Condemning the British Rioters!

75 posts / 0 new
Last post
Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Condemning the British Rioters!

If somebody is rich and privileged, I think we can assume that they have an easier time being a better person. I don't think that's a hugely controversial thing to say. I'm not saying this means nobody has any free will, but there are influences.

 

Lets look at a guy; just some guy in England, picked semi randomly. Lets say that this guy spent almost the first two years of his life at a family home in Paisley Terrace in the Willoughby area of Edinburgh. His dad worked as a tax inspector while studying for a law degree at the University of Edinburgh, then a couple of years in Australia as a lecturer at the University of Adelaide. He spent the remainder of his childhood in Durham England, where his father lectured in Durham University, and he went to the Chorister school in Durham, and then attended Fettes College, a prestigious independent school in Edinburgh, then became a lawyer.

 

Well, this is a pretty rich, white, privileged background. Would you say that somebody like this had “More” moral responsibility for how his life turned out? Or the destruction he reeks? Would he have about the same, or would he have less moral responsibility than a ghetto kid?

 

Well, I think responsibility with greater privilege comes greater moral accountability. Its not 100% to 0%, but its definitely there.

 

This rich privileged young white kid grew up to be Tony Blair. Tony Blair, in the first six years that he was Prime Minister, ordered British troops into battle five times; more than any other Prime Minister in British history.

 

Iraq in 1998 and 2003, Kosovo in 1999, Sierra Leone in 2000, and Afghanistan in 2001. None of these countries were threatening the United Kingdom. This was not Operation Sea Lion, with Hitler trembling at the haunches on the French coast. These were clearly international war crimes, falling under the worst crime, which is aggression from one country to another; the unprovoked invasion of another country.

 

Downing Street memo's seem to indicate fairly clearly that intelligence was manipulated and the population lied to, in order to draw England into the Iraqi war in particular, and this has resulted in the deaths – most conservatively – of 100,000 or more Iraqi's, the displacement of a million or so, and the shattering of the infrastructure, and the housing and the hospitals of an entire country.

 

So its fine with me if you want to place the heavy cloak of moral responsibility on ghetto youths whose brains have been shredded by crappy government schools designed to squash them and keep them in a permanent underclass. Its fine with me if you want to say that people who have never been exposed to a work ethic; people that have never been exposed to any role models who have grown up in poverty and single parenthood, in a culture that avoids work, and has been trapped into the role of the system. That's fine with me if you want to say that these people are 100% responsible for what they do.

 

But what level of moral responsibility falls upon some rich kid like Tony Blair, who starts wars against international law, and who is a war criminal by any objective standard. What is his level of moral responsibility?

 

Tony Blair now makes about £7 million a year. Commands £250,000 for a speaking engagement. Still bills out his private security force to the British tax payer at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds per year. Has an estimated net worth of £60 million. Works for a variety of financial companies, is a lecturer at universities, and has book deals. What is his level of moral responsibility?

 

Well, do you think that nobody sees this in society? Do you think the children are not aware of this? Do you think the youths are not completely aware of the rank moral hypocrisy involved in this kind of stuff?

 

The cost of the bail outs of the British banks. Lets talk about that for a moment, because we're all about holding people accountable for theft and destruction of property. Well, £850 billion – Eight hundred and fifty billion pounds – that is an extraordinary amount of money. That is what went to the banks.

 

Lets take a quick look shall we : -

 

£76 Bn   - To Purchase shared in RBS and Lloyd's Bank Group

£200 Bn - Indemnify Bank of England against losses incurred in providing over £200 billion of liquidity support

£250 Bn - Guarantee wholesale borrowing by banks to strengthen liquidity in the banking system

£40 Bn   - Provide loans and other funding to Bradford & Bingley and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme

£250 Bn - Agree in principal to provide insurance for selection of bank assets.

£671 Bn - Total government spending in the financial year 2009-2010

£32.9 M  - Slaughter & May – Commercial legal advice

£15.4 M  - Credit Suisse – Financial advice on a range of measures, including bank recapitalisation and the Asset Protection Scheme

£11.3 M  - Pricewaterhousecoopers – Advice on APS

£8.7 M    - Ernst & Young – Due diligence on APS, Northern Rock

£7.7 M    - KPMG – Due diligence on APS

£7.4 M    - Blackrock – Valuation advice on APS

£5.3 M    - Deutsch Bank – Financial advice on a range of measures

£5 M       - Citi Financial – Advice on APS

£4.9 M    - BDO Stoy Hayward – Valuation of Northern Rock

£4.5 M    - Goldman Sachs – Financial advice on Northern Rock

£1.5 M    - Morgan Stanley – Financial advice on Bradford & Bingley

£2.5 M    - Other Advisers – Financial advice on a range of measures and proposals to revive Britain's ailing economy

 

Now, the raising of tuition fees for British youth will cost the British government about £18 billion right? £850 billion to bail out the banks and to keep the bonus's of executive salary; of people who ripped off other people largely, or made extensive miscalculations which they alone should be responsible for.

 

£18 billion has been taken from the youth, and these were just loans which the youth are obligated to repay. Its true that some of the banks have to pay some of these loans, but way down the road, and not the executives making the bonus's right now. They get to walk away with all the money.

 

The £850 billion is going to take decades if not generations to pay off, and this was passed like that with no consultation from the youth who will actually have to pay. The government is going to need people with some pretty damn high earnings to be able to pay off the amount of debt that is being forced down young peoples throats, and yet, it isn't going to loan them any money to go to school, or to improve their skills. If it is going to loan to them, it'll be at extremely high interest rates, with tuition fees going up enormously.

 

And the whole system - “The” Whole System itself – Statism as a whole is the initiation of force to achieve your goals. If you want the poor people to get money, well, what you do is you go and raise taxes on the productive. You take from the productive and you give to the impoverished. That's the idea behind the welfare state. Can we really blame the kids for eliminating the middle man and simply take stuff from the productive themselves – the shops and the restaurants and the local business'? Hard to see why its OK for a tax collector, but its wrong for youth. Surely its much more efficient by the youth; much less overhead.

 

So, I just wanted to point these things out. I do not condone violence. I do not condone the initiation of force. It is wrong what the rioters are doing. They are playing directly into the hands of the ruling powers, because now the majority in England are going to beg for state power. They're shooting themselves in the foot even more than they have been shot in the other foot.

