It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The American People Are Angry!

page: 14
87
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


A good video, but he began to losse me when he began to talk about sustainable energy in the form of wind and solar power. These types of energy are simply not at the level to replace fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are not even an accurate way to describe them, as new studies are saying oil, for example, are created through deep earth forces rather than the decomposition of plant and animal life, as was previously believed. Why did he not mention exploiting our newly found oil reserves in the midwest, central plains, and Rocky Mountain foothills, which are so vast they can sustain the world for 250 years? Why did he bring up global warming, and it being caused by greenhouse gasses,which is implied to be human caused? One volcanic eruption produces more of these gasses than man has managed to put out since the begining of the industrial revolution. If we are causing these warm tempertures, how are we doing it, when our contribution to the gas emisions are no minisucle? It could not have anything to do with that giant fusion reaction thing our planet orbits going into a solar maximum period, could it? He makes no mention of free trade, and its impact on our economy. We have lost over seven million jobs from NAFTA alone. We transfer billions of dollars of our weath to china every year, ever since we brought them into the world trade organization. One study I read stated we would, out of neccesity, produce millions of jobs by simply withdrawing from the WTO. The demand for affordable products would not decrease, we can make it ourselves. If we went back to tarrifs, and withdrew from this globalist market that has emerged, we would once again be a nation that produces goods for our own consumption. In this type of competative market, we can only then blame ourselves if we loose out to foriegn competetors. The Japanese beat us in the tried and tested system of trade we once used, only because we stopped using the lean manufaturing principles espoused by Henry Ford. The took the lean model, improved it, and were able to produce quality products at a reduced cost. That is how they made such huge gains in the American market. We made a comeback when we reinstituted lean principles in our own companies. This comeback was destroyed by NAFTA, and futher killed by all of the additional free trade agreements, and our membership in the WTO. Getting away from our fiat currency and reducing the size of Government massively will make our country prosperous once again. I still liked the first ten minutes of his speech. It simply fell short of what I would have liked him to have said.




posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal

Eh many Americans are angry. The problem is they dont realize who they should be angry at and misdirect their anger so nothing changes.



Exactly, the American People are a bunch of nincompoops, who believe they are the best, the brightest, the greatest ... without having to provide any solid evidence of it. The only evidence they support, is that they are mindless brutes, who go to war here and there, And then they vote for removing their rights, to protect themselves ... and they blame Wall Street for not having money, instead of putting Bush, Cheney, Powell on warcrimes charges in Haag.

The American don't care, that they murdered millions of people ... they don't care that they sodomized prisoners, tortured and maimed. They don't care that children are being born in Iraq, deformed from use of radioactive materials.

All that the American people care about, is Homeland security and that Wall Street isn't producing money enough to buy drugs and booze.

The American people sold out their freedom for security, and now they will receive what they deserve ... neither freedom, nor security.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Ashertron
 

Your statement has no basis in logic as you neither know me nor do you know what I am doing or am prepared to do to help my country. You on the other hand seem to revel in the thought of us failing. This tells me you have issues. Ones that are very apparent...and not very intelligent...just thoughtless and transparent.
Split Infinity



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



I figured it out , we need to get you some viagra a million of your off spring in each western democracy
will sort this mess out in a generation.

edit on 2-7-2012 by Zngland because: sentence layout odd



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zngland

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by jude11
 


All of a sudden people are backing Bernie Sanders? I have a great deal of respect for the man and his convictions but I have to tell you this new love of Bernie is not typical - Why up until this point do I hear people calling this man everything from a liberal to a socialist and even a communist?

All of a sudden Bernie is a hero?
Always been a great man, and we should pay more attention to what he says.
edit on 1-7-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


Watch what they do, not just what they say.


Well thanks for the advice, but in his position he can only suggest.

Why watch what he does when a movement of this magnitude requires everyone on board
to express the same degree of anger and demand change?

Bernie's character is established, and what he does beyond what he has already done is moot.
Some people are trustworthy characters so after many years of "watching what they do" they prove themselves "dependable as the sunrise" and you no longer have to watch them.

What Mr Sanders has already done is show his indignation and vocalize what most of us already knew but could not articulate ourselves. He has offered reasons we can easily see, and informed anyone who did not know, why anger is justified and a civil uprising is necessary. He has legitimized our revolution.

I could watch what he does, but what I do is much more significant and far more important.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by hequick
reply to post by jude11
 


A good video, but he began to losse me when he began to talk about sustainable energy in the form of wind and solar power. These types of energy are simply not at the level to replace fossil fuels.


They would be if we used power and energy more efficiently.

