|
24 Sep 09 - 09:10 PM (#2730805) Subject: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC I think I'm looking forward to this one, too... http://fora.tv/2009/09/17/Filmmaker_Michael_Moore_on_Capitalism_A_Love_Story#fullprogram |
|
24 Sep 09 - 10:26 PM (#2730845) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk Me too. I've watched about half the video now, and it's excellent. |
|
24 Sep 09 - 10:35 PM (#2730849) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Power to the people! ;-) |
|
24 Sep 09 - 11:33 PM (#2730869) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Michael Moore is reaping the benefits of captialism quite well .... he has a very healthy investment portfolio ... it even included included some Haliburton stock! He denies it ... but, it's not the first time he's lied. biLL |
|
24 Sep 09 - 11:42 PM (#2730873) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: pdq He made over $100 million just from his 2004 Bush-bash movie. How do you spell hypocrit? |
|
24 Sep 09 - 11:58 PM (#2730878) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk So if anyone actually succeeds in doing anything substantial in a career sense in our present system, pdq, then I guess he cannot be considered a legitimate spokesman on behalf of the general public, the poor, and those in need? That sounds like a very good method for ensuring that any progressive messages which would initiate radical social change in the USA will never reach the general public at all....because only a message that HAS a great deal of money behind it (which can only be done if it's highly profitable) CAN reach the general public at all in the present system of film distribution as it exists in North America. There are a great many independent individuals of a progressive type who would like, I'm sure, to make a movie about the kind of things Michael Moore is addressing, and they would like it to reach an audience of millions. But....if they do not have a lot of money already and a lot of connections in the business already...that won't happen. Their movies will hardly be seen by anyone, won't be spoken of in the media, and won't play in the cineplexes across the nation. No one will know what they said. You've got to already be a major player in this capitalist system to be able to afford and get major exposure. Moore is a major player. I fear that the kind of personal moral nobility you seem to demand of people who represent views that worry you is based on your inner and unspoken desire for those people to simply not be in any position to make their views known. Then and only then will they meet your stringent requirements for moral purity...because then you'll get exactly what you want: they won't be heard. What bothers you about Moore, I suspect, is his message, not his moral fibre. Moore has not said he's against capitalism. He has said he's against greedy and unscrupulous and dishonest and antisocial business practices that damage 95% of society for the benefit of 5% of society. Rule by a tiny elite is what that is. It's not democracy. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:17 AM (#2730887) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Those kinds of criticisms look like nothing more than gossip to me, anyway. They certainly don't address the subject of the film itself. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:47 AM (#2730896) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: akenaton For once, I'm slightly at odds with my fellow heretics, Little Hawk and Carol. "Moore has not said he's against capitalism. He has said he's against greedy and unscrupulous and dishonest and antisocial business practices that damage 95% of society for the benefit of 5% of society.".....I'm afraid the practice of Capitalism always leads inevitably to the situation you describe Hawk, we should try to understand Capitalism for what it really is...a device to organise society in a certain way, to enslave society, to trade material posessions for real life. It should be wiped from the face of the earth! No excuses! |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:49 AM (#2730897) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC I haven't yet said what I think of Capitalism. I think I'll wait until I see the movie before I comment on that. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:57 AM (#2730911) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Richard Bridge On this occasion, I agree with akenaton |
|
25 Sep 09 - 05:42 AM (#2730975) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stu "How do you spell hypocrit?" With an 'e' on the end. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 07:35 AM (#2731009) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Moor stated that he's been waiting for the day to be financially independent enough to make *this* film. As far as he is concerned, he see's the money he's created from his prior work, as providing him with independent financial resources to invest in future projects. As his projects are not fundamentally self-serving in their purpose, I see no problem in that. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 07:38 AM (#2731012) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Make that Moore with an e.. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 07:54 AM (#2731022) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 I see Moore as the (U.S.) left's equivalent af Bill O'Rielly. Both are right on to the point 55% of the time. Both distort the facts and truth 45% of the time. This percentage which is nothing more than just plain propaganda is rather dangerous. Both lose their composure when confronted by someone who has them cornered in the ropes. Both reap sufficiently large amounts of $money$ out of their endeavors. As to the movie ... well, like Carol I'm going to have to see it before any I can make any comments on it. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 08:04 AM (#2731026) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 I should also add ... Both Moore and O'rielly play up thier working class backgrounds ... and distrust of the ivy league corporate heads. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 09:34 AM (#2731070) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk As regards capitalism itself, Akenaton....on what level? What I mean is this. Capitalism on the LARGE level does always lead to massive corruption and waste, not to mention stark insanity. No doubt about it. On the other hand, socialism on the LARGE level has led to other forms of corruption and waste and stark insanity (when you look at socialism as practiced by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc). Now what about on a smaller level? I see nothing wrong with the fact that an artisan or a small business person or a farmer or an entertainer charges enough his or her product or service in order to generate a profit and thereby earn a living. That's capitalism on a small scale. A product or service that is honestly and well done and useful deserves to generate a profit, and indeed is unviable if it does not do so (in a money-based economy). So when you say the word "capitalism", what are you talking about exactly? I've visited a largely socialist society...Cuba...and I liked it a lot. I liked the complete lack of commercial advertising. I liked the fact that there were lots of little unique local businesses (stores, cafes, artisans, etc) who were all different from one another according to who ran then and how....instead of the soulless chains that we have in North America like McDonald's, Starbucks, etc. And by the way, those little Cuban businesses and artisans were, in fact, engaging in a form of capitalist activity, because they were charging above cost for what they were selling in order to generate enough cash flow to make their activities profitable and worthwhile...despite the fact that they supposedly exist in a socialist society. So what you really had there was a mix of capitalism (small scale) with socialism (large scale). What we have in Canada is a mix of capitalism (large and small scale) with a mix of socialism (mostly large scale) although a series of conservatively influenced governments under orders from the corporates have been chipping away at the socialist institutions for about 3 decades now. So how are you defining "capitalism" when you dismiss it as entirely evil? As long as we have money at all, then I think we have to have a good deal of small-scale capitalism. We should find ways of severely regulating the activities of large scale capitalism so as to prevent its abuses. I would love to see a society with no money at all, where things are done because they are good for people, not because they generate a profit, but I don't see any likelihood of that happening in the near term. (See the many episodes of Star Trek Next Generation for a demonstration of exactly how such a society would work...and YES, it is possible! It only requires the vision and the will to set it up, educate people to understand it, and then do it. If done, it would establish a genuine democracy and a genuinely fair and sane social system on this planet by freeing people from the tyrranny of the once useful tool they invented long ago...money...which in time became a devouring monster.) ***** Moore is right to distrust social elites. Their primary purpose (in general, not right down to every individual in the elite) is to maintain and enlarge their already dominant position in a society and they do it on the backs of the ordinary public. Sometimes real reformers do come forth FROM the elite. They are notable exceptions to their class, and are probably viewed as traitors and subversives by the rest, I would think. Fidel Castro, for instance, was the son of a wealthy family. One thing about wealth...it gives you time to think about social theory, if you're so inclined to. An idealistic son or daughter of the wealthy can well become a revolutionary, but in so doing he or she must directly challenge the very power structure he was born in. Only a few do. