Killing America Slowly

[IG.]

This thread is devoted to the discussion of the book “Killing America Slowlyâ€￾ published chapter by chapter in this separate thread (posts #12, #19, #29, #30, #37, #44, then every post). You don't have to buy the book.

We all keep complaining about our governments, seemingly unable to do anything productive. Years go by, and things are only getting worse. But here is a solution – right in front of you, nicely presented in a book which will only take a couple of hours to read. Don't look for excuses if you are really concerned about where The United States is heading.

If you've read the book, feel free to bring up your arguments, comments, opinions, and other feedback.

Most of us are frustrated with our federal, state, and local governments, however unable to do anything practical about it. The book presents not just a solution, but the only possible solution which is justifiable, practical, achievable, incremental, and addresses the root cause of our problems with the governments.

The book is engaging, entertaining, and challenges the reader. It's logic is rather straightforward.

1. Introducing the definition of full control.

2. Introducing quantifiable measure of control. Both definitions remove any ambiguity when analyzing control of one entity by another.

3. Based on 1 and 2, people have very little control over their governments – despite common belief that they do. At the same time, these same governments have a great deal of control over its people, who are mostly unaware of it.

4. Governments consist of humans who predictably and inevitably grow corrupt, inefficient, lazy, power hungry, and many other things - when there is little control, which is the case. Such is human nature, and the entire history of humans is riddled with it. This is the root cause of our problems with our governments.

5. It is impossible to change human nature, but it is possible to give people full and continuous control over their governments by implementing Continuous Approval Process - CAP. Double checking with the definition of full control confirms that CAP gives people full and continuous control over their governments, effectively creating an amazing virtual oversight agency – putting CAP on the government, so to speak.

6. Because CAP addresses such fundamental root cause, most people are likely to agree - regardless of their political affiliation or financial status, which in turn makes implementing CAP achievable.

7. Once most people agree that implementing CAP is the ultimate solution, every election of federal, state, and local officials focuses on this one issue only. Thus, only those public officials are elected who promise to support CAP.

8. As a result, The United States Constitution is eventually amended making CAP a law.

9. Technical implementation of CAP follows.

10. New breed of elected public officials and politicians, being continuously under CAP, brings our governments back to sanity over time, making them efficient, reducing spending, and finally truly working for the people.

If you read the book, and disagree with something, please keep in mind the following prior to presenting your argument. You have to either disprove individual items above, or the logic which ties them together. Anything else would be of little use as it would have no bearing on the outcome.

You may find a flaw, but wouldn't you rather have the attitude of helping figuring out how to overcome it than use it as an excuse to discard the entire approach? It is impossible for one person to get every detail right. I truly believe that problems of such magnitude can be solved only through a collective effort.

If you've read the book, and agree with the proposed approach – what are you waiting for? Spread the word. Be the spark which will ignite the firestorm of long term positive changes in this country. There is no need to attend a demonstration, join a political party, or making a monetary contribution.

If you haven't read the book and doubting whether it really contains a solution, I have to ask you something. Do you really think that a solution will come from the government itself? Laughable. Maybe from a politician? No politician is capable of changing governmental machine and its culture. Maybe from a new political party? As people are getting more divided, the fragmentation of political forces increases. No political fraction will become mainstream.

There are only two possible scenarios awaiting The United States. In a natural scenario, the country will get more divided, dragging along until real economic/financial/political/humanitarian crisis of magnitude occurs which will affect most everyone and on a very personal level. Many will not survive. It will be accompanied by a political blame game, and as usually will provide a great material to various news outlets who will take advantage of your frustration by keeping your eyeballs on the screen while attracting more advertising dollars. Because the underlying fundamental reasons will not be addressed, the country will come full circle and yet another crisis will occur over time.

A more intelligent approach is to understand and address the root cause of the problem, and thus avoid multiple crises. It is only people like you who are capable of doing that. Don't sell yourself short thinking you don't have the power to change things. The solution is right in front of you. If ignored, you will still be complaining about the government years from now, but you will be a lot poorer, less safe, less happy, and more frustrated.

I invite you to read the book if you didn't have a chance to do so. It is your life and it is your responsibility to figure out your future. Ignored problems only pile up, grow, and come back at you stronger, but they never go away. What's the worst that can happen? You may disagree with what you read, but I guarantee you it will get you thinking. You are likely to agree with many things in the book.

Anything truly new seems strange. At first, it is ridiculed. After a while, it is accepted. Over time, it becomes self-obvious. It is only through thinking, analysis, and understanding one can come to a conclusion whether something makes sense, or not. Case in point, the invention of computer mouse. At the time, it was ridiculed by all those smart engineers, and hadn't been accepted. Many years later, it became a part of every computer, and anyone would laugh if a computer didn't have a mouse.

The United States is a relatively young country built on great principles of a Democratic Republic, but it's not immune to diseases inherent to democracies. The future of this country is truly in your hands. It's up to you whether to let it transform into something you will not recognize years from now as it is happening with other democracies, or bring it back to sanity – once and for all.

 

[MelodicMetalGod]

Question: If implementing CAP requires the approval of the current system/politicians and the current system/politicians are corrupt, then why would the current system politicians approve CAP?

You state that the current system is corrupt and self-serving, yet your solution relies on the current system to approve CAP which would almost certainly destroy the system and therefore would not serve the current system.

I look forward to your response.

PS: I have read the book as posted in the other thread. Tip of the hat to you for investing the time and thought and organizing those thoughts into a book/presentation. Well done! I do like the CAP idea in concept, though I do have doubts that it can be implement without corruption anymore than current systems.

 

[MelodicMetalGod]

Another question: IF CAP was actually implemented, what's to stop the corrupt players/controlling entities from simply reporting incorrect results?

