There will be no uprising in America.

reply to post by tide88


Tide88, I agree that it might not happen...but I also agree that it could happen. It really all depends on what does or does not touch it all off. And unlike the past the internet and general apathy and willingness to submit to a leadership based on promises of a better tomorrow and charisma can be huge factors.

If we only repeat the effects of the Great Depression (which on the whole wasn't that bad for the common people to recover...rich elitists however were hit hard). Elitism is also a stronger factor now as opposed to then. The super rich then as now realise that spreading the wealth pays off, but there were more that understood that then as opposed to now. Today's average rich (factory owner that is doing well for example) would flip the bird and close up shop in a minute if his wealth was threatened too sharply too quickly. The attitude of "I gots mine who cares about yours." is a little too prevealent for my comfort today.

Also differences in lifestyle in the common man are extreme. We are the moderately weathy comparitively that lost their shirts then. We have cars for transportation, refrigerators for food preservation, stores as opposed to gardens and chickens for food consumption. Even electricity and TV for evening leasure as opposed to bedtime at dark to save on lamp oil.

On the whole our education is less pratical knowledge and our experiences are more on self-endulgence than getting by with our wits and our sweat. We buy and throw away as opposed to repair. We call the cops if threatened instead of dealing with it on our own to avoid lawsuits for taking the law in our own hands.

So is it apathy or ignorance that would hurt us more today? Again, not saying it will definately happen but I acknowledge that it could and could become very dark and bleak for some to where their morality conflicts with their mortality. And that is a very realistic concern of mine when thinking of what the people as a whole will do when pressed.



[edit on 15-7-2008 by Ahabstar]

That's a silly assertion even at the best of times.
Cincinnatti, 2001
Los Angeles, 1992
and the infamous Summer of 1968. (Almost civil war...)

"Even at the best of times we are on the brink of imminent disaster."
- Somebody, but I heard it from Aleister Cooke.

www.archive.org...

More evidence that an uprising/the end/economic apocalypse is not likely:

The FDIC issues a "watch list" for the banks in which it is concerned. This, in some peoples view, is a list of possible bank failures for obvious reasons. However, the number of institutions that the FDIC has put on its watch list, and the number of total bank assets that are on the watch list, is extremely small:

www4.fdic.gov...

While the list has grown, its risen from about 0.5% of all institutions to 1.1% over the past year. This is still lower than the number on the watch list in 2002, and significantly lower than the institutions on it in the early 1990s.

By the way, a note to the doom and gloom forum gang: I exposed your tactics of calling everyone who isn't a "OMG THE APOCALYPSE IS UPON US" type of person a "government agent" early on. Its getting pathetic that your already using it again. Of course, without any evidence, it's just the normal "WHAT..OMG NO THE WORLD IS SO GOING TO END...YOUR LIKE SO A GOVERNMENT AGENT FOR DISAGREEING AND BRINGING FACTS INTO THIS!!!11111"

[edit on 15-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
Again another useless post, why not actually counter any of my arguments? Because you can not, it does not matter how YOU took my post.

What? Where did I say this? Why can't you address the fact that your making stuff up and are upset you got called on for doom and gloom and can't back it up?

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
I clarified for you several times, if you can not debate this topic with out construing a post to fit your own perception I don’t understand why you come on a discussion board at all.

Your just arguing with yourself my dear.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
You misunderstood my wording and meaning; I corrected you and clarified it for you. I even posed similar debatable questions for you and you refuse to debate the issue, instead you insult me and use the same old tired argument.

Sorry, you've been refused and its been posted. That you are to busy trying to create drama out of it to read it is not my issue. No insulting required, you do that to yourself by continuing to post like this.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
If you are so afraid to debate the issue with me instead of throwing childish baiting and bickering my way then don’t reply to my post. If you do not want to debate the issues based on how I’ve presented them, not how you poorly comprehend them, then you are a waste of time.

Your lack of ability to understand that you've been summarily refuted thus far is not my problem. You can sit here and argue with yourself all day, it won't change the facts I'm afraid.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
As for proof, what proof do you want? What proof do you ask for? You said there were people suspected of terrorism, can you post any links to the people that have been released and show me that every one of them was justly detained?

Where is your proof? Where is your proof that life in America sucks because someone in Guantanamo got water boarded? Where is your proof that the torture tactics used on those suspects surpasses any of those used by any other country? Where is your proof that only those whom have it good don't see the horror that you claim is the current status of this country?

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
This isn't about public opinion, again you only pay attention to half of my post and fail to comprehend the rest. This is about wrong done against the people, such as involving the Telecomm giants.