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 09:49 AM (#2731076) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: meself Capitalism is good at some things; socialism is good at others. Capitalism does a superb job of getting food onto the shelves of the grocery store. Socialism provides quality health care. Etc. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 10:31 AM (#2731109) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: pdq America's Capitalist EconomyFrom U.S. Department of State, for About.com In every economic system, entrepreneurs and managers bring together natural resources, labor, and technology to produce and distribute goods and services. But the way these different elements are organized and used also reflects a nation's political ideals and its culture. The United States is often described as a "capitalist" economy, a term coined by 19th-century German economist and social theorist Karl Marx to describe a system in which a small group of people who control large amounts of money, or capital, make the most important economic decisions. Marx contrasted capitalist economies to "socialist" ones, which vest more power in the political system. Marx and his followers believed that capitalist economies concentrate power in the hands of wealthy business people, who aim mainly to maximize profits; socialist economies, on the other hand, would be more likely to feature greater control by government, which tends to put political aims -- a more equal distribution of society's resources, for instance -- ahead of profits. Does Pure Capitalism Exist in the United States? While those categories, though oversimplified, have elements of truth to them, they are far less relevant today. If the pure capitalism described by Marx ever existed, it has long since disappeared, as governments in the United States and many other countries have intervened in their economies to limit concentrations of power and address many of the social problems associated with unchecked private commercial interests. As a result, the American economy is perhaps better described as a "mixed" economy, with government playing an important role along with private enterprise. Although Americans often disagree about exactly where to draw the line between their beliefs in both free enterprise and government management, the mixed economy they have developed has been remarkably successful. ©2009 About.com, a part of The New York Times Company. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 11:43 AM (#2731139) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Where do those figures of 55% right and 45% distortion come from? Has someone done a fact checking study on all of his work and come up with a legitimate percentage, or is someone just tossing off numbers from the top of their head? |
|
25 Sep 09 - 11:55 AM (#2731144) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: pdq ...here is Michael Moore in his own words. Some of you will see nothing wrong with his statement: Goodbye, GM ...by Michael MooreMonday, June 1st, 2009 I write this on the morning of the end of the once-mighty General Motors. By high noon, the President of the United States will have made it official: General Motors, as we know it, has been totaled. As I sit here in GM's birthplace, Flint, Michigan, I am surrounded by friends and family who are filled with anxiety about what will happen to them and to the town. Forty percent of the homes and businesses in the city have been abandoned. Imagine what it would be like if you lived in a city where almost every other house is empty. What would be your state of mind? It is with sad irony that the company which invented "planned obsolescence" -- the decision to build cars that would fall apart after a few years so that the customer would then have to buy a new one -- has now made itself obsolete. It refused to build automobiles that the public wanted, cars that got great gas mileage, were as safe as they could be, and were exceedingly comfortable to drive. Oh -- and that wouldn't start falling apart after two years. GM stubbornly fought environmental and safety regulations. Its executives arrogantly ignored the "inferior" Japanese and German cars, cars which would become the gold standard for automobile buyers. And it was hell-bent on punishing its unionized workforce, lopping off thousands of workers for no good reason other than to "improve" the short-term bottom line of the corporation. Beginning in the 1980s, when GM was posting record profits, it moved countless jobs to Mexico and elsewhere, thus destroying the lives of tens of thousands of hard-working Americans. The glaring stupidity of this policy was that, when they eliminated the income of so many middle class families, who did they think was going to be able to afford to buy their cars? History will record this blunder in the same way it now writes about the French building the Maginot Line or how the Romans cluelessly poisoned their own water system with lethal lead in its pipes. So here we are at the deathbed of General Motors. The company's body not yet cold, and I find myself filled with -- dare I say it -- joy. It is not the joy of revenge against a corporation that ruined my hometown and brought misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction to the people I grew up with. Nor do I, obviously, claim any joy in knowing that 21,000 more GM workers will be told that they, too, are without a job. But you and I and the rest of America now own a car company! I know, I know -- who on earth wants to run a car company? Who among us wants $50 billion of our tax dollars thrown down the rat hole of still trying to save GM? Let's be clear about this: The only way to save GM is to kill GM. Saving our precious industrial infrastructure, though, is another matter and must be a top priority. If we allow the shutting down and tearing down of our auto plants, we will sorely wish we still had them when we realize that those factories could have built the alternative energy systems we now desperately need. And when we realize that the best way to transport ourselves is on light rail and bullet trains and cleaner buses, how will we do this if we've allowed our industrial capacity and its skilled workforce to disappear? Thus, as GM is "reorganized" by the federal government and the bankruptcy court, here is the plan I am asking President Obama to implement for the good of the workers, the GM communities, and the nation as a whole. Twenty years ago when I made "Roger & Me," I tried to warn people about what was ahead for General Motors. Had the power structure and the punditocracy listened, maybe much of this could have been avoided. Based on my track record, I request an honest and sincere consideration of the following suggestions: 1. Just as President Roosevelt did after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the President must tell the nation that we are at war and we must immediately convert our auto factories to factories that build mass transit vehicles and alternative energy devices. Within months in Flint in 1942, GM halted all car production and immediately used the assembly lines to build planes, tanks and machine guns. The conversion took no time at all. Everyone pitched in. The fascists were defeated. We are now in a different kind of war -- a war that we have conducted against the ecosystem and has been conducted by our very own corporate leaders. This current war has two fronts. One is headquartered in Detroit. The products built in the factories of GM, Ford and Chrysler are some of the greatest weapons of mass destruction responsible for global warming and the melting of our polar icecaps. The things we call "cars" may have been fun to drive, but they are like a million daggers into the heart of Mother Nature. To continue to build them would only lead to the ruin of our species and much of the planet. The other front in this war is being waged by the oil companies against you and me. They are committed to fleecing us whenever they can, and they have been reckless stewards of the finite amount of oil that is located under the surface of the earth. They know they are sucking it bone dry. And like the lumber tycoons of the early 20th century who didn't give a damn about future generations as they tore down every forest they could get their hands on, these oil barons are not telling the public what they know to be true -- that there are only a few more decades of useable oil on this planet. And as the end days of oil approach us, get ready for some very desperate people willing to kill and be killed just to get their hands on a gallon can of gasoline. President Obama, now that he has taken control of GM, needs to convert the factories to new and needed uses immediately. 