great discussion, great ideas in this thread, our next plan should be to figure out how to tap into mainstream america or as many open minded people as possible to increase this movement of consciousness....before its too late...THE WALLS ARE CLOSING IN!!!!!!!
Michael Moore makes a lot of good points but how come he's always speaking of republicans in a stereotypical matter? If you get a chance watch Ron Pauls interview on Capitalism: A love story a whatever its called.
Interest rates should be capped at 10% on credit cards and 6% on mortgages. This would be real reform. No more pay day lenders, no more car title loans, no more usury fees attached to credit cards. Limit bank profits. That is what needs to happen.
That's a good suggestion - do you think there is a way to create a forum for good ideas that sit in the center of a round-table - that we could create, either here on Current, attached or as a new web vehicle?
I thought, well - put a web site together and get people like Bill Maher and Michael Moore and maybe Ron Paul - and anyone else who does not want this theft to go on, get their ideas and entreat their membership, as lurkers if nothing else.
Put together the necessary declaration. See to growing an organization. This is where the move-on, the tea party, the greens and the blues - and the reds can come together.
I have suggested in the past that we need what I called a "Constitutional Patch" that would re-stitch the Constitution to prevent what has happened.
We have to realize that this stuff has been going on since the very beginning.
We had slavery in the midst of our revolution for a country providing "freedom for all." Yet we had slavery.
We have also had the money-boys in there - and the political hacks in there working for them the whole history of our country.
As slavery was a poison that eventually had to be removed, - the financial abuse has been an abuse of our life-blood. The power -and financial power- of our country, as great as it is, has been weakened by parasites it's whole history.
Like natural resources, there comes a time when the rape of our wealth must accrue disastrous effects on the basic existence of our nation itself.
We have to address this gaping abscess. We have to fix ourselves and bind ourselves up.
I'm ready to engage and to lend whatever abilities I have to such process.
If voting for new politicians doesn't work then stop buying the products that give these multinationals the power. Then they will no longer have the money to bribe and corrupt our politicians. Buy local and stay away from the corporations!
We need a constitutional change or an amendment - we'll need to back the right movement.
However, short of that, - being off the grid is choice. It's kind of like saying there's a better roost from which to watch - on the Titanic.
Who knows, maybe it's the big twisting rollover into world chaos where cheap religions will, once again, bring the dark ages out of the coming destruction.
But life is short - and we will have to make up our minds what we will do - and then observe the result.
The capitalistic democracy envisioned by the forefathers is nothing at all like what we have now. In the 1700's a family could wake up to chop wood and tend to the crops in the fields. If they were industrious they could be done by afternoon to work on crafts that could be traded in town. It was this reward for ambitions that made it such a perfect system.
Today, we attempt to apply this agrarian tradition to our urban and modern rural society and it doesn't work. There is no forest from which to chop wood, and no farms for us to tend. The forest was protected by government and/or given away. There are no farms to tend. Agribusiness has been automated and has driven the farmer from his land.
Corporate politicians look down their noses at workers and question whether they have a right to work at all. When the economy fails (as planned) they demand bail outs from the middle-class. Workers have to compete in a global economy in which the competition has no labor standards, no safety standards, no environmental standards, and subsistence pay. It is a pure denigration to the idea of capitalistic democracy yet we still call it that.
Instead of capitalistic democracy it is a paranoic pornocracy where people are rewarded for investments, inheritance, image, giftedness, brazenness, craziness, and hypocritic integrity aimed at benefiting the self-regulating thieves already in power.
I see no stepping out of this situtation. The system is designed to prevent stepping. Socialism, at best, is a bridge to something else. Anarchy is yet more problematic. I see no other bridges. We need a forum of ideas to move us from where we are to something better. In the future I see a renewal of the separation of secular government and private industry, and more importantly the establishment of a separate representative moral authority to handle health care issues funded by donations and matching funds from government.
Just remember one thing: THIS IS NOT CAPITALISM. Capitalism rewards success and punishes failure. The fact is that these Wall Street crooks would be out panhandling but for a government that bailed them out. But of course, folks like Michael Moore continue to believe that a corrupt government is going to somehow reform a corrupt financial system.
You're analysis is mostly correct, but I think you're missing a key element in why this system (our government and economic framework) doesn't work very well. You are right that our current economic foundation is not purely capitalistic. There are regulations imposed by government, so it's not a "free market" in the purest sense. A system that values the creation of "wealth" (primarily) on an individual level would be an improvement over our current state of affairs, but only in so far as you wish to abstract wealth and value from a tangible reality. Underlying the entire enterprise is a set of assumptions about what should be valued and how. For instance, selling cake is valued, and money is the medium though which those transactions are mediated. That money could then be used to pay for murder as well, since its designation of wealth is an abstract quality not tied to the moral realities of human life. I believe this problem of values, for lack of a better phrase, is where things go wrong. Detaching value from actual resources, people and situations only succeeds in debasing the moral foundation of society. The farther we are removed from the consequences of our actions, the more immoral society becomes. Given that apparent reality, I don't see how pure capitalism succeeds in placing us any closer to our choices than our current configuration in any meaningful way. They both have the same damning flaw, whether or not one is slightly better than the other. I'm curious what your thoughts are on this problem. What is the best way of dealing with resource allocation and human wellbeing (I'm not sure I know the full answer to this one yet)?
Hey it's the flabtastic Mikey....champion hypocrite and whore. Well at least he's more entertaining than Chumpsky, and his populist bullshit and propaganda is packaged comfortably for the short attention span intellectually challenged drongos to consume. In the meantime, he can take a flying fuck all the way back to his 3 million dollar apartment in Manhattan.
That's a lot of hatred for a guy you've never met. If you wish to be taken seriously, maybe you should have something serious to say. Otherwise, stop wasting everyone's time spewing your vile rage at the wall. What a sad commentary you make of yourself.
Does the fact that, as you state, he is a hypocrite have anything to do with his argument? If he is a hypocrite or if he is a saint you should evaluate his argument independent of him, his actions can not make his argument good or bad. Steer clear of the ad hominem, if you have a problem with what he says attack his argument.
hypocritical - in what way? An Oscar-winning movie-maker makes money? along with the fact that you don't get to make movies at all, if you don't get the money. cause movies cost money, out and out money?
Moore is correct in his observation that people are not simply too stupid to act in their best interest, but actually dis-empowered to act on their good judgment by those with agendas of control. This idea that "THE MASSES ARE STUPID" is partly true, but it mostly serves as convenient propaganda for those who seek to justify their power. It's much easier to ignore the cries of the people when you dismiss them as rubes. Yeah, and who wants to keep them stupid rubes, I wonder? The biggest selling point of any power-hungry liar is that the masses are stupid and dangerous, so make me in charge and I'll keep them in line. Well I, for one, would take the masses over those thugs any day.
His point is still valid. The lack of regulations/community standards/anything at all guiding the construction of buildings in Haiti was a large part of the reason the quake killed so many people. The reason the death toll was much lower in Chile was due almost entirely to those safeguards being taken.