I think it is imperative to the continuation of the human race as a whole to start thinking and feeling on a global scale. This age old argument that "we must fix our problems at home before we look abroad" is both immature and irresponsible. The current financial crisis should help illustrate how intertwined we are on a global scale. Each countries actions effects every other country in turn. The more we turn a blind eye, the more the atrocities around the globe continue. Get Involved. Educate. Illustrate. Communicate. And change will come.

http://notphilsnotions.blogspot.com/2008/07/free-markets-and-freedom.html

The bottom line is, the problems in the world while a lot of having to do with resource alocation is also intrinsicaly and inimatley linked to the way people conceptualize many things like the environment and education. No policy can truly change anything, only by changing the way people of the world view and value these issues.

How do we change peoples hearts and minds, this is the fundamental question of all cultural scholars, which from what I've read doesn't have the largest amount of agreement. yet.

Although, by making such organizations easier to form and fund, you will see abuse of the system, but everytime you take a rulle away or add a rule you will have those who will find a way to use it to their ends.

So in the end, I ask my self what's utilitarian.

sounds good, will do later today, got to head to work a bit. As for global problems I never said to not help or that countries in poverty should be expected to pull themselves out of their problems. I do understand the ffects of colonialism and how it has set back many nations from such a capability. I just think the the global community of citizens is much more that a global community of governments, and governments should around the world should instead facilitate volunteering more, than rely every problem on a multi-government effort.

There are lot of Non-Profit groups and volunteers groups that have people participating all around the world that cover things governments can't whether in for political reasons or other ones. Like this groups that illegally distributes medical supplies in areas of Burma that need it, they can't get support from the government, nor can governments help for political reasons.

Though I think by be freeing up some of the red tape on such organizations you'll get more global aid from citizens of nations all over.

good idea, md

I think if you'd like to discuss these ideas further, you should make a separate topic something like "Policy changes to improve the US" but this conversation, despite my talking with you about it, is in the wrong section right now. We can continue if in your new topic if you'd like, but I think here, we should talk more about Darfur, Child Slavery, how the world can help in the Congo, and begin to talk more about standing up to the religious over-sensitivity of islamic countries, etc etc. World, not US.

There was no mention of any government involvement, it was simply stating that given that we're stuck in Iraq, and little hope of a shortend to that, let us examine and vote on what we should be paying attention to, what people in first world countries (not just the US) should be concerned with.

The UN, US, EU, Canada, anyone that is capable of helping these countries, these situations, should. This wasn't about policy changes for a better america, it was about Attention changes onto things that will help make a better world.

Its' idealistic if you believe that things are possible, given any time frame, that simply would not hold up in the real world. This means the idea that the citizenship of any country is fully capable of self-regulation and economic strength with little more than the ideas of a smarter class. sadly, the american public is NOT this way, which is obvious given the complete, overwhelming propagation of the religious right into everyday, governmental policy. A smaller government only means that even less of the minority will go unheard, unhealthy and unsafe.

The idea of starving, dying african citzens, who have to struggle to get even food and water, have the self-fortitude and strength to go against the power hungry, healthy, heartless powers above them, is just plain pathetic and dumb. The powers have placed them in a situation where they CANNOT defend, cannot ride up. You do yourself a disservice if you really believe that people can always rise up against oppression without help.

Your example of leading by example is within a rich, healthy, free country. The idea that your sisters might not agree with you, is not the same as saying 3rd world citizens can follow americas example on their own.

The one thing you learned is wrong.

Education CAN be quantifiable, in the idea that there are minimums, standards and expectations. This isn't to say that standardized tests work. Its a matter of having expectations and ideas in place that should be followed.

The idea that education needs to be de-governmentalized before non-profits could receive tax benefits also runs counter to the obvious order things should go.

Resumes don't prove skils, but employers, generally, know this as well, Thats what the interview process is for, etc, and has no bearing on the rest of this conversation.

Things are talking points weather I agree with them or not. Democratic, Repbulican, Religious, etc etc, all have talking points. I am just pointing out that you aren't saying anything beyond those points. You have a list of libertarian principles, often disputed, and have adapted yourself into a cliché of ideas and views of the world that are surrounded by blinders from reasonable arguments. I would say the same thing of anyone who strictly holds an unwavering, stubborn view of whats obviously been disproven.

You propose that instead of making sure that all states have equal educational opportunities we hope that one state completely adjusts itself and forces other states to follow. This idealism can best be seen by gay marriage laws being banned. One state starts it, others follow. Good ideas, as much as its fun to imagine they work, will not be adapted as readily, or successfully as you plan, even in a distant future. The idea that people will migrate away towards better education is again, dreamy and unreasonable. Leaving one state in shambles and poverty, hoping that after everyone has left, they'll be able to implement new ideas and recruit people back? You don't see the backwards nature of that, instead of just making them be better in the first place?

Non-interventionism is the face of crimes against humanity, is an isolationism from responsibility, from the world community and from the decency we as americans claim to uphold. Were we not in Iraq, Darfur would have been handled with by now, saving the lives of those being exterminated, and those who fought in Iraq.

