Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: The conversation still has yet to start.

Posted 5 years ago on Aug. 20, 2012, 12:28 a.m. EST by richardkentgates (3269)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

All I see now and have seen in most of the posts on this forum, on twitter, on facebook, at work, at the gas station, is an echo chamber of the mainstream media. A soundbite from a politician which is almost never based in any detail but a few scary words and name calling. Or we get to hear how much Trump sucks and I gota say, if you needed the media to tell you that, you have a long way to go.

The point is, we are all still having the conversation that the 1% want us to have. They set the tone, the topic, how much detail is or is not allowed, how each party should feel about it. A new association to historically evil leaders of days gone by. And you eat it up like a fat kid on a cupcake.

Not very many people are actually trying to have a conversation, The People are happy with the conversation that has been handed to them. Exactly when are the people going to begin their conversation? Not what is on ESPN, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, FOX.

You have no idea the irony of hearing people talk about change while repeating the same attitudes, only amplified, while carrying on with someone else's conversation.

Because you all have such a trained instinct to follow the silver back, most you shun anyone that is saying something that the TV has left you ill equip to talk about.

Still waiting.



Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 5 years ago

The main thing I see in the world around me is MASSIVE denial.Just absolutely pervasive.Our climate is changing rapidly-much faster than was predicted by computer models.Income inequality has been eroding the quality of life of middle class people,and at this point it is very noticeable and The Ripple Effect is being felt by middle class people who depend on other middle class people for their living.And yet everyone seems to agree-"It's a bad year because of the economy" and "maybe the economy will improve by next year."I really don't see it,but maybe it's just me-I think this is The Big Enchilada and the economy is not ever coming back to the way it was before the assets and money got redistributed to the !%, absent some kind of change on the order of a paradigm shift.The problem with busting through denial is that it takes time.

[-] 2 points by NoGoodTreason (1) 5 years ago

Here's a conversation starter: Let's apply the death penalty to a corporation. They are "persons" under the law and as such they must obey the law. Lots of corporations do things that a human person would end up in jail for. Let's prosecute them. Starting with Chevron/Unocal for a number of reasons: It's HQ is right next to Oakland. They are incorporated in CA. They are guilty of many counts and liable for several life sentences and/or capital punishment. The test case will send shockwaves through the market. Managers of other companies will be forced to mitigate risk of complete corporate dissolution by stoping activities that may be perceived as criminal. Finally, all we have to do is convince State Attorney General Kamala Harris to do her !@#$@#$ job. Shes just ONE elected official. Easy Peezy. Full article: www.NoGoodTreason.net

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

You don't think we have enough political theater already?

[-] 1 points by NoGoodTreason (1) 5 years ago

what do you mean political theater? Its a real action that would have real results. nothing theatrical about it.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 5 years ago

The conversation needs to begin with factual information. And OWS's major contribution has been exactly that. Pointing out the widespread corruption between wall street and government. If that is our only contribution, it will be a tremendous one because without those facts, the unknowledgeable majority will continue to be oppressed by the knowledgeable minority.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

True, the core of Occupy is doing this. Most of the clickedivists are not doing this. The majority of people spreading information on the web, including those in support of Occupy, are simply reacting to MSM. I am happy to see that Occupy is working on yet another TV ad, and that the core of Occupy are able to set their own narrative. The people should be doing the same. Until they learn to, there will be no change.

[-] 1 points by Trek19 (3) 5 years ago

"The conversation still has yet to start," because we have had a life-time of conditioning to bicker amongst ourselves about the small shit, while the stuff that really matters is agreed on, and passed into law.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

...while the stuff that really matters is tossed aside because there is only pressure not to act on those issue. The people have not learned to apply pressure for action on the issues that are important to the people.

[-] 0 points by Trek19 (3) 5 years ago

"The stuff that really matters is tossed aside" because with the help of the complicit corporate-owned MSM, we have our attentions diverted, and/or have been lulled into an almost comatose-like state. Outrage has been missing from this country for quite some time. See Chomsky's Media Control.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 5 years ago

Good post sir!