You state that an individual could check their own votes at any time and that the banks and ISP's would be charged with maintaining the integrity of the system. You also state that votes would maintain anonymity. If so, individuals would only be able to check the integrity of their own votes in the system while the validity of the totals would be entrusted to the banks, which have demonstrated their more than willingness to lie for a dollar, and the ISP's, which also show a primary interest in profit which leaves them just as vulnerable to corruption as the current government.

 

[GNBRETT]

I just assumed this was another Obama thread.....

 

[IG.]

MelodicMetalGod, these are excellent questions/points which I will gladly clarify!

Question: If implementing CAP requires the approval of the current system/politicians and the current system/politicians are corrupt, then why would the current system politicians approve CAP?

You state that the current system is corrupt and self-serving, yet your solution relies on the current system to approve CAP which would almost certainly destroy the system and therefore would not serve the current system.

You are absolutely right that existing system/politicians would never approve CAP. As the book explains, here is how it will happen. Absence of full and continuous control of people over their governments is the core fundamental reason our governments deteriorate in so many ways. CAP is the only way to address this fundamental flaw. Because this is such a fundamental and simple notion, most people would agree with it regardless of their political affiliation or financial status. Therefore, this could be the only issue of every future election, in turn leading to election of those politicians who will vote for CAP. Needless to say, this will bring into public service a different breed of politicians.

I look forward to your response.

PS: I have read the book as posted in the other thread. Tip of the hat to you for investing the time and thought and organizing those thoughts into a book/presentation. Well done! I do like the CAP idea in concept, though I do have doubts that it can be implement without corruption anymore than current systems.

I appreciate your kind words regarding my entire effort. Deep down in my heart I know it's all worth it. I learned not to question my inner calling, but to simply follow. Regarding your comments, I understand that you may feel doubts about the approach. If no one can identify why it wouldn't work, then there is no reason for it not to work. CAP system will NOT be implemented by the government. It will be implemented by selected banks and ISP's as part of governmental compliance - something, both groups of companies have been doing for many years.

Another question: IF CAP was actually implemented, what's to stop the corrupt players/controlling entities from simply reporting incorrect results?

This is a really good question striking at the heart of the matter, so I will elaborate a bit. Short answer: it is impossible, both theoretically and practically. You or anyone else in the world is free to download all votes at any time, and any number of times. So, if you download all votes on your computer, and your computer produces different count than reported by an ISP - they are lying, and you raise a red flag, which triggers an investigation. Governments are not involved in collecting and reviewing votes - these tasks are performed by banks and ISP's respectfully, therefore no one in the government can just punch something into a computer. Banks manage recording votes in the same way you make deposits and withdrawals in a cash machine, or other online banking activities. Have you ever heard about a bank messing up with a customer's transactions? Of course, not. They will neither be messing with your voting transactions. ISP's will only have voting information, but without names, addresses, etc. Everything is based on CAP ID's, and all of them will be in sync between banks and ISP's. So, no one can simply add a vote. Internal Auditing Process continuously verifying consistency of voting information between banks and ISP's, so if a ISP employee creates a fake entry, this will be noticed by the system very quickly. All of that is explained in the book, so I won't go into more details, however if you have a specific concern, please bring it up.

You state that an individual could check their own votes at any time and that the banks and ISP's would be charged with maintaining the integrity of the system. You also state that votes would maintain anonymity. If so, individuals would only be able to check the integrity of their own votes in the system while the validity of the totals would be entrusted to the banks, which have demonstrated their more than willingness to lie for a dollar, and the ISP's, which also show a primary interest in profit which leaves them just as vulnerable to corruption as the current government.

As I explained above, you or anyone else can download all votes and calculate totals yourself, which should produce exactly the same result as reported by a ISP. You know your own CAP ID, and can easily verify that no one altered your vote. So can everyone else - verify that their vote is correct. Because this will be so easy, most everyone will participate, and if they notice that someone altered their vote they will trigger an investigation. On top of that, you can download all or selected votes as often as you want, and conduct analysis manually, or utilizing a third party software. Remember, that although you don't know identity of other voters, their CAP ID's stay unchanged. You can see whose votes change over time, which in turn can give you a clue about illegal activity. Also, keep in mind that as with financial transactions, there is a paper trail everywhere, so anyone with the access to the system who tries to falsify voting information stands to lose a job, pay a fine, and/or go to prison if someone raises the flag and an investigation follows. Knowing all of that, someone has to be really silly to even attempt falsifying voting information.

 

[IG.]

I just assumed this was another Obama thread.....

This thread indirectly deals with this, too. So, your assumption is partially correct. ???

 

[fallenarch]

Imagine if you lived only as long as a fly. Your entire perspective would evolve in just 2 months or so. You would not know what happened before that, or know about the things that led to the events you witness in your short time. That is what I see in your book I.G. We have discussed this in PM's but your conclusions are drawn on either erroneous conclusions or conclusions that seem to overlook significant historical facts. You seem like a smart guy and you should be honest to your intelligence and really look at American history so you understand how we got where we are.

If you study our history, and you are honest with yourself while doing so, you will realize that our system of government, as conceived and implemented by our founding fathers, works. The one thing that they didn't think of is that the citizens would hand their vote over to the corporatists. Democracy is mob rule, that's why we are a Republic. There are no examples of un-checked capitalism not descending into a Darwinian free-for-all except ours, as it is "managed" by government. Finally (as we discussed and you dismissed), government creates potential, it does not create jobs.

The conservative disenchantment with government can be clearly traced back to one event - the civil rights act. Prosperity is not a zero sum game. That's what you need to write about if you really want to fix this country.

 

[JINKSTER]

What is happening to our nation (and others) is prophecy being fulfilled and man's best thinking can not reverse the inevitable.

Leaders of nations will be treated harshly.