Oh lovely, now we've changed subjects to the freaking warrant-less wiretapping. If you could form a coherent argument and stick to it, maybe we could get somewhere. As it is, here is what you are doing:

Step 1: Say something which you have absolutely no evidence for.
Step 2: Upon being refuted, deny you said anything in step 1.
Step 3: Upon being shown that you did indeed say what you said in step 1, deny again.
Step 3: Keep responding and denying everything, because if you keep up enough you will eventually get the last word.
Step 4: Change topic, return to step 1.

I award your attempt at trolling me (again) a 4 out of 10. I like the technique, although its rather amateur. Needs work.

[edit on 15-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by ALightinDarkness

Do you not read other replies?
I don't care what you do for a living, but what do FDIC predictions have to do with social unrest and public demonstration/urban riots?

These things can occur with seeming spontaneity even in periods of relative economic calm.

So could you explain how you interpret this report from FDIC as evidence that there won't be fairly widespread, overt public displays of dissatisfaction when gasoline reaches $7.00 a gallon?

reply to post by djerwulfe


Apparently you don't understand the OP, which posited that an Armageddon was not upon us in the United States. Part of the current fear mongering tactics is to throw up the economy as evidence of the end being nigh. The evidence on the economy shows the end is not nigh, as the OP posited. The data shows fear mongering over bank failures is just that - fear mongering. Can you show ANY data for what your proposing? No. I'll take the side with the data, thanks.

Your arguing with a straw man. No one ever said violence didn't happen during the "good times." It does, but it is not systematic. We are discussing systematic events here. I hardly call city-wide riots an "uprising" across America, which has quite a few cities and 300 million people.

[edit on 15-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

OMG PEOPLE (or should i say sheepable?) I GOT IT!
all those dangerous chemicals in fast-foods is creating a vast build up of bioaccumulate in the asses (brain.. *COUGH*) of the american people. these, when in large enough concentration's actually act as a controlling device/psychological disrupter (oh, i went there) causing confusion, paranoia and surprisingly a very big gut. this problem is further perpetuated by chemtrails that our own government are releasing into the air to make us even more stupid, in an effect to make sure we don't find out the truth. this is how the reptilian elite will implement there final plans!

JUST LOOK AT THE HISTORY, ITS HAPPEN BEFORE.

I HAVE EVIDENCE TO BACK UP EVERYTHING I SAID, PM ME IF YOU WANT IT,

LETS BRING THESE B***ARDS DOWN!

no, wait.. actually, your all just idiots.

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


Armageddon?
Anyway, how many riots does it take, then? How much violence? Seriously.
OK, numbers to show that we're in or entering an unprecedented economic slump? Are you kidding?
timesbusiness.typepad.com...
www.latimes.com...
www.indianexpress.com...
www.opednews.com...
www.independent.co.uk... onfidence-868793.html
www.the-global-guru.com...
www.aei.org...

I can get more.
So, all these analysts and journalists are alarmist-crackpot-doomgloomers?
Huh. Whoa. What WAS I thinking?
Yet, you yourself admit that social unrest isn't necessarily economic. In fact, it seems that the economy is really at the mercy of the public's collective emotional state... hmmmm...

Maybe I should find MORE numbers and words that indicate unprecedented economic difficulties for the U.S... you know... just to prove myself wrong some more with my lack of "data."

yes, you just solved the complicated issue of global economics providing us all with those links blah blah blah..
no really, please provide more that has yet to convince me, i think if you reach the magical number of 119 links (cause its 911 backwards) its proves it beyond heisenberg uncertainty principle
your the one with a PhD in economics and offered


[edit on 15/7/08 by cheeser]

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


making stuff

Kindly show me where I have made things up.

Your just arguing with yourself my dear.

Because you have so much trouble handling a debate with me that you need to bring American Idol into it, lol. By the way if I was arguing with myself you wouldn’t be replying. Not surprised you can not grasp this.

Sorry, you've been refused and its been posted.

Where?

No insulting required

Then why did you insult me?

summarily refuted

Where?

Where is your proof?

I asked you first dear, but you won’t deliver, you will only try to push the question back at me because when we step away from your baseless arguments you have nothing useful to bring to this argument and nothing substantial to counter it.

Oh lovely, now we've changed subjects to the freaking warrant-less wiretapping.

I was giving you an example of what I was referring to to help you comprehend my statement, and again it only makes you more confused, your problem, not mine.

reply to post by cheeser

Does this mean that everyone who has replied to the thread is an idiot?
Except, of course, for you?
Or is this type of input some kind of new ATS norm I wasn't briefed on?
Because it isn't very useful for one attempting to deny ignorance, as far as I can tell, but then . . . I AM an idiot.
And yet, it doesn't even really goad me into an argument or exchange.
It reminds me of Monty Python in that it really qualifies as "Abuse."
See how much work I'm having to do to find some value in your contribution?

