[Skybird]

Bruce, you are right on population sizes, I too preach that since long. I would like to see a global population of not more than 1-1.5 billion. More this one planet cannot sustain for lasting dynamic balances of ecological give-and-take.

Getting there is a problem, though. I think man will nbot get there by regulation, but onlky by war, natural disaster, mass starevations and epidemic diseases. In other words: man will get there only by "natural" means. Sounds cynic, but is not meant cynically. Ma's attempts to tackle the problems and rescue all those hungry people, will worsen the situation until it goes beyond control.

The second big thing beside population control that must be achieved is to destroy the state-monopoly on money. If money again becomes a resource of real value and thus limited availability, the spending frenzies of politicians and the endless wishes of the electorate that they bribe to elect them, necessarily will come to an end and will get reduced to sustainable levels all by themselves. Real money< got destroyed and replaced with worthless paper money in order to enable politicians to not be limited in their spending desires. In a simulation game, it would be considered an infinite-money-cheat. Politicians must be prevented at all cost to regulate money, for a real money and where it goes and what it does is a indicator for the political acting of a state. That is the reason why they desperately try to regulate money: to hide their own mismanagement and crimes. Politicians must be prevented to print money just as much as they need new chips. They must be stopped and prevented from that at all costs. Paper money must get destroyed. It is a cheat - and a cheat with very disastrous side effects. Needless to say: the central banks thus have to be destroyed as well. Without paper money there is no need for them anymore anyway. Their only purpose is top regulate money and to print it as needed by politicians.

And the third necessity on my list: Western people must understand again that freedom is not to be sacrificed for social equality, that nature does not know a concept of everything being "equal", and that justice and social equality are two totally different things. The same law for everybody: yes. Everybody being made equal by taking from the one and giving to the other: no. People should not be given money (that got stolen from the few) and according to their needs, but they should have the right to earn according to their ability.

We strangle ourselves but wanting to regulate all and everything. Nature. Freedom. Social status. Inbred abilities and disabilities. Economy. Thinking. Risk assessment. Economic enterprise. What we achieve is that we discourage the talent, and that we turn handicaps into the norm, that we get fixated on compensating our weaknesses and over that lose our strengths and do not improve them. By that we finally fail for our own home-made mediocrity.