 

The reality here is that the youth are listening. They don't listen to what their elders say. They listen to what actually occurs in the world. They listen to what actually occurs to rich white people who cheat and lie and miscalculate, then get massively rewarded.

 

They look at what happens to people who start wars in foreign countries for no reason of self defence, then lie to the population. They get awards, revered teaching positions, executive positions in banking and financial institutions. They get all the goodies that society can provide.

 

They look at how important they feel to those in power, when they see the government passing off their future as a nice little slave created for the banking institutions, and shaft them for tuition fees.

 

You understand?

 

The gravest danger for any society is not that the young do not listen to the moral instruction they are receiving …

 

… but that they do ...

 

~ VF ~

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
Serial killer

Blair, like Cheney and Obama are hired thugs, murderers for empire and big oil. They are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths of dark skinned people in Arab nations. Ironic that darker skinned people are the ones rioting in England. Blair doesn't even rise to the level of a serial killer who at the very least kills with twisted passion. He's a snivelling coward, a servile Golum. Thank you for drawing attention to the deeper moral reality of this issue!

Tim_P's picture
Tim_P
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 23 2009
Posts: 298
There is no sliding scale of

There is no sliding scale of morality based on income.  Every one of us wakes up in the morning and is faced with choosing between right and wrong hundreds of times a day.  More often than not, the income a person draws is related to how they tend to make those decisions.  How a person approaches school, their job and their community plays a role in their personal success.

I'm not saying that more income equates to higher morals, but that low ethics exist at both ends of the scale.  To suggest that because a person has a low income gives them any excuse for looting, robbing and mugging is completely wrong.  Marching for a cause is a very moral thing to do.  Turning a morally motivated march into a mass of looting and robbery is about as low as you can get.  There is no way to rationalize that type of behaviour based on income.  None.

Tim

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
agitating prop wrote: Blair,
agitating prop wrote:

Blair, like Cheney and Obama are hired thugs, murderers for empire and big oil. They are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths of dark skinned people in Arab nations. Ironic that darker skinned people are the ones rioting in England. Blair doesn't even rise to the level of a serial killer who at the very least kills with twisted passion. He's a snivelling coward, a servile Golum. Thank you for drawing attention to the deeper moral reality of this issue!

Nice to see your comments here.

I read quite a bit about the riots and the actor/comedian Russell Brand had some brilliant, beautifully written commentary on the riots:

... even David Cameron came back from his holiday. Eventually. The Tuscan truffles lost their succulence when the breaking glass became too loud to ignore.

...That state of deprivation though, is of course, the condition that many of those rioting endure as their unbending reality. No education, a weakened family unit, no money and no way of getting any. JD Sports is probably easier to desecrate if you can’t afford what’s in there and the few poorly paid jobs there are taken. Amidst the bleakness of this social landscape, squinting all the while in the glare of a culture that radiates ultra-violet consumerism and infra-red celebrity. That daily, hourly, incessantly enforces the egregious, deceitful message that you are what you wear, what you drive, what you watch and what you watch it on, in livid, neon pixels. The only light in their lives comes from these luminous corporate messages. No wonder they have their fucking hoods up.

...Politicians don’t represent the interests of people that don’t vote. They barely care about the people who do vote. They look after the corporations who get them elected. Cameron only spoke out against News International when it became evident to us, US, the people, not to him, (like Rose West, “He must’ve known”) that the Newspapers Murdoch controlled were happy to desecrate the dead in the pursuit of another exploitative, distracting story.
 

Why am I surprised that these young people behave destructively, “mindlessly”, motivated only by self-interest? How should we describe the actions of the city bankers that brought our economy to its knees in 2010? Altruistic? mindful? Kind? But then again, they do wear suits, so they deserve to be bailed out, perhaps that’s why not one of them has been imprisoned. And they got away with a lot more than a few fucking pairs of trainers.

These young people have no sense of community because they haven’t been given one. They have no stake in society because Cameron’s mentor Margaret Thatcher told us there’s no such thing.

If we don’t want our young people to tear apart our communities then don’t let people in power tear apart the values that hold our communities together....

Big Brother isn’t watching you

 

I think the riots are a result of a society that has learned to see and value everything through the prism of consumerism and whose leaders have embraced neoliberalism, as this essay helps to point out:

 

Commentator after commentator, from politicians to journalists, is blaming the recent chaos in London and beyond on “criminality”. What does that even mean? Crime is a product of social conditions, not a thing in and of itself. Recognising that people smashing, looting and burning are committing crimes is not an explanation – of course they’re criminals, what they’re doing is against the law.

What people aren’t recognising is that this kind of criminality is a direct product of consumerism. These kids have been told, all their lives, that what they own is more important than who they are or what they do. Having the right trainers, having the latest iPhone, eating the right chocolate bar – these are the things that are supposed to make you happy.

All through the ‘90s and into the new millennium, people were able to fund their consumerism with debt. Credit cards were handed out like sweets at a children’s party. Can’t afford it? Borrow. You need a new car, remortgage your house – the value of your two-bedroom ex-council flat is up 20%!

Then came the 2008 crash and the credit dried up. Ads for credit cards were replaced with ads for extortionate legal money lenders like wonga.com. The poor suddenly got poorer. Going into debt wasn’t the breeze it was before. But the consumerism didn’t adjust – on the contrary, politicians and economists looked to the consumers to boost the economy to help the poor banks out as bonuses for those at the top of the industry returned to their original level – and higher.

Areas like Tottenham are areas of high unemployment and social dislocation. Gang culture has grown across the UK for years, as Labour’s “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime” became ASBOs, stop and search and other repressive measures.

And then the Tories were elected – benefits cut, EMA cuts directly targeting the pockets of these young consumers. After the first student protest that attacked Milbank, every subsequent demonstration had large numbers of kids from the very same areas now in chaos. How were their legitimate concerns addressed? With kettles, riot police and political indifference.

Tottenham was hit very hard by the cuts, particularly youth services, which had their budget cut by 75% across the borough of Haringey. Eight of 13 youth centres were closed, bringing warnings that riots would ensue. An area so hugely dependent on state support was always going to suffer badly from cuts.

To make matters worse, when teachers, lecturers and public service workers went on strike on 30 June, the Prime Minister condemned the strikers as “irresponsible“. What message did he think he was sending to school-kids slagging off the very people who should be their role models?

Then came the News of the World scandal and the revelations of police corruption. What many suspected was shown to be true, the police, politicians and the corporate media were working together and breaking the law. This is all cognitive dissonance on a major scale, a society supposedly based on respect for authority and the rule of law is revealed to be nothing of the kind. The situation was like a tinder-box doused in petrol.

