I need help for a story

[Freohr Datia]

idk how well this story will go but...

I had a dream and thought it was real awesome-o so I tried making a story out of it. But you know, dreams are always so weird so it was hard to do this, but finally I came up with a good plot that would seem to fit the story real well. Most of it was thought out a couple days ago because my mind was racing that day...

But there was one thing my mind couldn't overcome.

(1st of all this is in the united states... since that's where I am =D )

I don't know how the government could possibly lose control of the situation.

Could you guys help me out? Do you know what could happen? I won't tell anything of the plot for now but if everyone needs to know the storyline to find out what could possibly happen then I may later. (maybe I could pm or something idk)

Anyways gotta go have dinner, I'll be back later.

[Fayt Zelpher]

idk how well this story will go but...

I had a dream and thought it was real awesome-o so I tried making a story out of it. But you know, dreams are always so weird so it was hard to do this, but finally I came up with a good plot that would seem to fit the story real well. Most of it was thought out a couple days ago because my mind was racing that day...

But there was one thing my mind couldn't overcome.

(1st of all this is in the united states... since that's where I am =D )

I don't know how the government could possibly lose control of the situation.

Could you guys help me out? Do you know what could happen? I won't tell anything of the plot for now but if everyone needs to know the storyline to find out what could possibly happen then I may later. (maybe I could pm or something idk)

Anyways gotta go have dinner, I'll be back later.

Let's see. What would cause the government to lose control?

Mass food shortages (unlikely since the US is a major food exporter and always has more than enough food)

Political unrest (that would probably take the President, VP, and at least 2/3 or each house of Congress. Again, unlikely, due to a well-established succession plan and the difficulty of anyone coordinating that kind of attack on American soil.)

If I were wanting to cause anarchy, I'd need to get hold of a small nuclear warhead and fire it on a decent sized city like Dallas. Seattle may be better because it's on the West Coast. After that, I'd need to create some sort of figurehead leader to create a source of fear.

Basically, if you want to frighten someone, put them in a situation where people die, and there is nothing that you can do to change anything. Make the people feel weak and helpless.

[Original Alear]

I would have something involving the US's deficits being unable to generate real growth, eventually forcing it to default on its debts (because income is so low that even by rising taxes it can't get enough money to pb), heretofore seen as risk free investments (the 3 months at least).

I don't see it happening but that is what I would do for fun.

Edited April 4, 2010 by SeverIan

[Phoenix]

I don't want to repeat the nuclear attack one, so I'll come back later with other suggestions.

[Freohr Datia]

Let's see. What would cause the government to lose control?

Mass food shortages (unlikely since the US is a major food exporter and always has more than enough food)

Political unrest (that would probably take the President, VP, and at least 2/3 or each house of Congress. Again, unlikely, due to a well-established succession plan and the difficulty of anyone coordinating that kind of attack on American soil.)

If I were wanting to cause anarchy, I'd need to get hold of a small nuclear warhead and fire it on a decent sized city like Dallas. Seattle may be better because it's on the West Coast. After that, I'd need to create some sort of figurehead leader to create a source of fear.

Basically, if you want to frighten someone, put them in a situation where people die, and there is nothing that you can do to change anything. Make the people feel weak and helpless.

Food shortages might not fit the story. Darn. (cause I've already gotten some of it written down =D )

Not as certain about the political unrest but I'll try get more thought into it.

Anarchy wouldn't fit.

Well it's supposed to be like the people doing something that the government can't control. It's almost like a situation that the people of the US are arguing about. So the government would be the one to feel weak and the people would be stronger.

I don't want to repeat the nuclear attack one, so I'll come back later with other suggestions.

Heehe the people who are rebelling somehow find a way to set a nuclear bomb on the government

But... you know... all that security.

Edited April 5, 2010 by Freohr Datia

[Fayt Zelpher]

What about something like a military revolt? With all the troops overseas, when they come home, some of them will probably go crazy from all the violence and horror they witnessed. Think about it...

Not to mention that if the government can't issue any debt and the soldiers aren't getting their pay. Now we've got a case of armed rebellion against the government.

[H3X/AntiStyle]

HEY YOU. Guess what? Uh, when you go overseas, it's not for the entire duration of the war. You go for about 9 months. Then you come back for about 3-4 years, depending on your unit.

Get it right. The people over there have NOT been over there since the beginning.

[Fayt Zelpher]

HEY YOU. Guess what? Uh, when you go overseas, it's not for the entire duration of the war. You go for about 9 months. Then you come back for about 3-4 years, depending on your unit.

Get it right. The people over there have NOT been over there since the beginning.

