There is plenty of money.

The next time some smarmy and smug political puppet tries to convince you that you, or perhaps one of your countrymen have to suffer financially, and to the deteriment to the quality of life, poke them in the eye.

Or if they engage in cuts to front line police officers, national infrastructure, and essential services, to the most vulnerable, in society. This time, boot them in the nuts!

They are lying to you, on so many levels.

'We're all in this together', said an out of touch and arrogant David CamORON.

But he doesn't really mean all, does he?

What he really means is anyone who is not rich.

Anyone who is not rich, which is by far the biggest %, they are 'in it together'.

Those who are rich are not in it at all.

I doubt you will see the Queen (no talents, no vote on her stateship) maybe trying to save on money next winter, turn the heating off, maybe put another jumper on.

And it is the same in the US, the fat cats and fat cat politicians trying to convince the masses that, yes, there is pain to come, but everyone is going to feel it.

It's not true.

But the media are happy to repeat that mantra, while giving considerably less, sometimes no attention, to the real reason why a huge hole exists in public funds.

No prizes for guessing why the media don't go after it aggressively enough, the media are nothing but the mouthpiece for the very elites that put the hole there - why would they properly expose themselves?

If you have the time, go try to figure out, a true cost, as to how much Iraq cost the US in total?

Then add that to what Afghani cost, and is costing.

Then add that to Libya.

Please, do these sums, rather than hear the figures from me, that way you will appreciate them more.

Then do one more thing...add that total to this...

The amount of public money used baling out banks, Wall Street, and New York money men.

Now, once you have that figure in mind, consider it for some moments.

Then tell me you are NOT offended when a man in a suit speaks about 'austerity'.

Thanks,

Jack

 

That's right on. The currency schemes are all about control and are a crock. It's easy to see. Same resources, same people, same ideas as the day before. All of a sudden, austerity and extraordinary debt. Bollocks!

 

It just so offends me that these elected, and often non elected elites can sit there, and believe that they can create expensive conflicts and support criminal bankers and money men, and then pass the bill on to us, by way of robbing the public purse to fund such things, and depriving everyone of a better country.

And what offends me most of all, is that enough people suck it up for them to keep on doing it, over and over.

Often it is down to apathy or ignorance, on the part of a person, other times they are so far gone, that they actually support the very system that is punishing them, for the benefit of the few!

And, of course, the age old tactic of the elites deploying the well fermented brew of divide and conquer. Through their media mouthpiece, the will imply that perhaps 'those on welfare', are to blame. Again, they repeat that idea often enough, and people who are angry about all the crap the country is in, they suck it up, like fools, playing right into the hands of the elites.

After all, if you can get the plebs to demonise anyone on welfare, and make them sound like criminals, then the attention of the plebs is NOT on those who truly brought a country to it's financial knees, and who are actual criminals.

And, of course, the elites and their media know that people on welfare are a good target - they cannot fight back, and who speaks for them?

However, when they tire of that, they then create new enemies for plebs.

'Illegal immigrant workers', is a favourite.

Yet, suggest that those found employing illegals get hammered, and what do you get?

Mutterings and excuses.

See, the people employing many of the illegals are likely the same one's that then come home, and rage about it, on the internet.

They will be rich anyway, and they got rich by committing crimes, the crime of not paying taxes, the crime of employing illegals, and likely the working conditions.

Yet, suggest that they get a long prison sentence, and all they do is shout louder, but about something/one else.

Jack

 

The problem is that the money is in the hands of a relative few. Good luck getting it out of their hands.

If nothing else, we need to cut the waste out of government. There is plenty of room for cuts in areas that won't necessarily affect the most vulnerable members of society.

For example, we could cut out agricultural subsidies altogether, because only a very small portion actually goes to small farmers. Most goes to large corporations that don't even need the money.

 

Well, it starts of belonging to the public, so perhaps not letting it get into their hands, and not permitting them to have such unfettered access to it, could be an idea?

 

I'd like to lower taxes too, but we need to cut spending to achieve that.

