Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Why does a sharp knife work better than a dull one?

Posted 10 years ago on Dec. 8, 2011, 2:12 p.m. EST by ogmos (0) from Los Angeles, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

A sharp knife works better because it concentrates all the force into a very narrow area.

Bearing that in mind, we can consider supporting only one item at a time to maximize effectiveness.

Pick one situation, explain it clearly so anyone can grasp what it is, why is behind it and why it's so important. It might even be best to stick to pointing out specific pieces of legislation (at first).

For example, elimination of the Bush tax cuts or reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. What is it and why is it relevant? Who supported it and why. This will shine a spotlight on specific legislators and keep them accountable.

If everyone starts talking about reinstatement of Glass-Steagall all over the country, it will soon be adopted. The public will see that the objectives are reasonable and achievable, the movement is clear and trustworthy.

The public will gain a sense that things can actually change, and the movement will gain more momentum and traction with the 99%.



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

The flip side of this is choosing one little thing is like throwing the dog a bone.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 10 years ago

Not if you pick the right thing to focus on.

We need to amend the constitution to stop the corruption of our government. Most of the rest of the problems flow from the overwhelming influence of the money of the 1%.


[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

It is humanly possible to be behind many things at once.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 10 years ago

Maybe for you, but most people have only a limited amount of time to devote to actively working for change.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Of course, your right thing is the most important.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 10 years ago

There are many important issues. The benefit of a constitutional amendment is that it strikes at the root of most of those problems. An amendment focuses on the cause, not just the symptoms.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I'm sorry, I don't feel that I have to focus specifically on the constitutional amendment and not the Bush tax cuts. That is where the bone comes in.

Which doesn't mean that I disagree with the benefit of a constitutional amendment.

[-] 2 points by wonder (79) 10 years ago

Although I'm not an OWS protester, its a lot easier to get what you want if you have something to focus on. Kind of a sad truth, but if you wanna beat politics, you gotta play politics. Or pull a french revolution.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 10 years ago

well said. What one sees here is cart before the horse like virtually every other thread here. Please people stop getting sucked into these meaningless debates. They are meaningless because this isn't the right time to have these discussions, not because your ideas or desires are meaningless. Save it for Philly. Every idea under the sun in this forum except beat the RepubliCrats at their own game. Except...


[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

I think more narrow would be more proper.

[-] 0 points by D7ame2Uv (116) 10 years ago

The Grace Commission report established that not a dime of the income tax goes to any services. Instead, all of it goes to paying interest on the national debt. The national debt, such that it is (in terms of size), exists only because all U.S. currency is loaned into existence by the Federal Reserve. There is no way this interest can ever be paid because the currency that would be used to pay it is also loaned into existence at interest. The only way to keep up is to inflate, which at some point leads to hyperinflation and collapse.

Instead of getting rid of tax cuts, why not get rid of the fraudulent system that requires their payment in the first place?