1. We can see that the current systems of capitalist economy, and federal representation may imply more costs in overhead than the benefits they produce, given the current environment of heightened technology, population density and proliferance of human life.

    In the case of remote operation, and mechanization of the work place and factory, we lose more money to maintain jobs requiring human involvement and physical interaction than to simply let the proprietors of the workplace transform itself and its resources in order to achieve efficiency.

    The capitalist system proposes to help us determine who to distribute our resources to, at an individual level, and in its current incarnation and supplementary government interaction it allows this at the semi-individual level.

    However, an accumulation of wealth can only be guaranteed through willful exchange for services. When there is the case that all services that can be granted aren’t beneficial to the current owner of wealth, then the population that can only grant services that cannot be beneficial will not get wealth. The problem that arises is that there is a certain amount of wealth that is necessary to be obtained for sustenance, and if that wealth cannot be achieved, the population suffers. This suffering has a widespread impact that is indirect that is social, political and economic in nature and can negatively affect all sectors of the population over time. Because of these indirect negative impacts, any positive effects of diminishing the population in order to better adjust the system for current arrangement and availability of resources may be determined to be overall counter-beneficial.

    We may be able to profit more and more consistently by orchestrating large scale socio-economic organization, and being able to respond quickly enough to adapt to a changing environment and pool of available resources.

    We would need to figure out how to comfortably sustain people, and culturally and emotionally satisfy population members while maintaining optimal productivity.

    This involves study and acceptance of behavior, cultural and emotional motivators and friendly interaction to help perpetuate a current understanding of a people and its decision making powers. This also involves a high level of education and involvement of the people in the decision making powers they have and the known consequences and effects.

    Government should facilitate ease of the decision making process and maintenance of all vital systems, in a way that is open to investigation and transparent.

    Some of these systems should include networks for education, ease of transportation of geographic relocation, a basic level of physical and mental health care, a trial based judicial system, and systems to monitor the progress of a system on a large scale and the availability of all the populations resources.

    We can build machines that build machines and then we can work remotely to operate them, in order to cut the costs of transportation, and divert efforts to efficient growth of the things that are immediately or strategically important.

    We need to be able to respond more efficiently and with better support to people who must make life adjustments to respond to changes in their work place and their lines of economic support.

    Many changes can be made already to work out a more efficient and effective system of production, except that there is now not adequate support for the people who must adjust in order to make these systems work.

    Forms of necessary support include relocation and job finding services, fallback educational programs, food, shelter and healthcare based welfare systems, mental help and easing programs, and cultural gratification.

    These systems must also be made immune to abuse by individual recipients of support. This can be done through satiation, is we know that we can engage enough of the non-productive population members in productivity by custom or tailored responsiveness, and weighing out the cost of engagement or participation on an individual level in order to make decisions about support type, continued support or penalization of the recipients.

    In order to facilitate the level of responsiveness that is necessary to the  decision making processes involved with making workplace changes and supply infrastructure and operation, people should be able to have a say in what gets produced, how it is produced, and be able to cut trade deals with suppliers on a large scale through democratic processes. The interaction is willingful on all sides, except that the supplier will be obligated to divulge all its information about operational procedures, income, expenditures and business model, or any other information pertaining to the operation of its business, and the supplier will be obligated to allow inspection of any aspects of any of its operating constituents. In the case of inspection, the inspector must also be obligated to divulge all its information about operational procedures, income, expenditures, or any other information pertaining to the operation of its business, and the supplier will be obligated to allow inspection of any aspects of any of its operating constituents.

    In this way suppliers will be directly bound to a responsive social contract that ensures its ethical behavior in a current context, and at the same time now be opened to be able to negotiate with its market constituents (who may be positively and negatively affected by the supplier) using different mechanisms than that of monetary exchange, because the market constituents will have a more diverse range of tools to interact with.

    If a certain percentage of vote is achieved, possibly with greater importance placed on votes received in and around geographical, social, or economic locations of physical, mental, monetary, and equitable “impact zones”, then the supplier being considered must come to a deal or be forced to adhere to a solution recognized by the democratic constituents under the penalty of arrest.

    Our current system of federal and local representation is not responsive enough.

    Nowadays we have the technology to make the voting and information exchange process easier and more efficient.

    If we all are aware and can agree on a system we can make it a reality. It takes education and a high(tened) sense culture of political, social, and economic awareness, and awareness of the science and power of organization and cooperation.

    We are now coming out of times of mainstream acceptance and systematic perpetration of injustice and inequality on the civil level. We are finally lifting the veil off the eyes of humanity with respect to racial and cultural differences, and now understand that these differences in themselves have no important or dangerous implications. We do not have to be afraid of each other anymore, or misunderstand each other. We now understand how to manipulate nature to such a degree that we can rapidly communicate with each other in order to cooperate, and fix misunderstandings, by revealing the truth to each other. Instead of believing differences in cultures means there has to be separation of cultures, we know that there are really no such rules to interaction that are inherent in nature.

    The currently alive generations are the first generations in America to really experience life without widespread acceptance of racial discrimination by mainstream society. We do still experience systematic racial discrimination, due to the equal opportunity act, although it is what we may consider a positive form of discrimination, in that it fairly minds history and serves to correct a problem of unequal and unsafe dysfunctional distribution of wealth and resources that arose through actions that were designed and intended to destroy specific races in favor of other races of people.