Russel Brand: The time for Revolution is now.

reply to post by benrl

Interesting vid. I have seen this guy a few times on the tube, he is semi funny and sometimes hilarious. However, and whatever he is, he is definitely passionate and opinionated about such things. But he is not saying anything I have not heard before, or that others have been saying for years and years, even on this site.

But hey, progress comes in all forms and shapes, and like he said in a vid dont look at the clothes and hair but at the message itself and if its validated. I have done that. And he has some good points and at the very least he is bringing to the forefront some of the thoughts many people have running around in there head to which there to afraid to say. He has some good ideas, and ways on bringing that about, some pretty interesting, and seem spot on...Others not so much. At least going by the vid you linked and a few more I seen of him.

However and how much he is right, or wrong about things, one thing will remain the same. The revolution will not be televised....Nor does it need to be, the whole idea of a global uprising people storming into the streets is a flawed idea to begin with, so many failings in it that one could write a book on it. It may have its uses when necessary, or in certain situation, however I do not think its anywhere near necessary or conductive to our current society, or to any large degree, and it just may be counterproductive. Oh and definitely expected.

But hey! Its good that people are actually starting to think about such thing, even people like Russel Brand, once his comedy days are done he may get a chance to really put what he preaches into practice, he seems to have made a good start on that. So we shall see.

a nice sentiment, but brand has missed the forest for the trees.

its not the system thats broke, but the politicians we elect.

best example, congress has an 11% approval rating, but its not your congressman thats messing up. so you re-elect him. 98% of the time, a congressmen gets re-elected so long as they dont commit a major scandal.

to fix the system, which is just a tool to be used, you must fix the people using the tool.

reply to post by TrueBrit


If it weren't for billionaires there would be no companies like SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, and others.


You cut people off at a million bucks and tell them they can't have more than that, then where does the entrepreneurial effort go? Who builds SpaceX and Virgin Galactic?

No one. That's who. Because no one is allowed to make more money, or reinvest what they have earned. You can't make big dreams real without big capital.

Guys like you don't understand how wealth is created. If you did you wouldn't be talking like this. People invest to make money in order to fund several things. Retirement, their own businesses, large ventures into unopened markets.

You cap that off at some arbitrary number and you will see the END to that.

CJCrawley
He likes the sound of his own voice, that's all.

I remember despising him for ruining the Big Brother discussion show - rather twee in the grand scheme of things, but folk had tuned in to see a discussion of the BB characters, not the Russell Brand Show.

I always knew this was just a launching pad for him and that he would inevitably 'go west'.

I'm all over that now, but he hasn't said or done anything since then to cause me to believe he's not just a rabid self-publicist.

(And he may have kicked the heroin habit but now he needs to ease up on the coke...)

You don't like him because he ruined your experience of watching Big Brother?

Says it all really. Please don't participate in this discussion.

ColCurious
And his solution is a "socialist egalitarian centralized administrative system"?
No thanks. I'll have the opposite of that please.

edit on 23-10-2013 by ColCurious because: (no reason given)

You want WHAT?! I think your argument has completely derailed.

buster2010
reply to post by Asktheanimals

 

Where did Russell Brand suddenly appear from? Who is this guy and why should anyone listen to him regardless of wit or intelligence? What's he done to make him worth listening to is what I'm asking?

He has done nothing to make him worth listening too. He's just another celebrity that thinks he knows politics.

'thinks" he knows politics? He made paxman look like an idiot! The current situation obviously infuriates him so it must mean something to him. Don't undermine him just because he's a 'celebrity'.

stormson
a nice sentiment, but brand has missed the forest for the trees.

its not the system thats broke, but the politicians we elect.

best example, congress has an 11% approval rating, but its not your congressman thats messing up. so you re-elect him. 98% of the time, a congressmen gets re-elected so long as they dont commit a major scandal.

to fix the system, which is just a tool to be used, you must fix the people using the tool.