We both agree that no matter what, regimes with power will persecute those without, embargo's put strain on those with power to reject their destructive ways and adjust their attitudes in a way that allows them to be part of the world community as well. This hasn't happened in Cuba, those most recent changes proposed as superficial. Embargos have been lifted in Vietnam & other places where they've adjusted their behaviors, even if not completely in line with the US policy, more in line with humanitarian causes within the world as a whole.

While I do think all the issues you mentioned are important it should be addressed by global non-governmental organizations which there is plenty. We can unite as one earth without having to be attached at the hip of our governments. We are all individuals, and as individuals working together we can accomplish more than by hoping that bunch of politicians from around the world play politics can achieve.

Don't forget, the UN is a room full of politicians, you need peoples who's job aren't Dependant on the pervasiveness of world problems to fix the problem.

It's only idealistic if I think problems would just go away over night, that's not what I'm saying. Most of the changes I'm proposing can't be done overnight or it have to be gradual policy change so society adjusts effectively trust me I'm not proposing drastic environmental corrections of overnight policy changes. Also most of these problem I agree won't go away, but in the example of oppressive regime, the only people that can free themselves without blowback is the people themselves and by cutting off resources to citizenry we make them Dependant on foreign aid which undermines any chance for some modicum for freedom in the first place.

What you do is be prosperous, peaceful, and successful and lead by example. I don't tell my sisters how to live their lives, I go everyday and word hard and be the change I want to see and I've seen that work better than any meddling in others lives.

One thing I've learned is that the principles that work ina microcosm of society usually work in macrocosm.

Just cause I don't butt into my friends personal affairs doesn't mean I'm they are not my friends or that I'm anti-social. I just respect individuality.

Resumes really don't prove anything as far as skills, even degrees from the highest regarded schools really don't mean much in a world were privelage dictates. Making things easier for people never made them smarter.

Why are things always talking points when people don't agree with them, trust me I've done my reading but we're working in a world with finite resources and those resources need to be efficiently used in order for us to last through any crisis.

As far as education, sure not all education would be ideal at first, but if I were parent and heard let say Massachusetts implementing some innovative education practices I'd move from let's say Georgia. When the productivity of Georgians workforce drops due to the mass exodus it will begin to implement polices of the states that are seeing prosperity. As far as inner city schools, there will also be non-profits who will cater to them, and with less tax burden and more tax incentives to give to such organizations they'd be able to to provide. Nowadays since the entire burden is forced on an already taxed society not enough donations are in circulation to handle the overwhelming burden in todays system.

Education doesn't need to be quatifiable, it's impossible, and standardizing only has the horrible effects we see now. It's the job of employers of creating ways to test the skills of their applicants. In this manner it's not backbreaking if you can't afford to college long as you have the descipline to teach yourself and demonstrate your skills in whatever each employer has decided to do so.

isolationism is different than non-interventionism, non-interventionism is about having diplomatic relationships with other nation but not creating financial and military relationships cause those create enemies and tie us into random conflicts.

Embargos don't make change, the regime continues to have the power despite an embargo or not, and the people at the bottom just suffer more if pressure is put on the regime to take more.

And one of your items on this topic, which is about what things around the world need to be addressed immediately by more abled, 1st world countries, is the implementation of a non-interventionalist policy? You realize that's the opposite of this topic's point? Darfur, Child Slavery, Typhoon relief: these are all things that demand worldwide support and intervention. The idea of isolationism in the world today is like being against the internet. You are just spouting libertarian talking points without regard for where you are posting them. In general, all that you've mentioned are policy changes relating to the US and have nothing to do with the world society at all.

Trade embargos are in place because of the way those in charge of their countries treat the citizens. Opening up those embargos would improve nothing, it would only make those w/ power more powerful & rich, forcing even more of their power down its citizens throats. Its idealism vs realism. Itd be great to think if we opened trading w/ cuba the human rights violations would disappear, but they would only be more pronounced, and the products tainted w/ more blood of those innocent citizens.

Your views are distorted and based on some idealistic things that won't work in practice. Privatizing education, removing the dept of education? That will result in even less funding for inner city schools, a curriculum of creationism & bible studies only in southern schools and a removal of any sense of standards, making education unquantifiable beyond standardized tests which are flawed even now. It's a lot of Ron Paul nonsense, that sounds good at first, but become heinously ludicrous when you look into it more. And either way, I think there are more important things that need to be addressed IMMEDIATELY.

http://libertyia.ning.com/video there are many videos about the issues, also a series of videos of me describing my views more in depth, they are a little old so some of the views I state may be a little different from new information but from what I can tell most it's is still dead on.

I did vote, I provided some brief in-depth descriptions on why I voted for each thing I did, it's a good read, trust me.

I'm not gonna comment to in-depth, I do think these issues need attention I think they handled more efficiently if governments gave more authority to independant non-profits and charitable groups and game bigger tax benefits to giving to those groups.

Cause well... with governement run programs... you get less than you pay for in each of these situations.

Except forgiving the debt, working in the financial industry that just wouldn't work at logistically. You don't need to forgive the debt, governments need to start spending with their means instead of spending their citizens few resources for political games.

I'm not anarchist, but to me the only role of government is to protect my freedom to make my mistakes and successes, I'll decide my standard of living I just want to government to make sure I have the autonomy to do so, that's it.