I apologize for my misrepresentation of the army, but this IS for a story and that is something that needs to be considered. The fact remains that some of the soldiers do return with PTSD and some of them do go crazy. Not to mention the government debt and all that stuff...

[H3X/AntiStyle]

PTSD =/= Homocidal. It's more like "Man. I'm sad. Shit sucks. Screw life. /molt into blob"

Or, "I'm just gonna be really wierd!"

They never talk about killing people. PTSD isn't because you enjoyed it. It's cuz they hated it. Why do something you hate?

ALSO. Government debt is actually well taken care of. Basically, all the debt is due to bonds (Well not all, but a lot). You know how they take care of that?

"Oh, you're putting in cash for a bond? Well, let's take that money, and use it to pay off the last guy to do that."

Edited April 5, 2010 by Ramiel

[Phoenix]

Heehe the people who are rebelling somehow find a way to set a nuclear bomb on the government

But... you know... all that security.

Well, it's not impossible, just ludicrous

If soldiers are going to go crazy, it shouldn't be over a mental illness. More like some policy on the home front that was a hundred times worse than any other government executed policy.

Um... F.E.M.A. coffins?

[Griulf]

Or it could just be chaos beacuse of the weather.-5 in Washington would make the US go crazy.

[Defeatist Elitist]

I've got a good one. Canada invades. And fucks you bitches up. It could be awesome. The opening chapters could be devoted to an excellent description of a moose cavalry charge, or a traditional Canadian Rush Headlong Into Bullets At An Enemies Heavily Defended Emplacement And Come Out Victorious maneuver. It would be grand.

[Original Alear]

What about something like a military revolt? With all the troops overseas, when they come home, some of them will probably go crazy from all the violence and horror they witnessed. Think about it...

Not to mention that if the government can't issue any debt and the soldiers aren't getting their pay. Now we've got a case of armed rebellion against the government.

Honestly, I don't think the armed forces are large enough to stage a military revolt that involves killing tons of people. Moreover, PTSD and crazy trauma is not the kind of thing that inspires a fascist military takeover, since it implies the soldier is severely traumatized by the violence he has experienced. (whereas your typical military coup would involve a general and soldiers who are pretty cold-hearted about oppressing the extreme left-wing and/or extreme right-wing elements or the government and populace that oppose them, despite the soldiers having the ties of "countryman" to those they are oppressing, torturing, etc etc).

I am not saying PTSD is not bad, but I am saying that it is not the kind of bad that involves a well-organized and centralized millitary revolt. Instead, it's more like vietnam where you have soldiers killing their officers and going AWOL because they felt their lives weren't being valued, the war was a losing cause, they didn't have the support of the people at home, and they weren't fighting for anything worth winning.

(hey Ramiel I know you might not agree with this either depending on your political outlook as there are some viet vets and troops serving in the army now who see vietnam as a war the media and american people lost for the military. Can we just leave it at agreeing to disagree if you feel that way? I understand if you don't want to, to some extent you might also agree with me but see me as grossly oversimplifying the motivations for fragging - I would agree I overgeneralized.)

They never talk about killing people. PTSD isn't because you enjoyed it. It's cuz they hated it. Why do something you hate?

I actually do believe that there were situations where people with war-related psychological disorders (not necessarily PTSD, dunno much specifics) had violent episodes, sometimes because they were relieving a traumatic experience. But even that isn't really the kind of thing that would allow a revolt.

ALSO. Government debt is actually well taken care of. Basically, all the debt is due to bonds (Well not all, but a lot). You know how they take care of that?

"Oh, you're putting in cash for a bond? Well, let's take that money, and use it to pay off the last guy to do that."

I don't want to sound overcritical. However, yours is a very short term outlook IMO. Plenty of governments did this when they were over-borrowing and in fact used this reasoning to borrow more from the IMF (and in the end simply further increased their debt pool). A good example would be Argentina. I know you will say "but we are the US, our economy is giant, to big to fail." However, Argentina was (IMO) not in the same class as say the developing asian economies, even the IMF thought so as it continued to favor Argentina after the asian economies began to collapse (actually, was probably a result of the IMF not wanting its last "baby" to fail when its others were in troublesome times). The real problem is that it undertook a great deal of borrowing at increasingly high interest rates and failed to use that borrowing to stimulate growth. Add in Buenos Aires' relationship with the surrounding provinces (provinces basically use money from gov't to finance fiscal spending that was supremely unproductive, even showing signs of corruption though it certainly benefited those employed in the provinces for some time) and you have a very poor situation. Moreover, Argentina was big enough to pressure US securities analysts to give thumbs up instead of thumbs down (overrate the security of loans to argentina) . I don't have any names right now, but if you really want I will dig up a book which has the name a of a whistleblower who tried to downgrade gov't bonds and got hushed up by his company. I'm not saying that we would face a problem of the same magnitude as Argentina (I do not see our reserve system being erased anytime soon as a result of our debt)

