.

[Lark]

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.



Let's be precise. I was referring to your shoes. Are your shoes a product of capitalism or were they created by some artisan with straps of leather?



It couldn't be that the political and economic environment promotes creative endeavors, right? Smart people exist everywhere, so where are all the great inventors from Venezuela?

So you figure that unless its like artisanal trade or primitivism its capitalism?

 

[Tellenbach]

So you figure that unless its like artisanal trade or primitivism its capitalism?

No, the fact that most shoes today are manufactured by corporations makes me think that they're a product of capitalism.

 

[Vendrah]

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

You mean if you flag as a Duck, then its a Duck cause you wanted to?
Then it is you who decides my convictions, right? Wrong!
Im a socialist now because I disagreed with some capitalism (or, rather, neo"liberal" aka "libertarian") stuff and for you everyone who disagrees is a communist! hahahahahah XD

Let's be precise. I was referring to your shoes. Are your shoes a product of capitalism or were they created by some artisan with straps of leather?

[MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION] already answered that for me! Thanks, Lark!
However, by the way, you (Tellenbach) should now stay on your house forever, you know why?
Roads and the public transportation system are all a product of government. Let's be precise: Are your roads created by some private company or by the government? By the government, so you, as a proper libertarian, should go with your own convictions and no longer use the roads and streets since they are all from the state!

It couldn't be that the political and economic environment promotes creative endeavors, right? Smart people exist everywhere, so where are all the great inventors from Venezuela?

Russia launched the first satellites on space.
The periodic table was also made by a russian.
There were some stuff made by scientists who were on socialism back then.

Political and economic environment can influence the inventions, but they can't invent things on their own.
If for you smart people only exist on capitalism, then, gee, that is really really short-sighted.

 

[Virtual ghost]

What I don't fully agree is about the regulations. My opinion on regulations is sort of mixed and changeable.

I believe that in a country where people are very honest and fair but also does have a slightly "Pish" personality does not require any sort of regulations. One of the functions of the regulations is that they are meant to control the cheaters - the ones who are going to lie and deceive. I do ask myself how efficient that really is, since corruption and fraud does spread is generally more homogeneous in the private sector and public sector - where there are disonest and exploitative entrepreneurs (the 5-20% of people who 'owns' 70-95% of the goods and property), generally there are disonest and exploitative politicians and public officers. When the people who take cares about the regulation are corrupt themselves, then things gets a little bit complicated.
So I don't think that the regulations are good in every case and there are right contexts where they should be lifted or dropped. But I never ever studied much that myself - so I can't answer which are the right contexts. People are in general too busy either defending the minimal-small or no state while some other few are defending a maximum-big state, while some others don't care, there are not really much sources that have this idea of "optimized state" (at least on the most common sources, Im sure Im not the first to think this way) that have any ideas or proposals where and when you should drop or lift regulations. This is actually more of a work for a professional economist, but I think a lot of the professional economists probably doesn't do that (maybe Im wrong about this and they do).
Social-democracy is perhaps the closest one that tries to optimize state, since it doesn't have a premise where the state owns and says everything.

In my book the main reasons why whole Latin America looks as it looks are very lose regulations (and perhaps too much focus on punishment).
Of course that new regulations have to be made by elected officials and the experts need to have a say and that the whole thing has to be made on common sense. While in a crisis some elements should perhaps be dropped and remade (but that is also a form of regulation). However without regulations or very lose ones you will probably hit much more walls than you have to and that has a high price in my book. This is why I am saying that there needs to be a clear democratic element on the mix since that holds "regulation madness" under control, while it greatly increases the odds that the right ones are actually made. However this requires fairly educated population.

 

[Vendrah]

No, the fact that most shoes today are manufactured by corporations makes me think that they're a product of capitalism.

The fact that most roads/streets today are manufactured by the state makes me think that they are a product of the state.
While that is true (almost all roads/streets are manufactured by the state), that does NOT mean that corporations or anything that is not the state can't create roads and streets - corporations or things that are not state and we haven't listed can create states and roads, while government or anything that is not a corporation can create shoes.
This shouldn't be hard to understand...

 

[Tellenbach]

Are your roads created by some private company or by the government? By the government, so you, as a proper libertarian, should go with your own convictions and no longer use the roads and streets since they are all from the state!

Libertarians are not anarchists. We believe there is a limited role for government. National defense springs to mind. The roads are not built by the government. The government hires private companies to do the job.

