Sally: It seems I have been fielding a different kind of TDG questions lately, and I’m not sure why. Your “powerful neighborhoods” is both valid and something new.
It will be 10 to 20 years to build the TDG. A good part of that construction will require local TDGs to merge with each other. At some point, a “rich TDG” is going to enter negotiations with a “poor TDG” for a merger.
There are a couple of social/political forces at play here. First the elected representatives of the rich TDG will be of a different mindset than the behind-the-scene players of the Democrat and Republican parties. If the goal is to favor the rich, such thinkers will probably not be in the TDG in the first place. So this leaves room for a fairer mindset. Second, that fairer mindset will realize that mergers are necessary to move the TDG forward. So it needs to treat the poor TDG with some sense of equality — or the merger will not happen. I fully predict that the solution will be found in the principle of one person = one vote — or something close to it. If it does not have that principle, the poor TDG will refuse to join.
Let’s use the example of a gated community of 5,000 people surrounded by 50,000 people of middle class or lower. Under our current system, the 5,000 holds more political power than the 50,000. Let’s assume that there are two local TDGs of 5,000 rich and 50,000 poor. If one person = one vote, that gated community should only get about 10% of the influence after the merger. If the rich TDG refuses that arrangement, it will be an island to itself. Which TDG is going to have more credibility? I would say the 50,000 group can continue to march forward without the 5,000. If the rich wants to have any say in the new system of government, then it should be willing to surrender itself to its rightful 10% influence. And like I said, the elected representatives of the TDG rich will more likely to be of a fairer mindset than the minstrels of the two political parties.
That was a really good question. Thank you!