Let's start a town/country/colony.

[Jenkins]

thank you john. for your efforts i shall bring you in as the the tresureor for my government

 

[Kovash86]

The unemployed, being of the surplus population which is unnecessary to the growth of society, will be restricted in breeding. One-child-per-couple regulations will have to be passed in order to keep the population at a sustainable level, something that could not be done in the long term with the legions of unemployed efficient management will create. This infringement upon human rights would be unique in a Technate, as its goal is to create a utopia in which men and women can do what they want. However, moral ideals must give way to simple practicality at some point. It is better to limit population growth for a few generations then to discover unsupportable masses later on.

The best way to limit population growth is with prosperity. I think there's something hard-coded into us by evolution that we produce many offspring when we wonder if our offspring will make it to a sexually mature age, and few when we can count on our offspring living long lives with multiple reproductive cycles.

In other words, it makes more sense to put all you eggs in one basket when only having one basket means you can watch that basket and make sure nothing happens to it.

Simply guarantee the unemployed that their children will be necessary to the growth of society, and for the cost of a one-time subsidy you can buy off surplus population growth.

I think there may also be some sort of mechanism that responds to war or the loss of a large number of one gender, and I know it isn't just horny soldiers returning from it, but right after WW2 America had a baby boom what was kind of bizarre about it was the % of the births resulted in males was about 300% of the regular numbers, effectively replacing losses in a single generation.

 

[Kovash86]

My personal country... That's a tough one, as I've never put much thought to it.

Location location location...
I'd suppose somewhere like New England. Not modern New England, more of 1990.

Economically: We'd be run by currency, as most countries/civilizations are. Oversea trade would be limited. We would import food as well, but much corn would be grown, as well as much ethanol processing.

Whatever you'd call this: In the metropolitan areas, any building exceeding ten stories would be prohibited. Noise pollution laws would be very strict. In suburban and rural areas, the same laws apply, but noise pollution laws would be looser. Modern factories would be utterly forbidden, in both areas. Sugar Cane and Corn (and Ethanol) would be massively produced resources. Any standing factories would be improved to the artificial lumber burning* which would be made in stand alone facilities, manually. Cars would be eliminated, and replaced with an underground transport system similar to the subway. The system would consist of looping rails going around the city to stations. Rail-riding vehicles would be available for rent at each station, summing into a fair rate of Two Currency Units/Three Miles. There would be two models to the rail-rider. electric powered and pedal, which would each rest on a different rail. (Red line for electric, blue line for manual) Hm... As for organization, the cities would be fit onto evenly measured blocks, with wide sidewalks in between, as well as the occasional railway station. I can imagine it a bit like Italy, with it's winding alleyways.

Military: No military.

Government: A council of four devout rulers. Corruption would not be tolerated to any degree. These four would be for the people, of the people, and always have the welfare of the citizens in mind. Each member would be part of the council for 10 years. Only 2 consecutive terms could be served.

Citizen wealth: Every citizen would be allowed a certain amount of luxuries. If you had a computer, you wouldn't get a TV for example. At age 18, all citizens would receive a government managed apartment, which would be maintained for 4 years. At the end of the four years, the inhabitant would be ejected.

Power/Energy: Due to our location, only salt water would be readily available for any sort of use.... I suppose we'd be using artificial, clean-burning wood*. I can't really think of anything for this one... The best thing I could devise is a man-made waterfall, which would require incredible labor.


Uhh.. That's all I can think of...
Yet I feel like I'm missing something..

Oh, also, my first post on The Escapist.

*Artificial wood is just what I use to describe miracle energy.

I see only one problem here, and I hate the necessity of it, every country needs a military, because some jackass nation or group will get jealous about what you have that they don't and they will attack you, whether you be on the ground, in space, or in the middle of the sun (just an example) someone will find a way to strike at you.

 

[Zemalac]

I see only one problem here, and I hate the necessity of it, every country needs a military, because some jackass nation or group will get jealous about what you have that they don't and they will attack you, whether you be on the ground, in space, or in the middle of the sun (just an example) someone will find a way to strike at you.

Not nessesarily. Switzerland, for example, hasn't been attacked by anyone in recent history due to a combination of good banks (go ahead and attack us--we have all your money) and very high mountains.

I'd say the problems in Portkins' system are more related to closing all the factories, thus making it impossible to mass-produce any items that might be nessesary. Also, strictly limiting the amount of luxuries allowed to people gives them nothing to strive for and causes societial decay. But that might just be my opinion.

@Portkins: Good first post, by the way.

 

[Anarchemitis]

So our Utopia will be like Mordor (save for the murder and such): a strikingly beautiful, sharp and very high mountain range surrounding the entire thing.

