Audacious Tactics

--- In ssi_list@... "Raven"
>
> > This might mean taxing authority goes to the UN rather than the
US or EU
> > and mineral royalties and income taxes, etc are paid to the UN
for the
> > benefit of all mankind, thus honoring the CHM provisions of the
relevant
> > treaties. The property is thus privately owned but taxed by
another soveriegn.
> I have one gripe with this, at least with the structure that
the UN has now. Much as I support UN authority in some areas, the
UN is not a democratically elected body. For this reason I do not
think that they should have a direct source of income through
taxes. For one thing, it would corrupt them for sure.
>
> Jon Lennart Beck.

So what's the alternative? As an aside, you don't think that the UN
is corrupt now? Is the evil in corrupting the already corrupted :)

Like I wrote earlier - it may be better to deal with the devil you
know that the one you don't.

I can't really see national sovereignty being extended to celestial
realms. This asteroid belongs to Zimbabwe. This portion of the Moon
belongs to Slovenia. This arc of the asteroid belt belongs to the
US. This kind of thinking strikes me as taking a good idea too far.
Kind of like trying to figure where to hitch the horses to that new
fangled horseless carriage :)

I think the lunacy of this scenario was a part of the thinking
behind the OST.

So, either we claim celestial objects together as a planet, or we
don't claim them at all.

There has to be a better way.

That's why I'm tossing around the idea of a standalone sovereign and
do away with UN participation, but also with US claims, EU, Chinese,
OAS, etc.

Besides, who better to look after and represent the interests of
orbital citizens and commerce than a government entirely concerned
with their representation and not beholden to Earth-based interest
groups?

TangoMan