The single biggest change we could make to end our dependance on fossil fuel would be to remove the commute.

We now have the technology to remove the need for gigantic offices in a major city and do the same job from a PC at home, or a local center, or a coffee shop. But we refuse to do it. Why? Because the oil and energy industries know that they would loose their obscene profits, and a corporation ALWAYS has to profit, that's the sole purpose of a corporation.

If we actually worked to remove the need for commuting we would save billions of barrels of oil a year, we would have less pollution, we would have better social lives and an increased quality of life across the board, we would not be wasting weeks of our lives every year in traffic, we would not need hundred story office blocks with heating, air con and millions of PC's running 24/7...

This one step alone, with the development of sustainable energy supplies, would remove much of the problem immediately.

It's not about simply replacing one source of energy with another, it's about reducing our dependance on fossil fuels through changing our social structure and way of life.

This is entirely possible, we just need to have the tools available to us to actually do it.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by Zngland

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by jude11
 


All of a sudden people are backing Bernie Sanders? I have a great deal of respect for the man and his convictions but I have to tell you this new love of Bernie is not typical - Why up until this point do I hear people calling this man everything from a liberal to a socialist and even a communist?

All of a sudden Bernie is a hero?
Always been a great man, and we should pay more attention to what he says.
edit on 1-7-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


Watch what they do, not just what they say.


Well thanks for the advice, but in his position he can only suggest.

Why watch what he does when a movement of this magnitude requires everyone on board
to express the same degree of anger and demand change?

Bernie's character is established, and what he does beyond what he has already done is moot.
Some people are trustworthy characters so after many years of "watching what they do" they prove themselves "dependable as the sunrise" and you no longer have to watch them.

What Mr Sanders has already done is show his indignation and vocalize what most of us already knew but could not articulate ourselves. He has offered reasons we can easily see, and informed anyone who did not know, why anger is justified and a civil uprising is necessary. He has legitimized our revolution.

I could watch what he does, but what I do is much more significant and far more important.



Your signature statement is already a reality. I was a voting Rep. until Bush had his coups d'état and essentially solidified the fascist game plan under the Patriot Act.

The Homeland Security building in Virginia rises four stories above ground and ten stories below. What in the world do you think is going on down there, when the CIA, NSA, FBI, and every other security organization is combined under a central intelligence mechanism which essentially functions like that of the Soviet KGB?

My fellow Americans are divided by the complicity of ignorance. They are so blinded by it, they are in denial. Ignorance and lack of action the greatest enemy of a free nation.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 



It's not about simply replacing one source of energy with another, it's about reducing our dependance on fossil fuels through changing our social structure and way of life.

This is entirely possible, we just need to have the tools available to us to actually do it.


I definitely agree with you on the insanity of the commute.

There are other tools that are effectively unavailable to us, such as serious research and development of alternate sources of energy, which are neverendingly driven out of business and/or bought up by the giant energy companies to prevent competition.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Hey, you all can go move to your super city, so the elite can have you all in a smaller area, you will be more manageable that way.

KEEP ME OUT OF IT.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 





I don't advocate plunder. I advocate redistribution of wealth from those steal or make inordinate and unbalanced revenues for their disporportionate services.


You may as well have said: I don't advocate plunder, I advocate plunder. Who decides what is "disproportionate"? You?


Those who make more can afford and should pay more for the betterment of society. It is not theft if you support this agenda. If you don't support it, it means you are selfish, greedy and snoty. If everyone pays the same rate, regardless if we have a corporate government or not, the government eventually collapses and so does organised civilisation. I keep forgetting you are a conservative masquarading under libertarianism or anarchy.




So you are going to try all the billionares and trillionares whom have enough money to bribe their way to heaven, let alone win ANY court case against them?


I never said "all the billionaires and the (imaginary) trillionaires should be tried for theft, only the thieves. Bribe their way into Heaven? Seriously? What is Heaven a metaphor?


You are still young and do not understand HOW capitalism works nor do you have any desire to learn. You learned everything in high school and college and now have an agenda to push free market capitalism with as little regulation as possible.





Earning wages and investment or worse speculation are entirely different concepts. People who work 9-5 earn their money versus the wall street speculator who uses insider knowledge and computer programs to vampire his way to millions.


All investment is speculation and without it there wouldn't be any wage earners because there wouldn't be any business...oh, that's right, you think the government should run business. They'll mysteriously do a better job at that then the justice system you've declared is so corrupt that "trillionaires" can bribe their way out of a guilty verdict, but somehow they'll run business fine.