And then the police shot a man dead in Tottenham and left the community without answers. The shooting of Mark Duggan lit a show burning fuse that exploded in Tottenham on Saturday night. The events in communities elsewhere saw what happened there and took advantage. Stretching the police by popping up all over the city meant they could loot with impunity.

What is looting but the collapse of the agreement in society that a buildings full of desirable items can sit on the high street and you need to pay to take things from it? Suddenly people found that this wasn’t true any more, you could just break the window and take what you wanted and, as was discovered in Tottenham Hale Retail Park early Sunday morning, no-one could stop you. CCTV cameras, ubiquitous in our surveillance society, were either forgotten or ignored.

A dangerous sense of power and fearlessness overtook a considerable part of the youth of this country. Worse, all respect for other people was gone and firebugs started burning things, with no apparent concern for the people who lived above the buildings they burned. Muggings, stabbings and shootings ensued.

Mass waves of criminality like this are not simple; they are a sign of a complete collapse in social relations for a large sizeable of the population. What makes it so tragic is that they were absolutely predictable, not just by those in the communities where the trouble is. In April last year, they were predicted by the leader of Liberal Democrats – now Deputy Prime Minister – Nick Clegg, if the Tories won with a narrow majority. Instead, the government has less legitimacy than that and the riots are far worse than anyone could have predicted.

Riot criminality is a product of consumerism and social breakdown

 

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
Tim_P wrote: There is no
Tim_P wrote:

There is no sliding scale of morality based on income.  Every one of us wakes up in the morning and is faced with choosing between right and wrong hundreds of times a day.  More often than not, the income a person draws is related to how they tend to make those decisions.  How a person approaches school, their job and their community plays a role in their personal success.

I'm not saying that more income equates to higher morals, but that low ethics exist at both ends of the scale.  To suggest that because a person has a low income gives them any excuse for looting, robbing and mugging is completely wrong.  Marching for a cause is a very moral thing to do.  Turning a morally motivated march into a mass of looting and robbery is about as low as you can get.  There is no way to rationalize that type of behaviour based on income.  None.

Tim

Yes, indeed.  Thank you Tim.  You've saved me the time of writing a response and expressed my thoughts better than I would have.  I understand the frustrations that come with poverty and injustice expressed by VF.  But all too often these actions involve a good deal of greed and hooliganism and a lesser degree of political awareness and activism.  On the other hand, if the rioters had chosen to vent their hostilies upon the very individuals who have contributed to their economic woes, while I'm not condoning violence, one could make an argument  for some justification to their actions.   

britinbe's picture
britinbe
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 381
They saw an opportunity....
I had a discussion with a friend a long time ago as to what would I do if I found say 1000 GBP on the floor, my friend was adamant that he would hand in the money to the police.  I replied by saying that I would like to think that I would hand the money in; my fiend was appalled that I said that.  Honestly, unless you are faced with a given situation, one does not know how one would react.
 
I cannot condone the wanton destruction and violence, but as one commentator on RT said, when a person’s sense of self worth is based on luxury items that they cannot affoard and how little hope of securing a salary to be able to affoard them, how can you blame them when temptation is put in their way?  Undoubtedly, there is a large organised criminal element involved in all this as well, but with the levels of social inequality that exist in the UK, it really was a tinderbox looking for a spark.  I fear we will see more of this as we go forward.....
 
I do really feel sorry for the innocent victims in all this from those that loose their jobs because a shop cannot affoard to reopen, to the people who lost their homes and everything they owned....
doorwarrior's picture
doorwarrior
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2009
Posts: 166
There is no sliding scale of

There is no sliding scale of morality based on income.  Every one of us wakes up in the morning and is faced with choosing between right and wrong hundreds of times a day.  More often than not, the income a person draws is related to how they tend to make those decisions.  How a person approaches school, their job and their community plays a role in their personal success.

I'm not saying that more income equates to higher morals, but that low ethics exist at both ends of the scale.  To suggest that because a person has a low income gives them any excuse for looting, robbing and mugging is completely wrong.  Marching for a cause is a very moral thing to do.  Turning a morally motivated march into a mass of looting and robbery is about as low as you can get.  There is no way to rationalize that type of behaviour based on income.  None.

Tim

I agree with your thoughts overall however, you are mixing morals with ethics rather loosely. I don't think there is a sliding scale of morality based on income but I do think there is a scale based on ethics.

Here is a defination for ethics  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethics

Here is a defination for morals http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/morals

In short morals are a personal set of guidelines while ethics  are  defined by society/community or a specific group.

As an individual no one is going to think " I make more money and am more privilged than others so I should act more responsibly, and take better care of my community". To the contrary I think privileged people think the world should cater to their whims and feel no responsibility to any one.

On the flip side society in general feels that the privileged people should do more to take care of everyone else. The general population feels that the privileged have gotten where they are because of the system so they should give something back.

Every where I look everything ( capital, power, opportunity) flows to the top and never makes it way back down to the rest of the people. The game is rigged for the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer and for the middle class to go away. If a person is wealthy and privileged they should do what they can to help others as much as possible. I don't believe they should be forced to, ie. taxes, laws, regulation, redistribution,  that will never work. The privileged should feel MORALY compelled to help others because of their sucess.

Rich

 

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Ministers Plan Removal of rioters' Benefits ...
Agitating Prop wrote:

Blair, like Cheney and Obama are hired thugs, murderers for empire and big oil. They are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths of dark skinned people in Arab nations. Ironic that darker skinned people are the ones rioting in England. Blair doesn't even rise to the level of a serial killer who at the very least kills with twisted passion. He's a snivelling coward, a servile Golum. Thank you for drawing attention to the deeper moral reality of this issue!

AP,

Extremely good to have you reappear back on the forum after so long!

I'm calmed that in your description of  Blair as "a snivelling coward; a servile Golum", that you left your truer expletives of the man to private message, and away from the forum boards ... ...

My apreciation for the use of such decorum ... ...

Our allies in this suburban war through further economic attrition could well be youth, if only their energies could be tapped into doing a type of something that is both meaningful and constructive. I sense more of the same will have to suffice, since recent discussions at Number 10 Downing Street are busy finding ever fancier ways to pour jet fuel onto the rising flames : -

Ministers plan removal of rioters’ benefits
Financial times ^ | 14 Aug, 2011 | Kiran Stacey

Ministers are drawing up controversial plans to remove benefits from those convicted of taking part in the riots that engulfed England last week, in a move Liberal Democrats and independent experts have condemned as counter-productive and overly expensive.