Using your argument I wouldn't say he has missed anything. He doesn't vote...
He doesn't vote (he says) because nothing ever changes. He believes the same hierarchy are always in control and until there is an alternative or some form of polical movement and/or change, he won't vote.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe



thx you for this ..

WOW>. I'm still laughing but OMG...................he so out of the damm box .. there is NO box.. plus.. I see that look on this face when he looks at the anchor in blue.. and then at the end.. he just knocks it out of the park with her.. *grin* ..

that is hilarious~!!! )

angryhulk

stormson
a nice sentiment, but brand has missed the forest for the trees.

its not the system thats broke, but the politicians we elect.

best example, congress has an 11% approval rating, but its not your congressman thats messing up. so you re-elect him. 98% of the time, a congressmen gets re-elected so long as they dont commit a major scandal.

to fix the system, which is just a tool to be used, you must fix the people using the tool.

Using your argument I wouldn't say he has missed anything. He doesn't vote...
He doesn't vote (he says) because nothing ever changes. He believes the same hierarchy are always in control and until there is an alternative or some form of polical movement and/or change, he won't vote.

again, he missed the forest (the system of gov) for the trees (the bad politicians).

voting is the only power you have. to not vote is to cede your power.

the reporter almost got him to say "you vote" when asked how the people of his new gov would be chosen.

so what needs to happen is people need to vote out all incumbents, if a suitable option is available. dont vote in idiots like palin or cruz or o'connell just because they are new and shiny.

for example, if i lived in the same district as neil degrasse tyson, i would start a write in campaign for him. or bill nye. most of congress is made up of lawyers, not business people, not scientists, not carpenters, but lawyers.

find an educated person at your local college and start a campaign for them.

the system is fine. i both believe and fought for it. its the politicians i dont like.

with the world of social media the way it is, it no longer takes millions to get your message out.

also, as a side note, im tired of politics having turned into sports. the bucs right now have lost every game, yet you will find fans that make excuses and say the bucs are the best. obviously, they arent. same for politics. an honest person can admit when the other side has a good idea.

for example, i mostly agree with the dems, yet some of the paul ryan budget makes sense. like reduce deductions, reduce tax rate. that is a compromise, cause it gets the rich to pay more, which i want, and lets the reps say they cut taxes.

thats called moderation, and in todays extreme politics, moderation is a death knell.

projectvxn
reply to post by TrueBrit

 

If it weren't for billionaires there would be no companies like SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, and others.


You cut people off at a million bucks and tell them they can't have more than that, then where does the entrepreneurial effort go? Who builds SpaceX and Virgin Galactic?

No one. That's who. Because no one is allowed to make more money, or reinvest what they have earned. You can't make big dreams real without big capital.

Guys like you don't understand how wealth is created. If you did you wouldn't be talking like this. People invest to make money in order to fund several things. Retirement, their own businesses, large ventures into unopened markets.

You cap that off at some arbitrary number and you will see the END to that.

edit on pSat, 26 Oct 2013 01:02:48 -0500201326America/Chicago2013-10-26T01:02:48-05:0031vx10 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

me me me ..

Reinvest.. I've heard that a gazillion times over in world corporations for the last 20 years.. reinvest into what... Bigger better faster ?? While the CEO's gather themselves yachts upon yachts and brag about their 'golden parachutes' .....

it's a mind set.. kingpin at the top ...always gets the best treatment, even when he runs the company or country into the ground..

IMHO........re-investing into bigger better faster ....isn't cutting it...only for the kingpins... reinvesting into HUMAN RESOURCES is that makes ANY company successful .. as in .....................making quality of life for those that work 10-12 hours days 6 a week worth coming to work for 6 days a week!!!

How.. take that 1billion PROFIT they just made and or even a small chuck of that and adjust the wages UP IAW the net profit of all those below the executive staff.....profit sharing is OUT .. has been since the new account rule showed up. (can't remember the name of it off the top of my head.. )

I don't entirely agree with RB's statement that we need to heavily tax companies and corps and then what.....where does THAT $$$$ go .. ?

