CDZ Wealth Distribution

[Holos]

It is not rare that I have come across the insistent request of Democrats and Liberals for the wealth of the elite to be properly distributed for the whole population.

I propose that before anything so marvelous happens and is cohesively established for transnational improvements, certain fundamental conducts must be comprehended and consented too.

With wealth also comes power, with power comes responsibility.

The responsibility is necessary so that no fuses are blown out with excessive power and left off without the information to light them again.

Even with appropriate infrastructure invested in, developed, maintained and established, civilians (international citizens) who are free and still working on their freedom (ie. the wealthy, rather they got their wealth concentrated and retained, or already efficiently and legally circulating), have to be educated in regards to their participation at such a permanent and continental request, enterprise and engagement.

This then being stated, I believe it is of a consensual nature that the truly needed process of wealth distribution has already been underway for a considerate amount of time.

Is there anything in this process that Republicans and Conservatives find disagreable?

 

[320 Years of History]

I propose that before anything so marvelous happens and is cohesively established for transnational improvements, certain fundamental conducts must be comprehended and consented too.

And what behaviors are they to which folks must consent? And who are the folks you feel must so consent?

Even with appropriate infrastructure invested in, developed, maintained and established, civilians (international citizens) who are free and still working on their freedom, have to be educated in regards to their participation at such a permanent and continental request, enterprise and engagement.

Red:

• What infrastructure do you consider as the "appropriate" one(s)?

Blue:

• Free or not, what makes you think that, as goes the redistribution of wealth, civilians (foreign or domestic) who have enough wealth that some of it can be shared with others are uninformed about the nature and extent of the contributions they are or will be called to make?

Note:
As you can tell from the above questions I've asked, I can't even get started in a discussion without having to ask for clarifying information. So, if you feel compelled to or can only respond to me with that passive voice syntax you so often use, don't bother. Simply letting me know you think it best that you and I not engage on this will be fine with me.

 

[BULLDOG]

You would be better off just writing what you want to say instead of trying so hard to sound intellectual. It would make your point better, and wouldn't make you sound like a wannabe prick.

 

[Holos]

I propose that before anything so marvelous happens and is cohesively established for transnational improvements, certain fundamental conducts must be comprehended and consented too.

And what behaviors are they to which folks must consent? And who are the folks you feel must so consent?

Even with appropriate infrastructure invested in, developed, maintained and established, civilians (international citizens) who are free and still working on their freedom, have to be educated in regards to their participation at such a permanent and continental request, enterprise and engagement.

Red:

• What infrastructure do you consider as the "appropriate" one(s)?

Blue:

• Free or not, what makes you think that, as goes the redistribution of wealth, civilians (foreign or domestic) who have enough wealth that some of it can be shared with others are uninformed about the nature and extent of the contributions they are or will be called to make?

Note:
As you can tell from the above questions I've asked, I can't even get started in a discussion without having to ask for clarifying information. So, if you feel compelled to or can only respond to me with that passive voice syntax you so often use, don't bother. Simply letting me know you think it best that you and I not engage on this will be fine with me.

Behaviors to consent with:

Law, policy and commercial enforcement.

The folk I feel have to consent, besides Democrats and Liberals:

Legislators, politicians, and merchants.

Appropriate infrastructures:

Roads carefully supplanted with assisting facilities for the improvement of long term health; planned to assure provision by insuring effective penalty for any intervening or disrupting transgressions over already established neighborhoods and thriving ecological systems such as national parks and reservations. Under further congressional meeting, the expansion of already delineated ecological niches or the implementation of completely new niches by the reconsideration of previously developed territory could also come to be appropriate.
Briefly, roads and ecological niches.

Contribution is unnecessary for the wealthy. The wealthy are self sufficient. Therefore the wealthy are able to share safely without any risk to their ammounted wealth or to their selves.

 

[Holos]

You would be better off just writing what you want to say instead of trying so hard to sound intellectual. It would make your point better, and wouldn't make you sound like a wannabe prick.

I wrote exactly what I wanted to convey. My point was to engage interested parties in writing what exactly they found disagreable in the efficient distribution of wealth, with their precise terms, since I have received many reports about equal distribution of wealth possibly being of a detrimental nature.