Nation will rise against Nation.

The world will be left in a state of woe and turmoil.

A seemingly great leader will bring answers to the worlds problems and peace to Israel.

Most will exalt him as he seats his throne at the dome of the rock...where he will betray the Jews and commit great acts of blasphemy against God and take his wrath on mankind as "The Abomination Of Desolation"...further separating man from God...as nothing will be bought or sold by anyone who has not taken his mark...hence the beginning of the first 3 1/2 years of the 7 year tribulation.....which precedes the last 3 1/2 years of...."The Great Tribulation".

66% Of "The Builder Generation" were professed Christians.....in contrast....today's "Millennial Generation"?....those ranging in age 14-34?...only 15% are professed Christians...the fall of the temple will precede the above...does this give you an idea of "where we are at"?

So no matter who you place in office...what their doctrine or agenda is...or what special acronym programs they intend upon implementing?...it is all for not.

It is written that no man will know the time...I believe this is because "the time" is unwittingly dictated by man's declining faith in God...which in turn yields power to the abomination...and when he is strong and powerful enough?....he will seat his throne and the horrors of the end times will begin.

Now what were we talking about?....oh....that's right...egotistical pomp driven politics...that dirty little "P" word.

 

[IG.]

Imagine if you lived only as long as a fly. Your entire perspective would evolve in just 2 months or so. You would not know what happened before that, or know about the things that led to the events you witness in your short time. That is what I see in your book I.G. We have discussed this in PM's but your conclusions are drawn on either erroneous conclusions or conclusions that seem to overlook significant historical facts. You seem like a smart guy and you should be honest to your intelligence and really look at American history so you understand how we got where we are.

If you study our history, and you are honest with yourself while doing so, you will realize that our system of government, as conceived and implemented by our founding fathers, works. The one thing that they didn't think of is that the citizens would hand their vote over to the corporatists. Democracy is mob rule, that's why we are a Republic. There are no examples of un-checked capitalism not descending into a Darwinian free-for-all except ours, as it is "managed" by government. Finally (as we discussed and you dismissed), government creates potential, it does not create jobs.

The conservative disenchantment with government can be clearly traced back to one event - the civil rights act. Prosperity is not a zero sum game. That's what you need to write about if you really want to fix this country.

Fallenarch, you don't provide a single specific issue why the plan in the book would not work. Everything is laid out in clear logic. It's a plan of action founded on reasoning. Brushing it off without pointing to a specific item which would not work simply means you are not receptive to it in general - more of an emotional state than anything else. I'd be more than happy to elaborate, but you have to be specific. The book does not propose to change our political system - it's still a Republic.

As I mentioned in our PM's, a great past and history do not preclude bad things from happening. You provide some general statements which are inconclusive. You are right, I do not perceive governments as the entity which creates potential, but regardless of that this has no bearing on the proposed approach. Please point out which conclusions are wrong.

I agree that prosperity is not a zero sum game. Again, this statement does not contradict the book.

If you feel the plan and approach could be improved, please elaborate. Remember, I don't want to be right - all I want is to avoid seeing this country going to a bad place - a place I've been to and seen with my own eyes. It is already happening...

 

[IG.]

Jinkster, you seem to be content with whatever happens. Let me tell you a story...

Home of a very religious Jew was being flooded. He believed in God so much that he was sure that God would rescue him. As he was sitting on the roof of his house, a neighbor came by on a boat and offered to save him. The Jew refused saying that God will save him. Two more boats approached the Jew, but he refused their help. Eventually water flooded the house completely, and the Jew drowned. Once in Heavens, the Jew asked God why he didn't save him. God replied: "I attempted to save you three times, but you rejected my help".

 

[fallenarch]

I gave you a lot of specifics in our PM conversations and you refused to see them. I enjoy debates when both parties are looking for a shared truth, but I think your goal is to push this concept. That's fine but it is not logical or intellectually honest. I don't want to dominate this thread, but it will be interesting to see where people take it if they even take the time to read it.

 

[JINKSTER]

Jinkster, you seem to be content with whatever happens. Let me tell you a story...

Home of a very religious Jew was being flooded. He believed in God so much that he was sure that God would rescue him. As he was sitting on the roof of his house, a neighbor came by on a boat and offered to save him. The Jew refused saying that God will save him. Two more boats approached the Jew, but he refused their help. Eventually water flooded the house completely, and the Jew drowned. Once in Heavens, the Jew asked God why he didn't save him. God replied: "I attempted to save you three times, but you rejected my help".

Okay...thanks for sharing but I've heard that story dozens of times over many years now...and the irony to me is that so many think it's so cool and so true when the fact of the matter is that it has Several MAJOR Fundamental Flaws...since the first time it was ever told...and that flaw is this..."Spiritual Ignorance".

Now before you fall completely into the "Feeling Offended Mode" please allow me to explain as follows...

First off?...who says dying is "Not Saved"?....this Jew was "saved"...and I might add...exhibited exemplary Faith...and for his trust in the Lord was rewarded with his place in Heaven....The God I know and love never "Attempts" anything...he is the Almighty...he "Attempts" nothing....he gets it done...and I might venture to say that he's not that naive that he would've bothered "sending help" at all in the first place (let alone 3 times) rather he would already know and be well aware that his Saints mind, heart, soul and level of Faith would reject such....up front...before the neighbor in the boat ever bothered paddling by...so right there is where this "story" becomes "fiction" for me.

Secondly?...this Jew who was already "Saved"....his apparent ends was "Salvation"...(and real important here)....

By "Grace" Alone...Through "Faith" Alone....In "Christ" Alone.