The periodic table was also made by a russian.

Mendeleev lived from 1834 to 1907. The Romanovs were killed after Mendeleev's death.

The point isn't that it's impossible to achieve greatness, it's just a great rarity in socialist regimes. This is also why there are very few inventors or historically important people coming out of Scandinavia.

 

[Vendrah]

In my book the main reasons why whole Latin America looks as it looks are very lose regulations (and perhaps too much focus on punishment).
Of course that new regulations have to be made by elected officials and the experts need to have a say and that the whole thing has to be made on common sense. While in a crisis some elements should perhaps be dropped and remade (but that is also a form of regulation). However without regulations or very lose ones you will probably hit much more walls than you have to and that has a high price in my book. This is why I am saying that there needs to be a clear democratic element on the mix since that holds "regulation madness" under control, while it greatly increases the odds that the right ones are actually made. However this requires fairly educated population.

Well, Brazil here is known for having a good bunch of regulations and being overly bureaucratic - but now Im starting to doubt this on bold since you are saying the opposite and maybe this on bold was a neoliberal lie. Do you know any source that does actually measure regulation honestly (I mean, that on a pure form)? I mean, the economic freedom index doesn't do that because it includes things such as the Corruption Perception Index.

I think the fairly education argument can actually twisted to other side - more educated people can mean less necessity of regulations since people are already educated. But as I said, I don't really know when and when not in terms of regulation, but I still advocate for a more context-based and more pro-optimization approach rather than getting all of regulations up or down. I know you didn't meant that everything has to be regulated, but you seem to think that there is a need for A LOT of regulations for all societies to be decent, I just don't believe that in all contexts that is true (but might be in some).

 

[Vendrah]

Libertarians are not anarchists. We believe there is a limited role for government. National defense springs to mind. The roads are not built by the government. The government hires private companies to do the job.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. XD!

If you decided that I am a socialist, then I decide that you are an anarchist and I will take you as an anarchist until you take me as a communist/socialist.

Mendeleev lived from 1834 to 1907. The Romanovs were killed after Mendeleev's death.

The point isn't that it's impossible to achieve greatness, it's just a great rarity in socialist regimes. This is also why there are very few inventors or historically important people coming out of Scandinavia.

You are aware that US alone has 10-15 times the population of the Norse countries together, right? Maybe 10 times the population if you include Venezuela on the pack.
The population count does count in terms of inventions, and also, well, are Norse countries "rich" (US count as a rich as an approximation, please @cecee don't kill me on that, I get it that it has been rough, but, well, Latin America is worse) for 200-300 years? Maybe [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] knows the answer cause I don't XD!
Long term wealth, world influence, population size, country IQ, country Critical THinking, let me extrapolate a bit: & Personality does have influences into technological advancement and inventions.

Anyway, as I said and repeat on a more obvious way: The most essential thing for an invention to exist is the inventor, not capitalism or socialism or any ism. It is a merit of the inventor, I really hate when neolibs steals the inventor's merit and say its capitalism when they (inventors) are not a billionaire.

 

[Tellenbach]

The most essential thing for an invention to exist is the inventor, not capitalism or socialism or any ism. It is a merit of the inventor, I really hate when neolibs steals the inventor's merit and say its capitalism when they (inventors) are not a billionaire.

If greatness is strictly a function of smart people and population, then there'd be far more great men/women from socialist/communist nations than from the USA, so it'd be really easy to name more people of similar greatness to these Americans:

1. Thomas Edison
2. Nicola Tesla
3. Henry Ford
4. Bill Gates
5. Steve Jobs
6. Jeff Bezos
7. Elon Musk
8. Michael Jackson
9. Christopher Nolan
10. Jonas Salk

There are far more, but let's just start with these 10. Go ahead. Where are all the great men and women from socialist/communist nations?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Well, Brazil here is known for having a good bunch of regulations and being overly bureaucratic - but now Im starting to doubt this on bold since you are saying the opposite and maybe this on bold was a neoliberal lie. Do you know any source that does actually measure regulation honestly (I mean, that on a pure form)? I mean, the economic freedom index doesn't do that because it includes things such as the Corruption Perception Index.

I think the fairly education argument can actually twisted to other side - more educated people can mean less necessity of regulations since people are already educated. But as I said, I don't really know when and when not in terms of regulation, but I still advocate for a more context-based and more pro-optimization approach rather than getting all of regulations up or down. I know you didn't meant that everything has to be regulated, but you seem to think that there is a need for A LOT of regulations for all societies to be decent, I just don't believe that in all contexts that is true (but might be in some).