War is peace. Corporations are people. And freedom is doing what the government says. Time to vote for the same people we always vote for... the same ones that vote for Wall Street deregulation, wars, more debt, and tell you what you can't inhale!

Austerity is counterproductive. We need GROWTH

But all they want to do is Criminalize Dissent

And they're building weapons to fight peaceful protesters

All while plotting to Iraq Iran

All it takes is a billion dollars to buy democracy

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

Microwaving protesters. I love how they call that 'safe'.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 5 years ago

notice the "peace not war" signs too

[-] 1 points by imagine40 (383) 5 years ago

This is good example that valuable discussion is being had!

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 5 years ago

So, let's get 10 items that we can all agree upon, and unify behind those ideas. If those ideas seem unrealistic, let's shoot for something really attainable, stuff that matters, something that if nothing else happens, these 10 things got a fair chance at reform. You go first. Realistic reforms that we can start with, that will unify the 99%. I'm serious. Stand up and give me 1 good one, something we can all agree on. I'll stand with you, we want EVERYONE to stand together on it. Now is the time, let's seize the moment together. I won't waste my time on "let's create Eutopia." Just gimme halfway realistic demands, and I'll work with you. Let's unify as many people as possible behind 10 ideas to start the 21st Century.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 5 years ago

The first goal must be to get the government back into the hands of the people. Any other goal, no matter how beneficial, will never be accomplished while a corrupt minority still holds the reigns of power.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

When we talk about wage deflation, we always point to inflation. Because it's a major factor in how wage deflation has come about. Poverty is a primary theme of inequality which is also a theme of Occupy. I have pounded on the cause of wage suppression, the mindset that enables wage suppression, and the use of inflation to pave the way for transference of wealth to the 1%. There are even some who have tried to push this in the media but it never catches hold and is paved over, without exception. Even MSNBC never talks about the roll of inflation v deflation or even regulating inflation so as not to benefit only the wealthy. You don't even have to take my word for it, the data is there for all to see. The population needs to understand inflation/deflation and how it effects them. The policy around controlling this should be done by Washington, not the FED. And this should be something that is discussed around election time, for congress and the president. It involves interstate commerce so there is no constitutional barrier.

But thats just me.

[-] 2 points by NLake72 (510) 5 years ago

Ok, I'm not an economist. Let's get some consensus on it, and roll with it. Got anything else that people can easily get behind, say, regulating the derivatives market, splitting the investment banks for insurance purposes... Something super easy for everyone to latch onto? Anyone can chime in, it's not my game, it's our country, we all want what's best. 10 items we can agree upon.

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 5 years ago

Raising taxes on people making an income above 250k per year?Or would people think that is too low to start the increase?I think it is OK,but my perceptions may be distorted by the fact that my income is 10k per year and falling.

[-] -2 points by brudlo (-454) 5 years ago

harry, your age? your education? whose computer are you using?

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 5 years ago

I a 53 year old art school dropout.I have 2 good computers,an assortment of digital imaging equipment and enought art supplies to last for the rest of my life.My financial situation was not always so dismal-I used to do some odd jobs of various types and sell some artwork occasionally.The reason I was able to buy all of these things is because I have been anticipating both personal and national financial collapse since 2006.I am better off than most impoverished people because I practiced Super Frugality for years to purchase the things I need to buy that are relatively expensive.I admit that I find the process of saving money when at a precariously low income to be painful and difficult in the extreme.My main income is SSI which I get on account of a chronic illness that I have that leaves me a person not desirable to exploit by capitalists because I am mildly disabled.I frequently do free artwork and graffiti abatement for local small business owners to try to give back to the taxpayers who subsidize my existance.

[-] -2 points by brudlo (-454) 5 years ago

how were you " exploited"?

