The 2008 Recession Was Caused by Kindness
- Thread starter Apone
- Start date
I've been insulted and threatened on this forum many times, it can be a bit of a bear pit at times but it is also a crucible of ideas out of which have come many interesting discussions. There are some pretty gritty discussions on this forum that are genuine attempts to get beneath the surface of things right to the core. I think that's a pretty INFJ thing to do. There are also many harmless and neutral discusions as well, so its upto the individual what they want to involve themselves in.
If you are finding a discussion on marriage not to your liking then why not give some of your own input in an attempt to balance viewpoints or perhaps avoid it altogether if it is causing you that much distress?
But you are trying to do something that i've noticed a lot of right wing posters do which is trying to shut down dialogue. What you seem to be doing, rather than engaging in debate and sharing viewpoints is trying to censor what is said on the forum and i see too much of that around here.
I believe in peoples right to get married sure.....i also believe in my right to express my opinion (gained from my experience) that contracts and debt are, as i see it, 2 of the strands of a web which tie people into the system and that marriage is a contract and should not be viewed as a loving relationship. A person can however be in a loving relaitionship AND married but they can also be married and not in a loving relationship. In short marriage is a contract and does not equal love.
My position on a lot of the things you've listed above are that they are often imposed on people and become 'tradition' and oftentimes people don't even question whether or not those things are actually empowering them or limiting them.
I've seen these things cause untold distress in people and you can discearn it in the posts people make even on this forum. What i'm arguing is that perhaps some of these things can be reviewed. How beneficial are they or are they in fact actually devisive?
This is the point where some right wing people might accuse me of doing the work of the global elite who want to see all traditions broken down in their march towards a global collectivist, consumer society.
I am aware of the risks in meddling with identity, but i think it can also be a road to growth. The road i'd like to see is one where people have more democratic involvement not less.
You seem to me to be attempting to censor again as if someone who has not fulfilled the criteria you list above should shut the fuck up and i guess just listen to you and the other right wing commentators tell us how the corporations are our best buddies?
You're attacking me instead of looking at the issues of the debate. if you just want to hate on me then PM me, but this thread is about the forces behind the recession, so why don't you just focus on that here?
During the 1950's Congressional and Senate investigations into tax exempt foundations (often set up and used by the power elite) Director of Research Norman Dodd presented his findings to the Recce Committee.
He said that foundations such as the Ford and Carnegie foundations used their funding in the field of education for the purpose of :''directing education in the United States toward an international viewpoint and discrediting the traditions to which it had been (previously) dedicated''
Dodd found that foundation grants had been used to take education away from local community level, disgard tradition, promote collectivism and of changing curricula to deny ''the principles underlying the American way of life'' and of providing funding for experiments to ''determine the most effective means by which education could be pressed into service of a political nature''.
Dodd found that accessory agencies were also funded by the foundations. these included: The American Council of Learned Societies, the National Research Council, The Social Science Research Council, The American Council on Education, the National Education Association, the League for Industrial Democracy, the teachers unions, the Progressive Education Association, the American Historical Association and the JOhn Dewey Society.
The point i'm trying to make here is that large amounts of private wealth coming from the corporate/financial elite is having a huge shaping effect on education in the US.
Some of the ways it influences i agree with. The things that concern me are the lack of transparency (the modus operandi is behind the scenes manipulation) and that the elite envisage a society controlled by them.
I want a society controlled by all of us and for that reason i think its ok to question the way things are being done
I'm not advocating anyone go out and shoot anyone so i'd rather you don't try and tar me with that brush if you don't mind?
I'm not saying read propoganda selectively, i have said a number of times on this forum that people should listen to all points of view and question everything, including what i write.
The media has a huge effect on shaping peoples perceptions and for that reason people should question it the whole time and seek other sources to verify its truth.
I think Prof. Chomksy is right when he says it is used by the power elite to 'manufacture consent'.
