another idea for democracy based on super-majority voting instead of simple majority of representatives chosen in many cases by plurality votes. In such a government everything requires a super-majority of the vote, such as 80% of the vote.
The assumption is that the initial condition of the fully automated economy and government is ideal in terms of a modern middle-class experience for everyone with a guaranteed income and free entertainment. It can only get worse from there. Humans offer nothing to improve the future of the automation. Inevitably, they will segregate into groups. Those groups will strive for improvements of their condition where their best opportunity is at the expense of other groups. The automation will adapt.
I think this daily expense account is more realistic than a basic income to provide for the basic welfare of the unemployed in a fully automated economy. It is also helpful to illustrate how dismal this state of affairs will be. The expense account is a daily ration, and a cot in a shelter. But the shelter will have plenty of available virtual-reality head consoles.
We need a new approach to governance at all scales in order to sustain and build upon our culture. I think a new approach is possible by recognizing that narratives are expendable. We do not need consistency of narratives over time, for all narratives at all scales from nations to individuals.
For those who were surprised by this recent election, be prepared to be even more surprised by the next one.
The first ten amendments are descriptive of pre-existing rights the population perceived it already enjoyed before ratifying the constitution. A major reason why the courts so often have to make decisions on grounds of these first ten amendment is because the ruling majority has newer more modern understanding of natural rights of citizens.
I am frustrated with the current debate about gun rights to be exclusively about the wording of an amendment written by people living some 12 generations earlier. I would welcome a fresh debate on proposing a new amendment that confirms but updates the rights granted by the second amendment. An amendment such as the above may advance the debate by minimally impacting gun rights for rural areas while allowing for closer regulation of public trust for arms in denser populations.