Our current government is not sustainable

Thank you for your response copper29.Here is my response to your accusations of validity.1) Pro is very correct in saying that the Federal Republic System is not set in stone, because in truth it is set in paper with ink that was hand written by our founding fathers. The Constitution outlines the form of government that is in power today. For the Federal Republic system to be abolished would require takeover from an internal or external party that throws out the Constitution and it's practices in order to establish it's own system of government. Having a failed economy does not mean complete and total takeover in this fashion.2) Pro defeats his own claim that the federal government has become more than the federal republic. He quotes my definition, agrees that it definitely defines our form of government, but then goes on to speak about how it isn't what our government is and that our government is also the economy. Regardless, we can look at past economic crisis such as the Panic of 1819. Panic of 1837, Panic of 1857, The Great Depression, and even the latest recession that we are still in. In none of these U.S. crisis was the Federal Republic system thrown out with the Economic practices that contributed to the crisis. The reason for this is because amidst the widespread poverty our government still went on. Citizens, in their rags and emaciated figures, still went to the polls to vote for new representatives. We still needed congress members, we still needed a President, and we still needed a judicial system. The congress members and the President would all contribute to form the new practices that their economy would function on. In addition they would also initiate programs that would help their citizens get back up on their feet. Agricultural Adjustment Administration, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Farm Credit Administration, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the National Recovery Administration, the Public Works Administration and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Congress passes the Emergency Banking Bill, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, the Farm Credit Act, the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Truth-in-Securities Act.(1) The governmental system of Federal Republic was instrumental in reforming the economy in the past and it will be instrumental in reforming our economy in the future. Now, here are my musings on the economy and it's relevance to government.Pro's argument relies heavily upon the assumption that failure of economy leads to failure of our current Governmental system. The implications of Pro's argument entail a system of government the central government is not restricted and the component parts do not retain a degree of self government and ultimate sovereign power does not rest with the voters. All of these would no longer be part of our governmental system why? Because the economy failed? I don't think so.My argument is based in the basic assumption that the economy will not disappear any time in the foreseeable future as long as we still have human beings who need resources. People will still trade furs, cows, crops, services, and other things in order to get what they need. The form of these tradings, or the form of the economy, has no impact over the form of governmental system because the PEOPLE still want legislative representatives, an executive branch leadership, and a judicial system to interpret the legislation. The governmental system we have now is strong in it's form because it is endorsed by the people living under it. We can look back at nations who had emperors, kings, and queens as the sole rulers of their land. Eventually these countries threw out monoarchy and divine rule and replaced them with the constitutions, legislative branches, and an executive branch. These governments don't all take the form of a Federal Republic but bear a strikingly similar resemblance to them. Economic crisis are not isolated to the United States, and when they do happen in countries where similar governmental systems are in place they do no result in a radical change in government formation. Why is that? Because each country has the endorsement of the people in their form of government. People believe that their form of democracy or republic can go on without reverting to less mature forms of government. The memory of oppresive or totalitarian rule is fresh in the minds of some of these countries and they believe that their democratic system can work. There is no reason to believe that the failure of the U.S. economy would cause a huge uprising resulting in the scrapping of the Constiution and it's form of government. It would mean a country where the central government is not restricted and the component parts do not retain a degree of self government and ultimate sovereign power does not rest with the voters. The people didn't want a government like that in the past and I dont see any evidence that would implicate that they want it in the future.To be clear, I don't wholly disagree with any of Pro's reasons why the economy may fail. It is true that we may soon have runaway inflation, high interest rates, and expensive commodities, but that doesn't mean that human needs stop existing. The economy may fail, but my friend, the only thing going down with it that belongs to the government are it's current fiscal policies.(1) http://www.hyperhistory.com...