I am not saying they are universally bad, stop trying to put words into my mouth the whole time
I also agree with certain aspects of globalisation and liberal values, i just believe it is my responsibility as a member of a democratic society to always question what power is doing and to act if i disagree with it. I believe there is a move by an elite to consolidate their power and i think this has been going on for generations. This is not just my view but held by many people around the world, whose viewpoints are readily available on the internet.
They are not all powerful and have to use covert means to achieve their aims (i'll post a clip of President Kennedy talking about them in my next post. i'll leave it to you to decide whether he is speaking of this covert group, like Eisenhower did or whether he is talking about communism as some people claim)
I don't agree with this. I don't think that jews forced into ghettos and death camps by the nazis had much choice.
However i do agree that elites are enabled by our acquiescance which is why i am arguing that workers have power when they stand together; getting people to stand together is a difficult thing when they have been conditioned to stand by themself however!
To be motivated enough to stand together they need a clearly defined thing to stabnd against and the elite have remained largely hidden using politicians as front men and fall guys.
I'm not talking about the rich, i'm talking about the super rich; its the super rich that have the real inside information. If you lost your butt then you aren't in the club
Now your getting into the realm of human psychology and the corporations employ psychologists to help sell products to people that they don't need and to manipulate their emotions through PR and advertising.
This is incredibly unfair to all the people who have ever been exloited or abused. Somethings we can't choose.
We can however strive to recognise the forces at work and try to work together to build a better world.
We can build a better world, a fairer and more equal world, I believe.
President Kennedy speaks to the assembled US press about a secret monolithic power threatening the freedoms of US society. Some people claim that this speech was made after the Bay of Pigs attack on Cuba and that Kennedy is speaking about the communists, but if that's the case then why doesn't he just say that?
Besides the global elite have worked with the communists and are proponents of hegelian dialectics where they will use totally ammoral approaches to acheive their objectives for example funding both the russian revolution and Hitler's rise to power!
Much of the paranoia against 'communism' within the US during the cold war was in fact related to the global financial elite who like to meet in groups like the Club of Paris, the Bilderburg Group and the Bank on International Settlements.
Also he cautions against freedoms being curbed as a result of perceived dangers and that is exactly what has happened in recent times with freedoms being curbed in a war against something abstract called 'terroism'.
[video=youtube;FnkdfFAqsHA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnkdfFAqsHA[/video]
Of course Kennedy was later shot dead by persons as yet unspecified
Another politician killed in the cold war was Congressman Larry MacDonald who was killed when the commercial Korean airlines flight 007 he was travelling in was shot down by Russian fighters after two of his political opponents who were supposed to be on the flight were diverted at the last minute.
I'll post a clip of him talking on US television about the New World Order in my next post
Besides the global elite have worked with the communists and are proponents of hegelian dialectics where they will use totally ammoral approaches to acheive their objectives for example funding both the russian revolution and Hitler's rise to power!
Much of the paranoia against 'communism' within the US during the cold war was in fact related to the global financial elite who like to meet in groups like the Club of Paris, the Bilderburg Group and the Bank on International Settlements.
Also he cautions against freedoms being curbed as a result of perceived dangers and that is exactly what has happened in recent times with freedoms being curbed in a war against something abstract called 'terroism'.
[video=youtube;FnkdfFAqsHA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnkdfFAqsHA[/video]
Of course Kennedy was later shot dead by persons as yet unspecified
Another politician killed in the cold war was Congressman Larry MacDonald who was killed when the commercial Korean airlines flight 007 he was travelling in was shot down by Russian fighters after two of his political opponents who were supposed to be on the flight were diverted at the last minute.
I'll post a clip of him talking on US television about the New World Order in my next post
Not one, not two, not three, but twelve posts back to back.
Safety first.
Lol i find it fascinating how you right wingers always revert to ad hominum attacks!
