Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!Touche! I cannot in good conscience disagree with thee so I won't! Every day in every way things are getting curiouser and curiouser (in dual homage to both Emil Coue and Lewis Carroll).
There are simply no easy answers. It is virtually impossible to enact great change without drawbacks, without someone suffering for it.
As an example- Crime. Historically the lowest crime rates occur in places with the harshest sentences, like physical punishments and particularly, death. Inevitably, innocent people get executed unjustly and crime isn't cured.
I think its fair to point out much of the world's strife stems from there being too many humans, how to address this without ending, shortening or preventing lives. Who gets told they can't breed? At what point are the uncounted masses of poor and indolent required or enabled to stand on their own and contribute more than mouths to feed? By what means?
There is no way to enact large scale change without spawning accusations of tyranny. At the risk of being a tyrant, and to finally answer your question, I'd pursue the following: Enact a worldwide policy of eliminating fossil fuels for renewable energy. No exceptions. (Exxon-Mobil will sue vigorously.) Require owners of arable lands to produce food on some portion of it. and put unemployed people to work on infrastructure and land reclamation.(Again, legal and financial challenges ensue) Require all countries to build water purification plants sufficient to support their populations. (How to finance these facilities?) Eliminate the public exercise and political influence of religion. 2 hands working are more useful than a thousand clasped in prayer. Too many conflicts born of faith, too much time wasted. All life sentences in prisons are commuted to death sentences. Why should the limited public dime be wasted warehousing useless criminals. That said, lifers will be given a grim choice of working for the public good or execution. Lastly - Automatic, unconditional and free healthcare to all with LEGITIMATE medical need. (That ought to fuel some rage)
There's my first 100 days. Let the outcry and protesting begin. At least until the Great Decider puts a lid on that too.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at February 12, 2017 11:11 AM MST
My oh my! This is a fine kettle of fish! I had written you off due to a prior answer that included egregious insult. But I can find no insult here at all though I have looked very closely at it. So thank you for this very thoughtful and informative analysis. I appreciate the time you invested in it. Happy Sunday to thee Z! :) This may be the start of a beautiful friendship! Now where have I heard that before?
This post was edited by my2cents at February 13, 2017 10:38 AM MST
My comments take whatever form is suitable to make my points, Rosie. You are free to interpret them as you like. I'm glad you liked these. I'd be a bit less judgmental about tone if I were you, lest you be thought a hypocrite.
Keep your questions coming, Dear, and I will gladly expound on them in thoughtful ways. Cheers.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at February 12, 2017 11:54 AM MST
Benedict Arnold 