A real democracy allows for change of government and thus the change of agendas under normal circumstances. We are not living in ideal circumstances, far from it, the taxpayer is being lynched to fight wars and paying to be misled by the bilderberger capitalist propaganda. Tons of paid blogger jobs are available last time I checked.





Profit derived from unethical practices tolerated by state or federal mandates is still stealing in my book.


But the very same state or federal government that tolerates these unethical practices is who you think should run business.


No. These clowns should be fired and a new political party should take central stage, one that dares think ahead for positive change. One that allows for popular opinions rather than misconstrued amendments from the bill of rights.




Laws are written by people and some laws leave a lot to be desired.


Legislation is written by people and legislation is not law, merely evidence of law. Law could care less about your desires.


Evidence of law? What the hell is that supposed to mean and how is it different to what I said?




I have read about your disdain of big government and your contempt for the lawyers of this corporate republic yet you employ double standards in relation to the privileged.


it is you who holds the double standard, and what you don't like about me is that I fight for everyone's right regardless of their financial status.


Pure hypocrisy on your part. The rich people are the problem and a government that kisses their ass and allows for dictation. A right winger would then bring up stalin and hitler as his best strawmen arguement in a pathetic and vile attempt to smear all of the left.

Been there, done that. Boring!!
edit on 2/7/12 by EarthCitizen07 because: fixed quotation tag



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Who decides what is "disproportionate"? You?

Yes, they do believe they know better, just listen to the government, because they know better (that is if the government follows a socialist agenda)

All profit is bad, all business is evil.


WOW. Talk about exaggerations?


Conservative "I want a small government" but usually fails to give out details.


Except free market and freedom that is. As though the two ever existed or have the potential of ever existing.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zngland
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



I figured it out , we need to get you some viagra a million of your off spring in each western democracy
will sort this mess out in a generation.

edit on 2-7-2012 by Zngland because: sentence layout odd


That you refer to the U.S. as a "democracy" only underscores how very, very, very, very, very, little you've figured out. Being proud of ignorance is astonishingly foolish.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by Zngland
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



I figured it out , we need to get you some viagra a million of your off spring in each western democracy
will sort this mess out in a generation.

edit on 2-7-2012 by Zngland because: sentence layout odd


That you refer to the U.S. as a "democracy" only underscores how very, very, very, very, very, little you've figured out. Being proud of ignorance is astonishingly foolish.



and i might add....common
2nd line



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Who decides what is "disproportionate"? You?

Yes, they do believe they know better, just listen to the government, because they know better (that is if the government follows a socialist agenda)

All profit is bad, all business is evil.


WOW. Talk about exaggerations?


Conservative "I want a small government" but usually fails to give out details.


Except free market and freedom that is. As though the two ever existed or have the potential of ever existing.


and what details do you have to give, OH ITS FOR THE PEOPLE bull# I hear from every one of you socialist types.....its never been given a chance you say......you spout your crap about capitalism and free markets WHEN THERE HASN'T been any free markets and capitalism for a long time, the only thing we have today is cronyism.

Oh, go after the corporations and take the money from the rich, that will fix everything......ya, details, lets hear some details on how that is going to work. But hey, if you naive fools ever get your socialist dream, I plan on sitting on my arse and letting a few of you work for a change.

FOR THE PEOPLE, NOW GO WORK - I want some cheetos and beer.


--------------------------------------------------

edit:

Here is an idea - all you folks who want to live by some socialist ideal can move to that super city that was talked about on this page, you can leave us conservatives to fend for ourselves on the outside.
edit on 2-7-2012 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 





Conservative "I want a small government" but usually fails to give out details. Except free market and freedom that is.


A free and unregulated market place eliminates the FDA, the USDA, the SEC, the FAA, the FCC, the EPA, the FTC, the EEOC, FDIC, ICC, NLRB, NRC, OSHA, and the Federal Reserve. That eliminates quite a bit of excess baggage, and is implicitly so in a free and unregulated market, but some people need the simplest of terms spelled out for them.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Thank you for your response. There are still some things about taxes and tax liability that I do not understand....But am learning.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Conservative "I want a small government" but usually fails to give out details.

Except free market and freedom that is. As though the two ever existed or have the potential of ever existing.


I've been trying to figure out what it is that YOU want from government and it doesn't add up for me. Hopefully its just a misunderstanding and you can straighten me out.

You've thoroughly demonstrated your awareness that we live under a corporate form of government and you're probably equally aware of what the Act of 1871 meant for the organic Constitution. But to point a finger at unregulated free trade as the culprit doesn't allow for the various types of corporate operations, from monopolistic government, to too big to fail banks, down to large and mid size businesses that produce the things we want to buy and even further down on the roster to Mom and Pop stores. They must all be incorporated, BY LAW.