I have had a lot of trouble editing my posts (as i stated earlier it wouldn't let me edit so it came out as a wall of text); gremlins are messing with my posts! For that reason i had to delete 2 of my posts which you've counted and it would only let me post one video per post so i've had to post all the videos seperately, so yeah there's been a number of posts in a row, but not because i chose to.
I love the irony though Jim of you trying to accuse me of overposting when i have been on the forum since October 2009 and have only posted 1,378 times whereas you have been on the forum since December 2010 and have posted 1,432 times!
The clips i've posted i think are pretty important in discussions about who is doing what at the top level and why
Why don't you get back to the subject matter instead of launching personal attacks against me?
Last edited:
I'm supporting your safety.
Know safety, no pain.
No safety, know pain.
However, you can't both complain about people not lending money to the poor and also lending money to the poor at the same time. Although, you do not believe that enabling people to do business generates wealth... I guess you are right, according to the axiom espoused in the OP you are merely looking to impoverish yourself by attempt to help others prematurely.
Thanks for keeping everything on topic?
Are you trying to threaten me in a cryptic way?
I'm not saying that....you're trying to put words in my mouth (this seems to be a common approach by right wingers?)
I am on topic its you launching ad hominum attacks (as usual)
I'm saying we should see the crisis within a larger picture. I'm also saying that we are in danger of losing our democratic powers as much as we are in danger of losing our wealth. All this is part of a wider agenda.
Why don't you watch the clips i've posted and listen to what some of the wests leaders and politicians are saying about this?
No. I'm hoping you don't get some kind of horrible multiple post induced injury.
There were no ad hominem attacks above.
Because although you view the videos to be key to the topic I think they have nothing to do with the topic; rather I think it is explained by jus ad bellum of all involved parties. Everyone involved got what they wanted. Everyone + bystandards got penalized for underestimating physical reality.
No-one did anything at gunpoint or was lied to; some people didn't read the small print, some people didn't understand who they lent to. More didn't realize they were stakeholders in the problem, therefore, everyone misunderstood the risks.
There is a simple principle which applies: No-one is evil in their own mind; everyone commits fair and justifiable actions or else they would not act at all.
You worry about not getting an injury yourself and let me worry about my own health
Yopu have reverted to your usual tactic of insults and ridicule instead of addressing the issues
Everyone involved did not get what they wanted; many people are losing their homes, jobs and businesses.
The power elite got what they want which is the movement of public wealth into private hands
Seriously though man, how are you ever going to evolve your perceptions if you won't listen to other perspectives? Why not listen to what they're talking about?
It's all about the movement of wealth from public hands into private hands, which as Congressman Larry McDonald said is part of a process on the road towards a 'new world order'
And you continued your good form of declaring that people are insulting you when they don't agree with your point of view; despite no insults being made.
Well done!
Everyone accepted write-downs. Some people got a short term increase in wealth for long term pain.
This is because they didn't understand the economic fundamentals.
Nope just when they use insults and ridicule
Its all there for everyone to see in black and white
I debate with people all the time. the only time i mention that they are using insults and ridicule is when they have stopped discussing the topic and are using insults and ridicule
You are in fact still trying to bait me Jim instead of dealing with the topic!
(Note: i've added the following response to Jim in because it appears he has gone back and edited his posts to make it look like he has been discussing the topic rather than attacking me, after i made the comment that it was all there in black and white and that people could see what he's been doing. How come it says at the bottom of my post that i have edited it but it doesn't say at the bottom of Jims post that he's edited his?)
Many people didn't understand the tangled web of derivatives!
The banks acted fraudulently in hiding risk and posting it throughout the banking system in order to make short term profits. When this giant house of cards came crashing down the governments bailed them out with public money.