2. Don't put another $30 billion into the coffers of GM to build cars. Instead, use that money to keep the current workforce -- and most of those who have been laid off -- employed so that they can build the new modes of 21st century transportation. Let them start the conversion work now. 3. Announce that we will have bullet trains criss-crossing this country in the next five years. Japan is celebrating the 45th anniversary of its first bullet train this year. Now they have dozens of them. Average speed: 165 mph. Average time a train is late: under 30 seconds. They have had these high speed trains for nearly five decades -- and we don't even have one! The fact that the technology already exists for us to go from New York to L.A. in 17 hours by train, and that we haven't used it, is criminal. Let's hire the unemployed to build the new high speed lines all over the country. Chicago to Detroit in less than two hours. Miami to DC in under 7 hours. Denver to Dallas in five and a half. This can be done and done now. 4. Initiate a program to put light rail mass transit lines in all our large and medium-sized cities. Build those trains in the GM factories. And hire local people everywhere to install and run this system. 5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses. 6. For the time being, have some factories build hybrid or all-electric cars (and batteries). It will take a few years for people to get used to the new ways to transport ourselves, so if we're going to have automobiles, let's have kinder, gentler ones. We can be building these next month (do not believe anyone who tells you it will take years to retool the factories -- that simply isn't true). 7. Transform some of the empty GM factories to facilities that build windmills, solar panels and other means of alternate forms of energy. We need tens of millions of solar panels right now. And there is an eager and skilled workforce who can build them. 8. Provide tax incentives for those who travel by hybrid car or bus or train. Also, credits for those who convert their home to alternative energy. 9. To help pay for this, impose a two-dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline. This will get people to switch to more energy saving cars or to use the new rail lines and rail cars the former autoworkers have built for them. Well, that's a start. Please, please, please don't save GM so that a smaller version of it will simply do nothing more than build Chevys or Cadillacs. This is not a long-term solution. Don't throw bad money into a company whose tailpipe is malfunctioning, causing a strange odor to fill the car. 100 years ago this year, the founders of General Motors convinced the world to give up their horses and saddles and buggy whips to try a new form of transportation. Now it is time for us to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine. It seemed to serve us well for so long. We enjoyed the car hops at the A&W. We made out in the front -- and the back -- seat. We watched movies on large outdoor screens, went to the races at NASCAR tracks across the country, and saw the Pacific Ocean for the first time through the window down Hwy. 1. And now it's over. It's a new day and a new century. The President -- and the UAW -- must seize this moment and create a big batch of lemonade from this very sour and sad lemon. Yesterday, the last surviving person from the Titanic disaster passed away. She escaped certain death that night and went on to live another 97 years. So can we survive our own Titanic in all the Flint Michigans of this country. 60% of GM is ours. I think we can do a better job. Yours, Michael Moore MMFlint@aol.com MichaelMoore.com |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:16 PM (#2731155) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Those figures are mine .... I've been working on a scientific algorithm for determining statistics regarding distortion of factual truth ... though not complete in it's development I'd say the results are close, give or take 10% either way. Then again Fox news would arrive at 100% right on for Bill in regards to the factual truth and 100% complete distortion of the factual truth for Mike Mike Moore's team would arrive at a complete reversal to Fox's results. As to anyone else ... well only you can determine what is factual and what is distortion. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:23 PM (#2731162) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC I would be interested in seeing how the figures of 55% and 45% were arrived at, then. And I would also like to see the method used of verifying the accuracy (or lack of it) of the things O'Reilly and Moore say. I say this because, if those figures are not accurate, the person stating them as fact is guilty of the very same thing they are accusing Moore of. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:33 PM (#2731169) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Well .... it should be said "guilty of the very same thing they are accusing Moore and O'Rielly of". If Moore and O'Rielly can state their agenda's in Books, movies, websites, without backing up (completely) what they say, then I can arrive at what I stated based on my statistical factual Truth software program ... which is btw cloned from the spin cycle chip from our LG front end loading washing machine ... now, if I can can only get it to blow hot air I've completed my task. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:34 PM (#2731171) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel number 6 On The Oberman show last night he said that he would gladly retire if there was no need to expose a corrupt and unfair corporate system. If both Keith and Michael were so successful that corporations would no longer pay them for their criticism based shows they would both be out of their current work. They shook hands and hoped that day might come. People who watch movies and shows allow for more to be made. If there was no longer a need or interest in such educational entertainment, Michael would be out of the movie business. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:39 PM (#2731173) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC But that is assuming that what Moore says is not accurate. Since no evidence has been provided that what he says is not accurate, then the above syllogism doesn't work. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:39 PM (#2731174) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Oops. The syllogism in the post right after my last one. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:41 PM (#2731175) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel Capitalism concentrates wealth to the exclusion of many. Super Capitalism concentrates such gigantic wealth to the exclusion of virtually everyone, that it can destroy entire nations as well as world economies. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:41 PM (#2731176) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 "If there was no longer a need or interest in such educational entertainment, Michael would be out of the movie business." the same can be said for Bill Orielly ... but that doesn't state that all their showbiz should be taken for the factual truth. Both these guys beleive that they have an agenda to expose the wrongs in our society ... kudos to them (I sincerely mean that) but how the expose it is rather stretched, distorted and exagerrated ... all this to capture the audience's attention. As I stated, I (personally) take about 1/2 of what they each say as the factual truth. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 12:45 PM (#2731178) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Nobody has so far produced any evidence that the way Moore exposes things is stretched, distorted, and exaggerated. So far, all they have done is express an opinion that it is those things. So I don't see why anyone should take these accusations as the factual truth. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:05 PM (#2731192) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel Moore is not a reformer. He has no bills before Congress. He is a man who can go to a theatre for 2 hours in the dark with 200 people and laugh your ass off and even cry. There are two expose's in this film which will be new to most people. Otherwise everyone is free to feel any way in which they wish. If 6 wishes to disbelieve without any reason he is entitled to his feelings. How one feels about facts is often a feeling of denial. "I wish it weren't true... so it isn't true" is just a feeling. Other people feel that the more they know, the more they want to know. As for our system it is a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes are legal for the richest and make countless people miserable. There is no Democracy when it comes to the economy. You have no say in the economy. Financial Corporatons do and gamble however ever they want. Scams? Swindles? Of course, thats how they make money. Its not like they are building a car. They are accumulating money that is not yet theirs. There has not been a single rule change or regualtions of Wall St. since the collapse. not 1 |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:07 PM (#2731193) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel edit "He is a man that can cause you to go to the theatre..." |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:10 PM (#2731196) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC People are certainly entitled to their feelings and opinions. But we don't have to accept those things as facts. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:29 PM (#2731214) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 "But we don't have to accept those things as facts." Exactly ... I was a big fan of Moore but i started to have my doubts about him after I saw Bowling for Columbine ... specifically the scene where he said Canadians don't lock their doors .... even in Toronto ... and then the scene where he just walks up to a front door of a house and knocks ... lady opens the door and states ... no we never lock our doors here .... well, we lived in Toronto right by where that was filmed ... guess what ... we always locked our doors, have for years. Everyone does, out of fear. In fact just about the time that was filmed we were broken into ... so was everyone else on our street ... locked doors and all .. the thieves kicked in windows ... police said they were powerless to control the B&E's ... the volume exceed the manpower to stop it. So Mike lied to impress the U.S. audiences that things were cosy and safe north of the border ... that his system system was wrong and ours isn't. I always wonder how much he paid that woman that he talked to on the front porch? After that I looked more closely into his facts and cinematic (3 ring circus) techniques ... manipulated for his own agenda. But, I guess if he did show things the way it really is (blemishes and all) and used less grandstanding, exagerrated facts, used a more flat editing style he would have a difficult time attracting an $audience$. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:35 PM (#2731217) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: McGrath of Harlow "...a "capitalist" economy, a term coined by 19th-century German economist and social theorist Karl Marx... " The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary give the first use of the word as 1792, in France. That's 26 years before Karl Marx was born 1n 1818. Evidetly the U.S. Department of State needs a fact checker. I'm not too surprised at that... |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:42 PM (#2731223) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Hmmmm .... maybe they could use my Statistical Factual Truth Software program .... I'll probably have to apply some modifications in it for their use. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:44 PM (#2731226) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel I'll give you an example of Michael Moore lieing. In this new movie Moore dubs words into the mouth of Jesus Christ. He has him preaching the Capitalist Bible. Of course this is a lie and Christ did not preach the Capitalist Bible,nor did he appear pn camera. However it does show the difference between the actual "WORD" and the recent Evangelical Word who claim our Christian Capitalist Founders of America wanted you to give your money to the church and Reeublican Party as preached by the TV prosperity preachers and money changers in local worshiping establishments. Even if I am a minority of one I consider myself a humorist at times. It is my experience that there are about 20% of people in this world who do not get satire. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:48 PM (#2731229) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stringsinger It's so easy to call people liars. That's what they're doing to President Obama via Joe Wilson. The Halliburton stock thing? Prove it. It sounds like a rightwing gossip column to me and they are liars. number 6, you have been demoted to number 2. :) People in America who do anything worthwhile are subject to the system as it stands which needs to be changed to reflect true democracy. The US could use a healthy dose of socialism in it's government in the managing of health care and the environment in the way other European countries are doing it. I don't think that I want the government to make shirts. We still need private companies. Anyone who thinks the American system of government is perfect now or would be better off with private corporations running it exclusively is off their rocker and anti-democratic. Micheal Moore did his thing without the intent of making a million dollars. He was making these kind of films even in his early T.V. days. The only reason he is getting this right-wing flack now is that he is able to reach the public with some hard reality. He is actually a practicing Catholic although he disagrees with some of their institutional decisions. Bill O'Reilly has not particulaly engendered any confidence by reasonable American people. He is a right-wing pundit who has the "noise machine" on his side. Moore actually is a self-made entrepreneur who should have the Libertarians admiration. He is making his money the "old fashioned" way.....honestly. There are many self-satisfied Americans who don't want to have this discussion. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:49 PM (#2731230) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC A lot of Canadians I know say they never lock their doors. Even some in Toronto. I've definitely heard that one mentioned by Canadians as a cultural difference between the US and Canada. JtS would never lock the door, either, if I didn't have strong feelings about keeping the doors locked. So maybe he wasn't wrong about that one as much as just not running into the right Canadians. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:51 PM (#2731231) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 "It is my experience that there are about 20% of people in this world who do not get satire. " I'm beginning to see a real need for my Statistical Factual Truth Software program ... I think I'm gonna make a lot of $bucks$ out of it. Buy a lotta stock from the money I make .... maybe I'll have take up residency in the Cayman Islands. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 01:52 PM (#2731234) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: pdq " Not that all of these individuals used the term capitalism, for as [Thomas L.] DiLorenzo points out, "The word capitalism was coined by none other than Karl Marx, who hoped that it would help in his crusade to denigrate the system of private property and free enterprise and promote socialism" (p. 1). Although this is a book about capitalism, it is not a book on economics. As an economist, DiLorenzo is naturally quite at home when he discusses concepts like consumer sovereignty, supply and demand, scarcity, the division of labor, comparative advantage, inflation, price floors, price ceilings, monopoly, the free-rider problem, eminent domain, protectionism, mercantilism, rent seeking, embargoes, predatory pricing, and equilibrium prices. But because these concepts are all explained in layman's terms, and are only introduced when necessary, no prior knowledge of economics is required. In fact, because of the pervasive misunderstanding of capitalism, it might be better if the reader didn't know anything about economics because he would have less to "unlearn." The title of the book may initially seem to be an exercise in hyperbole, but such is not the case. How Capitalism Saved America is indeed the untold history of our country. After a brief introduction and two very crucial introductory chapters on the nature of capitalism and the perpetrators of anticapitalism, DiLorenzo takes us through nine chapters of American history – from the Pilgrims to the recent California energy "crisis" – and shows "how, from the very beginning, capitalism has been vital to America's growth, and how excessive government interference in the economy has only exacerbated economic problems and stifled growth" (p. 4). Although the book is written chronologically, any of these nine chapters can be read independently. However, only one of them is necessary to see that the book's title is not an overstatement. Because it was Marx himself who coined the term, it is no surprise that capitalism has been falsely thought to benefit only capitalists and the rich while exploiting workers and the poor. DiLorenzo dismisses as Marxist propaganda the idea that capitalism is "a zero-sum game in which 'somebody wins, somebody loses'" (p. 13). Instead, "Capitalism succeeds precisely because free exchange is mutually advantageous" (p. 11). And not only does it succeed, it is "the source of civilizations and human progress" (p. 1). Capitalism has "brought to the masses products and services that were once considered luxuries available only to the rich" (p. 12). Capitalism is not only "the best-known source of upward economic mobility" (p. 26), it "actually reduces income inequalities within a nation" (p. 26). In short, capitalism alleviates poverty, raises living standards, expands economic opportunity, and enables scores of millions to live longer, healthier, and more peaceful lives." |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:01 PM (#2731247) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Well Carol .... I've lived here all my life ... Toronto, small town Ontario, and now here in the Maritimes ... I have never known anyone who intentially leaves the door of their house unlocked .... well, I do know someone who lives in Bell Isle N.B. who did, up until a couple of years ago ... until thier house was broken into. Maybe in rural Nfld they don't ... but things are changing. Jeeezuz ... here in the little backwater port town of Saint John you house would be ramsacked in no time .... whew, the thought of it scares the bejeezes out of me. biLL (now shamefully called Number 2) |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:04 PM (#2731253) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel Communist China has found a warm spot for Capitalism to thrive. When a Chinese capitalist corporation knowing sells poison baby milk, their post facto regulation is swift execution of the boss. Capitalism needs a strong foundation of regulation. It needs a strong cage. It needs containment. ...for it can be a fierce toxic and lethal tool for destruction as well as construction. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:06 PM (#2731255) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Like I said, maybe he wasn't so much wrong as just running into the wrong Canadians, because obviously there are a lot of Canadians who don't lock their doors, even if not all Canadians know about them. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:08 PM (#2731257) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC And by the way, JtS has lived in Ottawa, as well as the suburbs of Toronto, and he used to never lock his doors (and as I said, still wouldn't even here in the US, if I didn't have strong feelings about it). |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:10 PM (#2731259) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 HuH .... well .... probably a bunch of Americans (the U.S. ones) out in the backwoods of Minnesota, Alaska, Maine who don't lock their doors either. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:41 PM (#2731281) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) It all depends on your local community (UK village - near a crumby town). I regularly leave my doors unlocked, it's my fella who's the door locker. My Mother always left the back door unlocked, so does my Uncle, and so did my Grandmother. Members of my Mothers London Irish family leave the front door unlocked, I think it harks back to traditional social habits from the Motherland. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 02:43 PM (#2731284) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) When I say 'unlocked', I don't just mean 'unlocked'. I mean, the door is open for any unexpected guest to just *walk in* unannounced without asking, if they happen to turn up. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 03:07 PM (#2731300) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: sing4peace Here's Malvina Reynolds' take on the subject... THE MONEY CROP - Oh, money has its' own way And money has to grow It grows on human blood and bone As any child would know It's iron stuff and paper stuff With no life of its' own And so it gets its' growing sap From human blood and bone. Many a child is hungering Because the wage is low And men will die on battlefields (I sing "many will die") To help the money grow And those who take the money crop They're at it without end They plant it in the tenements To make it grow again... The little that they leave for us We cannot make a seed We spend it on our shoddy clothes And every daily need We spend it in a minute In an hour it is gone To find its' way to grow again On human blood and bone Blood and bone.... (c. Schroder Music Co. 1966) ------ Joyce (sure I'm a Marxist...Harpo was always my favorite) |
|
25 Sep 09 - 03:39 PM (#2731314) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: McGrath of Harlow The thing is, "capitalism" is not the same thing as "free enterprise" - in some ways it is the opposite. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 03:41 PM (#2731316) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Hey look kids .... the bottom line is don't blindly follow leaders albeit they are politicans or showbiz types .... it's a money driven capitialist world out there and these types certainly will take their cut of the action. You can be slightly skeptical of Bill O'Rielly and criticize him and still be a right winger and a patriot. You can be slightly skeptical of Michael Moore and criticize him and still be a left winger and a socialist. Personally I lean pretty far to the left on socialist issues and my anxiety level goes up a few meters whenever I hear about the sleaze, and greed of the corporate capitalists. I prefer to admire the people that walk the walk ... the doctors and nurses that work in the fields of 3rd world have not nations, the mother theresas out there, the people out there that work in the food handout centres, the legal aid lawyers, the people out tere on the front lines helping the homeless, those that work with the street kids, the addicts ... you get the drift. Watch, listen and understand these people, they speak the factual truth. I just don't think Bill and Mike really walk their talk 100% .. looking at Mike do you think he really walks at all .... ok, cheap shot ... my apologies Mike ... anyway, I'm outta here. biLL |
|
25 Sep 09 - 03:45 PM (#2731319) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Michael Moore does the people of this country a huge service by bringing out information that we need to know and he helps create the kind of public groundswell that we need in this country to help us get out from under the tyranny of the major corporations. Perhaps someone living in another country might not understand this as well as people living in this country. We don't have to blindly follow him to know how important he and his work are here in this country. Those of us living in the US without any access to medical care understand this very well. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 04:01 PM (#2731331) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC O'Reilly, on the other hand, works entirely on behalf of the major corporations, and that's the most important difference between the two of them. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 04:39 PM (#2731373) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: McGrath of Harlow "patriot" is not a word that should be handed over to the right. Michael Moore would appear to be pre-eminently a patriot, someone who has done a lot to counteract the efforts of the kind of self-proclaimed American "patriots" who have done so much to damn the USA in the eyes of the world. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 04:48 PM (#2731377) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) YES MGrath, who could criticise him for being anti-ordinary people or anti-honest democracy? It's all he speaks of. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 09:38 PM (#2731521) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk Virtually every American thinks of himself as a "patriot", specially in times of national emergency. This doesn't mean they will agree with each other on various political issues nor does it mean they have any respect or understanding for forms of patriotism which differ from their own. Of COURSE Michael Moore is a patriot. And so is George Bush. And so is Barack Obama. And so is Glenn Beck. And so is Alex Jones. And so is Hillary Clinton. And so is some crazy White supremacit who's planning to plant a bomb somewhere. They're ALL patriots...in their own judgement....by their own best understanding of what it means to be a patriot. Their understanding may be very flawed, and it may be based on ignorance or irrationality. That's how the human mind works. Virtually everyone out there is a patriot to their own nation....and they'll kill one another over the fact that their understanding of what makes one a patriot differs. Such is the folly of human political thinking. When various patriotic Germans decided to tried to assassinate Hitler in 1944, and failed, they were deemed "traitors" and executed by other patriotic Germans who thought of themselves as patriots because they were protecting Hitler (the head of state). The same kind of radical divide exists in the USA. It's like 2 (or more) mutually exclusive realities, both claiming the moral high ground, both utterly certain of their own patriotism...a patriotism based on their own basic assumptions about reality. The thing I like about Michael Moore, though, is that he makes a strong point about not hating his various political opponents on a personal level no matter how much he hates the policies they are supporting. That's a good sign in regards to Michael Moore. It show that he has a bit more compassion and insight than a lot of people do in this world. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 10:34 PM (#2731543) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel Moore has done more for the workers and families of Flint Michigan than some of you know. He may even have helped these people more than his critics have. |
|
25 Sep 09 - 11:06 PM (#2731560) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk That would be no big surprise, would it? |
|