Enter regulations.This is what kills the free market because the most stringent regulations are always directed at the smaller companies and these regulations are enforced with unbending force, while the big corporations are allowed to escape through loopholes that are written into the laws for that exact purpose, through collusion between well paid company lobbyists and congresscritters. And we pay for it all in fewer choices and higher costs and more taxation.

You speak of democracy as being your preferred form of governent, so I'm really confused about your moniker which indicates a preference for global government and that is about as far from democratic rule as you can possibly get. If you're trying to escape powerful monopolies through regulation, remember, there is ONE UN, ONE WTO, ONE WHO, ONE UNESCO, ONE WB, One IMF, ONE hague and on and on. All these branches of global government, and more, are monopolies wrapped tightly around the monopolistic Bank for International Settlements. Talk about a trap!

Also, in a truly democratic global system you would at least be given the opportunity to vote for your representatives to the UN, but leaving aside the penchant for fraudulent elections, you are not even given the sop of casting a meaningless vote, and you never will be. The powerful few who "represent" you in the corrupt world councils are hand picked by the monopolistic federal reserve and its special friends, along with the corporation known as USA, Inc. Moreover, as long as there are member "states" with veto powers, the end product will not be democracy for anyone on planet earth, nor any consideration for the wellbeing of "the people of the world". It merely shrinks who may profit and hold ultimate power.

Can this be a good thing?



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 




There has to be some balance between the free market and regulation. A free market shouldn't be allowed to destabilize the entire economic security of the planet. The US is still recovering from a partial collapse that is costing huge amounts of money, jobs and government services, because Fanny and Freddy were SO "deregulated", they were allowed to operate like banks without the escrow to back them. This is very corrupt.

Without controls in place, greed robs and plunders and redistributes the bounty to the the most corrupt.

I don't understand why people are either on one side or another in such matters. How about looking at the whole picture and understanding what a free market really is and why it must be regulated to some extent.

As far as democracy existing, it really doesn't, because there are institutions that are always manipulating the economy of the masses and what you refer to as a democracy can be compromised in many ways.

From what I reading, there is a global paradigm transition in which people are becoming more interested in economic security rather than political democracy and so-called freedom. People are willing to sacrifice at least some of their liberties, rights, privacy for economic guarantees.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by g2v12
 





There has to be some balance between the free market and regulation.


There can be no balance between the free market and regulation. Just one single regulation kills the free market. It is just that simple. It is disingenuous and empty rhetoric to claim there can be a balance struck between the two. There is either one, or the other, never both.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by g2v12
reply to post by frazzle
 




There has to be some balance between the free market and regulation. A free market shouldn't be allowed to destabilize the entire economic security of the planet. The US is still recovering from a partial collapse that is costing huge amounts of money, jobs and government services, because Fanny and Freddy were SO "deregulated", they were allowed to operate like banks without the escrow to back them. This is very corrupt.

Without controls in place, greed robs and plunders and redistributes the bounty to the the most corrupt.

I don't understand why people are either on one side or another in such matters. How about looking at the whole picture and understanding what a free market really is and why it must be regulated to some extent.

As far as democracy existing, it really doesn't, because there are institutions that are always manipulating the economy of the masses and what you refer to as a democracy can be compromised in many ways.

From what I reading, there is a global paradigm transition in which people are becoming more interested in economic security rather than political democracy and so-called freedom. People are willing to sacrifice at least some of their liberties, rights, privacy for economic guarantees.


I agree, in an economic system such as we have there needs to be balance and that balance was upset when Glass Steagall was revoked for the benefit of the uber big businesses. So the problem isn't regulations, per se, its who's writing them and for what purpose they're being written. And as you say, without controls in place in such a system, greed robs and plunders and redistributes the bounty to the the most corrupt. That's exacly what happened. We watched it happen. And if we don't figure out PDQ how to get the pen away from those who are writing the rules, we will be ruined and balance won't matter anyway. Basic survival will take center stage at that point.

As for democracy, the only true democracies I've ever run across in my studies of various cultures were the native tribes of America that the European immigrants could not and would not tolerate. And the only reason democracy worked out for them was because they banded together in very SMALL groups where everyone could have a say, even those who were part of larger tribal groups within the Confederacy of the Iroquois.

The problem for those who would give up anything for one more day of the appearance of normalcy is that many of us are not willing to sacrifice liberties, rights, privacy for economic guarantees because there ARE NO guarantees. Ever. That's a natural law that doesn't require anybody's signature.



new topics

top topics



 
87
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join