One of the things i am saying is that the government and the financial sector are in bed with each other and are colluding to move public wealth into private hands. the housing crisis was just one example of them doing this. It is part of a neoliberal agenda which is about a corporate/financial elite seeking a global hegemony
Last edited:
I don't think I could possibly ever respond to all of that but I will say I definitely don't identify as right wing and I don't think that thinking of things in terms of sides is productive. It's easy to criticize the actions taken but I don't think that believing in a less dramatic/revolutionary course of action makes you inherently left or right. I don't think that anyone supports corruption or denies that there were some extremely unforgivable actions that more or less went unpunished... but whether this was because the government is corrupt or because they didn't want to risk collapsing an already fragile economy with a radical action that would probably only make investors even more nervous... well, it's impossible to say. I definitely don't think that the crash was severe enough to warrant the kind of dramatic, reckless action that OWS seems to be demanding, but I do think that a few gradual changes in the right direction are a good idea. At the same time, I know that preventing the situation from becoming even more desperate means that you have to make some hard choices...
AND: I didn't say that the times we're living in now are perfectly peaceful, I said that they're the most peaceful times in recent memory. The world wars are an exception... since WWII, no major world powers have had any large-scale conflicts. Compare that to the two millennia that preceded it, and you'll see that the major powers were almost constantly fighting huge, extremely destructive wars with no 'peace breaks' in between.
AND: I didn't say that the times we're living in now are perfectly peaceful, I said that they're the most peaceful times in recent memory. The world wars are an exception... since WWII, no major world powers have had any large-scale conflicts. Compare that to the two millennia that preceded it, and you'll see that the major powers were almost constantly fighting huge, extremely destructive wars with no 'peace breaks' in between.
These terms often allow us to get a handle on concepts. You may not call your self something but there are views which are characteristic of the right or of the left and there is a general consensus on where certain boundaries are. I'm not saying its an exact science but it is possible to generalise to a certain extent.
I'm not asking you to respond necessarily, i'm presenting a viewpoint which i see as a counterbalance to the one which we are all bombarded with in the corporate media everyday.
There are certain movements at work at different levels of society. The 'washington consensus' is called such because certain groups have agreed to operate by that mode of thinking.
What i am trying to put across with as few extra 'conspiracy theory' frills as possible is that which is widely accepted by people on all sides of the political arena and that is regarding something called 'neoliberalism'.
What i'm saying is that the elite who use neoliberalism as the philosphical foundation for their behaviour will tell you all sorts of arguments about why it is the right thing to do, but in reality what it is doing is making its supporters richer and the rest of humanity poorer, because its very function is to move public wealth into a few private hands and corrupt politicians have helped this process.
If a stranger came upto you in the street and put his hand in your pocket and took your money what would you do? If he then said ''no i'm not taking your money'' and stuck his hand in your pocket again and took more money and kept doing this all the while repeating his mantra of ''no i'm not taking your money'' how long would it be before you said to the guy ''no you ARE taking my money!!!'
Because that's what we all collectively need to do to this elite that IS taking our money
I'm not wanting to get into a big battle of wills with you and am always amazed at how people will argue back at me when i think i've presented some pretty reasonable arguments and perspectives.
I think some people get defensive because they think i'm being critical of the rich (millionaires) when they or their family might be what they deem 'rich', but i'm not. I'm talking about the super rich (billionaires). I'm talking about global investors who can affect national economies with their behaviour.
No people DO support corruption that's why it exists!
They also DO deny unforgivable actions. Here is a clip of a neoliberal guru Jeffrey Sachs who is aligned with the people i'm criticisng, admiting that the wall street elite do not admit their guilt:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/video/2012/apr/12/jeffrey-sachs-wall-street-video
It's not impossible to say the government is corrupt because they have chosen to support the bankers and not the real economy of production and consumption. You can find articles (i've posted some here before) about how the financial sector are the biggest financial contributors to the government. We have also had many scandals in the UK for examle over politicians expenses. They are corrupt and they are riding on a neoliberal gravytrain.