The US and other developed nations do not face this problem. The US in particular has extremely favorable interest rates when borrowing, nearly 0. It always has but in recent years it's been ridiculous. However the reality is that the US and other developed nations - with the exception of Germany and Japan, who are still net savers - are on the exact opposite path that economic logic once dictated they would be on - a developed country, where the best investment opportunities have been exhausted, should see less opportunity for profit but more stability. However, the US stock market has not stabilized, it has been MORE erratic. If you reinvested your capital gains, you would still have made small profits on the S&P 500 even during most bear markets, the recent bust is the first since the depression IIRC where you would see substantial losses (around 11%) if you invested in the market as a whole.

If developing countries recover, we will see higher interest rates on borrowing. I do not see the US' debt collapsing. I DO see US having to cut further spending which stifles our own possibilities for future growth (investment in alternative technology for instance) as well as the chance for social reform (healthcare etc).

[Defeatist Elitist]

Honestly, I don't think the armed forces are large enough to stage a military revolt that involves killing tons of people. Moreover, PTSD and crazy trauma is not the kind of thing that inspires a fascist military takeover, since it implies the soldier is severely traumatized by the violence he has experienced. (whereas your typical military coup would involve a general and soldiers who are pretty cold-hearted about oppressing the extreme left-wing and/or extreme right-wing elements or the government and populace that oppose them, despite the soldiers having the ties of "countryman" to those they are oppressing, torturing, etc etc).

I am not saying PTSD is not bad, but I am saying that it is not the kind of bad that involves a well-organized and centralized millitary revolt. Instead, it's more like vietnam where you have soldiers killing their officers and going AWOL because they felt their lives weren't being valued, the war was a losing cause, they didn't have the support of the people at home, and they weren't fighting for anything worth winning.

(hey Ramiel I know you might not agree with this either depending on your political outlook as there are some viet vets and troops serving in the army now who see vietnam as a war the media and american people lost for the military. Can we just leave it at agreeing to disagree if you feel that way? I understand if you don't want to, to some extent you might also agree with me but see me as grossly oversimplifying the motivations for fragging - I would agree I overgeneralized.)

I actually do believe that there were situations where people with war-related psychological disorders (not necessarily PTSD, dunno much specifics) had violent episodes, sometimes because they were relieving a traumatic experience. But even that isn't really the kind of thing that would allow a revolt.

I don't want to sound overcritical. However, yours is a very short term outlook IMO. Plenty of governments did this when they were over-borrowing and in fact used this reasoning to borrow more from the IMF (and in the end simply further increased their debt pool). A good example would be Argentina. I know you will say "but we are the US, our economy is giant, to big to fail." However, Argentina was (IMO) not in the same class as say the developing asian economies, even the IMF thought so as it continued to favor Argentina after the asian economies began to collapse (actually, was probably a result of the IMF not wanting its last "baby" to fail when its others were in troublesome times). The real problem is that it undertook a great deal of borrowing at increasingly high interest rates and failed to use that borrowing to stimulate growth. Add in Buenos Aires' relationship with the surrounding provinces (provinces basically use money from gov't to finance fiscal spending that was supremely unproductive, even showing signs of corruption though it certainly benefited those employed in the provinces for some time) and you have a very poor situation. Moreover, Argentina was big enough to pressure US securities analysts to give thumbs up instead of thumbs down (overrate the security of loans to argentina) . I don't have any names right now, but if you really want I will dig up a book which has the name a of a whistleblower who tried to downgrade gov't bonds and got hushed up by his company. I'm not saying that we would face a problem of the same magnitude as Argentina (I do not see our reserve system being erased anytime soon as a result of our debt)

The US and other developed nations do not face this problem. The US in particular has extremely favorable interest rates when borrowing, nearly 0. It always has but in recent years it's been ridiculous. However the reality is that the US and other developed nations - with the exception of Germany and Japan, who are still net savers - are on the exact opposite path that economic logic once dictated they would be on - a developed country, where the best investment opportunities have been exhausted, should see less opportunity for profit but more stability. However, the US stock market has not stabilized, it has been MORE erratic. If you reinvested your capital gains, you would still have made small profits on the S&P 500 even during most bear markets, the recent bust is the first since the depression IIRC where you would see substantial losses (around 11%) if you invested in the market as a whole.