Intel hangs around Oregon /USA due to the fact that they get tax breaks, if not, they would move.. if they did....unemployment would skyrocket .......and never come down not for a long long time...

reply to post by Komodo

Reinvest.. I've heard that a gazillion times over in world corporations for the last 20 years.. reinvest into what... Bigger better faster ??

Yes, as a matter of fact. Bigger, better, and faster. There is a lot of private money being reinvested in the the commercial space exploration industry. There's a lot of money being reinvested into material research. There's a lot of money being reinvested into energy research. That money isn't coming from thin air. And it isn't coming from people who aren't allowed to make more than a certain amount.

It's coming from millionaires and billionaires.

SpaceX's Elon Musk

Musk started Zip2, a web software company, with his brother, Kimbal Musk. The company developed and marketed an Internet "city guide" for the newspaper publishing industry.[7] Musk obtained contracts with The New York Times and the Chicago Tribune[15] and persuaded the board of directors to abandon plans for a merger with a company called CitySearch.[8] Compaq acquired Zip2 for US$307 million in cash and US$34 million in stock options in 1999.[16] Musk received 7% or $22 million from the sale.[15]
X.com and PayPal[edit]
Main article: PayPal
In March 1999,. Musk co-founded X.com, an online financial services and e-mail payment company.[7][8] One year later, the company acquired Confinity,[15] which operated a subsidiary called PayPal.[15] Musk developed the person-to-person payment platform[15] and renamed his company PayPal.[17]
PayPal's early growth was due in large part to a successful viral growth campaign created by Musk.[18] In October 2002, PayPal was acquired by eBay for US$1.5 billion in stock.[19] Before its sale, Musk, the company's largest shareholder, owned 11.7% of PayPal's shares.[20]
SpaceX[edit]
Main article: SpaceX
Musk founded his third company, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), in June 2002[21] and is the CEO and CTO. SpaceX develops and manufactures space launch vehicles with a focus on advancing the state of rocket technology. The company's first two launch vehicles are the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets and its first spacecraft is Dragon.[22]

You can clearly track his successful and self made trajectory of investment and reinvestment to a company I think we can all agree is a good thing. SpaceX. This company is on the leading edge of space exploration logistical support. With continued growth and investment, SpaceX will soon be THE leader in space exploration, logistics, and travel.

This is just one of MANY examples of entrepreneurs who would not be if some here had their way.

Lastly, there's been this mantra as of late that companies should exist only to provide hefty wages to workers. While that sounds all nice and good, it defeats the purpose of starting a business. Which is to make money. While some companies like the example above make money, they also provide a much needed research arm in the private sector that did not exist before they became a player. It was a monopoly by government, and they wasted billions in stalled exploration mostly due to political fights.

While I firmly believe in paying your employees a decent wage for what the job is worth, I do not believe that companies like McDonalds should waste money paying a burger flipper 15 bucks an hour and then be forced to raise their prices to cover it. That is not a feasible method of running a business. Low skills and low education should be paid accordingly, in turn high skills and high education should be paid accordingly.

reply to post by projectvxn

Lastly, there's been this mantra as of late that companies should exist only to provide hefty wages to workers

really .. now I wounder why that is....hmmmmm....

look man, I'm not ranting on technology or even start ups .. hell .. I KNOW what it takes.. and working on right now.. !!!! as of this post.. !!! the LACK of invocation of 3/4 of the world corps is so staggering just in America you'd pass out of the sheer lack of it.. if you ever thought about taking a good hard look at any manufacturing floor ....

and yes.. if manufacturing / production had the attitude as 50% of entrepreneurs did .. we'd all be living better lives.. but..

LISTEN TO WHAT I"m saying.......