The crash is so severe that we still don't know how it is going to end. The whole global economy is on the rocks at the moment and a number of European countries are on the verge of defaulting on loan payments to the international bankers; we have strikes, revolutions, occupations, invasions and wars.....its all incredibly severe and is going to run and run.
What 'reckless' action are OWS calling for?
As far as i'm aware there are many different groups with different viewpoints all marching beneath the OWS banner. Some are merely asking for reforms such as regulations to be re-instated that were dropped or for the government and courts to exercise anti-trust powers such as RICO to break up some of the 'too big to fail' monopolies that are blackmailing us all.
I don't agree with you. nation states didn't even exdist for two millenia. The worst conflicts have come with the industrial age and were enabled by industrial powers and financial backing, which are the very people I am saying are still causing many of the global problems.
Also due to the nuclear bomb major powers have not been able to directly lock horns due to the potential dangers of nuclear war breaking out so they have been fighting each other through proxy wars around the globe which have claimed the lives of millions of people. There has been constant warfare since the second world war and the major powers have pretty much always been involved in them in some capacity or other ('cold war')
The there is 'war by other means' such as economic or currency wars which also claim victims in many different ways....not always as clear cut as a bomb on the head but often no less destructive
Muir, you have stated on this forum that it is not just billionaires who are corrupt, but also people who have the means or inclination to take a Zumba class, or a simple and inexpensive vacation to the Bahamas. I could probably find the exact posts if I wanted to. So that is one of the reasons I personally “argue back” at you, in case you are curious.
Regarding the “don’t tar me with that brush” statement, you did too post that link to the video where the man said the Iowa primaries were rigged, I found it. That video stated that the solution was to start shooting people. It was in your post titled “Voter fraud in Iowa” and if you click on the video, there’s a ranting crazy man with a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag behind him and he made the statement about shooting people at exactly 2:07. You posted it, I did not make it up. So if you don’t agree with that mindset, why on earth would you post it?
For the record, he also made a few other statements that I question. He also said there were secret votes only in dictatorships. (There are NO votes in dictatorships) and that Ron Paul has more support than anyone else in the US. (Not so. He has some support.) Just because you saw something on a blog somewhere does not make it more true that if you saw it on MSNBC, either. Truth is truth.
I too do not identify as “right wing”, and object to that label. I do not care for the viewpoint that
“people living in mud huts with 11 children = good; everybody else = corrupt, bad and heading for a fall” and I certainly do not care for the shooting people viewpoint either.
I've never said anyone doing zumba is corrupt!
I do remember the conversation you're referring to though. You said something provocative to me and mentioned you were taking zumba classes so i said to you 'i don't think now is the time to zumba your cares away!' The context of it being a discussion about the current and the future impending financial catastrophe (which i believe is coming)
Nothing there about anyone doing zumba being corrupt
Try to see it from my perspective. I've posted what i think are some pretty well thought out perspectives in this thread and instead of discussing those with me you have kind of just gone after me instead....which you are still kind of doing
I think we first clashed when you misinterpreted a post i made about jews and muslims living together in peace and you said something along the lines of: they are living together in peace right here in my city. But i had meant the middle east (as the discussion was about israel). My argument had been that i don't think an expansionist policy is going to make jews safe because its just going to anger people.
I've also argued that i don't think jews are passive victims in history....a view i hold because some of the most influential people in the world are jewish. I also stated that i don't think jews have a monopoly on suffering and that millions of non jews died in the world wars but we don't hear so much about them.
I think these are all pretty reasonable comments to make. I view the holocaust as one of many tragedies that have happened throughout history and that it should not be used as an excuse for further violence but instead we should all learn from these horrific events (in order to ensure they don't happen again) and also acknowledge that they should really be viewed within the context of a larger picture
Concerning the bahamas, I have no issue with anyone going to the bahamas....the only issue i might have with the bahamas is that it is being used as a tax haven for the super rich
I posted a clip of an individual (a radio show host) who was extremely concerned that there was about to be vote rigging in Iowa. He expressed his frustration in pretty stark terms. He, and many other people in the US (and further afield) are concerned that their laws or constitution are being re-written, that their taxes are being siphoned off to the super rich and that their leaders are corrupt. They are of the view that their country came into existence because their ancestors were willing to take up arms against a British establishment that was enthrall to central bankers and was taxing them excessivley in order to fund wars abroad.