 

You miss the point.

It is not about something as simple as cutting taxes.

That was tried anyway, and what a mess became of it.

This is about so much more, so very much more, than the cosmetic gesture of cutting tax a little bit, here or there.

 

Well, what do you suggest in terms of policy?

 

Capital is globalized. It can move to safe harbors.

 

In what area?

I cannot give a catch all manifesto.

But really, I do think everyone has a duty to themselves to wake up to the fact that political elites, and the media, lie to us, over and over.

We need to do the most free thing, and that is NOT vote.

Show them that we know the game is rigged, and the game is up.

They need us to comply, they need us more than we need them.

A mass no show at an election, because people had woken up that ANY sort of vote means you are aiding and abetting, it would be catastrophic for the elites.

 

That's an interesting idea, but I doubt you can get a 0% turnout.

At best, you could get a 25% turnout, but that's still enough people to put someone into office.

 

Who knows how, esp with the internet, it could catch on and go huge?

I guess you are right, if there are still enough lemmings that do not get it, then they still have enough to play their rigged game.

Less lemmings it is then?

 

Perhaps so...

Still, I have my reservations with direct democracy. I think our system has plenty of flaws, but a republic is about as good as it gets.

 

Doesn't have to even be a direct democracy, if you feel you are not ready for that.

Keep your representative democracy, by all means.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, other countries in the West operate with it, and without the level of fakery and corruption of the US system.

You need to purge if you wish to save it though, and if you value and want to protect true and honourable representative democracy.

And I am afraid that's what too many have failed to do.

Bloated and in a stupor, too many of the public finger point at one another, or are 'busy' with reality television, to have realised to what extent that their democracy has become more a corporation.

 

Only the people and not the bankers should take losses.
If the bankers take losses, it might be bad for us, causing us all to take losses too. Better that we take the losses for them, so they don't have to.
No sense both of us taking losses.

 

In my first election, I will be voting, but not for any politician. I am voting for myself.

 

Well done - I am sure the billionaire elites will be thrilled by you.

 

There are a plethora of flaws in our current representative democracy. Besides media manipulation, in politics, you have gerrymandering, filibustering, logrolling, earmarks/porkbarrel projects, riders, partisan whips, and campaign contributions. All of these issues can be solved with common sense reforms. The problem is that any legitimate proposals are silenced because the game is either too much fun, or too beneficial.

 

S-a-t-i-r-e

 

just raise interest rates and let the zombie banks fail.......you will be dancing at the gas pumps!

 

What movie was that. Oh, right. Zoolander. Funny flick. Better than it should be.

Maybe representation is the problem. I don't know. There are plenty of practical arguments in favor of republicanism (I'm talking in terms of the political system, not the political party, obviously), but I find myself wondering whether or not it would be better if we were all senators.

At the very least, the lobbyists would have to spread the bribes out more, right?

 

the whole world would collapse,[/end sarcasm] .............................and the bankers would have to work like the rest of us.

 

Some of our peers are better at representation, but a lot of them aren't.

In general, smaller countries that are mostly monocultural are better at maintaining lower levels of corruption. This is why Scandinavian countries tend to be at the top in terms of quality of life.

The same goes for countries like Australia and Canada.

When it comes to larger countries that are more diverse, however, things get more complicated.

I wouldn't think the U.K., France, Germany, Italy, or Spain are less corrupt than we are. They each have their problems just like we do, and Spain and Italy seem especially corrupt in their financial systems -- even more than us.

So no, I wouldn't think any of the major First World countries are better than us in terms of political systems.

 

Unfortunately, complex systems are always prone to inefficiencies, and even collapse. The problem is that until the idea of complexity theory arose, such a phenomenon was not clearly defined. What has to occur is a simplification of all systems, political, economic, and social, while maintaining as many ideals of modern American society as possible.

 

Some things can be simplified, but one of the reasons our system is still functional is due to decentralization of power.

If we tried centralizing everything, it would just fall apart.