IF ...................your net profit ............makes 1billion ........in 1 quarter of the year...............adjust the wages according .. to those under the executive staff...meaning re-invest BACK in to human resources .........NOT better mats, and R&D .. that's already budgeted in .. right .. ?? !! as it should be already for the YEAR ..

and obviously .. joe at the McD's doesn't need to get paid 15/hr .........wages as we know are 'skill & performance based" .. so be gone with that argument ..

reply to post by Komodo


Wow! 10-12 hours a day, 6 days a week eh?

Try 24 hours a day 7 days a week every day of the year. Because that is what it takes to build a successful business.

Every body misses this point. The same businesses that every one here wants to rob blind due to some sick sense of self entitlement, and which provide employment for people, have to be BUILT BY PEOPLE.

People talk about hard work, good honest toil, the seat of the laboring masses. What do you think it took to get the company into a position that they could employ these people.

Yet you and your kind want to hold them back, and limit them because they are making too much money!!

That's it, Im off to do business with China, at least they have the right idea.

...He made paxman look like an idiot!

Paxman is a hugely overrated journalist with more celebrity status than genuine talent as a hard-line questioner, but I can't see how this flavour-of-the-month, mean-spirited, new age clown that is Russell Brand has made him look like an idiot.

It's a TV show - you know TV? Show?

projectvxn
reply to post by Komodo

 

Reinvest.. I've heard that a gazillion times over in world corporations for the last 20 years.. reinvest into what... Bigger better faster ??

Yes, as a matter of fact. Bigger, better, and faster. There is a lot of private money being reinvested in the the commercial space exploration industry. There's a lot of money being reinvested into material research. There's a lot of money being reinvested into energy research. That money isn't coming from thin air. And it isn't coming from people who aren't allowed to make more than a certain amount.

It's coming from millionaires and billionaires.

SpaceX's Elon Musk

Musk started Zip2, a web software company, with his brother, Kimbal Musk. The company developed and marketed an Internet "city guide" for the newspaper publishing industry.[7] Musk obtained contracts with The New York Times and the Chicago Tribune[15] and persuaded the board of directors to abandon plans for a merger with a company called CitySearch.[8] Compaq acquired Zip2 for US$307 million in cash and US$34 million in stock options in 1999.[16] Musk received 7% or $22 million from the sale.[15]
X.com and PayPal[edit]
Main article: PayPal
In March 1999,. Musk co-founded X.com, an online financial services and e-mail payment company.[7][8] One year later, the company acquired Confinity,[15] which operated a subsidiary called PayPal.[15] Musk developed the person-to-person payment platform[15] and renamed his company PayPal.[17]
PayPal's early growth was due in large part to a successful viral growth campaign created by Musk.[18] In October 2002, PayPal was acquired by eBay for US$1.5 billion in stock.[19] Before its sale, Musk, the company's largest shareholder, owned 11.7% of PayPal's shares.[20]
SpaceX[edit]
Main article: SpaceX
Musk founded his third company, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), in June 2002[21] and is the CEO and CTO. SpaceX develops and manufactures space launch vehicles with a focus on advancing the state of rocket technology. The company's first two launch vehicles are the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets and its first spacecraft is Dragon.[22]

You can clearly track his successful and self made trajectory of investment and reinvestment to a company I think we can all agree is a good thing. SpaceX. This company is on the leading edge of space exploration logistical support. With continued growth and investment, SpaceX will soon be THE leader in space exploration, logistics, and travel.

This is just one of MANY examples of entrepreneurs who would not be if some here had their way.

Lastly, there's been this mantra as of late that companies should exist only to provide hefty wages to workers. While that sounds all nice and good, it defeats the purpose of starting a business. Which is to make money. While some companies like the example above make money, they also provide a much needed research arm in the private sector that did not exist before they became a player. It was a monopoly by government, and they wasted billions in stalled exploration mostly due to political fights.