Yes, but as I said the quality of regulations is what actually counts. Also for me having a functional law enforcement is also a form of regulation. Since I am talking about wider scope of things than just "It says on the paper". Since this has to work in practice as well. For me quality regulation shouldn't feel as a bureaucracy, since that in general means that you are doing something wrong (and people therefore feel frustrated). Plus regarding educated people: educated people are creative and that rises the complexity of everything that is going on. What in practice rises the odds and need for regulation in order to lower technological mismanagement. Which is often fatal: toxic food, collapsing buildings, traffic regulation, internet laws/regulations .... etc. What are fields that truly uneducated can't create on their own.



Plus I really doubt that Brazil is all that regulated, I never studied your laws in detail but how all things actually seem to work in Brazil that looks pretty lose from European perspective. I am more likely to believe that it is you that have never lived in truly structured environment.

 

[Maou]

It would be impossible to have everyone independently wealthy. Even if people always had money magically appearing in their wallets. Rich people are rich, because they perpetually earn money and constantly try to increase the amount, not because they have a lot of money to spend on hand. The status of everyone being independently wealthy wouldn't survive for very long, and almost immediately people will fall into rich and poor again given a few years. Economies cannot sustain millions of "independently wealthy" individuals, because there wouldn't be a work force that can meet anyone's demands (even with those who like to work). Even automation could not keep up with the demands. And a LOT of jobs require actual humans to do them. Money value would drastically decrease. If everyone is a millionaire, no one is a millionaire.

So to answer your question, yes. But at that point, its a lost cause.

 

[Vendrah]

If greatness is strictly a function of smart people and population, then there'd be far more great men/women from socialist/communist nations than from the USA, so it'd be really easy to name more people of similar greatness than these Americans:

1. Thomas Edison
2. Nicola Tesla
3. Henry Ford
4. Bill Gates
5. Steve Jobs
6. Jeff Bezos
7. Elon Musk
8. Michael Jackson
9. Christopher Nolan
10. Michael Jordan

There are far more, but let's just start with these 10. Go ahead. Where are all the great men and women from socialist/communist nations?

Im sorry, where are all the great men and women - actually, it is my imagination or there is not a single woman on your list? None of these names sounds like a female name lol hahahhahaha - so lets cut the woman part - where all the great men from stateless anarchism? Cite me the great Somalians and Paraguayans and maybe Ill care even trying to look for Venezuelan and Cuban stars - no, I won't, that is definitely a waste of time.

Anyway, you are aware that the US has a quite of a "strongly influential culture", right? Because I can barely give japanese names of inventors and famous yet japanese does register a lot of patents considering their population and even globally. Most famous people being from the US does not necessarily means that US people are so great. It might means that US got more marketing - anyway, we are speaking English and not Esperanto on this forum and I really don't think that even if I did talk Esperanto I would find a Esperanto Typology Forum, nor there is any section of the forum for Esperanto speaking.
I don't even remember the name of the Russian guy who were the first one that went to space - Yuri something, perhaps? Or I don't even know who were major engineers on there.

That is simply the power of imposing your own native language instead of Esperanto; The power of managing to spread the culture and all that stuff. Lucky of you to be born on that country. So unlucky for me and for the other 80-90% of the world.

Anyone will be way more likely to get famous if they are born in a developed country or live on one of them - its almost impossible to prove me wrong here. As well as anyone will be way more likely to get more famous if they born in any place that got plenty of resources.
So, basically, listing names of famous people doesn't really help any sort of argument.

Plus I really doubt that Brazil is all that regulated, I never studied your laws in detail but how all things actually seem to work in Brazil that looks pretty lose from European perspective. I am more likely to believe that it is you that have never lived in truly structured environment.

Maybe you are right, but you don't know any sort of places that does that comparison between world regulations?
I really don't and it would be helpful! Maybe I never lived in a truly structured environment while also being told that I live in a sea of bureaucracy (which I think that is likely) but tbh I really never knew any sort of different environment than here in terms of regulation - I don't know how the regulations are done in Europe, for example.