Officials in Number 10 and the department for work and pensions are putting together plans for the harsh punishment of those found guilty of even the most minor infringements during the riots after a public petition calling for such a move gathered nearly 200,000 signatures.

David Cameron will lay the ground for such a move on Monday, in a speech a week after the worst of the violence took place in London. The prime minister will argue that there has been a “slow-motion moral collapse” in the country, and argue that the problem needs to be tackled in various ways, including through the benefits system.

He is expected to say: “I and ministers from across the coalition government will review every aspect of our work to mend our broken society: on schools, welfare, families, parenting, addiction, communities; on the cultural, legal, bureaucratic problems in our society too.”

FT.com

... emphasis mine ...

Yeh, Cobblers!!!

Reminds me of the late eighties, where people young and old that refused to pay the exorbitant Council Tax, lossed their right to vote out Thatchers Government. The country blew into quite a tinder box state back then, but nothing in comparison to right now.

Lets hope that the means of distraction aren't kept up for too much longer, or that these riots aren't used as yet more of a means of distraction in themselves - who can tell at this moment. Rubber bullets for the first time on mainland Britain, and an inexperienced army with basic training to make up for cuts in the police force sounds ominous, yet not in the least impossible.

The recent implosion of that cancerous Murdoch rag The News of the World was one large block from the base. The cement aint yet dry on the replacement to aid kicking it right back out. The British public though, appears to pride itself in its abilities of self-policing themselves up against cul-de-sac walls of their own building ...

~ VF ~

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
doorwarrior wrote: ... Every
doorwarrior wrote:

...

Every where I look everything ( capital, power, opportunity) flows to the top and never makes it way back down to the rest of the people. The game is rigged for the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer and for the middle class to go away. If a person is wealthy and privileged they should do what they can to help others as much as possible. I don't believe they should be forced to, ie. taxes, laws, regulation, redistribution,  that will never work. The privileged should feel MORALY compelled to help others because of their sucess.

Rich

This is the same advice that Obama gave the Banks, but it fell on deaf ears. So how do you propose to fix a problem that's not fixable with wishes and hopes?

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
xraymike79
xraymike79 wrote:
doorwarrior wrote:

...

Every where I look everything ( capital, power, opportunity) flows to the top and never makes it way back down to the rest of the people. The game is rigged for the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer and for the middle class to go away. If a person is wealthy and privileged they should do what they can to help others as much as possible. I don't believe they should be forced to, ie. taxes, laws, regulation, redistribution,  that will never work. The privileged should feel MORALY compelled to help others because of their sucess.

Rich

This is the same advice that Obama gave the Banks, but it fell on deaf ears. So how do you propose to fix a problem that's not fixable with wishes and hopes?

If measures to control economic piracy and militant slaughter overseas, don't evolve through legislation, 'evolution' could be given a power assist by the addition of one little letter that means so much!  The letter 'r'.

Let the revolution begin!!!

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
agitating prop
agitating prop wrote:
xraymike79 wrote:
doorwarrior wrote:

...

Every where I look everything ( capital, power, opportunity) flows to the top and never makes it way back down to the rest of the people. The game is rigged for the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer and for the middle class to go away. If a person is wealthy and privileged they should do what they can to help others as much as possible. I don't believe they should be forced to, ie. taxes, laws, regulation, redistribution,  that will never work. The privileged should feel MORALY compelled to help others because of their sucess.

Rich

This is the same advice that Obama gave the Banks, but it fell on deaf ears. So how do you propose to fix a problem that's not fixable with wishes and hopes?

If measures to control economic piracy and militant slaughter overseas, don't evolve through legislation, 'evolution' could be given a power assist by the addition of one little letter that means so much!  The letter 'r'.

Let the revolution begin!!!

So they say.... probably why we have been seeing the strengthening of a police state:

"What these assorted court rulings and incidents add up to is a nation that is fast imploding, one that is losing sight of what freedom is really all about and, in the process, is transitioning from a republic governed by the people to a police state governed by the strong arm of the law."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/one-week-in-the-life-of-a_b_868721.html

gregroberts's picture
gregroberts
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 6 2008
Posts: 1024
"Can we really blame the

"Can we really blame the kids for eliminating the middle man and simply take stuff from the productive themselves – the shops and the restaurants and the local business'? Hard to see why its OK for a tax collector, but its wrong for youth. Surely its much more efficient by the youth; much less overhead."

Loved it!

 

doorwarrior's picture
doorwarrior
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2009
Posts: 166
Emapthy is the key

I have bee visiting this site for 3-4 years. I have seen the debates going back and forth about what system will save us. I have not posted in most of these discussions because I don't believe anything will save us now.  Pure free market will not work, neither will any socialist model, or any model of any type. There is no system that will make this planet a better place because the people of earth are selfish snots.  We need to learn to care for those around us and for those we will never meet. To have people make decisions based on what will be good for everyone, not just whats good for themselves. You can't take from one to give to another either, redistribution will never work. All of the models discussed here at CM and every where I look will never work because humanity's morals of today are totaly screwed.

I would not say what I wrote was advice. I was really just pointing out the difference between ethics and morals.

My solution is to wait. All of this will come tumbling down, the Three E's guarantee it. How far down I don't know, I hope its far enough to shatter the hold that large corporations/government(same entity in my mind)  have on the populace. This will give us a chance to build a new "system". It is my hope that humanity will learn what  Empathy is and learn to respect each other and the planet. As a whole people don't care about anything but themselves and this is the root of all evil.

If you want a system, how about a free market with the participants having socialist morals and a teeny tiny gov. Not going to happen in todays world. Maybe next time.

Rich

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
The Six Stages of Awareness ...

Mike,

In your post above, Russell Brand's Big Brother Isn't Watching You, and indeed, Donnacha DeLong's The Revolution Will Be Streamed, nail home fully for me exactly what I see is happening in the UK. With hope, and in short-shift, it is what should surely be arriving at the shores of the United States within the year.

Russell and Donnacha's accredition to what is obvious to me - and oblivious to those I once considered wise enough to see, if they'd just open their selfish eyes - is forever missing in mainstream media. I sense this unfolding anger beginning to appear more often outside of peoples houses, rather than through edited news in the comforting glow of home TV screens, showing some place else obscure. It will continue to role around the globe in many a forum, and with hope, to the forefront, and beyond underground movements.