And it blows me away just how many folks over the past many years have told me this story/joke and did so with a pomp level of conviction that would infer they have a deep understanding of the Lords word in his love letter too all mankind..."The Holy Bible"...when what it exhibits to me is that they lack even the most basic understanding of any of the many messages of Love, Faith, Hope and Salvation contained within...which to me is a strong indication they very well may be fooling themselves in that they are not saved.

Sadly it seems to me that these days most like to dress up...grab their Bible...and go "Play Christian"....oh they read the words...many of which makes no sense to them and some are even proud if they are able to pronounce them all correctly....but how many truly break it down word by word in a actual verse by verse study of the Holy Bible?...it's been my experience "Not Many At All"...as for 3/4's of my lifetime I myself have walked out of Sunday morning Sermons thinking to myself...

"Huh?...Whad he say?...and what was the point?...what did it really mean?"

And I walked away from many Churches with my soul feeling as empty as my wallet as while I fed the Tithe Bowl I was not getting spiritually fed and I see a lot of that going on in Churches today...deeply troubling....which I guess is why I bothered to type this much of a response here.

But yes...you are correct...I am content with whatever happens....as I trust, accept and have strong faith in that ALL that happens?...must be Gods will...and what isn't?...is mans will...one of those ends with results and the other consequences...but this acceptance and faith gives me the inner peace God intended and keeps me "IN" the world but not "OF" the world....let alone entertaining any thoughts that the exercising of my will might save a nation from it's written prophecy.

My great commission is to save as many as I can through the Lords word...and it is incumbent upon me as a Christian to do all I can to save the Jews from the abomination....let alone joke or tell fundamentally flawed, fictional stories about them.

God loves you Igor...but you may want to take care and spread the true word...spreading the message and not the mess and?...

definitely not veiled jokes and fallacies. L8R, Bill.

 

[IG.]

Jinkster, I don't feel offended, but your relationship with God is way more close than mine, and I respect that. However, where I strongly disagree with you is that Lord works in subtle ways, and the story I told you which you've heard many times - is part joke, but part serious. I do believe it is, you obviously don't. BTW, I am Jewish and heard lots of Jewish folk stories, but can never remember them. However, for some reason this one popped into my mind once I read your post.

 

[IG.]

I gave you a lot of specifics in our PM conversations and you refused to see them. I enjoy debates when both parties are looking for a shared truth, but I think your goal is to push this concept. That's fine but it is not logical or intellectually honest. I don't want to dominate this thread, but it will be interesting to see where people take it if they even take the time to read it.

Fallenarch, you gave me some general inconclusive statements. Some I agree with, some I don't, but they have no bearing on the proposed approach. I am being very specific and deliberate and explained everything in detail - hence, the book. I even summarized the gist of the book in 10 simple items. Yet, you cannot specifically dispute a single item, or the logic tying them together. It seems that the entire approach does not appeal to you, but you seem to be unable to figure out where the flaw is. I understand the feeling and sympathize, however the fact that you are unable to come up with a single specific flaw in the proposed approach while being somewhat critical of it only encourages me that the proposed approach is valid.

This is not a general political debate, but a specific topic identifying root cause of our problems with our governments. This is not a place for vague statements, but the place for specifics. As you pointed out I am pushing the concept, have been pushing the concept, and has been open about it - and for a good cause, which is to prevent where this country is going, and not for a personal benefit. I didn't even put my real name on the book because it's not important to me.

Where you are right is that not a lot of people are reading it, and this is pretty disappointing.

 

[MelodicMetalGod]

MelodicMetalGod, these are excellent questions/points which I will gladly clarify!

Question: If implementing CAP requires the approval of the current system/politicians and the current system/politicians are corrupt, then why would the current system politicians approve CAP?

You state that the current system is corrupt and self-serving, yet your solution relies on the current system to approve CAP which would almost certainly destroy the system and therefore would not serve the current system.

You are absolutely right that existing system/politicians would never approve CAP. As the book explains, here is how it will happen. Absence of full and continuous control of people over their governments is the core fundamental reason our governments deteriorate in so many ways. CAP is the only way to address this fundamental flaw. Because this is such a fundamental and simple notion, most people would agree with it regardless of their political affiliation or financial status. Therefore, this could be the only issue of every future election, in turn leading to election of those politicians who will vote for CAP. Needless to say, this will bring into public service a different breed of politicians.

I look forward to your response.

PS: I have read the book as posted in the other thread. Tip of the hat to you for investing the time and thought and organizing those thoughts into a book/presentation. Well done! I do like the CAP idea in concept, though I do have doubts that it can be implement without corruption anymore than current systems.

I appreciate your kind words regarding my entire effort. Deep down in my heart I know it's all worth it. I learned not to question my inner calling, but to simply follow. Regarding your comments, I understand that you may feel doubts about the approach. If no one can identify why it wouldn't work, then there is no reason for it not to work. CAP system will NOT be implemented by the government. It will be implemented by selected banks and ISP's as part of governmental compliance - something, both groups of companies have been doing for many years.

Another question: IF CAP was actually implemented, what's to stop the corrupt players/controlling entities from simply reporting incorrect results?

This is a really good question striking at the heart of the matter, so I will elaborate a bit. Short answer: it is impossible, both theoretically and practically. You or anyone else in the world is free to download all votes at any time, and any number of times. So, if you download all votes on your computer, and your computer produces different count than reported by an ISP - they are lying, and you raise a red flag, which triggers an investigation. Governments are not involved in collecting and reviewing votes - these tasks are performed by banks and ISP's respectfully, therefore no one in the government can just punch something into a computer. Banks manage recording votes in the same way you make deposits and withdrawals in a cash machine, or other online banking activities. Have you ever heard about a bank messing up with a customer's transactions? Of course, not. They will neither be messing with your voting transactions. ISP's will only have voting information, but without names, addresses, etc. Everything is based on CAP ID's, and all of them will be in sync between banks and ISP's. So, no one can simply add a vote. Internal Auditing Process continuously verifying consistency of voting information between banks and ISP's, so if a ISP employee creates a fake entry, this will be noticed by the system very quickly. All of that is explained in the book, so I won't go into more details, however if you have a specific concern, please bring it up.