 

[Portkins]

I do see what you're saying Zemalac, originally when I typed it out, I had 'miracle power' factories, but they seemed a bit unneeded and redundant.

Secondarily, I didn't mean it so strictly. I meant if, for example, you had a diamond ring, you could only buy so many... But, again, revision is something I suppose I needed. In retrospect, I'd replace that with a high tax on luxuries (on purchase, not annually)

Also, I realized what I forgot. Taxes & Liquid management.

Edit: Thanks, Zemalac, I try to not post unless I've got something meaningful to say/point out.

 

[Zemalac]

Eh, no worries. A high luxury tax is a much better idea, in my opinion, though it does make the luxury-affording class much more elite than it was before. I dunno if there's any way ro regulate that, really. But then again, I'm not quite an expert on the issue. And as for the factories, I think you should use the man-made waterfall idea to power at least a few, simply because that is an awesome idea.

@Anarchemitis: Connecting Switzerland and Mordor...I never thought it possible. Yes, our utopia will be like Mordor.

Does anyone know how to create a giant flaming eye?

 

[Melaisis]

Does anyone know how to create a giant flaming eye?

One can do great things with chilli, sambuca and hydrogen.

 

[John Galt]

The best way to limit population growth is with prosperity. I think there's something hard-coded into us by evolution that we produce many offspring when we wonder if our offspring will make it to a sexually mature age, and few when we can count on our offspring living long lives with multiple reproductive cycles.

In other words, it makes more sense to put all you eggs in one basket when only having one basket means you can watch that basket and make sure nothing happens to it.

Simply guarantee the unemployed that their children will be necessary to the growth of society, and for the cost of a one-time subsidy you can buy off surplus population growth.

While in a society in which everyone could be trusted to make choices based on the good of the whole this would work out to limit population, human nature and self-sacrifice seldom intersect. Trust in the people is one thing, but control is better when the consequences are this serious. People can never be trusted to go along with something simply out of their own goodwill. I think legislation restricting family sizes would do better for population control, even in prosperous nations.

Also, look at the Baby Boom. Prosperity did nothing to slow down the families of America from churning out children.

 

[Zemalac]

@John Galt: I think that legislation would be a bad idea, because it's to overt a tyrrany. What you need to do is subtly work the idea into the very culture of your utopia. Make it so that people don't even think of having more than two children. Don't use propaganda, exactly: just a very subtle brainwashing. That way you avoid unfourtunate situations where parents actually have a third child. What are you going to do then? Any decision will seem overly cruel. No, alter the culture and you will have much better results. It might take longer, but with something as important as this quality is the only thing that matters anyway.

 

[John Galt]

Good point. However, the primary difficulty would come from the religious groups protesting against birth control and new moral structures. But still, they'd be a lot more tweaked if they had actual legislation to protest, so I guess your idea would work out better in the long run.

 

[Saskwach]

Also, look at the Baby Boom. Prosperity did nothing to slow down the families of America from churning out children.

I'm pretty sure the Baby Boom was the result of a generation of men coming back from war and getting down to their real business. Oh, and lots and lots of immigrants coming in and doing the same. It's pretty clear from the Baby Boom that prosperity isn't the only factor acting on fertility rates, but you can't say that prosperity and its results haven't lowered the number of babies being born. In fact, the problem that prosperous nations are finding is that their people aren't having enough babies. Look at Japan for instance- it's horrifying what will happen to their society in the next few decades.

 

[Omnidum]

We must rebuild the Aztec civilization! That way, we have a good city and protection!

 

[BuckminsterF]

An undersea city where the artist would not fear the censor and the scientist would not be bound by petty morality...

 

[John Galt]

Also, look at the Baby Boom. Prosperity did nothing to slow down the families of America from churning out children.

I'm pretty sure the Baby Boom was the result of a generation of men coming back from war and getting down to their real business. Oh, and lots and lots of immigrants coming in and doing the same. It's pretty clear from the Baby Boom that prosperity isn't the only factor involved on fertility rates, but to say that prosperity and it's results haven't lowered the number of babies being born. In fact, the problem that prosperous nations are finding is that their people aren't having enough babies. Look at Japan for instance- it's horrifying what will happen to their society in the next few decades.

*Faced with his own lack of research into the matter, our hero concedes the argument.*

 

[Anarchemitis]

An undersea city where the artist would not fear the censor and the scientist would not be bound by petty morality...

That seems plausible, in a video-game-fan psycotic scuba-man kinda way.

 

[Anarchemitis]

Holey Moley! A Necro!