Thoughts of a New World

scarcity as an economic concept, is the conclusion of a specific line of reasoning regarding the rational distribution of resources.to measure scarcity of a particular economic good or service, we must assume that a price mechanism resulting from the market laws of supply and demand will provide an accurate indicator of relative scarcity, thus providing a means to make decisions about the opportunity costs of competing products and services... but this assumption presupposes the existence of a market... it presupposes that subjective valuations of resource desirability by predictably irrational individuals, varying from self-interested to altruist, can act as indicators of resource availability...i think this assumption is in error. and takes the whole idea of rational resource distribution from the wrong angle. but since we're limited to market interactions by definition, we must move on to ethics to attempt rationality.feudalism taught us that top-down hierarchies are not so good for the majority of people, and the majority of the people eventually started taking a firmer hand in the governing of their own lives and the lives of those around them. ... There is a fair amount of research showing the same thing. Markets are hierarchical... but they can be "flattened" out by democratizing the organizations that act as agents in the economy.Worker-owned co-ops are by no means perfect, but if i have to choose the lesser of two evils, ethically, i'd rather see a world of "middle class" people, without the upper and lower classes, ie. reduced economic inequality, than a growing upper class that requires a growing lower class, until it doesn't require the lower class at all. http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/12/18/if-apple-was-a-worker-cooperative-each-employee-would-earn-at-least-403k/

Should children be held responsible for their actions in the same way as adults?

Should the Roman Catholic Church (If they are unwilling to simply dissolve the church) do away with Church Laws regarding celibacy and marriage?

 if drone strikes, which terrorize civilian populations, with or without the presence of "terrorists", are not terrorism, then the word has lost it's meaning.terrorismˈtɛrərɪzəm/nounthe unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.none of the civilians killed by drone strikes authorized such strikes.let's have a look at what constitutes a war crime, shall we?from wikipedia:"-murdering, mistreating, or deporting civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps-murdering or mistreating prisoners of war or civilian interneesforcing protected persons to serve in the forces of a hostile power-killing hostages-killing or punishing spies or other persons convicted of war crimes without a fair trial-wantonly destroying cities, towns, villages, or any object not warranted by military necessity"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime Drone Strikes qualify as war crimes on at least 2 counts In fact, the Patriot act itself has permitted war crimes, since it has allowed several individuals to be killed or punished without a fair trial.