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 5 years ago

Any person who works for greedy rich or wealthy families is exploited.In fact.anyone who can work at all is a candidate for such exploitation.Nowadays,only the highest profit margins are acceptable to Capitalists,so lots of work goes begging,and lots of workers are idled.That is our system-I have no right to work,but I do the best I can.Judging by your posts,you seem to be a more affluent person than I am who is afraid Some Bum Is Gonna Figure Out A Way To Take What You Got.You are a TP or a quasi-TP who thinks the materialistic lifestyle is so great that an army of Mexicans,Blacks,and Trashy White Bums want what you have.Well fuck you.I don't want anything to do with your self obsessed,shallow values or your money-grubbing lifestyle.I don't want to interact with you because the only thing you can see in a person like me is failure.People like you only care about money and I am sick of it.Shove your money up your ass since you love it so much.I don't like moochers but I am sure you don't give away at least 400 bucks a year to help people who are less fortunate.I do.and if you are disappointed that extreme poverty has not crushed my spirit-LOL-LOL-LOL-That makes my day-TYVM

[-] -3 points by brudlo (-454) 5 years ago

do you ecpect to work for a poor person ? why do you consider being paid for working as being exploited? you know nothing about my finances. i never said or implied that you're a failure, you label yourself. there is nothing wrong with having money. it pays the bills. from your own posts it seems that never had any spirit to crush.

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

Don't start your "all Americans are the 1%ers" bullshit on my thread. What exactly does a $2,000 per month apartment look like in mexico?

[-] -1 points by brudlo (-454) 5 years ago

i have no idea what your post has to to with my comment to trashyharry.

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

Then elaborate. You aren't going to come on here and berate the poor.

[-] -1 points by brudlo (-454) 5 years ago

"berate"? i asked some simple questions . harry has since answered them.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

Controlling inflationary policy set by Washington would by proxy lead to policy in all the regulatory offices that control the things you mentioned. In essence, controlling inflationary policy through Washington means voters can hold someone accountable, and voters will essentially control economic policy. Democratic Capitalism as some would call it. There are two events in US history that stand in the way of Democratic Capitalism, the advent of the FED, and EO12333(1981) that attaches economic policy to national security. By having elected officials take the heat for this policy, these missteps will be undone.

[-] 0 points by imagine40 (383) 5 years ago

What conversation do you want to have? What is stopping you from having it. Just speak up.

Do other people have to give up their freedom to speak because you deem them unworthy? not valid? Can there be 2 or more conversations going on without any attempting to shut down the other?

Seems more like you want to silence certain conversations rather than have a particular conversation. Have your conversation!. And allow everyone the same freedom. Whether you agree or not.

So. What is it you want to discuss? Speak up?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

Sure, here is my conversation. http://blog.richardkentgates.com

Now show us yours.

[-] 1 points by imagine40 (383) 5 years ago

So is your conversation that the 99% must control the conversation? If so I agree. Is it also that the inflation/deflation must be addressed in some way to benefit the 99%. I think I could agree but I don't exactly understand. What should we do to address the inflation/deflation issue?

My conversation would be to get all money out of politics so that the wealthy do not control the conversation with our leaders. I think this 1st priority can facilitate most other issues of importance to the 99%. We should get every candidate on the record now on whether they support this concept. if they renege we vote them out.

[-] 1 points by Carroll (40) 5 years ago

I keep hearing of the desire to remove money from politics. So I would like to hear your response to the interpretation of history that money has always been the mediator in politics. By that I mean that from our nation's beginning, everyone was expected to buy as much influence as they could afford. Since we were a nation founded to pass political power from the feudal aristocracy to the middle class of the industrial revolution, the general idea was that the average of the successful business interests would call the tune. This average would be found through competing contributions of money. Since Congress would spend the nation's wealth to satisfy those sponsors, the resulting legislation would reflect the best practices of the middle class and nurture a prosperous economy for all of society. This in contrast to the laws of the king who was in no way beholden to the new middle class.