While I firmly believe in paying your employees a decent wage for what the job is worth, I do not believe that companies like McDonalds should waste money paying a burger flipper 15 bucks an hour and then be forced to raise their prices to cover it. That is not a feasible method of running a business. Low skills and low education should be paid accordingly, in turn high skills and high education should be paid accordingly.

edit on pSat, 26 Oct 2013 04:04:40 -0500201326America/Chicago2013-10-26T04:04:40-05:0031vx10 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

So what your saying is that only highly skilled, highly educated people should have a high standard of living?

What about people who work in the care profession? What about people who's motives aren't profit driven?

Just wonder where people who didn't catch breaks, have mental health issues, or aren't all that intelligent, where they deserve to fit into society as you see it?

I am relatively intelligent, didn't get a good education because I spent my formative years sorting out the mess my parents left me in, trying to make myself into a productive member of society as opposed to a drug addled alcoholic. I am also not money driven, but do work very hard in what ever job I do, Do I not deserve a respectable wage?

It bothers me somehow when a man or woman's worth is measured by intelligence and/or bank balance

reply to post by siriussam

So what your saying is that only highly skilled, highly educated people should have a high standard of living?

Your standard of living, if you are of sound mind and body, is decidedly up to you. Your level of education is dependent on how much you're willing to get done.

What about people who work in the care profession? What about people who's motives aren't profit driven?

What about them? They still have bills to pay. If you're not driven by profit then don't seek it. I don't pretend to know what is best for you. I know what is best for me.

Just wonder where people who didn't catch breaks...

Catch breaks? I didn't catch any breaks. I'm still working toward the field I want to be in. And in a few years I will be where I want to be., then I'll be able to fund ventures into the business world.

I'm an immigrant to America. I spent time homeless, hungry, and penniless. I refuse to go back to that, and I will do whatever is necessary within the law to make sure that doesn't happen again.

have mental health issues

There are plenty of people with mental health issues that have been and continue to be successful.

or aren't all that intelligent

I have personally known folks with developmental issues who have strived very hard to succeed in life. For other, like in mental health, who suffer debilitating developmental or mental health problems there is help. And I am willing like so many others to be counted among those who would gladly give to ensure these people don't have to live in abject poverty on top of having to deal with their health problems.

I am relatively intelligent, didn't get a good education because I spent my formative years sorting out the mess my parents left me in, trying to make myself into a productive member of society as opposed to a drug addled alcoholic. I am also not money driven, but do work very hard in what ever job I do, Do I not deserve a respectable wage?

The wage you "deserve" is entirely dependent on your experience, education, and skills isn't it?

It bothers me somehow when a man or woman's worth is measured by intelligence and/or bank balance

Save for developmental issues, if you're not willing to put in the effort to further your marketability on the job market don't complain when the wages you earn are reflective of the effort you put in. Working hard is not a marketable skill. Anyone can work hard. It's the skills and experience you bring to the table that make you worth that extra dollar.

reply to post by Komodo

IF ...................your net profit ............makes 1billion ........in 1 quarter of the year...............adjust the wages according .. to those under the executive staff...meaning re-invest BACK in to human resources .........NOT better mats, and R&D .. that's already budgeted in .. right .. ?? !! as it should be already for the YEAR ..

Guess what else is already budgeted in. RAISES.

It's not profit if you have to dump it into something business related. That's called an expense.

reply to post by projectvxn


So, as long as you apply your self to your education, and improve your marketability you will be fine and have a high standard of living, if not, you deserve what you get?

Society and your profit wouldn't exist without low skilled, poorly educated people, do they not deserve a good standard of living?

It is understandable that you would not want the current system to change, it has worked for you.

Many believe that there is another way that isn't driven by greed, elitist dogma, back scratching and the top 1% or even top .1%, it is this that people want to change.

Do you fear the loss of the current system? Do you think it would put you back to where you have come from? You obviously have the skills and the education, so nothing to fear.

This guy is brilliant!!