This speech of "quality" regulations can be turned into "quality markets doesn't need regulations". Don't take me wrong, it is not that I strongly oppose regulations, it is just that I believe that there are right and wrong contexts and kinds of regulations (specially the latter) and believe that these things should be more studied rather than over-regulating everything or just not regulating anything at all. Im still a strong believer that a society really strong on Honesty - and maybe there is not a single one on earth that is strong enough - with people that has more of a loose personality - does not need much regulation. If 100% of people were honest and fair and more "loose", I believe that any sort of regulation would be toxic. I know this scenery is surrealistic, but just to point out an example of an occasion were regulations can be dismissed.

Maybe one day Ill get to even try to study about this, but since my words are very low on influence, studying this might be a waste.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Im sorry, where are all the great men and women - actually, it is my imagination or there is not a single woman on your list? None of these names sounds like a female name lol hahahhahaha - so lets cut the woman part - where all the great men from stateless anarchism? Cite me the great Somalians and Paraguayans and maybe Ill care even trying to look for Venezuelan and Cuban stars - no, I won't, that is definitely a waste of time.

Anyway, you are aware that the US has a quite of a "strongly influential culture", right? Because I can barely give japanese names of inventors and famous yet japanese does register a lot of patents considering their population and even globally. Most famous people being from the US does not necessarily means that US people are so great. It might means that US got more marketing - anyway, we are speaking English and not Esperanto on this forum and I really don't think that even if I did talk Esperanto I would find a Esperanto Typology Forum, nor there is any section of the forum for Esperanto speaking.
I don't even remember the name of the Russian guy who were the first one that went to space - Yuri something, perhaps? Or I don't even know who were major engineers on there.

And that is kinda the main problem with his question. Most other countries, regardless of their politics simply don't have the cult of individualism like US, where the point of life is to become a star in whatever you do. Therefore all those people in most other countries work more inside the system (and many like it that way). Fame and real greatness are two different things.

 

[Tellenbach]

Anyway, you are aware that the US has a quite of a "strongly influential culture", right? Because I can barely give japanese names of inventors and famous yet japanese does register a lot of patents considering their population and even globally.

The Americans I listed are influential because they created great technology, music, and movies. I agree that Japan also has a global influence because they similarly create terrific products, but Japan isn't a socialist nation. That's the whole point. Socialist nations stifle people; they destroy critical thinking at an early age because rational thinkers threaten the power structure of those regimes.

Basically, over the last 40 years, the most influential people out of Scandinavia are Bjork, Abba, the guy who invented Linux, and the Swedish Bikini Team. There is a very heavy price to pay in Democratic Socialist nations - these nations destroy the potential to achieve greatness.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Maybe you are right, but you don't know any sort of places that does that comparison between world regulations?
I really don't and it would be helpful! Maybe I never lived in a truly structured environment while also being told that I live in a sea of bureaucracy (which I think that is likely) but tbh I really never knew any sort of different environment than here in terms of regulation - I don't know how the regulations are done in Europe, for example.

This speech of "quality" regulations can be turned into "quality markets doesn't need regulations". Don't take me wrong, it is not that I strongly oppose regulations, it is just that I believe that there are right and wrong contexts and kinds of regulations (specially the latter) and believe that these things should be more studied rather than over-regulating everything or just not regulating anything at all. Im still a strong believer that a society really strong on Honesty - and maybe there is not a single one on earth that is strong enough - with people that has more of a loose personality - does not need much regulation. If 100% of people were honest and fair and more "loose", I believe that any sort of regulation would be toxic. I know this scenery is surrealistic, but just to point out an example of an occasion were regulations can be dismissed.

Maybe one day Ill get to even try to study about this, but since my words are very low on influence, studying this might be a waste.

Well if Europe was in the position of Brazil: it would stop clearing the Amazon for the sake of environment (and we are slamming you over that regularly), there wouldn't be so many gangs since the system would clean this up through law enforcement or education (like tuition free college), there wouldn't be so much junk on most of the streets (and most of that would get recycled), there would evidently be less fraud since it would be harder to do and less need for it, GM food would be banned, traffic safety would improve, laws would regulate that your food, water and meds have less toxic elements in them, you would have legal protection against various data gatherers, if your bank scams you there are decent odds that you will get your money back ... etc. I don't really need some complex data sources to see: your posts, what the media say and how most of the the place looks on google earth. Therefore the logical conclusion is that regulation is loose or it isn't implemented.



Your mistake is that you see regulations simply as means how people deal one with another. While for me the key part is that their work is more in sync and that it adds one upon the other, what smooths the whole situation and therefore no one falls from the cliff due to circumstances. Plus there is something called "industrial standards", which are vital for having stable high tech society.