You state that an individual could check their own votes at any time and that the banks and ISP's would be charged with maintaining the integrity of the system. You also state that votes would maintain anonymity. If so, individuals would only be able to check the integrity of their own votes in the system while the validity of the totals would be entrusted to the banks, which have demonstrated their more than willingness to lie for a dollar, and the ISP's, which also show a primary interest in profit which leaves them just as vulnerable to corruption as the current government.

As I explained above, you or anyone else can download all votes and calculate totals yourself, which should produce exactly the same result as reported by a ISP. You know your own CAP ID, and can easily verify that no one altered your vote. So can everyone else - verify that their vote is correct. Because this will be so easy, most everyone will participate, and if they notice that someone altered their vote they will trigger an investigation. On top of that, you can download all or selected votes as often as you want, and conduct analysis manually, or utilizing a third party software. Remember, that although you don't know identity of other voters, their CAP ID's stay unchanged. You can see whose votes change over time, which in turn can give you a clue about illegal activity. Also, keep in mind that as with financial transactions, there is a paper trail everywhere, so anyone with the access to the system who tries to falsify voting information stands to lose a job, pay a fine, and/or go to prison if someone raises the flag and an investigation follows. Knowing all of that, someone has to be really silly to even attempt falsifying voting information.

RE: You are absolutely right that existing system/politicians would never approve CAP. As the book explains, here is how it will happen. Absence of full and continuous control of people over their governments is the core fundamental reason our governments deteriorate in so many ways. CAP is the only way to address this fundamental flaw. Because this is such a fundamental and simple notion, most people would agree with it regardless of their political affiliation or financial status. Therefore, this could be the only issue of every future election, in turn leading to election of those politicians who will vote for CAP. Needless to say, this will bring into public service a different breed of politicians.

This relies on two things that do not seem to be readily observable in our country. In fact, the contrary to both is readily observable. A united front amongst the people and the willingness/ability of a politician to follow through on election promises (not to mention the UNwillingness of the "money" to finance a campaign for anyone that won't play ball for them).

Consider the issue of taxes. There is likely no more issue in our country that is more polarizing among the masses. Virtually everyone, regardless of politics, religion or financial status agrees on the simple notion that taxes are too high, assessed via an unfair and fantastically complicated code (70,000+ pages, last I knew) that is impossible or any one person to manage or completely understand. Similarly, the majority of sub-250K/year earners agree that a simple 10% flat tax would be fair, easy to understand for everyone and easy for the government to manage/collect/account. Yet, here we sit, all of us, each and everyone, beholden, year after year, to rising taxes and an every expanding and confounding tax code that takes 15% or more from most sub-250K earners while also creating a plethora of scenarios that have millionaires paying under %5 while the middle class can pay up to 40% or more. All the while, the gov't mis-uses, abuses, mismanages and out and out steals the tax money that is collected.

So the question is, why would we expect the people to unite over one fundamental concept, CAP, when they have never even come close to doing so over another, taxes?

The other question is, of course, if the system (current politicians and businesses and wealth holders) determines the candidates from whom we may choose to vote into office, why would the system provide us such options that would lead to the destruction of the system?

I, for one, sadly, do not see any motivation for the current system to acquiesce on either point.


As for the technical implementation of CAP, I did read all that was in your book, including the proposed checks and balances and the idea that it's possible to create a system that is 'un-cheatable', for lack of a better term. Actually, your statement in response to the potential for the system to be manipulated was this: ‘Short answer: it is impossible, both theoretically and practically.’
Once again, I’m afraid this is unfortunately Utopian. Do banks often make mistakes? Do ISP’s? Yes! They most certainly do.

I suspect that most banking errors that are noticed are resolved over some period of time, but damage happens to lives in the meantime. In fact, many minor errors will go unnoticed due to the lack of attention paid by many consumers. Still, in the end, banking errors will be resolved, if noticed, because the banks know that anything else would result in a complete loss of clientele and therefore profit.

As for ISP’s, ever had an issue there? No? Then count yourself fortunate! Comcast has left a timing/clock issue unresolved for years! Verizon has had complaints of being unable to stop UN-authorized, un-warranted automatic withdrawals, even when clients spend ludicrous amounts of time working with their support to straighten things out. Oh…and the banks ALSO have complaints regarding not being able to similar transactions. Again, generally, these issues get ironed out…over some period of time. But, again, not always before damage is done.

The point here is that big data is COMPLEX, systems aren’t perfect, people aren’t perfect and big businesses are big for a reason and it ain’t because they’re in the habit of being altruistic. Let's take a look a few things that present significant obstacles to CAP. I'm not saying it's impossible and I'm not saying it shoudn't be pursued. Just sayin' that at the very least it will be a massive challenge.

1) Even little data can be complex. And CAP would be MASSIVE data.
2) A system such as cap would be perhaps the most massive secure data universally accessible system EVER. The design and implementation would be a team effort of thousands of people. Without worrying about security or integrity, it would be a massive undertaking. Adding in the security/integrity aspects takes it to a whole ‘nother level. Mistakes in design, implementation, maintenance, support and user operation will happen. Most issues will be addressed. Eventually. IF they are discovered. Think digital “hanging chadsâ€.
3) People aren’t perfect in effort or morality or integrity. Implementation of CAP will take a a LOT of people. Some of them will be bound to be looking for a way to manipulate the system and others will be hired by “the system†to specifically seek out way to manipulate the system.
4) Banks and ISP’s are in it for the money. Being entrusted to maintain CAP would make them a primary target for “the systemâ€. Since Banks are ISP’s are made up of people, “the system†will likely find takers. Thus, there is no guarantee that Banks or ISP’s will serve the spirit of CAP.
5) Finally, one word: Hackers. They’re out there. And the best will be employed by “the system†to exploit CAP for the benefit of the system.