Let me make it clear I do not condone the limited suffrage of that day or like the fact that poor people had no say, or even advocate successful business practices as the moral rudder for our country. I'm just saying that's our heritage. And, with no ungodly-wealthy people, it was a system that kept the focus on a healthy economy, something we may appreciate after 2008. It could do nothing about the inequality of forcing the South to pay for the infrastructure of the manufacturing North and its suppliers of raw material in the West. It certainly did not solve the problem of slavery. I'm only pointing to our heritage.

Of course, after the changes in corporate law of the 19th. century, the resulting corporations amassed so much wealth and were able to buy enough influence to throw the system out of balance. Some of the first giant corporations built the transcontinental railroads and with the influence they could buy, they promptly threw American agriculture into a depression that helped bring on the general collapse in 1929.

I understand that such influence and bed follies of Congress and the corporations is the reason people say 'take the money out'. I also know that legislative attempts to do that fail. I remember the reform of the 70's that lasted about 5 years. Money simply found ways around and always will. There is another way to ensure the broad democratic bases gets in on the conversation.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Our system has always benefitted the wealthiest. never the middle class.

We must get all money out of politics.

"It's the only way to be sure"

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

First, the economic policy, including inflation, should be done by congress and not the FED, regardless of who prints the money.

...by controlling policy around leverage) would be one way. This would effect inflation without adding or removing currency to/from circulation.

[-] 0 points by imagine40 (383) 5 years ago

Shouldn't we work to eliminate congress and if we can do that, won't we the people be managing this task through votes (internet perhaps) Perhaps some financial body the people can manage day to day monetary tasks can be created, but not the FED because they ARE bankers who serve themselves and the 1% elites. And only congress if we get money out of politics (as I said) & until we can implement a real direct democracy model. Right?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

idk man. You seem to be all over the place and without any real roots for your assertions.

[-] 1 points by imagine40 (383) 5 years ago

End of conversation? We agree on no FED! I agree on using congress but only until the direct democracy model is created! Do you support the elimination of congress and creating a direct democracy model?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Yeah everyone is stupid zombies except you!

If only they understand things as well as you!. What do you think they should be conversing about besides inflation/deflation.?

What conversation should we have? I hear your criticisms clearly but you're not saying the conversation should be about criticism. Why don't you start the conversation you think we should be having instead of having the conversation criticizing everyone else.

Or is criticizing everyone, the conversation you wanna have. I mean I'm sure it makes you feel pretty good hearing from your friends here that you're right! Everyone is stupid but us!

C'mon. Correct the problem. Don't pump up your ego dressing us down.

We ain't gonna grow the movement if we call everyone stupid. How smart is that? Genius?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

Why don't you start the conversation you think weshould be having instead of having the critical conversation.

C'mon. Correct the problem. Don't pump up your ego dressing us down.

Way to go, you're a real pace setter.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

no good? I know whats goin on. I don't recite MSM propaganda.

But I also don't think I have to prove anything to anyone. I also think insulting people is counterproductive to a movement that MUST grow.

Inclusiveness is the word of the day. Even brainwashed zombies must be embraced, respected, and informed.

The only people we can avoid are the unrepentant offensive people who think they are better than everyone else. Too cool for school.?

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 5 years ago

LOL, you're trying to flip to the top as the moral authority. Dude, I grant you moral authority.

You guys really don't get it. You're spinning your wheels bud. You sound so similar to the current state of discourse that you are invisible. You're a mud droplet splashing into a mud puddle. The net effect is nothing.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Thats not very nice to say. Are you trying to say I am inconsequential?

I disagree. I have converted many people over the decades. Maybe not here. Maybe! But I know you must keep trying. As far as this site goes I have determined the most important thing to do is to challenge the negativity, the fallacies perpetrated to keep people from voting and posting important issues that hurt the 99%.

I don't have to prove anything to you and of course I don't subscribe to your very negative description of me.

We disagree.