26 Sep 09 - 03:08 AM (#2731634) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Michael has to be one of the bravest people in the US, if not the world, for having the guts to stand up and question those at the top, to expose them for what they are. He does this against people who could, quite literally, have him 'taken out' tomorrow, if they so chose. I'm glad he's making money, not only so he can make more films, to expose more lies, wake more people up and get thousands of people angry at what has been done to them, but because he no doubt probably needs a huge amount of money these days to keep himself and his family safe from those whom he exposes. He is an Antidote to Apathy. Thank God! And you know something, he may just save the world, all on his own... And maybe, just maybe, THAT is why the librarians of the USA gathered around him to ensure his first book was published and got out into the wider world, after so many tried to have it banned. 'Stupid White Men' are not only the ones who've been doing so much wrong for so very long, but also the ones who have turned their backs upon what has been staring them in the face for decades. He's a brilliant man who has the ability to get people to change and personally, I'd love to see him 'cloned' (LOL) so that every single country, state, town, village, had a person in it who had the guts to stand up and say "No! THIS IS WRONG!" |
|
26 Sep 09 - 07:48 AM (#2731717) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stu Capitalism: Wealth rolls uphill, shit rolls downhill. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 08:13 AM (#2731722) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Greg F. Evidetly the U.S. Department of State needs a fact checker. Be interesting to see WHICH State Dept. produced the piece- Obama's or the BuShites'. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 09:06 AM (#2731735) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 McGrath of Hallow .... that 'patriot' statement was a sarcastic poke at O'Rielly .... if anyone watches his show they would get it ... every night on his show he has a ridiculus segment pertaining to his pick of the day, whose a pinhead and whose a patriot. Personally I don't think a patriot can be applied only those who are right or left in their political leanings. I really don't know what a patriot is. but, with that being said ... I go along with Thomas Paine's view on patriotism ... "It is the duty of every patriot to protect his country from its government." biLL |
|
26 Sep 09 - 10:48 AM (#2731786) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk A patriot is someone who (in his own mind) takes pride in his nation and defends it. This can include people who disagree totally about their country's politics and who recommend completely opposite ways of dealing with problems. ;-D And they will quite likely accuse one another of being "unpatriotic" if that is the case... Virtually all people are natural patriots to the country they were born in. It's instinctive in people to be that way. They will rationalize their patriotism according to their own self-interest, of course, and that's why things tend to get a little complex when things like money enter the equation. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 12:05 PM (#2731809) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC I don't think I can agree with Thomas Paine's view on patriotism, because it leaves out the corporatocracy. We need protection from them as well, and a lot of people who are working on behalf of the corporations will hide behind those words of Paine to try to kill the government's ability to protect us from the corporations. We need government to protect us from the corporations. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 01:32 PM (#2731860) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 But that's just what he meant. Corporatocracy in many ways is correlated to non-communist governments .... with the exception of China ... but that system I just can't figure out. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 01:37 PM (#2731863) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Most people in the US don't understand Paine's words in that way. They think that the corporations are the good guys who need to be defended from the government, which they see as being the bad guy who is picking on the poor defenseless corporations. That's why this country is so screwed up. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 01:42 PM (#2731865) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Lizzie Cornish 1 They do, Carol? Yeesh! That is sooooo worrying! Wake up, America! |
|
26 Sep 09 - 01:46 PM (#2731868) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: pdq "Most people in the US don't understand Paine's words in that way." ~ CarolC Perhaps that is correct since most of us went through the public school system where he was never even mentioned. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 01:46 PM (#2731869) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC Totally. They see government regulation of the corporations as being a form of tyranny. That's why we're so screwed up, and why the corporations control so much of how we live in the US (and much of the rest of the world). |
|
26 Sep 09 - 01:47 PM (#2731870) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC My last post was addressing the point in the post immediately following my second to last post. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 02:04 PM (#2731884) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 I agree Carol. |
|
26 Sep 09 - 04:01 PM (#2731962) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk Yes, it's really the corporatocracy (and banks) which are controlling the government in the USA...by the power of money. This is the part of the picture that much of the American public just doesn't get. Number 6 - I think the system in China amounts to this: In the sense of governmental and police and military authority at the top, it is rigidly centralized, draconian, authoritarian, and utterly ruthless. That's the inheritance of Maoist Communism. In an economic sense, however, the Chinese are tremendously effective and hardworking business people and very pragmatic, so they have naturally embraced all the most effective forms of capitalist marketing because that's the smart thing to do. They are also modernizing very rapidly and doing some very high quality stuff in their cities and their manufacturing sector. There's absolutely no reason why you can't combine centralized Communist governmental authority with aggressive and effective capitalist marketing and trade. They are not mutually exclusionary. All it takes is the will to do it. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 12:47 PM (#2732474) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stringsinger Corporations given personhood was a murky decision given by the case of Santa Clara vrs. the Railroad(1800's) in which a court clerk rewrote a memo, C. Bankcroft Davis declaring this personhood which became court precedence. A prescient account of this episode can be found in Thom Hartmann's book, "Unequal Protection". (You can Google it). Number 6, I've promoted you again after hearing your lucid comments. My apologies to you. No we shouldn't follow self-style pundits. But Moore is more than that. He represents a hidden groundswell of Americans who realize that something is drastically wrong with our system of government as it stands when issues and bills can be bought like commodities without the real substance of their value in helping American society. Unfortunately, in a country that values personalities over substance, we need people who are catalysts for social change. Obama was elected as a figurehead. His campaign ideas were good ones. Whether he will emerge as the kind of president I thought he would be is still questionable. We assumed that there was pure Communism, pure socialism, pure capitalism etc. but this is not true. Every ism of governing had other elements in it. We have had socialism in our Medicare, post office, military, public works for some time. Social Security is socialism. European countries have found a blend between capitalism and socialism that work. We could do the same in the States. The thing that is holding us back is corporate greed and Moore is right about this. There is another negative. The Christian jihad in Afghanistan today by the American military but this is another thread. Stringsinger |
|