With all of that in the mix, to say that it’s “impossible†to manipulate the system is optimistic to say the least, IMHO.

I love the CAP idea in spirit and in concept. But I don’t know that it’s realistic. Partly due to the complexity of the required implementation, but first and foremost because it would require a tremendous unwaveringly united front from an overwhelming majority of people. And that would mean they’d have to put aside all of their bickering over other very important issues, such as (please enjoy and also forgive my humorous aspirations here):

1) Should pre-shcoolers be allowed to wear hoodies to school? And, if caught in violation, how many days should they serve in prison?
2) Can a woman choose to have an abortion? Can she make that choice for her daughter? For her mother? For her favorite contestant on the Bachelor?
3) Is Vladimir Putin gay or just a metro-sexual?
4) Which minority/majority/race/physical attribute/athletic event/charity deserves exclusive use of the color turquoise?
5) How can we convert more of the world’s food into fuel so that we can continue to drive past starving people?
6) Almost 100% of experts agree that global climate change is a due to human activity. Should DWI fines be lower for drivers of hybrid vehicles?
7) Should baptized bank robbers be allowed to take ID pictures with their masks on?
8) Holding parents accountable for their children’s bad behavior but levying jail time and fines at any parent that actually disciplines their children beyond requesting an appointment with the child to discuss “How to make grown up choicesâ€.
9) Choosing budget cuts for non-essential services: Local soup kitchen/homeless shelter, reducing fire department personnel or have 1 less diplomatic dinner at the White House for minor foreign dignitaries?
10) Is Redskins a name borne of admiration or racism?

 

[fallenarch]

This is why CAP is a bad idea:

1. Essentially CAP is a Parliamentary system, where the electorate can call for a confidence vote on officials at any time. This is something our founding fathers specifically worked against because public officials need to be able to make unpopular decisions at times, or more simple to avoid mob rule. A representational democracy will allow officials time to make the tough calls and have time for the results to show before facing the crowd. BTW: since when did a mob act thoughtfully?
2. If you can't get people to vote, how are you going to get them to monitor all those numbers and make decisions?
3. The CAP system, as I understand it, would move the country more toward federalism. Currently you can only vote for your representatives as they represent you and are beholding to you. If you can vote on CAP for any representative, the rest of the country can vote for my representative. This is the same issue with money in politics. When someone in N.C. puts millions in a VA race, it reduces my representation as a Virginian.
4. As has been mentioned, how are you going to get elected officials to agree to get graded constantly?
5. CAP will bring government to a halt. You cannot reach agreement in an open, transparent forum. Compromise is the sausage making of government and it is necessary. Otherwise you are governing by committee, which will never work.
6. Even if we all know what our government is doing, will they know why? Keeping up with things would be a full time job that few of us have time for. So our decisions on who is making good or bad decisions would most likely fall back on emotional issues like guns, race, sexual orientation and religion. Sound familiar?
7. Unless the government is going to make available CAP stations everywhere, this system would be discriminatory and would push the approved decisions toward the upper classes, who have the time and resources to participate.

Gotta go to work, but there are several more.....

 

[IG.]

Wow! What a post, MelodicMetalGold! You bring up valid and to the point concerns, and elaborate well. A dash of humor makes it easy to read.

The objective of the book is to solve one issue - governments getting out of control, and dragging the country down, eventually to a crisis of magnitude. Key here is understanding why governments behave this way - and on a very fundamental level - away from politics, and that's what I hope will unite most people. I spoke with many who stick with a certain party not because they are such big fans, but because they see no other way. Most people are fed up with governments, and will gladly take a better path if presented. Regarding all other topics, let people argue - we are humans and have different opinions, and that's OK.

You are right that politicians often don't follow on their promises. However, this will be an issue of one simple and bold promise. It will be really hard to back off. What you also may not realize that those politicians who don't feel comfortable making such promise will not be elected. As a result, a different breed of politicians will emerge.

"So the question is, why would we expect the people to unite over one fundamental concept, CAP, when they have never even come close to doing so over another, taxes?"

Your question contains the answer: fundamental concept. Your example with taxes is great. However, this is a common problem, but not a fundamental concept. Situation with taxes is a consequence of something else, namely the desire of the governments to squeeze more and more money out of it's people, which in turn is a consequence of governments growing and getting out of control and as a result needing more money. Without addressing the underlying reasons attempting to change the tax system is futile. Governments getting out of control is the fundamental reason - not only when it comes to taxes, but to so many other things - big and small.

"The other question is, of course, if the system (current politicians and businesses and wealth holders) determines the candidates from whom we may choose to vote into office, why would the system provide us such options that would lead to the destruction of the system?"

They do influence the selection, however if people demand one and only one thing - voting for CAP, there would be nothing they (system) could do no matter how they disagree with it. It is our divisiveness which gives politicians so much wiggle room in making promises. Once it is narrowed down to a simple indisputable issue, they will have no choice but to either accept it, or give up their position. This will allow a new breed of politicians to emerge. Have no doubt that current politicians and businesses and wealth holders will put a desperate fight.

As to the technical implementation of CAP, you are generalizing and throwing many things in one basket. By the sound of it, no computer system can be implemented. Yet, we have so many computer systems successfully running. Hackers can only take advantage of flaws in the the system - there is no magic here. You have to point out to a specific flaw. Being a software developer, I am very specific and deliberate when it comes to technical implementation. So, are you saying that hackers will break into the banks' systems and add/change votes? If they could do it, they would routinely be breaking into our banks and stealing money - a more lucrative proposition. Never heard of that. Same goes for ISP's. I also never heard about a hacker breaking through VPN, because that's how banks and ISP's will be communicating.