 

[Vendrah]

The Americans I listed are influential because they created great technology, music, and movies. I agree that Japan also has a global influence because they similarly create terrific products, but Japan isn't a socialist nation. That's the whole point. Socialist nations stifle people; they destroy critical thinking at an early age because rational thinkers threaten the power structure of those regimes.

Basically, over the last 40 years, the most influential people out of Scandinavia are Bjork, Abba, the guy who invented Linux, and the Swedish Bikini Team. There is a very heavy price to pay in Democratic Socialist nations - these nations destroy the potential to achieve greatness.

Im sorry, did I miss your post containing the list of the greatest Somalians and Paraguayans? I mean, not that I care that much...
As far as I know, you should have more than a 1000 posts complaining about socialism in the US, the government on the US, these leftists in the US, etc... as far as I know, the US does not fit the neoliberal standards of capitalism. So why it is now suddenly the argument?

Anyway, [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] gave some sort of good answer. I didn't wanted to get on this subject, but this relates more to the Narcissistic disorder and to the US giving plenty of Narcissistic supply to some few people (maybe [MENTION=4050]ceecee[/MENTION] would agree) at the cost of others, but, gosh, that is really a long subject.

Well if Europe was in the position of Brazil: it would stop clearing the Amazon for the sake of environment (and we are slamming you over that regularly), there wouldn't be so many gangs since the system would clean this up through law enforcement or education (like tuition free college), there wouldn't be so much junk on most of the streets (and most of that would get recycled), there would evidently be less fraud since it would be harder to do and less need for it, GM food would be banned, traffic safety would improve, laws would regulate that your food, water and meds have less toxic elements in them, you would have legal protection against various data gatherers, if your bank scams you there are decent odds that you will get your money back ... etc. I don't really need some complex data sources to see: your posts, what the media say and how most of the the place looks on google earth. Therefore the logical conclusion is that regulation is loose or it isn't implemented.



Your mistake is that you see regulations simply as means how people deal one with another. While for me the key part is that their work is more in sync and that it adds one upon the other, what smooths the whole situation and therefore no one falls from the cliff due to circumstances. Plus there is something called "industrial standards", which are vital for having stable high tech society.

Well, I live here and I can say a few things:
- There are agencies that regulates things here. Bolsonaro and Guedes (the neolib minister and "his crew" that has a lot of influence over Bolsonaro) is destroying part of them for the neolibs and for the neolib minister, but these regulations does exist (less and less with time, but they do). The work of preserving the Amazon before Bolsonaro wasn't bad at all.
- There are law enforcement and lots of arrests. Lots of people are arrested here - not lots of the super-rich, though.
- There is free education, actually, it is just at a terrible quality on the elementary and secondary and high school in a way that private schools are needed. Most of the bests universities are public, although Bolsonaro have been destroying a bit of them because Guedes wants them to end and to every university to be private.
- There are people who clean the streets, you know? XD! Maybe less than Europe, don't know.
- We do have regulations over MEDs - a lot more than US as far as I know. It is very difficult to get melathonine (hope I written it right), for example. Although I don't like some of them - I had found out for example that I can't buy any anti-depressant or a medication to sleep unless a doctor approves me to do so.
- The fraud things more relates to a lot of people being corrupt per se here than lack of regulation. More or less regulation doesn't make people more honest.

My actual personal preference is for less regulation, I personally find bureaucracy quite annoying. But I ain't stupid nor do I have an immense power and wealth and selfishness to defend all the regulations to go down.. Nor I am a scammer to want more opportunities for deceiving.

 

[Stigmata]

If everyone is wealthy then no one is wealthy.

 

[ceecee]

Im sorry, did I miss your post containing the list of the greatest Somalians and Paraguayans? I mean, not that I care that much...
As far as I know, you should have more than a 1000 posts complaining about socialism in the US, the government on the US, these leftists in the US, etc... as far as I know, the US does not fit the neoliberal standards of capitalism. So why it is now suddenly the argument?

Anyway, @Virtual ghost gave some sort of good answer. I didn't wanted to get on this subject, but this relates more to the Narcissistic disorder and to the US giving plenty of Narcissistic supply to some few people (maybe @ceecee would agree) at the cost of others, but, gosh, that is really a long subject.

