By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
So there are many people who favour less centralised government and some who would go further and prefer to have totally self-governed local areas without any centralisation at all.
The second thing is essentially what this proposal is:
However, as always there is a caveat. It would be on land owned by a tech firm with all transactions and interactions done on the blockchain and partially funded with a tax on transactions. So in one way you'd get the freedom of small local government but with the downside of a totally digital existence without likes like cash.
I think the first question would need to be: How divergent from the laws of the land could the autonomous local government be? If it was too far (ie. no correlation to other laws) then that would be a big concern.
SB
0
This might be an interesting discussion on 12:06 - Mar 19 with 265 views
One does question the motivation and I wonder what "cool things" Berns has in mind. Without details wouldn't residents simply be asked to swap one unaccountable tech firm for another?
Paid in a crypto currency does also sound echoes of company scrip to me.