All the reasons you are providing are more of a general nature, more indicative of your overall doubt - an emotional state. Let me address them one by one.

1) Even little data can be complex. And CAP would be MASSIVE data.

General statement. There are approx. 150 million registered voters. Unidentifiable voting information for each voter would occupy no more than let's say 1000 bytes. So, all voting information would occupy 150 GB of data - a smaller portion of a typical 500 GB or even 1 TB hard drive on your typical desktop, or even a laptop.

2) A system such as cap would be perhaps the most massive secure data universally accessible system EVER. The design and implementation would be a team effort of thousands of people. Without worrying about security or integrity, it would be a massive undertaking. Adding in the security/integrity aspects takes it to a whole ‘nother level. Mistakes in design, implementation, maintenance, support and user operation will happen. Most issues will be addressed. Eventually. IF they are discovered. Think digital “hanging chadsâ€.

General and wrong statements. By design, the viewing part of the system is already available to anyone - there is no need to hack or breach anything. Anyone in the world is free to download all voting information which does not contain any identifiable information such as names, addresses, etc.

You are also wrong about the design and implementation effort. The system is actually so simple - a lot simpler than many existing computer systems. It would take no more than 10-20 people to design. Logic is simple, and there are just a handful of possible screen layouts. Heck, a single enthusiast developer could do the work. Banks will only have to tweak their existing systems to accommodate a few new fields, otherwise it's like creating a bank account.

Automated Continuous Auditing Process quickly discovers discrepancies assuring the system's integrity.


3) People aren’t perfect in effort or morality or integrity. Implementation of CAP will take a a LOT of people. Some of them will be bound to be looking for a way to manipulate the system and others will be hired by “the system†to specifically seek out way to manipulate the system.

Let them try, and end up in prison. It is a valid concern, but supported by a very general statement. I can only reiterate: it is theoretically impossible to alter data which will go unnoticed. Try to come up with a single scenario how this could be accomplished.


4) Banks and ISP’s are in it for the money. Being entrusted to maintain CAP would make them a primary target for “the systemâ€. Since Banks are ISP’s are made up of people, “the system†will likely find takers. Thus, there is no guarantee that Banks or ISP’s will serve the spirit of CAP.

Again, general statement suggesting that nothing can be implemented at all. Please point out how a bank or an ISP would take advantage of it, or how an outsider would target the system.


5) Finally, one word: Hackers. They’re out there. And the best will be employed by “the system†to exploit CAP for the benefit of the system.

Absolutely valid concern, but once again, hackers can only exploit a flaw. ISP's do NOT have any identifying information. ISP's do not have an interface allowing to change voting information. In order to change voting information, a hacker needs to penetrate an ISP, learn DB passwords, learn server passwords, and so on and so forth. But even if all of this is successful, automated Continuous Auditing Process will quickly discover the discrepancy between ISP data and bank data.

Your humor is appreciated, LOL. And as you pointed out correctly, in order to start this process, the key is to unite and put all our bickering aside. I hope that understanding that absence of full and continuous control over our governments is the fundamental reason - will do just that.

I appreciate your detailed responses leading to a productive discussion of this important subject.

 

[IG.]

Fallenarch, these are good points - thank you. Let me go over them one by one.

Essentially CAP is a Parliamentary system, where the electorate can call for a confidence vote on officials at any time. This is something our founding fathers specifically worked against because public officials need to be able to make unpopular decisions at times, or more simple to avoid mob rule. A representational democracy will allow officials time to make the tough calls and have time for the results to show before facing the crowd. BTW: since when did a mob act thoughtfully?

You have an absolutely valid concern, but you are not exactly right. If CAP allowed a simple rule of majority and would allow removal of a public official right away, that would be a mob rule. I am all for a Republic and would never want to change that. However, there are five things which significantly tame down this process, effectively giving regular people a good degree of control over their politicians, while at the same time not giving them so much control as to be able to act as a mob. First, CAP process contains two phases - in first phase, we continuously approve/disapprove a public official. Only if a disapproval reaches a threshold, we move to the second phase where we have to make a separate decision whether to keep/remove a public official, and we only remove an official if the vote reaches a certain threshold. Nothing is automatic. Second, both thresholds are set around 67-70%, so a 50.1% disapproval will not cause any action against a public official. Third, there is a time delay of 7 days to make a decision on whether to keep/remove a public official, so it's not instant. Fourth, an unattended vote of a disapproval automatically changes to a vote of approval after 30 days if left untouched. Fifth, all initial settings of votes are set as votes of approval.

Both the threshold and the delay can be set differently in order to find a good balance. What would be your suggestion? Maybe you have another idea what else could be done in order to achieve a good balance?

2. If you can't get people to vote, how are you going to get them to monitor all those numbers and make decisions?

This is a great question! The Key is in understanding why people don't vote: 1) they don't believe their voice matters; 2) it is a lot of time/effort, so many opt out especially considering item 1. With CAP, this will be easy, engaging, and fun. Reading others' comments alone would be entertaining and a new way to learn what others think. One can use CAP on their smartphone, tablet, computer, ATM, or even on Internet enabled TV's - achieving unprecedented accessibility. People will feel in control because they truly will be in control of their politicians. They will know their voice matters, and will be eager to express it.

3. The CAP system, as I understand it, would move the country more toward federalism. Currently you can only vote for your representatives as they represent you and are beholding to you. If you can vote on CAP for any representative, the rest of the country can vote for my representative. This is the same issue with money in politics. When someone in N.C. puts millions in a VA race, it reduces my representation as a Virginian.