There are choices to remaining in the cities of the world at this time if you are the rising young generation that make up a quarter of the UK populations under twenty-five. It will be on their knees, or on their feet.

Chris Martenson's Six Stages of Awareness seems apt to the future austerity package sold to the British public, where many have no means to survive it.

First there is the long drawn out knife of Denial that you and I have witnessed in spades. Then there is Anger, for which I believe is slowly emerging. Bargaining as a means to justify the reasoning behind the eyes as whether to jump from the track, or be hypnotised by the merry sing-song rhythm of the train. The emergence of Fear then, as a given. Depression, as much the certainty of the difficulty in the journey ahead. And with all of that combined to try your means, the uncertainty of Acceptance for the weary traveller, on a path too few have yet beaten, and therefore with the greatest chance has grown over before their start.

Considering the demographics, I'm wondering how adaptable a state school educated city dweller really is, if we remove prayer and wish fulfillment from the equation, and look in at the cold hard facts of what twenty million people actually look like within a sixty-five mile radius of London. When the dole cheques half, inflation further devalues the currency another 15% in under three years, food prices rise another 5% to match the last year in the next, and the 18% on a gas bill kicks in across the country from September.

Demographics count if the stats hold water : -

Here's Tom with the weather ...

~ VF ~

 

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
Thanks for welcome back!!

Thank you so much, Vanity and Xray. It's so nice to be appreciated. Great thread and great work, as always, from both of you. As you can tell...I finally have my fighting spirit back! The psychopaths aren't always at the top. Sometimes they're right in our midst,, pretending to be our best friends--just like corporations and politicians! I am now very well versed in economic, political and personal cruelty.  I've learned a tremendous amount from the experience.

 . The  betrayal of entire nations, particularly the most vulnerable has been aided and abetted and masked by consumerism.  The moral compass of society at large has been lost under a mountain of credit and useless merchandise. Society has become completely ego driven. There is little refinement, little real civility, just the weak tea of politically correct hypocricy.

  Ahhh, the weak tea of politically correct moralizing when we need the double shot expresso of deep discontent and action. The riots are a charade, aggressive acts that support the corporations. Indignation, expressed in looting objects of social destruction? Breaking windows to pilfer designer clothing?  This is a gift to corporations; free advertising. How fantastic must these things be that people are able to risk prison terms and social censure to acquire them?. This isn't consumer society breaking down, the looters are brave soldiers, willing to take risks to acquire. They should be commemorated in photo-journalism of the likes of the Iwo Jima photo. Perhaps they could be raising a flag with the Gap logo on it!

 

. Sometimes I  wonder if we are being ruled by a subspecies of anti-social human masquerading as actual people It's just that bad.

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
doorwarrior wrote: I have
doorwarrior wrote:

I have bee visiting this site for 3-4 years. I have seen the debates going back and forth about what system will save us. I have not posted in most of these discussions because I don't believe anything will save us now.  Pure free market will not work, neither will any socialist model, or any model of any type. There is no system that will make this planet a better place because the people of earth are selfish snots.  We need to learn to care for those around us and for those we will never meet. To have people make decisions based on what will be good for everyone, not just whats good for themselves. You can't take from one to give to another either, redistribution will never work. All of the models discussed here at CM and every where I look will never work because humanity's ethics of today are totaly screwed.

I would not say what I wrote was advice. I was really just pointing out the difference between ethics and morals.

My solution is to wait. All of this will come tumbling down, the Three E's guarantee it. How far down I don't know, I hope its far enough to shatter the hold that large corporations/government(same entity in my mind)  have on the populace. This will give us a chance to build a new "system". It is my hope that humanity will learn what  Empathy is and learn to respect each other and the planet. As a whole people don't care about anything but themselves and this is the root of all evil.

If you want a system, how about a free market with the participants having socialist morals and a teeny tiny gov. Not going to happen in todays world. Maybe next time.

Rich

 

Part of the problem is framing part of the debate about economic systems along the lines of  redistribution of income, alone, without questioning the underlying dynamics in that system. If a business, for example is structured along partnership lines where the top guy voluntarily limits his income to say, 5 times that of the lowest level employee, most of the arguments about redistribution would nullify. And most people would be just fine with that. Person brings new partner into the lowest tier of a business, at 25 thou a year. He then limits himself to 125,000. a year income. Could you legislate this? Hell yeah. Would you have to? Probably not. Then initiate a flat tax. Get rid of 50% of the military. Make people work for welfare. Devote most tax dollars to education. Problem solved

 

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
To rationalize or not to rationalize
Tim_P wrote:

There is no way to rationalize that type of behaviour based on income.  None.

How is anything around us rational?  I put it to you that the trodden masses probably all suffer from some form of mental illness, depression being highly likely right at the top of the list.  On top of that, I just heard on the radio yesterday this nutrition researcher interviewed on how the food people eat affects their mental health..... and having seen Jamie Oliver's excellent TV series on school food (AND what they eat at home, ie chips!) it is no wonder to me that poor people have no hope of living anything like a life that will make them feel like they can rationalise....

See this?

Mike

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Ministers plan removal of

 

Ministers plan removal of rioters’ benefits
Financial times ^ | 14 Aug, 2011 | Kiran Stacey

Ministers are drawing up controversial plans to remove benefits from those convicted of taking part in the riots that engulfed England last week, in a move Liberal Democrats and independent experts have condemned as counter-productive and overly expensive.

When people lose everything......  they lose it!  TPTB truly have no idea.  Morons the lot of them.

The only result from such a stupid move will be a revolution, just like is happening in Nth Africa and the Middle East...

The next twenty years........

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
agitating prop wrote: Thank
agitating prop wrote:

Thank you so much, Vanity and Xray. It's so nice to be appreciated. Great thread and great work, as always, from both of you. As you can tell...I finally have my fighting spirit back! The psychopaths aren't always at the top. Sometimes they're right in our midst,, pretending to be our best friends--just like corporations and politicians! I am now very well versed in economic, political and personal cruelty.  I've learned a tremendous amount from the experience.

 . The  betrayal of entire nations, particularly the most vulnerable has been aided and abetted and masked by consumerism.  The moral compass of society at large has been lost under a mountain of credit and useless merchandise. Society has become completely ego driven. There is little refinement, little real civility, just the weak tea of politically correct hypocricy.

