Never going to happen. First, efficiency of old appliances was terrible, so going back will make things less efficient. Second, energy use is correlated to population and standard of living. So unless you want to lower the population or reduce/hold the standard of living for people, energy requirements will always increase. Efficiency doesn't help because of Jevons paradox.
The question is, if the government cannot be trusted, what is the solution? Unfortunately (and paradoxically) at least half the people you talk to will suggest some change or law that actually increases government power.
The solution to government corruption is smaller government. If there is less power and money in the government's hands, then there is less incentive to try and take it or abuse it.
The wall of Techdirt stories on police misconduct is very misleading, and not very insightful. There are about 800,000 cops in the US and probably over a million interactions between the cops and the public every single day. A handful of bad situations proves nothing. The plural of anecdote is not data.
I don't think anyone said that the biggest risk for a cop was gangbangers. Stabbing is probably the biggest risk for a cop. This is why cops take all those precautions to check your pockets, and put you in the back of their squad car while they are trying to sort everything out.
Deaths do not represent risk. There could be significant risk, but also significant risk managment, so the deaths are low. For example, construction worker have high fatalities, in part, because they employ young people who don't have experience. I think I read that the majority of industrial fatalities occur in workers with less than 6 months on the job. That doesn't mean construction work is more risky than any other work, just that the risk management system is pretty poor.
Also, these numbers don't say deaths per manhours. These statistics give us nothing to judge how risky one profession is from another.
There are 3 ways to control risk. First is administrative. Have clear procedure that minimizes risk, like when to call for backup. The second is engineering. This is like putting a suspect in the back of a police car while you are questioning other suspects. The third is protection. Like wearing a bulletproof vest.
All risk can be managed with these three controls. These don't eliminate the risks, but manage them. The risk a cop has is similar to a construction work, who has to wear a hardhat and wear a harness.
Expecting a cop to increase his risk exposure because the public doesn't like it is ridiculous. How is a cop going to tell a random person from a criminal? He must treat every situation as having risk, and therefore follow the administrative and engineering procedures to mitigate it.
Google is in a terrible position. They are attacked by Apple and Microsoft through their Rockstar patent troll, moronic politicians want them to regulate the internet, and the evil NSA forces them to give away secrets. Users love them, because they give almost everything away for free. But of course, users don't count where the government is involved.
The housing bubble was caused by the Fed holding interest rates low after the dot com bubble. After the crash, the government should have allowed many banks to fail, but they didn't. Most of the problems can be traced back to the government.
This is just ridiculous. Get rid of rent? What the hell are you talking about? If I own a building, and you need somewhere to live, why can't two FREE adults come to an agreement? You pay me and get a roof over your head. What, so in your world, the government owns everything and a committee determines rent? A committee determines the price of bread? That was tried. It failed.
Government is a big part of the problem. Let's get rid of the federal reserve, which is basically a private company that sells currency to the government. Let's have a true free market for all things, including money. The 2000 and 2008 crashes were caused by the fed printing, which caused the dot com bubble and the housing bubble. Look at the stock market. Just another bubble created by this "quantitative easing" bullsh!t.
Your opinions are corporations are just nonsense. Do you want a flower shop to be criminally responsible if someone gets pricked on a rose? Ridiculous.
You are right on almost everything except energy. Energy will always be scarce. An when energy isn't scarce, storage is. Liquid fuels are so useful because they are an incredible storage of energy. You would not believe how precarious the electrical grid is balanced. Supply must equal demand, always. We had a chance to be energy independent with nuclear, but the hippies set that back a few decades. The other renewables are just not scalable at this time, and won't be for decades.
Bullsh!t. I know many people who work for Ma&Pa stores, and they are the worst offenders. They call you in for short shifts, don't pay you for meetings outside of work hours, don't pay you properly for stat holidays, etc. Then they claim they are unfamiliar with the law. Large corporations follow the law to the letter, because they know they'll get into trouble if they don't.
Oh, and the living wage argument is utter nonsense.
Totally unworkable. Explain how fines could be tied to income in a simple system. Does the cop ask my income when writing the ticket? Do I declare it? Or are you suggesting the absolutely ridiculous system where the federal government sends my income tax return to the municipal government? What a bureaucratic nightmare. Plus, all my data would be shuffled around to people who should not see it, and could potentially fall into the wrong hands.
The solution to big government is not bigger government.
Jail time is ridiculous. Some people, especially those in more precarious financial situations, can lose their jobs if they are forced to miss work. This is highly regressive. And will just fill jails up with normal people.
Using a percent of annual income sounds good, but is totally inefficient. What, they are going to look at my tax return?