27 Sep 09 - 01:23 PM (#2732496) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: robomatic Winston Churchill (and I'm writing this without looking this up, thank you very much) supposedly said: "Democracy is a terrible political system, except for all the others." I think he might have said it about Capitalism as an economic system, in exactly the same manner. And maybe he did, and it's the political one I'm imagining. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 01:43 PM (#2732506) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk Yes but what is "capitalism" in terms of a "system"? We are not confronted with a choice between "capitalism" or "not capitalism", because our present system is not pure capitalism anyway and it never was nor ever could be. It's a mixture of capitalism and socialism and it can't NOT be. You can't have a modern society without a number of socialist institutions in place and functioning. You can't have modern marketing and trade without a number of capitalist practices in place. Therefore it is misleading to even label what we have AS "capitalism", because it isn't pure capitalism. Neither is it pure socialism. It's both of them in combination. What you need is some regulatory restraint on the worse misuses of capitalism, that's all. Privately owned companies should not be allowed to behave in such a way as damages most of a society to the exclusive monetary benefit of the company. They should be restrained from committing antisocial actions in the same way any citizen is restrained from committing antisocial actions...by force of law. Banks should not be allowed to lend out vastly more money than they really have on deposit...in REAL money. To do so is to engage in a pyramid scheme, and that's illegal. The banks have been scamming the public in that fashion for several hundred years now to enrich themselves, and the situation has gotten totally out of control, and who pays for it? The general public. The 700 billon dollar USA bailout to the banks was a reward to the very criminals who created the situation, and the public will have to pay it off through taxes...for generations yet to come. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 02:04 PM (#2732522) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: robomatic Pyramid schemes ARE NOT illegal. IF you're the government, YOU'RE THE PYRAMID! Anyhow, 60 Minutes (US Show, sorry) is supposedly gonna have an article tonight about how to trace Madoff's scheme out to address those who were impoverished, a subject which is dear to me because I'm interested in cons and also how to fix things. It seems to me that given a pyramid scheme, there are no innocent victims in the legal sense, by which I mean an investor with or without knowledge is receiving stolen goods. Therefore, at the most, each investor should simply get their money back. No investor should make a profit off of it, because there never was a true profit. So you go to the original documents, find out what went in, what went out, you claim everything that went out, seize the estate of the promoters, and use it all to repay the original 'ignorant' investors. This is a redistribution of wealth to correct a crime. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 03:29 PM (#2732569) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: number 6 Thanks stringsinger ... whew .... feels good to be back as a '6'. :) "Unfortunately, in a country that values personalities over substance, we need people who are catalysts for social change" .... excellent point. biLL |
|
27 Sep 09 - 04:12 PM (#2732602) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk Well, robomatic, if pyramid schemes are not illegal, they certainly should be, because their intention is to defraud many for the benefit of a very few. Just imagine how great it would be to be a bank. You only have, let's say, 100 million $ in real money deposited by your depositors. Okay? Now you make loans to a whole lot of different business outfits and to the government, and said loans total, let's say, $800 million. Banks do that. All the time. And they charge interest on all of it! But where did the additional $700 million that they lent out come from? Why, from thin air, that's where! They created it out of absolutely nothing when they made the loans (many loans to many customers). It's a fiction, written on a balance sheet, created by a signature, and backed by no collateral. The government did not issue that additional $700 million, they did not print the bills, they did not mint the coins, it isn't REAL. But nobody knows that, so it becomes real in its effect, and the bank created it from nothing. And they get paid interest for it. And then, for gosh sakes, where will the interest come from? Out of the sky? What a deal. It's like having your own personal money tree. How do you blame the government for that pyramid scheme? They didn't engineer it, they don't profit from it. The privately owned banks did it and THEY are the ones who profit from it. The only sense in which you can blame the government is this: the government never bothered to originally regulate the banks in order to PREVENT them from doing this kind of pyramid scheme. Now what happens in the long run? The amount of money in circulation, most of it created out of thin air through banks loans, gets more and more enormous....as is the case with pryamid schemes. But the material world doesn't get more enormous. Thus the dollar becomes worth less and less in real terms, because there are more dollars to go around. And that's where we get inflation. Again, the government did not do this. Private banks did it. The government failed in that it did not act to prevent them from doing it, but the government is massively in debt to those same banks...with debts it realistically can never pay off. And the banks get richer. That is our reality. It isn't the government in control of the banks, it's the other way around. Some small banks, of course, will go under when the false bubble bursts...and the biggest banks will buy up their assets, get a bailout from the government (meaning the taxpayers), and the whole fraudulent criminal scheme starts rolling once again. Boom and bust. Boom and bust. Boom and bust. That is how the system is set up to work. The only thing you or I can do in the face of it is this: 1. STAY OUT OF DEBT! 2. Ensure that we have a viable way to earn a living. 3. Save up during the good times, because bad times will come. It's cyclical, just like a sine curve. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 04:24 PM (#2732612) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: CarolC There may not be any specific federal law prohibiting pyramid schemes in the US, but there are some state laws prohibiting them, and the FTC prosecutes people engaging in pyramid schemes under other laws. At the Commission, we bring cases against pyramid schemes under the FTC Act, which broadly prohibits "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce."(12) That Act allows the Commission to file suit in federal court and seek a variety of equitable remedies, including injunctive relief, a freeze over the defendants' assets, a receivership over the defendants' business, and redress or restitution for consumers. FTC Website |
|
27 Sep 09 - 08:09 PM (#2732787) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel The opposite of Capitalism is not Communism, its Democracy. When have you ever had any say with what Wall St. or even Goldman Sachs did with your money? The only say you have is to put what money you have inside your drywall. Put it in a bank and every 7 or 8 years another scheme allows a bank to take some or all your money. Its a fixed game that makes Los Vegas look like an innocent infant. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 08:10 PM (#2732788) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: robomatic LH, CarolC: I didn't write with enough clarity. I was trying to make a point humorously but I went on too long and buried the lead: Pyramid schemes ARE illegal, UNLESS you're the Government. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 08:18 PM (#2732795) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk No, they're illegal unless you are the government or a corporation or a bank. And the banks are the absolute experts in that field. |
|
27 Sep 09 - 09:08 PM (#2732825) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Sandy Mc Lean This I have stated before and I am sorry for being repititious but capitalism in no way equates to democracy nor does socialism equate to communism. It seems that many are to dense to understand that! |
|
03 Oct 09 - 10:41 PM (#2737696) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel I just returned from the theatre where the crowd laughed and grumbled out loud. There was plenty of applause at the end. If people cried at certain scenes they did it silently. |
|
04 Oct 09 - 01:43 AM (#2737734) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Amergin I just want to comment on something Donuel stated above about corporations.... "Its not like they are building a car." So what are GM, Chrysler, and Ford? People who for the fun of it, decide to build cars in their garage at home? I doubt I will see this film, and not due to political beliefs....Moore's egotistical grandstanding is tired. |
|