  Ahhh, the weak tea of politically correct moralizing when we need the double shot expresso of deep discontent and action. The riots are a charade, aggressive acts that support the corporations. Indignation, expressed in looting objects of social destruction? Breaking windows to pilfer designer clothing?  This is a gift to corporations; free advertising. How fantastic must these things be that people are able to risk prison terms and social censure to acquire them?. This isn't consumer society breaking down, the looters are brave soldiers, willing to take risks to acquire. They should be commemorated in photo-journalism of the likes of the Iwo Jima photo. Perhaps they could be raising a flag with the Gap logo on it! 

. Sometimes I  wonder if we are being ruled by a subspecies of anti-social human masquerading as actual people It's just that bad.

 

That's hilarious, but perversely true!! Thanks for the mind trip and psychoanalysis. This would be a good time to post this video:

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Consumerism

My favorite part of the movie "They Live".  Time to put on your alien sunglasses!

Sorry if this is a bit off topic but Paul Krugman seems to think an alien invasion would be good for our economy.    This idea just leaves me scratching my head thinking what a joke the economic profession really is.   I wish Rogoff would not have cut him off because I really wanted to hear his full explaination.  Whatever it was going to be, it clearly was positive.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/08/14/paul-krugman-c...

doorwarrior's picture
doorwarrior
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2009
Posts: 166
Never Going to Happen

AP wrote:

Part of the problem is framing part of the debate about economic systems along the lines of  redistribution of income, alone, without questioning the underlying dynamics in that system. If a business, for example is structured along partnership lines where the top guy voluntarily limits his income to say, 5 times that of the lowest level employee, most of the arguments about redistribution would nullify. And most people would be just fine with that. Person brings new partner into the lowest tier of a business, at 25 thou a year. He then limits himself to 125,000. a year income. Could you legislate this? Hell yeah. Would you have to? Probably not. Then initiate a flat tax. Get rid of 50% of the military. Make people work for welfare. Devote most tax dollars to education. Problem solved

Lets start with a little background. I own a small business (started solo in my garage in 2000) with eleven employees. The lowest guy is  a part time warehouse helper that makes about 20K per year. No way am I going to do all I do for $100K. Lets take my mid-level guys then, they make about $50K per year. Ok, I can live with $250K. But to use your analysis in a larger picture, you want a person to run a multinational company for about $80K(warehouse help is about $8 per hour). Do you really think this is possible? Do you think anyone will agree to that? I have been reading your posts for a long time and you seem much smarter than that. I agree with you about the flat tax, the military,  welfare and many of the other things you have posted on. I disagree about public education.

The  problem with all the ideas to solve the problems of our world is that THEY WILL NEVER HAPPEN! Your ideas sound great on paper but will fall flat in the real world. This includes everything from a totaly free market system to a pure socialist system to everything inbetween. Its easy to say "just do this, problem solved". How do you get 8 billion people to go along?  Lets just say you want to change the US. How do you get an entire society to have a paradigm shift to your reality? You can't subjugate people to any plan no matter how wonderful it may seem on paper.

I know we need to have a discussion so we can better help to shape the future. Thats the point though, we need to discuss the future and what type of society we will build out of  the ashes of the one we live in now. Not how we could change this or that with the system we have and everything will be fixed. This system will collapse under its own burgeoning weight, nothing can change that. What we need is for people to care about each other. To make decisions based partialy on a free market to be productive and profitable, and partialy on social justice to have "things" more evenly distributed. But, you can't TELL people how to behave, they need to act of their own volition, their own choice. We need to remove greed from humanity, which will never happen in todays world but may be possible in the next one. Until you can get people to actually care about each other and the environment all the talk about changing monetary  policy or the social structure or politics or just about any subject you want to insert here is just noise. Its the people and their beliefs/morals that make the system, its not the system making the people..

Rich

PS Sorry to VanityFox for hijacking the thread

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb ...

Doorwarrior,

No worries ...

You're not hijacking the thread at all. In fact, I welcome your opinion, but I don't believe AP was making any statement about your business in the least, or framing a scenario that was supposed to be thought out, just a great deal nearer to something better than where we're at, and where things are gonna end up?

Look, the way I see it, Stanley Kubrick got it all down pat in 1964 with Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. I happened to find the full film out on YouTube a few days ago. Now, I know its one of ao's favourite movies, and I thought I'd share it with ya - So, set your feet up on your desk and turn down the white noise in the forum, because you have a choice here. You can do one of two things: Either watch Stan's take, or Helen's at the base of my post. Stan'll make you laugh and squirm, but Helen's will just make you squirm, so ...

~ VF ~

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
doorwarrior wrote: AP
doorwarrior wrote:

AP wrote:

Part of the problem is framing part of the debate about economic systems along the lines of  redistribution of income, alone, without questioning the underlying dynamics in that system. If a business, for example is structured along partnership lines where the top guy voluntarily limits his income to say, 5 times that of the lowest level employee, most of the arguments about redistribution would nullify. And most people would be just fine with that. Person brings new partner into the lowest tier of a business, at 25 thou a year. He then limits himself to 125,000. a year income. Could you legislate this? Hell yeah. Would you have to? Probably not. Then initiate a flat tax. Get rid of 50% of the military. Make people work for welfare. Devote most tax dollars to education. Problem solved

Lets start with a little background. I own a small business (started solo in my garage in 2000) with eleven employees. The lowest guy is  a part time warehouse helper that makes about 20K per year. No way am I going to do all I do for $100K. Lets take my mid-level guys then, they make about $50K per year. Ok, I can live with $250K. But to use your analysis in a larger picture, you want a person to run a multinational company for about $80K(warehouse help is about $8 per hour). Do you really think this is possible? Do you think anyone will agree to that? I have been reading your posts for a long time and you seem much smarter than that. I agree with you about the flat tax, the military,  welfare and many of the other things you have posted on. I disagree about public education.

The  problem with all the ideas to solve the problems of our world is that THEY WILL NEVER HAPPEN! Your ideas sound great on paper but will fall flat in the real world. This includes everything from a totaly free market system to a pure socialist system to everything inbetween. Its easy to say "just do this, problem solved". How do you get 8 billion people to go along?  Lets just say you want to change the US. How do you get an entire society to have a paradigm shift to your reality? You can't subjugate people to any plan no matter how wonderful it may seem on paper.

