???? Is No one going to mention the nose dive clinton took at ground zero?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Chad, I wonder if there is a scale of government anywhere in the world you think is 'doing it right'?

I don't know. I'm saying that scale and size is not the issue, but rather the ability to do more with less, to honestly evaluate the results of policies and not just the intentions, to develop infrastructure that directly benefits everyone instead of just a few and intangibly everyone else.

I'd like to see us move toward a socialist democracy of the sort you see in some northern european countries.

It seems that Northern European socialism seems to be sustained mostly by abundant natural resources, fossil fuels in particular. Southern European and South American countries have very similar policies but they seem unable to sustain them. Also, Fabian models are based on the industrial paradigm's of standardization and mass-production that I mentioned. Government housing apartments are built for the normative occupants. Transport is centrally organized to shuttle people along predetermined routes to designated districts. Socialism treats people like parts in a machine. I see the future as more organic, individualized, and more decentralized. Technology is putting power directly in the hands of people like never before. I can do more with my laptop than an large architecture firm could do 20 years ago.

Now I agree, this could go a couple of different ways. Maybe we are headed towards a Gibson dystopia. Maybe a Asimov utopia. Or maybe a little of both. I'm thinking the solution looks less like Fabian socialism and more like Capitalism 2.0. Instead of spreading the wealth, maybe the better approach is to making everyone a shareholder. Not a universal income, but universal capital - a minimum asset portfolio for each individual wherewith the productivity gains of corporations create prosperity with dividends. Just a thought. Maybe unworkable, but my point is that the old solutions will not work for much longer.

Sadly, we don't have the history of mutual concern they have.

I do not think that is a fair statement. Americans have always had preference of local community effort over universal governmental action. Each approach has its down-sides but that doesn't not make either one less compassionate.