No, you are mistaken. Please have another look. A voter can only approve/disapprove their respective public elected officials which pertain to their country/state/district/town/village/municipality. No federalism.

4. As has been mentioned, how are you going to get elected officials to agree to get graded constantly?

They will never agree, but they will have no choice but to either accept, or give up their position. Have no doubt they will put a desperate fight, stopping at nothing to preserve their power. Practical way to achieve this would be to make CAP the only issue of every future election. This would leave no wiggle room for a political candidate - either disagree and leave, or agree and vote for CAP. What will unite us to focus on this one issue only? Understanding that CAP addresses the root cause of governmental decay: absence of full and continuous control of people over their governments.

5. CAP will bring government to a halt. You cannot reach agreement in an open, transparent forum. Compromise is the sausage making of government and it is necessary. Otherwise you are governing by committee, which will never work.

If you are referring to the federal government, it is close to the halt already. Our society becomes more and more divided. As the book explained, this process will only deteriorate. The more divided our society becomes and as a reflection of that on our governments, the more stalemates we will have in our federal government. Aside from that, CAP would simply put politicians on a shorter leash. With CAP implemented and united by deeper understanding, we all will be less divided, and therefore compromises will be easier to reach to begin with. Being under CAP, politicians keep doing what they are doing today, but under our watchful eye. This will make them to be really concerned with their honesty and integrity, and that's the main purpose we are trying to achieve.

6. Even if we all know what our government is doing, will they know why? Keeping up with things would be a full time job that few of us have time for. So our decisions on who is making good or bad decisions would most likely fall back on emotional issues like guns, race, sexual orientation and religion. Sound familiar?

It is a valid concern. However, you are overlooking that fact that there are millions of us - observing, reading, watching TV, thinking, etc. We already know a lot, and process new information daily without even realizing it. Currently, everyone keeps their concerns and frustration with specific government actions inside. CAP would allow to act upon such dissatisfaction, not only by allowing to disapprove an elected official, but to also express your view anonymously while at the same time letting others see what you expressed. While an individual may be focused on a few selected issues, millions of us collectively would certainly cover the entire spectrum of issues. Examples of the topics you mentioned is a small selection of popular debatable topics. There are many specific more mundane wrongdoings by local, state, and federal governments which leave no doubt in people's mind that those were wrong.

Utilizing CAP, government officials will be able to easily conduct research of people's opinion, and will be able to know how their actions are perceived by the people they govern. A seemingly unpopular decision can be explained to the people, preferably ahead of time. Many of us are reasonable people, and may even agree when presented with a valid argument.

7. Unless the government is going to make available CAP stations everywhere, this system would be discriminatory and would push the approved decisions toward the upper classes, who have the time and resources to participate.

This is a valid concern. That is why CAP system will be available on any smart device, laptop, computer, ATM, and even Internet enabled TV. How about donating an older device to someone who doesn't have one so that they could use CAP? For example, I know for a fact that an older cellphone can be donated and then given to an older person so that they can easily call 911 for free in case of an emergency.

Some people who are unable to utilize the system themselves (e.g. disabled, or older people) could be helped by relatives, volunteers, and friends.

 

[fallenarch]

If you are willing to address all the difficult if's that your system would have to resolve to work, why not take a simpler approach:

1. Stop making it difficult to vote. We need to be able to vote online.
2. We should be able to watch election results on line in real time. We should have vote PINs that you can enter on line and see every thing you ever voted for.
3. There should be an online, real time database that tracks votes in congress, presidential vetos, vacation time - everything cap hill does on line for public access.
4. Every dollar a government official gets for a campaign should be listed on an online database anyone can log onto. If doners want to be annomous, they can be listed by type (i.e. Oil Company, HealthCare Company, etc.). You can give as much as you want, you just have to tell people where your money comes from and who owns you.
5. There should be an online information source that is non-party affiliated. They would evaluate bills based on the benifit/negatives to people by demographics. All should be so average people can understand it.
4. Teach citizenship in schools again.

No need to change the system........

 

[IG.]

Fallenarch, all excellent points and I am all for it. Although positive, implementing your points will cause only marginal improvement. I often watch Fox News (and CNN as well), and lately getting sick of it. "We report, You decide" is their motto. They oftentimes keep discussing the same subject over and over again (milking the cow so to speak), and although I often agree with what they uncover, there is nothing I can do in practical terms. I want to scream at the screen: "OK, you reported and I decided, and then what?" My point is that I can have a detailed report in front of me with all the wrong things the governments and politicians are doing, and won't be able to do a thing except for getting frustrated and discussing it with others. With CAP system in place, others and I would have a practical way to provide a meaningful feedback loop to our pertinent elected officials, who in turn would really listen because they would know what's coming if they don't. On a personal note, I also would rather have people browsing CAP system being curious what others are saying about governments and politicians, and effectively participating in a political process than spending hours on Facebook.

Regarding voting online, no one will trust a government or any other company's website to correctly collect and count votes. If their system works as the healthcare website, you can bet it will be hacked and messed up before the vote is over, or it will simply go down. Voting online can only be implemented as part of the proposed CAP system because it is impossible to cheat, decentralized, reliable, redundant, and has a number of anti cheating mechanisms in place including automated self auditing process. I am a software developer of many years, and can taste how such system would be designed and how it would work - flawlessly. As I mentioned, CAP is a pretty simple system compared to many existing ones.

The uniqueness of CAP system is that organizations charged with supporting it would not have full control over it. Ordinarily, this has never been done because usually a computer system belongs to an organization who fully controls it - be it a bank, a governmental entity, or a corporate entity. In case of CAP, it belongs to the people. Participating banks and ISP's are simply facilitators with very limited control. Although this has never been done (there was no need), this does not present a technical obstacle.