While the devil in such things is always in the details, I think we can agree on a few fundamental skunkwork rules:
With very few exceptions the federal government would have no say whatsoever about what happens in Pacifica.
No federal taxes would be paid by Pacifica residents,
No federal money would flow from Washington to finance Pacifica's operations or infrastructure.
Residents of the three states would continue paying their usual state taxes but the federal tax would be replaced by a tax to fund Pacifica's skunk works activities. (The only money Pacifica would send to the IRS would be payment for direct services negotiated and contracted by Pacifica with the feds.)
Pacifica would pay Washington an annual fee to cover Pacifica's share of national defense.
How would Pacifica be governed? What role governors and state legislatures play? Would the Pacifica skunkworks need an over all “board of directors” comprised of representatives from industry, banking, government, healthcare and citizen-members representing the interests of environmental, youth, the aged and workers, etc? How would such board members be selected/elected? How would we keep the corrupting influence of big money from perverting the whole process? All good questions that would each require the right answer.
I would argue that it was a dynamic form of skunkworks that created the late, great US of A in the first place. Of course, they didn't call it a skunkworks. It was called “the Wild West.” But it functioned exactly in the way a skunkworks is intended to function. The entrenched federal forces exercised only the most tenuous control over what settlers west of the Mississippi were up to. Instead settlers experimented with what I call “wild cat innovation.” They made plenty of mistakes but, since their lives often depended on finding sustainable solutions, they eventually did, and those "proofs of concept" working solutions were later institutionalized.
Once the Union was complete and railroads and telegraph installed, the Wild West Skunkworks was shut down. One could argue that it was at that moment the seeds of stagnation began to germinate.
I only propose such a radical (and unlikely) proposition because I am at loss to come up with anything short of that. I've exhausted my last gram of faith or hope that the current two-party farce will -- or even can any longer -- function for the common good.
Stephen Pizzo has been published everywhere from The New York Times to Mother Jones magazine. His book, Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, was nominated for a Pulitzer.
I THINK WE HAVE FORGOTEN ONE VERY REAL REALITY, THE CFR TC GLOBALISTS THAT HAVE CONTROL OF OUR GOVERNMENT NOW, AND HAVE AN AGENDA WITCH THEY BEEN SLOWLY PUTTING INTO PLACE SENCE THE 1920'S, AND HAVE ALMOST GOT THE BRASS RING, MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT SKUNKWORKS, THIS WHAT THE AMERICAN PEPOLE ARE FACING, THEY HAVE MEMBERS IN EVERY BRANCH OF OUR GOVERNMENT, THERE IS NO MORE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE ANY MORE, THOSE DAY ARE GONE, AND IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING TO THE WAR MANCHINE, AND MOST AMEREICANS DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO LEARN. AND THE MASS MEDIA DECEPTION THATS BEEN GOING SENCE THE 1920'S TO KEEP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THE DARK ABOUT THE TRUTH,AN IS STILL HAPPENING TO DAY. I AM 65 A I WAS BORN AT THE RIGHT TIME GOING THROUGH THE 50'S 60'S 70'S AND PROUD TO BE A FREE AMERICAN AND ALL I SEE NOW IS MONEY POWER AND GREED IN OUR GOVERNMENT. IF ANYONE KNOWS HOW TO STOP THESE GLOBALIST SPEACK UP.BE FOR WE ALL HAVE TO GO TO NIGHT SCHOOL, WAIT FORGET THAT GO TO DAY SCHOOL BECAUSE YOU WOUNT HAVE A JOB ANYWAY AND LEARN SPANISH. TAKE CARE RAS
by
RICHARD SHADE (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 460 comments)
on Friday, October 26, 2007 at 5:55:27 AM
Going global is not necessarily wrong. What makes the difference is the kind of globalism. Will it be the kind that filters up from the world's grassroots or be imposed from above? I seem that there is too much centralism and not enought diversity. The process of careful planning still needs to take place or nothing will come about. Brainstorming or mutual consultation may be a start, but then there needs to be a direction. The direction that arises, of course, may be a surprise and seem more like order that has emerged out of chaos. Who knows?
by
billiam (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments)
on Friday, October 26, 2007 at 11:54:52 AM
Going global is not necessarily wrong. What makes the difference is the kind of globalism. Will it be the kind that filters up from the world's grassroots or be imposed from above? It seems that there is too much centralism and not enough diversity. The process of careful planning still needs to take place or nothing will come about. Brainstorming or mutual consultation may be a start, but then there needs to be a direction. The direction that arises, of course, may be a surprise and seem more like order that has emerged out of chaos. Who knows?
by
billiam (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments)
on Friday, October 26, 2007 at 11:56:31 AM
