to build VancouverHomeless.org into a website that would do something to help homeless people, but then I realized that in our society, rich and poor people are just parts of the system.

Someone has to lose for the system to work.

:werd:

In a society based on competition (Capitalism), not everyone can win.

Homeless people are not a part of the system. Rich people require workers to do shit for cheap, not homeless people rotting on the streets.

So in this case, no, they don't have to "lose". Or at least not to the extent that they do

Can you explain how it is possible to have 0% unemployment?

Another thing, seriously, SO MANY PEOPLE'S JOBS are based on the fact that people will be homeless, selling drugs, breaking into cars, living on the street, needing clean needles, being mentally disturbed...


The downtown eastside cannot be "solved" because it would put too many people out of work.

wouldnt it be more correct to say that the east side problem 'shouldnt' be solved since it would put too many people out of work? its not like it would be that bad if they closed needle centers down? the people there would have to find new jobs but it wouldnt be the first industry that got shut down. thats like saying Gm can go out of buisness cause it would put too many people out work. but the plants close and the people have to find new careers.

cliffs: putting people out of work is no reason not to clean up the eastside or any reason why it cant be done. just a reason why people dont try to.

1. get rid of min wage and unions - they artificially inflate wages and create unemployment.
2. get rid of ei - ppl won't take low paying jobs when they can get a cheque for doing jack
3. do you consider ppl in the middle of changing jobs and seasonal workers unemployment?
4. make sure ur not in a recession

something like that, i'm not an economist.

0% UE isn't necessarily what you want.. but if you wanna confuse standard of living with the above, you should be more worried about good economic policy to improve productivity rather than "helping" workers. All you're doing is benefiting some wkrs over others while the size of the pie stays the same.

ppl should take macro econ instead of learning from the news. There's little truth and a whole lot of political.. lying.

Losers still win in a first world country. It's more if you can't pass, you fail.

Well, since the government is already creating jobs to deal with the downtown eastside, what would stop them from creating jobs to do something else? Is everything in the world so perfect that the government couldn't possibly think of somewhere else to allocate those funds? I can think of a few things that would be nice to have done, rather than paying people to deal with my window some asshole smashed because he's on the streets.

And while they are creating those jobs, why don't they create a few more to deal with the 5% that isn't taken care of by private industry?

However, obviously there will never be 0%, if for no reason other than mentally disturbed people. But hey, instead of paying for cops to clean up the mess, why no pay professionals to diagnose and take care of the mental people instead?


1. Unions is a complicated subject, but the minimum wage is not. History has shown that companies will not pay a living wage unless forced to. The only way it causes unemployment now is because of globalisation providing opportunities to pay lower wages and ignore all sorts of labour laws in other countries....which pretty much shows that if companies can find a way to cut corners, they will. Which is why there is a minimum wage.


2. Reform EI, so it's more of a hassle to be on EI than to get a job. That way the only people on EI are the ones that actually need it. Getting rid of EI altogether is just stupid.


Well, whatever rhetoric you want to use, it's still pretty fucking dumb to think that having homeless people is a necessity for a capitalist society to function. Their living in the gutter in no way contributes to society, and the savings by not helping them is rapidly closing in on 0 as property crime, hospitalization, and other enforcement is factored in.

i'm just answering the question, i'm not saying we should be doing this instead of that.

oh and you will always create unemployment with min wage higher than the wage determined by supply and demand. It comes with the territory. It's like eating beans then getting gas - they go together.

couldnt have said it better myself

omg listen to you talk. who are you trying to impress on here?

haha, its kinda funny no one really understands what the NAU is all about
yet they have so much to say about it
its simply a currency system created solely for the purpose of globalization
not a bad thing really but definitely inevitable
just a matter of time before we will be paying for everything here with ameros

can't we just call it THE DOLLAR? it's a better name :)

Amexinadian Dollar