Thank you Minotaur! FWIW, I have not forgotten that it was your gracious gift of 10 D which kicked off this journey for me! So double thanks are in order.
:grin::grin::grin:
We are all responsible for our own choices, and I feel conflicted because mine are leading me to a position where I have much less time to spend here than I would otherwise like. I am honoured to have had the opportunity to take part in this first vote (yes, I just did:grin
, even though I have not had time to participate in the ongoing debate and momentous changes that have been taking part here. I have been able to read most of it, and it seems that most of my thoughts have been represented to one extent or another, so it is comforting to know that I am not entirely needed here.
I will do my best to keep up with things, and vote as the occasion arises, but you may not be hearing much from me for awhile.
I would like to commend solarminer for doing such a fine job of consolidating the thoughts being expressed, and helping to maintain a cordial atmosphere. Shoot, even Camosol is sounding more level headed and not quite as belligerent.:what: One quick word about how I view "likes," since I might not have time for much else for a while. I use them frequently to express just that... I like a post that causes me to think and/or expresses a complex or controversial idea with clarity and cordiality. It does not necessarily mean I agree.:tongue:
Finally I would like to share a few, possibly impractical, ideas that I have not seen mentioned that I will leave for your corporate consideration. First, regarding taxation. Despite my libertarian (or possibly anarchic
), tendencies, I have no intrinsic opposition to the idea of taxes. The US founders were not opposed to taxation per se, but to taxation without representation. This chart (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP) shows that the average percentage of gdp taken in taxes, is about 20%. I think a max of 10% certainly keeps us in safe territory, given the current representative situation. Given all that needs to be done, I am not worried about abuse at this level. I think most governments and companies would be thrilled if they could limit TOTAL waste to that.:wink:
Second, there has been much discussion about the impossibility of fairly returning funds once they were emitted. I suspect it would be possible to code for excess(?) funds to be retained until the annual 7% reduction in rewards, and simply extend the existing level until the excess was fed back into the system in the normal way. In this way the total emission would not be changed, and there would be no significant motivation to prevent the spending of funds out of greed. Evan's new proposal might make this a mute point, but I have not had (nor do I expect) a chance to think about it.
Finally, regarding voting. I agree that voting should not be forced. That said, the objection that voter apathy could prevent adoption of worthy projects has merit. It seems to me that the simple solution is to have the vote close under two conditions. First, as soon as 51% (or 2/3, or whatever is decided on) of MNs vote in favour or against, a proposal; however, each ballot initiative should have a closing date. In the event that the chosen percentage is not achieved by that date, the decision should be decided on the basis of the votes cast--not the total number of possible votes.
It may be that all this has already been suggested, in which case, please excuse my redundancy. In the mean time...
Onward, and upward...
and peace to you all!