Well, I had to laugh at the "There is a very heavy price to pay in Democratic Socialist nations - these nations destroy the potential to achieve greatness." I'm sure all that best education in the world, industrial innovation and much higher life expectancy are meaningless, it's not nearly as great as a driverless car killing people. That's American.

Also most Americans can't possibly see beyond the myth of American exceptionalism, nor do they grasp what it means. But hyper-individualism (maybe a better description than narcists) is rampant, psychotic views of the world and what people are holding up as "accomplishments" are huge reasons it all stagnates here.

Some reading...

Swedes in the States

Are the Nordics edging out Silicon Valley? Bloomberg thinks so.Earlier this year, Bloomberg released their 2018 Innovation Index, an annual list of the most innovative countries, which is based on 7 factors (including patents, research and development, and impact of innovation). Three Nordic countries made the list including Sweden (#2), Finland (#7), and Denmark (#8). South Korea topped the list at first place, and Israel beat the United States for 10th place.
Why did the United States drop out of the Top Ten? According to the report, even though productivity improved, there was a large drop in the Education Efficiency category, which is the addition of new science and engineering graduates in the labor force. Value-added manufacturing also declined.

 

[Vendrah]

If everyone is wealthy then no one is wealthy.

Bravo!
I am feeling stupid for not saying that earlier XD!
But I guess we could separate things:
1) Being rich: If everyone is rich, no one is. If a place got no poor people, there is no rich people and vice versa.
2) Being prosperous: In English may not, but at least in Portuguese, being prosperous doesn't necessarily imply that someone around you has to be poor. I mean by prosperous as if everyone had a quite of a comfort life with some good resources for a decent living, something like that. I guess [MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION] meant that.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Im sorry, did I miss your post containing the list of the greatest Somalians and Paraguayans? I mean, not that I care that much...
As far as I know, you should have more than a 1000 posts complaining about socialism in the US, the government on the US, these leftists in the US, etc... as far as I know, the US does not fit the neoliberal standards of capitalism. So why it is now suddenly the argument?

Anyway, [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] gave some sort of good answer. I didn't wanted to get on this subject, but this relates more to the Narcissistic disorder and to the US giving plenty of Narcissistic supply to some few people (maybe [MENTION=4050]ceecee[/MENTION] would agree) at the cost of others, but, gosh, that is really a long subject.



Well, I live here and I can say a few things:
- There are agencies that regulates things here. Bolsonaro and Guedes (the neolib minister and "his crew" that has a lot of influence over Bolsonaro) is destroying part of them for the neolibs and for the neolib minister, but these regulations does exist (less and less with time, but they do). The work of preserving the Amazon before Bolsonaro wasn't bad at all.
- There are law enforcement and lots of arrests. Lots of people are arrested here - not lots of the super-rich, though.
- There is free education, actually, it is just at a terrible quality on the elementary and secondary and high school in a way that private schools are needed. Most of the bests universities are public, although Bolsonaro have been destroying a bit of them because Guedes wants them to end and to every university to be private.
- There are people who clean the streets, you know? XD! Maybe less than Europe, don't know.
- We do have regulations over MEDs - a lot more than US as far as I know. It is very difficult to get melathonine (hope I written it right), for example. Although I don't like some of them - I had found out for example that I can't buy any anti-depressant or a medication to sleep unless a doctor approves me to do so.
- The fraud things more relates to a lot of people being corrupt per se here than lack of regulation. More or less regulation doesn't make people more honest.

My actual personal preference is for less regulation, I personally find bureaucracy quite annoying. But I ain't stupid nor do I have an immense power and wealth and selfishness to defend all the regulations to go down.. Nor I am a scammer to want more opportunities for deceiving.

I didn't say that this doesn't exist as social elements. But that everything just don't seem to be as sophisticated, what is easy to relate to loose or unimplemented regulations (what is kinda the same thing).
Yeah, Bolosnaro made some things worse but the point is that in my version this wouldn't happen at all. Also bad schools are also work of bad regulation and the lack of funding.


Your entire system looks generally improvised, what has it's charms but your lack of sophisticating things is eventually killing you (at least some of you). And yes safer upbringing lowers the amount of corrupt people that do frauds. What is kinda my point: education, resources, laws, people ... they all need to be in sync to provide truly good results. Just about every country can say "yeah, we have laws", but that isn't really the point. The point is how well they interact one with another (and that is real regulation). My own country is currently studying how to be good as our partners on the continent and the key is in quality interaction of all elements, not that they are simply there.