Would a single "World Government" prove more effective than the individual Nations managing themselves?

Answer 1

OMG
Incompetence, corruption, vice, and stupidity on a GLOBAL scale....
Stop the planet, I want to get off...

Answer 2

NO! Look how ineffective the UN is. The only world government that is likely to occur in the new future is if Islam conquers the world. Europe will be the next continent to be conquered as their native population is going to decrease and their immigrant population is increasing. Most Europeans are too soft. Only the British have the guts to fight.

President Bush is trying to move the US into a union with Mexico and Canada, the North American union. If that occurs it will be a total disaster for the US and Canada.

Answer 3

Not at all Skinny. A single "World Government " would be disastrous to our existence. We would lose all our rights as citizens. And the same goes for creating the North American Union. Look at what has happened to Britain after they entered the European Union. This video will show you just how disastrous the NAU would be to the USA.

http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/videos/EuropeanUnion.html

This is a 45 min video from Britain, it will open your eyes completely on why we need to fight against the establishment of the North American Union.
Please DO NOT pass on viewing this because of how long it is. If you don't have the time to watch it right now, PLEASE star this question so you can find the link with ease.

Answer 4

The only thing that a single world government would bring is stability. That means you would have to rely on the leader or leaders of this single world government for their benevolence and that is dangerous. If the countries of the world see atrocities occurring then it is their moral duty to come together and quell it. Other than that, nations and cultures should be left to their own devices, and allow them to peaceably coexist via free markets with limited controls. This ensures freedom.

Answer 5

No. The larger the area of government, the worse things go. Because it is very inefficient. Can you imagine the US federal government trying to govern each little town and hamlet in the US? How long would it take them to fix a pothole, put up a stop sign, etc.?

Answer 6

Do you want someone telling you what you can eat for breakfast, what clothes to wear, how much money you can make, when you can travel, what services you can get at a hospital, what kind of car you can drive, when you can have children, how many children you can have, what sex the child will be, how many times you can flush your toilet, how much of your belongings will be given to charity, how many years you can live and what your favorite color will be? Socialism is a disease of the mind. It is an infestation of the soul and the parasites that promote it are a virus to humanity. Read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. Also read "Animal Farm" and "1984" by George Orwell.

Answer 7

It would if you're in the Third World, given the despots that usually rule there, but not for the "First" World, since invariably resources would be shifted from the developed world to the undeveloped world.

Answer 8

Only if that single world government was a copy of the US government. Anything else would be a serious down grade likely to spread poverty ignorance and disease

Answer 9

Yea, like we really would want a Single One World Government controlled by China and India to run the world.

But maybe you would.

But I sure as heck wouldn't !!!!!!!!!!

Answer 10

Hell, the governments now can't even control their own populace. NO WAY could they manage the entire worlds.