Well i think some people are beginning to wonder if they should take up arms again and reclaim their country. People are already dying though. There are US service men/women fighting and dying abroad in wars that Ron Paul would end, so perhaps his supporters (and people in general) are justified in feeling some frustration about the political system especially after many anti-war protests fell on deaf ears and the vote rigging in the Bush/Gore election. The reality of the US politicial system is that it's largely determined by money and it's largely stage managed by the power elite in a media circus.
I think it was interesting to post the clip because it was showing the depth of feeling out there concerning the movement of wealth and the changing of laws that is going on right now. This is what governments would call listening to the 'noise' on the internet (ie getting an idea of the feeling in the general populace by examining the internet)
I've never stated that people living in mud huts with 11 children =good and that everyone else is corrupt and heading for a fall!!!!!!!!!
You keep trying to put words in my mouth
What i've done in this thread is defend the rights of labour against the excessive claims of the capitalist class.
By this i mean that life is being made harder for people who work for a living or are unemployed (labour) and the reason for this is the movement of public wealth into the hands of the capitalist class (those that make a living from their investments)
Its true however that i would rather see 10 families each with $100,000 than one family with $820000 and 9 families each with $20000
My reasoning behind this is that instead of having one family who are able to afford the best healthcare and education for their family and who can afford to lobby politicians to get what they want but are detached from the rest of society and concerned about the instability of society and of their own safety and 9 families who are all scraping by on $20000 and who are unable to afford good healthcare and education and are caught in an endless cycle of debt and are angry at their lack of representation in the political system......it would be far better to have 10 families who can all get good healthcare and education and who are all healthy and happy and living in a more stable society....the scandinavians do it and it works.....its not rocket science
I'm not for violence unless in self defence (how you define self defence is another issue). I'm of the opinion that there is a group of international bankers and businessmen who are largely intermarried or interconnected through their business concerns who use their wealth to control the media, politics and the education system and that what this group of people want is to create a global consumer, collectivist society which they will control in a centralised system.
These people often push for 'liberal' causes which i generally agree with. I also agree with their globalist outlook. The things that concern me about what they're doing is that they are doing it by stealth and that i think they want to control things centrally whereas i believe in democracy (people power).
I see the current economic crisis as part of their scheme to centralise their power further. Maybe they will create a better world (i sure hope so), but i feel that i don't want to hand away all the say in how things are run to these people. I believe that me and you and everyone else should have a say in how things are run.
I also see many of the other issues discussed in this forum including feminism, gay rights, marijuana legalisation, the economy, politics, spirituality/religion, abortion, art and a whole host of other issues as tied up in this whole scheme as well because this group of people i'm speaking about have played a large part in these processes as a way of breaking down society and the individual in order to create something new.
Now that's ok i believe in all those causes and i have also tried to deconstruct myself to a certain extent and i want society to evolve. We are in a transitional stage at the moment but i'm concerned that what we evolve into next might be a poisoned chalice.
The reason i'm concerned is that i believe that whenever you have centralised power you get corruption and exploitation. The greatest protection against these things therefore (imo) is for the power to reside with the people. So i want whatever comes next to be more democratic and more equal not less democratic and completely imbalanced.
I also believe in change by growing awareness not through stealth.
This should be worked for though growing awareness and through peaceful means by workers organising (people who work for a living or are unemployed). Nows the time that we say to the elite 'we are happy for change to come, we want a better more peaceful world, but we don't want to be ruled over by anyone and we want a fairer share of the wealth especially considering it is us doing all the work!'