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage

Where is your proof?

I asked you first dear, but you won’t deliver, you will only try to push the question back at me because when we step away from your baseless arguments you have nothing useful to bring to this argument and nothing substantial to counter it.

HAHAHA, i know you are but what am i? i asked first?
are you serious?

reply to post by djerwulfe




PLEASE tell me you just did not use the mass media to proclaim that doom and gloom was real. Man, that was funny. Of course the media proclaims doom around every corner, IT IS WHAT THEY DO. It is what they have always done, it is what they will always do. I've provided proof that the end is not nigh, and here is more DATA (not media hype):

Raises rising and GDP growing: www.bea.gov...
Number of banks under FDIC watch growing less and other FDIC statistics: www.fdic.gov...
Happiness in US stable and growing worldwide: www.ns.umich.edu...
USA ranked number 1 in prosperity index: www.prosperity.org...

But wait, let me guess....the media is telling the truth, and the government AND the independent academic researchers - who actually have data - are lying. The data is against you. Armageddon is not here.

[edit on 15-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by cheeser

See my previous reply. What is the purpose of your responses here? You are neither contributing nor arguing. You're just writing snotty silly things.
Phd. in Economics? ??? Is this your area od expertise?
If you have an actual opinion, by all means, do share, otherwise I suggest that the "Special Monitoring" of this thread should examine your activities here.

Originally posted by djerwulfe
reply to post by cheeser

 

Does this mean that everyone who has replied to the thread is an idiot?
Except, of course, for you?
Or is this type of input some kind of new ATS norm I wasn't briefed on?
Because it isn't very useful for one attempting to deny ignorance, as far as I can tell, but then . . . I AM an idiot.
And yet, it doesn't even really goad me into an argument or exchange.
It reminds me of Monty Python in that it really qualifies as "Abuse."
See how much work I'm having to do to find some value in your contribution?

in my final statement i was referring to posters opposing the OPs general stance,
i thought i made that quite clear?

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage


Look you can keep proving yourself wrong - even while you've been refuted already - or actually bring something up to discuss. As it is now your just rambling. Your previous points have been completely refuted - your in denial about it - but your denial does not change reality.

My proof? I just provided it above. Show yours. I won't hold my breath. You'll probably (how surprising) deny it.

I can see your not used to doing anything but making baseless accusations and then denying them when your shown to be wrong, so let me offer some help:

1. Make a statement that consistent of a logical, singular train of thought.
2. Elaborate on said statement.
3. Let me respond.
4. Debate the substance of our disagreement, and do not attempt to drag me around in circles over what you did or did not say in order to deflect when you realize you were wrong.

If you cannot do this, just stop replying.

[edit on 15-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by usaf99ces


cool thanks for your service in the military and as a firefighter.

im kinda slow though. the point of your post went right over my head.

reply to post by mountain19


sure i remember a few of those things, i have to wonder the point of your reply too. im not getting either one of these for some reason. but then again i havent read the whole thread just skimed through to see if any directed something tward me. if you guys could explain yourselves a little better i would be more than happy to contuine this conversation...

[edit on 15pmu102007 by DaleGribble]

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


Ok, then what sources do you find acceptable? I am not some conspiracy theorist.
Historical precedents? Books with only less than x number of copies sold? Journal articles aren't mass media. Would they suffice?
I'll get them for you! Just let me know what sources are acceptable to you?

Originally posted by djerwulfe
reply to post by cheeser

 

See my previous reply. What is the purpose of your responses here? You are neither contributing nor arguing. You're just writing snotty silly things.
Phd. in Economics? ??? Is this your area od expertise?
If you have an actual opinion, by all means, do share, otherwise I suggest that the "Special Monitoring" of this thread should examine your activities here.

by the "PhD in economicas" statement, it was of course sarcasm. i was assuming that the poster isn't a expert in the area of economics by the tone of his/her post, yet the poster spoke as if he was (hence the PhD in econimics statement), as if he/she knew for certain a economic crash is definitely on its way purely by posting a few links which he/she probably never read. when ACTUAL experts in the area have very conflicting views and wont say with much certainty how its all going to end (well the majority of them).

lighten up a bit, i did actually try and get a point across that most user posters/lurkers probably picked up.

reply to post by djerwulfe


Only those sources accepted by any scholar who is interested in the truth - I know your not - but still, you should know what those are. A hint: peer reviewed journals, or data from academic research or government sources which have been reviewed by academics for integrity (includes BLS, Census, etc.).