Do you think this world government would be ideal?

Question

Do you think, if the whole world, adopts a form of equality, where no one is above another and social classes are abolished throughout the world, it would ideal? Do you think if corporations were eliminated and everyone was given basic resources, it would be ideal? Do you think if ordinary people were involved in the government's decisions, it would be ideal? Do you think if the government was under scrutiny to make sure they were equally distubuting resources and not plotting against the people, it would ideal? Do you think, if there were survellience cameras everywhere to prevent people from commiting crimes and making sure everyone was working, it would ideal?

Why would it be a disaster if attempted?

yager, this is not a calculus question...o.O

Mist Hurricane, what you talking about?

Answer 1

No. Why should we give up our sovereignty to a world government and then have to comply with world rules and laws that go totally against what we believe and our constitution?

Answer 2

I think the problem with this utopion outlook on world goverment is three-fold...power, checks and balances, and representation.
First, George Washington once said that 'government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous master and a fearful servent.' The problem is that power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. A government tends to become more tyrannical and abusive in relations to it's distance...for example, we can say our first government is ourselves, then our families, then our city, county, state, federal, then world government...with world government being the most out of touch, and ourselves being most in touch.
Second, there will be no checks and balances in a one world government. Difficult enough in the U.S., for example, to have accountability at the federal level, who will be accountable at the world level? God? Who can ever challenge the final ruling of a one world government?
Third, representation...we represent 1 of 6 billion units of power in a one world government. Soon, will be 1 of 10 billionths...and most of us, are a small one at that, being that today oligarchs and the wealthy have a preponderance of power when it comes to governance today. I and you will have a decreased amount of power when it comes to government as it increases it's distance, and more of a power as it becomes more local.
Equality is a myth, nothing is equal. The famous phrase all men are created equal, does not mean all men are equal. Obviously the slave-owners who wrote it didn't think all men are equal...
Corporations being eliminated may not be a bad idea, depending on what replaces it. However I do agree that corporations along with rampant capitalism is becoming a big problem. America's middle class are being squeezed out, in favor of shipping jobs and corporations overseas for cheaper overhead and cheap labor, and they like to keep wages low to sell cheap products to the masses. Their concern is profit only and what is good for business, unfortunately, not always what is good for business is good for America.
I believe in the phrase, the masses are asses. No, ordinary people involved in government decisions would not be ideal. Far from it. Most people work, have families, take trips, and simply don't have the time to truly delve into what is going on in Washington D.C., federal government. I guess this can apply to any country...in reality, 1 percent or less really control the sways of government and revolutions anyway. Hence why the opposite, local government, is most beneficial to the ordinary people.
Your question, Do you think if the government was under scrutiny to make sure they were equally distubuting resources and not plotting against the people, it would ideal, once again, is flawed logic...because who is the government? People. And people are not perfect, they are flawed. The genious of the founders of America's republic was the idea of checks and balances. They knew that power always breeds corruption, no matter who you put in there, or how you spin it. The best course to prevent corruption was to have a series of checks and balances, one branch watching another, of relative equal power, to make sure one doesn't have an over-reach on the other...hence, legislative, judicial, executive branch...Unfortunately, it seems the executive branch has gained a monopoly over the others, and seems to continually take away power from congress and presidential powers becoming more despotic...for example, presidential decisions on troop deployments and warfare.
Your last question, Do you think, if there were survellience cameras everywhere to prevent people from commiting crimes and making sure everyone was working, it would ideal? I can answer it this way....you can tie everyone up to a tree, and get rid of crime 100 percent...however, what is the cost? Is it worth whiping out the peoples freedom, our liberty of movement, of thought and consciousness, to eradicate crime? There will always be crime, because people are flawed, hence why we need government...the trick of course is to give the people maximum liberty without wholesale license of crime.
Hey, I never promised you a rose garden...there is no perfect, stop looking for it...

Answer 3

No, no government is "ideal", there will be flaws in any no matter how "perfect". But whats your point? We could sit around speculating till the cows come home about what "the perfect governement" is, but it accomplishes nothing. Action speaks much louder than words, and I would rather be out working or helping somebody than try to think of perfection in a place there can be none.

Answer 4

I think it is generally a good idea but as for it actually working no. It's almost communistic concept it sounds okay but it will never realistically work. As for surveillance cameras I really don't believe that having them will make a difference people will still comment crime, how about in convenience stores or people stealing in Walmart they still do it. I could reallytype about three pages on this explaining this but I have decided that simple is probably better. lol.

Answer 5

A world government treating all people as equals without the existince of different countries is very ideal but very hard to implement.

Answer 6

Sure, as soon as we can get NY to stop fighting with NJ over Staten Is. Or Georgia v. Florida over oyster water. Or Bush's fence.

Answer 7

Wouldn't work. The only world government we will be getting is that run by the multinational corporations. Mark my word, it is happening. We will all be economic serfs soon enough.

Answer 8

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!


World governent is a bad idea.

Are you the person behind AJ?

Sorry aparently your not Aj

One of her crazy Qs Qshttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArvPZjLYGmtt2L0ndqqNdD7sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071115150224AA6WsIb&show=7#profile-info-Qz9JygLdaa

Answer 9

7 because as the limit of x approach's 2 from the right side, the function f(x) gets incredibly close to 7

Answer 10

Can you say Hello Russia? I hope you are just asking a thinking question not thinking that it would be ideal.