Re: This is the future of mankind anyway

"Aleksandar Sarovic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> "Stuart Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Aleksandar Sarovic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > "xyz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > Have you ever considered that you might be wrong?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Of course I have and hesitated to be self-confident for 20 years. But
>  guess
> > > what, my book has already been reviewed by many people, amongst them by
> > > university professors, and no one has found any reason why it would not
> > > work. Now it is time to be taken seriously and I am very provocative for
>  the
> > > same reason. Besides, my system cannot make any harm to anyone, only
>  good
> > > things.
> > >
> > Well you are lying
> >
> >
> 
> 
> I am afraid you are not capable of following a basic logic. But I give you
> one chance. Please tell me where do I lie?

Aleksandar, I'm essentially an idealist so I like the concepts you
have proposed but there still seems to be some stuff I'm not sure
about.

1) Having every person in the world vote on every descision would be
great but I think that placing that much trust in the internet is a
bit nieve.  It will never be completely secure and not everyone can
afford access.  Plus if a cable or a main hub is overloaded, it is not
just a communication problem but also a political one.

2) You said that if one party was to not pay taxes then all other
parties must also agree.  If that is the case.. nothing with get done
cause there will always be someone who disagrees.

Cheers,  Andrew