Dear Tommy1,
You have a knack to encourage discussion.. that what these forums are about... you and I have nothing to gain or lose.. and neither do we or can we know who the real Tommy1 or the real NKVC is... contributing to a discussion in a forum seems like a job to you.. for me it is just simple.. voicing my views.. trying to understand life more.. doing things I like to do.. and of that sorts...
I do have a job for a livelyhood.. this and others things I do are things that are of interests to me... here I state stuffs because I know some truths and know who the real culprits are... I do not work for Sheikh Issa now nor am I working for anybody by writting what they want me to write.. ( if that is what you are implying ).
Yes I am in Muscat now and no I do not know Abu Khaled.. maybe by his personal name I may know him and no I am not a cousin of Omar Rahman.
Now you do fancy bullets and illumination.. i hate ammunition by the way.. love a good chat anytime.
Open your eyes and look at the crumbling democracies .. look at the successful systems... do not just support for the sake of winning an argument..dont just say, " If you do not come to democracy, democracy will come to you through western arms and ammunitions."
Ok now coming to your bullets, because of the electoral nature of democracies, special interest politics becomes the name of the game. In order to win an election, politicians must compete for the support of interest groups. The largest and most lucrative interest group (most votes) is the “have-nots”, and politicians can cater to them with wealth redistribution policies. Thus, democracies take on a redistributionist role: the welfare state is born.
As basic economic reasoning tells us, if you tax productivity and subsidize non-productivity, you will end up with less producers and more nonproducers. A destructive cycle sets in: as producing becomes less and less lucrative and nonproducing becomes more and more so, welfare spending increases while production and thus taxable income decreases. Thus, welfare policies only exacerbate the problems they intend to cure. They reward present-mindedness and discourage future-mindedness and, if left to run their course, will inevitably lead to a Soviet-style economic collapse.
Whereas a kingdom is the private property of the king, he has a strong incentive to uphold the integrity of private property law (the validity of his ownership of the kingdom depends upon it). The king also has an incentive to uphold economically beneficial law—private property law—to increase value of his kingdom.
Democratic rulers have no private ownership stake in the government and thus have no incentive to uphold the integrity of private property law. Nor do they have an incentive to maintain economically beneficial law. On the contrary, they can benefit by creating artificial laws—legislation—that serve to undermine private property law for their own benefit. Under democracy, mountains of legislation erode private property law: property owners become increasingly restricted in what they can do with their property. As private property law is continually weakened, long-term planning becomes more and more uncertain and people become more and more present-minded....
hope you are using rubber bullets Tommy1