Defining 'thrive'.

"Western" countries offer stability, but at what cost. 'Thrive' is a relative term and certainly is viewed in quite different ways by individuals concerned. One's 'thrive' is another one's loss and decline. Or, thrive, can be taken from the sense that police, courts the judicial system guard efficiently the current status quo, with all the inequalities within it. The extent of which (inequalities) is left upon each individual to consider, according to its sensitivities developed.

And how do you revisit a law? What kind of considerations this 'visit' will take? Will it be based in whatever is currently accepted, or will it broaden its base? Will it consider the views of the infringers? Or, will it regard them as aberrations and as such, eliminate them.

... laws that serve the people? ... interesting concept. Are there any such laws? May be a few. But the bulk of the laws I know it's all about money, making it the master for people to serve. Laws that serve the money and swamp any benefits, the few laws that serve the people, might bring.

... sheer number of "infringers" ... a demand for something. What defines that demand ... should that demand be looked at from the perspective of profit only .. are there any other perspectives that can be looked at from ... are these other perspectives more powerful. Is it a loosing battle? Certainly the views of the "infringers" that define their acts must be known ... were they ever been considered at all ... or it suffices to say that they incur a loss in profits.. looked at only from the perspective of profit ... largely profits companies handling creators work, make