I know we need to have a discussion so we can better help to shape the future. Thats the point though, we need to discuss the future and what type of society we will build out of  the ashes of the one we live in now. Not how we could change this or that with the system we have and everything will be fixed. This system will collapse under its own burgeoning weight, nothing can change that. What we need is for people to care about each other. To make decisions based partialy on a free market to be productive and profitable, and partialy on social justice to have "things" more evenly distributed. But, you can't TELL people how to behave, they need to act of their own volition, their own choice. We need to remove greed from humanity, which will never happen in todays world but may be possible in the next one. Until you can get people to actually care about each other and the environment all the talk about changing monetary  policy or the social structure or politics or just about any subject you want to insert here is just noise. Its the people and their beliefs/morals that make the system, its not the system making the people..

Rich

PS Sorry to VanityFox for hijacking the thread

A little background from my side. My husband co-owned a business with a couple of other founding partners, several years ago. He made about 110,000 a year. The receptionist made about 20,000 or so...I'm guessing. He fought to get them medical benefits, couldn't get his partners to agree to it as it was prohibitively expensive and would represent an unalterable fixed cost. Instead they instituted a profit sharing plan. We always felt we were making out like bandits and amazingly lucky. My husband never felt he worked that much harder than any of the employees.

Depending on where you live, your health care costs, whether you have kids or not, 100k, clear,  is a pretty good income. Why would you want or need more? ( Bearing in mind here, all of the qualifiers)

As far as the heads of multinationals making 80 grand, you are assuming that my theoretical universe would even allow multi-nationals. If I did allow them, I would insist that the CEO made only 4 or 5 times what their lowest paid made. Why should they make more? If they want to make more money they would have to raise the wages of the lower tier partners after they crunched the numbers to see if it made sense.

When you are born into a rapaciously greedy competetive culture it's hard to separate out, what is actually true about human behaviour as opposed to what is true in your particular culture.

Both my husband and I were born in N.America but are ethnically Scandinavian.. We might be genetically predisposed to feeling repulsed by the type of greed that would give us more than our due while freezing others out..

I think there is a paradigm shift coming and it IS possible to get from here to there. It starts by coming up with workable solutions.. As far as "making people do things" that probably won't be necessary. They will do what makes the most sense. I actually think people, once they are educated, often do make the right choices.  And....they make the right choices because it actually feels better. Having too much money is a barrier to good healthy friendships with a diverse group. And it's having fun with our buddies that is the most rewarding experience for most of us.

 

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
The Barbarians Inside Britain's Gates

VF,

Thank you for pasting one of my favorite movies.  While the importance of the 3Es is well recognized here, it is laudable that you're raising the awareness of this forum regarding the heretofore largely unrecognized dangers of the pollution of our precious bodily fluids.;-)

Getting back on topic, here's an opinion piece from the WSJ on the riots.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424053111903918104576504033881168802-lMyQjAxMTAxMDEwNTExNDUyWj.html?mod=wsj_share_email_bot

AP,

You know that the R word is forbidden here and in the basement as well ... even though history shows that once things have degraded to their present state, substantive change is highly improbable without it.  Actually, the most historically important R is yet to come and is described in the book of another R which is part of another R.  Hmm ... the 3Rs ... could be the start of a new forum for the fringe.

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
I don't buy it
Vanityfox451 wrote:

 

If somebody is rich and privileged, I think we can assume that they have an easier time being a better person. I don't think that's a hugely controversial thing to say. I'm not saying this means nobody has any free will, but there are influences.

 

Actually, I think Stephen Molineux is grossly mistaken here.  If anything, wealth and power may corrupt them even more than the person of average or below average means.  And typically, they didn't become rich and privileged by being kind, unselfish, and generous nor by having ancestors that were.

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
ao wrote: Vanityfox451
ao wrote:
Vanityfox451 wrote:

 

If somebody is rich and privileged, I think we can assume that they have an easier time being a better person. I don't think that's a hugely controversial thing to say. I'm not saying this means nobody has any free will, but there are influences.

 

Actually, I think Stephen Molineux is grossly mistaken here.  If anything, wealth and power may corrupt them even more than the person of average or below average means.  And typically, they didn't become rich and privileged by being kind, unselfish, and generous nor by having ancestors that were.

Touché!!!!!

VF,

Thanks for the Movie....watching it now for the first time.

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
One Week in the Life of a Police State ...

This is to everyone on the thread, but nobody in particular ...

I'm feeling tested and constrained. I suppose its just the amount of disturbance people bring with them into discussion, as something of a thought that's hung in the mind that needed an outlet to vent in. But at the very bottom of Xraymikes post here, you'll find an article by John W. Whithead that totally directly describes what it was that brought me to personally transcribe Stefan Molyneux video, and make this thread happen.

I don't know what is being missed by people that assume there is another intention in word or in film if the point was so blatantly obvious it could be nothing else?

Now, the Huffington Post and this forum will probably frown at the entire article being reproduced here, but I can break down in part what its stark points to me are, and for anyone to be curious enough to read it in its entirety at the original source.

One Week in the Life of a Police State

Firstly, the late great Chalmers Johnson in a quote toward the heading of the article as opening : -

"The United States today is like a cruise ship on the Niagara River upstream of the most spectacular falls in North America. A few people on board have begun to pick up a slight hiss in the background, to observe a faint haze of mist in the air or on their glasses, to note that the river current seems to be running slightly faster. But no one yet seems to have realized that it is almost too late to head for shore." -- Historian and author Chalmers Johnson

For the life of me, and try as I might, there can't be a single person on this forum that has watched the Crash Course that could disagree with this statement.

Now three paragraphs that are the rough allowed limit here, to reproduce (in part) what I believe salient : -

Indeed, a handful of seemingly unrelated incidents in the week leading up to Memorial Day perfectly encapsulated how much the snare enclosing us has tightened, how little recourse we really have -- at least in the courts, and how truly bleak is the landscape of our freedoms. What these incidents reveal is that the governmental bureaucracy has stopped viewing us, the American people, as human beings who should be treated with worth and dignity. That was the purpose of the Bill of Rights. The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures of our persons and effects was designed so that government agents would be forced to treat us with due respect. With this protection now gone, those who attempt to exercise their rights will often be forced to defend themselves against an increasingly inflexible and uncompromising government.