If developing countries recover, we will see higher interest rates on borrowing. I do not see the US' debt collapsing. I DO see US having to cut further spending which stifles our own possibilities for future growth (investment in alternative technology for instance) as well as the chance for social reform (healthcare etc).

*insert insensitive remark here*

[Original Alear]

*insert insensitive remark here*

I could never be offended by you

[Defeatist Elitist]

I could never be offended by you

Good, because you know I wouldn't mean it!

[Freohr Datia]

.......................... Ok I'm still clueless and not revealing the plot (that I've gathered so far) hasn't helped much so I'm getting that now. I'll edit this post and get it down but for now I guess I just want to get people prepared just in case they might be interested in helping. It'll take me a while to find out what I want to include in the description and what I don't want to include.

Ok... now I was kinda upset that people have been saying the economy will likely not fail... but I don't really care this is just a "what if" situation. I had to make it fit the dream as much as I could and this seemed to fit.

So... yeah. The economy of the United States gets worse and worse, recession turns into depression.

People are trying to find solutions to the problem and it is real hard because the government is too much in debt and nobody wants them to spend any more because that could just worsen things.

Being typical humans who start getting desperate for things after being under stress or things like that stuff that makes you desperate, some people have thought of a solution, but it is horrid and selfish because it targets certain people. They split into two opposing groups and the targets/victims/whatever tell the government to stop the horrible people who suggested what they did, but for some reason that I need help finding out, the government is not able to help either because some may agree with the terrible people (which I think unlikely) therefore causing disagreement among the government so that they lose control of the situation, or maybe the government just can't control either the horrible people or the "victims." Can anybody think of any way at all that they could lost control of something like this?

Edited April 14, 2010 by Freohr Datia

[peener weener]

inb4RP

[Parrhesia]

Centrist third party comes into power.

No party can grab a hold on the Senate/House of Reps.

People start getting assassinated.

[Freohr Datia]

Hmm... might consider the centrist one. That might actually be good but I think there are some counters but I'm not sure. And if there are any I can usually think of some type of loop-hole or something. But anyway the U.S. is gonna pretty much divide itself so the Centrist would have to control both or one. I'm not sure how easy it would be to control both sides but... well, yeah I don't know that much. That was one thing I didn't like about how I decided to make the story like this but there was really no other way I could think of that would make this story like the dream. Maybe the Centrists could stick with the bad pplz and the rest would do what they could to govern themselves... or maybe just not be able to and all individuals just did what they did.

Well, those disagreeing or agreeing could differ among the parties... that could cause problems and make the government lose control because they can't come up with a solution among each other or just fight to much so that they won't let something get decided.

Assassinations are probably already going on or something and I'm not sure how I could make that cause the gov to lose control or not.

So I guess I would add (maybe unnecessarily) that a huge conflict among the two sections will be going on after they split.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Freohr Datia

[Phoenix]

Instead of trying to figure out how America could possibly become totally destabilized and fall apart, why not look through history and find a country that actually did fall to pieces, figure out the specifics, and then write a version of that catastrophe that could fit the US's situation?

There's a lot of countries, and a lot of history after all :)

But that's just my opinion.

[Griulf]

Rome

China

Inka

[Freohr Datia]

Instead of trying to figure out how America could possibly become totally destabilized and fall apart, why not look through history and find a country that actually did fall to pieces, figure out the specifics, and then write a version of that catastrophe that could fit the US's situation?

There's a lot of countries, and a lot of history after all :)

But that's just my opinion.

Rome

China

Inka

Ok! I'll go for that but I gots ta get off. Thanks!

[Freohr Datia]

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

('Scuse me for the double post but I have to get help and bump this up.)

Well, I think I may have come up with something. (I love the song "With Eyes Wide Shut" it always pulls me through and has inspired so many ideas/solutions that I've needed even though it doesn't relate to the story at all)

I think this almost happened once but idk so first I'd have to ask you all.

Didn't the United States once almost divide itself or something before (I was thinking of the Join or Die thingy but looked it up... not so much...)? I thought I remembered something like this, but here's my plan pretty much.

Before it gets to that though, I was thinking that this "horrible plan/solution" maybe could have been restrained by some law or something about it because that's how bad it is, but maybe it'd be too hard to reinforce.

So perhaps those who were "victims" would ask to be allowed to be split apart from the United States to try support themselves or something and then they'd be allowed to and while they do try to keep their new nation (or whatever it could be called) together it's not managed as well but still slightly (because that's part of the storyline already and I believe something like this happened to Russia but idk what I'm trying to remember)...

And I think that seals that one seam that's all that's left in my plot... Do you all think it works?

Boy do I hope this works I've had to freeze up my writing because of this one small thing that affects so much.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Freohr Datia

[lolDeath]

Texas.