I would make a better world dictator

1. In regards to English, it is currently the lingua fraca. That means that it is the global trade language. It would be most efficient for this to be the language everyone learns. Furthermore, since the ethnicities will be so diverse throughout the world, the constant blending will help everyone to learn English. 2. This debate has turned from success of the world under our leaderships to whether or not we would see revolt. I am now going to go into detail on why my world would have a better economy and the people will be happier. a. The taxation will be simple and easy to collect. Taxes will be collected at the state level which is signifantly faster than at the federal level. The particular tax plan, FairTax, ensures that almost all people pay less in taxes by the end of their life than with income tax. The fact that the wealth will remain in the hands of the people will make them happier and will make the economy better. b. I am not sure that I have said this, but my world would have a gold standard for currency. This means that there would be virtually no inflation, which makes a better economy and a happier populace. c. Given that everyone will speak the same language, English, after so many years, trade between the states will be easier. d. Unlike your world, which is no different than how the UN is set up, my world would have completely free trade since it is completely united. This means an increased diversity of goods(especially since there is ethnic blending) and lower prices across the board. e. Since most things are handled at the state level, every area can do what benefits them the most. This policy of state's rights will lead to a better economy throught the globe. f. My education system will boost our economy because people will learn to think for themselves and can come up with business ideas and more innovative things(with the aid of specific college education) 3. Given these, there is no reason for revolt. Yes the first couple of years to the end of the first decade will show extreme instability and we would have to show strict control. But after this, the people would on average, be happier because of the better economy and freedom of religion that many of them did not have before. Your view on counterculture would have merit, but you forgot to address that there is incredible ethnic blending due to forced migration. A given city may have five percent muslim population, which is not enough to start a powerful movement. With the churches that the state may open and the Christian views taught in school, many would convert to Christianity, if not, become very tolerant of it. "I think I would be safer from revolt than you. Consider that many people have pride in heritage. While this can indeed cause conflict, attempting to destroy the notion of heritage will bring armies to your doorstep." I will destroy heritage yes, but again, I would have forced migration so they cannot "bring armies" to my "doorstep" "Your laws may cause uproar from the more developed nation. You would have the former Americans, Cannadians, British, English, China, and Japanese all trying to kill you. Not to mention the Middle East burning your flag in the name of Allah" Again, forced migration means that the people will not be as capable to unite against me. They will all get along, but they will not have the common heritage to find cause to fight. Besides, the guys from Nigeria will like me because my economy would be better which would sway the opinion of the few who may see a worse economy in my world. To sum up this round, my economy would be good, there is no reason to revolt, even if there was, the people could not rally against me. See you in Round Four