Unfortunately, despite the fact that the Patriot Act has been perversely applied to average Americans, when some of the more controversial provisions recently came up for renewal, they were passed by many of the same individuals -- many ushered into office on the impetus of the Tea Party -- who had claimed to oppose it. Within hours of the Patriot Act extension being passed, however, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, revealed in an interview that the "real" Patriot Act is classified. In other words, Wyden's message is that the government has been broadly interpreting the Patriot Act for its own purposes and keeping that interpretation under wraps. Stated Wyden: "We're getting to a gap between what the public thinks the law says and what the American government secretly thinks the law says." Thus, the violations of the Patriot Act are worse than we thought.

 

Consider, for example, a recent incident involving a young ex-Marine who was killed after a SWAT team kicked open the door of his Arizona home during a drug raid and opened fire. According to news reports, Jose Guerena, 26-years-old and the father of two young children, grabbed a gun in response to the forced invasion but never fired. In fact, the safety was still on his gun when he was killed. Police officers were not as restrained. The young Iraqi war veteran was allegedly fired upon 71 times in what appears to be yet another senseless killing. Guerena had no prior criminal record, and the police found nothing illegal in his home. Incredibly, medical authorities were kept away from the scene for more than an hour, by which time it was too late to save Guerena's life.

The end piece closes the article as a bookend to Chalmers Johnson's opening with a part of "Letter from a Birmingham Jail", by Martin Luther King Junior : -

We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives in the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere in this country.... Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.... We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.... You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern.... One may well ask, "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: there are just and there are unjust laws. I would agree with Saint Augustine that "An unjust law is no law at all."... Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.... I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the very highest respect for law.... We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal.... It is the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually time is neutral. It can be used either destructively or constructively. I am coming to feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than the people of good will.... But as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love--"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you."... Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist--"This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist--"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." So the question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be. Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love?

There is nothing - nothing at all - that I can possibly misplace - even in the attempt - to the intentions of John W. Whitehead, that don't set a chill down my spine at the exacting nature of the facts that are set out before you. They are watertight and exacting, as the expression in the frustration at the continual injustice that broke out the recent riots in London; something of a temporary reprieve at personal freedom and dignity, laced with the condemnation of theft and violence ...

Thank you Mike,

~ VF ~

dshields's picture
dshields
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 24 2009
Posts: 599
Please...

Please, the violent assault upon, destruction, and stealing of other people's property is clearly wrong.  People who do that should be arrested and jailed.  If my neighbor makes a lot more money than me is it ok if i go and break into his house and smash a bunch of stuff with a bat and steal some more stuff  ?  Obviously not.  One of the posts on this thread was discussing how a person's upbringing might impact their behavior as an adult.  I am sure that is the case.  People who are not raised properly will indeed misbehave as adults.  A very large segment of the American population has not been raised correctly.  It will be easy to see that when the economic situation gets worse here in America, first the police and then when the police are unable to cope, the military are really going to have their hands full.  So called "urban areas" will become savage war zones when the transfer payments are reduced or eliminated.  Sorry, it is just the way it will be.  Those people were not raised properly and it just is what it is.

That said, here in America and it sounds like it is the same over in GB, we do have an income distribution problem.  While some hedge fund folks do seem to make an awful lot of money (possibly too much), in general I think the real problem is not "those evil rich people" make too much money, it is more like the middle class got wiped out.  Some guy who worked very hard for 25 years and now owns 10 restaurants is not an evil rich person ripping off the unwashed masses.  Come on, it is simply not true.  As a matter of fact, he has created a lot jobs for people.  Some of the jobs he created, such as the managers of the businesses, will be decent paying.  The problem is there is not enough of those people.  The problem is we wiped out the middle class by exporting their jobs to 3rd world counties and they went from 25 to 50 dollars an hour with benefits to 10 bucks an hour at Home Depot.  That is the problem and that is a really big problem.  Millions of people would be in the 25 to 50 dollars an hour right now if that had not have happened and the income distribution graph and the tax revenues into the various levels of government would look a whole lot different if the job exporting frenzy had not happened.  The government geared up an entitlements based system back when we had a large and productive middle class.  In the 50's, 60's, and 70's it looked good.  We were the manufacturing powerhouse of the world and we could afford it.  Starting in the 80's we began to export our jobs.  The 90's were a massive exodus of jobs.  The 00's were also bad.  The exporting is still going on but it is slacking off now.  We exported the jobs of the middle class which enabled us to have a generous entitlements system.  That is all gone and I do not believe it is coming back in any meaningful way any time soon.  But, we just keep spending like we are still the manufacturing powerhouse of the world.  That is bound to come to a very bad end.  People's expectations for transfer payments grossly exceed the ability of the economy to support.

At this point the politicians are unable to control spending so we are heading for a collapse.  We simply have a government we can no longer afford.  It is just that simple.  Recently, inbound government revenue has started to drop again at all levels of government.  This is very serious as it was bad enough the way it was.  If we are heading into another downturn it will be very serious indeed.  What the majority of people have not been able to figure out yet is the transfer payments are going to get cut one way or another in the not so distant future.  They will be cut through some organized legislative process or they will be cut by a disorganized crisis process.  But, cut they will be.  When that happens all hell is going to break loose in America.  There will be riots in cities.  There will be madness.  The politicians can not save us from ourselves.

 

britinbe's picture
britinbe
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 381
Tax service
gregroberts wrote:

"Can we really blame the kids for eliminating the middle man and simply take stuff from the productive themselves – the shops and the restaurants and the local business'? Hard to see why its OK for a tax collector, but its wrong for youth. Surely its much more efficient by the youth; much less overhead."

Loved it!

 

I lived in the Netherlands for a while, the tax man was call the "Belasting Dienst" or "Tax Service", it always brought a smile to my face whenever i saw it knowing that it was a service that was being provided to me lightening the burden of salry in my pocket and on my bank account....LOL

frobn's picture
frobn
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 28 2010
Posts: 184
dshields wrote: ...What the
dshields wrote:

...What the majority of people have not been able to figure out yet is the transfer payments are going to get cut one way or another in the not so distant future.  They will be cut through some organized legislative process or they will be cut by a disorganized crisis process.  But, cut they will be.  When that happens all hell is going to break loose in America.  There will be riots in cities.  There will be madness.  The politicians can not save us from ourselves.

I hate to be cynical but indications are that If the riots do come, which is likely, official policy will be one of benign neglect towards the masses while providing full protection for the financial elites through military and private security forces.

 

gregroberts's picture
gregroberts
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 6 2008
Posts: 1024
"socialist morals" Like

"socialist morals"

Like using a gun to force people to do things they normally wouldn't do? Sounds like utopia.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments