I'm a Prisoner of the State Yet I Have Done Nothing Wrong

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


We are the modern day slave but we just don't know it. The terms are just different now, we are giving the illusion that we are free but in reality we are controlled through money.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


What you are describing is the Marxist eternal battle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, if you want to resort to the communist cry for anarchy and the rise of the proletariat then feel free but just look at how that’s worked out historically.

reply to post by michael1983l


Well, I'm not a marxist, but the old dude did have a few interesting things to say. One of the more pertinent ideas he had was that the capitalist system would ultimately destroy it's self. From a mathematical standpoint he was right. Mathematically, the monetary system is an exponentiel system. Which just can't work in reality, because of the finite nature of earth's ressources, among other things.

He also argued that the globalization of capitalism would be the final nail in the coffin. Again, point for Marx. Before, the bust-boom-bust cycle could kinda work. When one country went under, another saw that as an opportunity for cheap investment. Now, we're all like dominoes. When the first one falls, all the others do as well.

Economically, what we are seeing now is basically endgame. Sit back, take a shot, and watch it burn.

When the smoke clears, lets try something different. I mean really different.

Electing politicians has never changed anything. Politicians are only usefull in creating laws to say who is allowed to have what, and why. We now have enough for all, without conditions, and that alone renders politics obsolete. We need to do away with our exchange system. Entirely. No more "you can't do this if you don't have that". Freedom should not be defined by the size of a bank account.

People will only be able to truly break free the day they are able to correctly identify what their chains are made of. Well, those chains are forged of cold hard cash, and there is no possible compromise between freedom and the economic slavery brought on by any kind of exchange-based system. And that, unfortunately, is a historical fact.

reply to post by michael1983l


No. Slaves are the modern day slaves. You and I are a part of a semi-free middle class that has been manipulated for centuries through religion, money, education etc.

And, those of us in this class who are skilled and resourceful have the opportunity to make a lot of money and gain freedom. Not an option for true slaves.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I don't really have many gripes with the money system. I'm young and believe I have the opportunity to make a lot of money and be free and happy..

I do have gripes with the ethics of many who live based on nothing but making a dollar at any expense including exploiting the weak.

I think the system is not as much the problem, it is the destructive people within the system

Originally posted by michael1983l
so the sheeple being the sheeple all start buying up their council houses. Then the Government de-regulates the Mortgage lenders and they start lending to people at 100% or even 110% mortgage, flooding the market with new buyers, who in the long term could not really afford what they were doing. House prices shoot up, pricing nearly all first time buyers off the market and then the rug gets pulled.

There's your problem right there. These "sheeple," as you say, took out mortgages they could not really afford betting housing prices would still climb and they could sell at a profit. You blame the banks for lending the money. I blame the sheeple for asking for it. There's plenty of blame to go around here and the "sheeple" bear some burden. Both the banks and the sheeple wanted to make some money here and they both lost. I don't think it's fair to blame one side of this equation.

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes
reply to post by michael1983l

 

From what I can tell, the banks/mortgage lenders, aren't actually letting these properties out or selling them. They are sitting on them, waiting for the cost of housing to increase. They want to make the highest possible raise on these reposessed properties.

They are biding their time.

Of course they are. Their own mortgage is underwater. The banks gambled and lost. It’s now their house. If they sell at the depressed rates they lose on the books. If they wait, it’s a paper loss. It’s just like selling a stock that went down. You haven’t actually lost the money until you sell it. They aren't trying to "get a raise;" they are hoping to break even.

Further, if the banks DID put these houses on the market, it would depress the market even more and make the whole thing worse. Think of the individuals in the same boat who paid too much for their houses. If the banks DID put the repossessions on the market you’d be screaming bloody murder that they did.

It's definitely a bad situation, but simply blaming everyone but yourself isn't going to help you. You'd like to blame the banks, the mortgage company, the governments, anyone but yourselves. This is a worldwide economic issue that has affected the entire Western world. A lot of people got excited about the bubble and they OVEREXTENDED THEMSELVES. Nobody made them do it. They just got greedy.

I have a son who did exactly that. He was in a perfectly reasonable house, but he wanted to live on the lake, so he mortgaged his modest house at 100% to get the down payment on the lake house, bought that. Prices still were going up, so he mortgaed that house for 100%, bought cars and boats and fancy granite countertops. Then the housing bubble burst along with his plumbing pipes. His house was worth half what he paid, so he stuck the bank with it. He abandoned the house. They won't sell it because if they do they lose half a million.

The only fault I can find with the bank here is that they lent my son the money. That was stupid on their part, but the whole thing started with my greedy son who instigated this whole thing because he thought he should achieve what his Dad did in half the time. Now he suggests he could use some help, and I say "No." My house is paid off. I have no mortgage. I don't live on the lake and I don't have a boat but I also don't have a negative net worth and a bunch of bills. My son could have done the same if he'd just chilled out.

I've done nothing wrong and I'm NOT a prisoner of the state. Fancy that.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

you are not a prisoner you just have to work to live like everyone else so stop moaning

Priceless. You know what slavery means, right ? 'Cos that's a pretty good definition you got there.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


That’s fair enough and understandable, but your argument is very similar to that of the Marxist critique of capitalism.

Many people feel let down by the system of capitalism that they ones loved and its understandable but to go to the total opposite end of the spectrum in seeking salvation form communism is not the way forward, a form of socialism perhaps but not pure communism.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I didn't really draw the connection between Marx and what I was saying...I thought I was making a case for capitalism. Huh.

reply to post by Ismail


I used the word prisoner in that sentence.

Anyway I think there is a rather big difference between being a slave and say having a job at Tesco, despite what you may think of your boss and your shift patterns.

Having a job does not make you a slave.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


The answer to the question is that we certainly need something different. But I am not claiming to have the answer to what that is.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


If you read up on some Marx you might start to see what I am getting at, you are talking about a struggle between the poor and the rich how those have control those who don’t have. You’re not all the way there but the way you discuss social class for example has some characteristics I would associate with a Marxist argument.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Yeah, I'd say I agree with the premise of Marxism...just not the means of solving the problem with a centralized command structure. I'm more along the lines of individuals and communities authentically changing their behavior to create a better life for themselves.

Solution is a more productive and empowered people, not a government that attempts to do this for them.

This includes the upper class taking it upon themselves to be more socially responsible and ethical.

Slave is the correct term. OP is correct.

Yes, I can quit my job and find another; but chances are over 90% the place I go to is just like the last place.

Low wages and treated like #.

There are few good places to work here in the US ; and I bet the UK is the same way.

I am a professional and have a license as well.

I have worked at some really bad places and HAD to quit.

Rent and mortgage prices are the same way here in the US


The only way to change this is to get rid of money

reply to post by michael1983l


You are a prisoner of society as soon as you are born, the systems is governed by the state. Non compliance to rules that you had no say on and will have very little power to do anything about will result on exclusion and suppression.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


True, you were refering to a prisoner. A prisoner who has no choice other than to work. I'll go out on a limb here. Sounds like a slave, no ?

I'm not saying that working at tesco's is the same as being a slave, I'm saying that work in general, if exchanged against the means to fulfill one's needs, is akin to slavery.

The job doesn't matter. City trader or janitor, you can change your job, but you can't escape a system that REQUIRES you to work or die.

Oh sorry, you can, but only in a few rich countries and even then, only once you've done your time (geddit *nudge* *nudge*).

reply to post by Ismail


For me there is no alternative to work. I am not allowed to take what I need from the land, unless I own the land. Catch 22 situation.

reply to post by michael1983l


Why should *you* own the land ? Owning something is only usefull in an exchange based economy. What if we declared earth and it's ressources the common heritage of mankind. You could work the land for all you wanted. Better, others would help work it with you.

reply to post by Ismail


Yes but if I did that now I would get locked up or shot.

The Native American Indians knew how to live off the land without anyone's aid.

They did not need the greed of white culture to survive; they had survived for centuries and lived well for centuries.

They developed their own medicines off the land as well.

This is one reason the greedy nasty white europeans did not like the Indian;

they were afraid of them.

The American Indian ; despite all their inner tribal war fare ; had developed a culture FREE of the need for MONEY, TAXES....

THe white people knew the Indian could live independently of their evil system

and knew they could not live together....