04 Oct 09 - 04:30 AM (#2737756) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Just been sent this, by a friend... Subject: A Great Opening Night -- Do Not Put Off Seeing "Capitalism: A Love Story" -- GO TONIGHT! All of Wall Street is Watching! A Great Opening Night -- Do Not Put Off Seeing "Capitalism: A Love Story" -- GO TONIGHT! All of Wall Street is Watching! Saturday, October 3rd, 2009 Friends, Thank you, all of you, who packed the theaters across North America last night to see my new film. The movie houses were rockin'! The national movie exit poll company announced this morning that the audiences in America gave "Capitalism: A Love Story" a rare "A" rating! Wow, thank you! In most multiplexes where "Capitalism" played, it was the #1 or #2 top-grossing movie there for the evening. That is nothing short of amazing. For those of you waiting till next week to see it, I can't say this strongly enough: Do not put off going to see "Capitalism: A Love Story." It is not just a movie. It is a referendum that is being closely watched by the CEOs of America. Let me tell you bluntly, the suits on Wall Street are closely watching to see how this movie does this weekend. So, too, are the members of Congress. If "Capitalism" has a huge opening, it will send shivers down their corporate spines, telling them loud and clear that the American people are mad as hell and are not into taking it any more. It will put all the bosses on notice that the vast Obama-voting majority has awoken from its silence and are out in full force. But if the attendance is just "ok" or "so-so," then they will be relieved knowing that there is not a popular groundswell of opposition out there -- and then they can go about their business as usual. I'd like to send them a different message. Treat tonight and tomorrow as if it were election day. Blow their minds on Monday morning when they show up at their executive suites, switch on CNBC or Fox Business News, and learn that America turned out in droves to participate in a raucous denunciation of Wall Street and everything it stands for. I often hear people ask, "What can I do to make my voice heard?" Your answer is at the nearest theater showing this movie. Trust me, packing these movie houses tonight and tomorrow will eff them up in an overwhelming and profound way. Last night, there were many reports of spontaneous cheering throughout the film in nearly all the theaters. Theater managers reported difficulties in getting people to clear the theater lobby afterwards because groups of total strangers assembled to passionately discuss what they just saw. One manager wrote to me and said, "It's a good thing we carry Gummy Bears and Junior Mints at the concessions stand instead of pitchforks and torches! These crowds were ready to march over to the local Citibank and do something!" Another manager said a crowd in the lobby formed around the little Chase ATM machine next to his popcorn stand and started to "yell at it." Jeez! (Click here to see some of the cell phone photos fans have sent from various theaters around the country last night.) Here's what I've heard the most about last night: Audiences were stunned and shocked by many of the things I reveal in the movie -- stuff that the networks have refused to show them -- even though they have the footage! They purposely withhold this news from you, the public. And because I dare to show it, some networks now refuse to license any of their footage to me. So I get my hands on it and put it in the movie anyway. I truly don't care. I'm sick and tired of the truth not being told to the American people -- and I am willing to suffer whatever the consequences come my way because I showed it to you. Fortunately we have "fair use" laws in this country that have kept my hide out of court so far. There is something so patently wrong with not being told what Wall Street and Corporate America are up to. If you go see "Capitalism" tonight, you'll see what I mean. You will alternately have your head spinning and then find yourself laughing your ass off! Much more is riding on the success of this movie than the amount of popcorn that is sold. If we do well this weekend, the studio will expand the film to smaller towns next week. Don't put off seeing it! Click here to find out where it's playing and order your tickets now. Call some friends and make a night of it. My crew and I have put nearly two years of our lives into this and I am honored that it has been so well received. Join in on the fun of giving AIG, GM, Bank of America and all the other thieves the shellacking they deserve. And send me a photo of you and the crowd there tonight! I'll post it and personally send it to the heads of all the financial institutions and the members of Congress. They need to get a clue -- right now -- and I'd like you to help me send them that clue! Thanks again, and I'll see you tonight at the movies! Yours, Michael Moore |
|
04 Oct 09 - 12:04 PM (#2737987) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: meself Okay - so if we all go out and spend our hard-earned money on his movie, he is going to donate what percentage of the take to what noble cause? Sorry - this comes off as just another bit of crass advertising. |
|
04 Oct 09 - 06:24 PM (#2738343) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: McGrath of Harlow It seems likely, on the basis of what Michael Moore has done before, that profits from the film will primarily be used to pay for the next film. It seems to me that anyone who wants more money for personal use than they need to lead a comfortable life is pretty evidenty out of their mind. The fact that there do seem to be a lot of people who are out of their mind in that way is no reason for assuming that Michael Moore is one of them. He doesn't come across as that stupid, and he clearly enjoys making films and stirring things. |
|
05 Oct 09 - 11:22 AM (#2738855) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stringsinger Micheal Moore is the one of the few people in the marketplace today who has the temerity to tackle honestly the social issues of the day. Some may quarrel with the term "honestly" but I don't see any one else outside of say Greenwald and Ironweed who are making any films that address the real problems of this country. You can shoot the messenger if you want to but the message remains clear. Capitalism as we know it today does not work for the average American. The super rich control the government and reap the profits undeservingly. Wall Street has become an agent of exploitation. Tax money from the American people has been stolen. "Some will rob you with a six gun and others with a fountain pen"...Woody, "Pretty Boy Floyd." I found Moore's film to be too much Catholicism for my taste so I have my nit-picks too. I think the film does a real service by tackling uncomfortable subjects such as insurance companies collecting profits on dead people, politicians being bought off by corporations and lobbyists and a general philosophical Ponzi scheme where many Americans think they have a shot at the Brass Ring and can become super tycoons. I call that the American Delusion. Where I think Moore doesn't deliver is on the role contemporary religion plays in fostering the Delusion and its emphasis on the capitalist profit making at the expense of human needs. Moore's films were not made to make money for corporations. Leave that to O'Reilly and his ilk. Moore's appropriate approbation of American unionism is addressed in a concise way. Whatever you think of Moore personally if you are a thinking American you have to admit that he addresses important issues head on without fear of rejection by corporate, political, lobbying powers or those in our contemporary government who are being bought and sold. Frank Hamilton |
|
05 Oct 09 - 10:57 PM (#2739317) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk He has the guts to take on the really tough and absolutely vital contemporary issues in America...and to risk the major flak that is directed at anyone who does by those who are profiting off maintaining the corrupt status quo. Good for him. |
|
05 Oct 09 - 11:13 PM (#2739321) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: GUEST,Number 6 I don't like the way Moore ridiculed and put down Ralph Nader ... Nader is one of the few spokes people in the U.S. who advocates serious change to politics and the system ... he has it right when he says there is no difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Something to watch out in regards to that ... Saturday Night Live did a skit lampooning Obama this past weekend .... maybe it's the beginning of the same old, the same old. saturday night live biLL |
|
06 Oct 09 - 08:00 AM (#2739478) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk There are a few differences between the Democrats and Republicans (the parties themselves, I mean, not the individual people in them), but they are rather akin to the differences between two turds that are all wrapped up in nice Christmas packaging with cheery decorations. One has a blue ribbon around it. The other has a red ribbon around it. Remove the ribbons and the wrapping, and you will see that it's almost impossible to detect any difference worth mentioning. As for going back to the same old, same old...that usually begins very soon after the excitement of election night. There is a ruling $ySStem that controls both those parties. It has no name. Its masters do not run for office and most people don't even know who they are. It holds presidential elections to make you imagine that you have a choice and to keep your attention focused on (yet) a(nother) presidential figurehead rather than on reality. |
|
06 Oct 09 - 02:28 PM (#2739780) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stringsinger The difference goes as far as rhetoric is concerned but when the Democratic Congress and Senate vote for defeating public options on insurance reform, support a failed foreign policy in Afghanistan,bail out the Wall Street tycoons, take money from well-heeled lobbyists, then Nader has to be recognized as a whistle blower. But so does Micheal Moore. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party has sold out to Special Interests. Those on the Left sit quietly and wait for Obama to do something to correct the flaws in the System. They may be "waiting for Godot". Meanwhile Democratic politicians still take exorbitant money from corporations and lobbyists for not only insurance and big pharma but the defense contractors as well. I think Moore's next film should be on the deterioration and the privatization of the American educational system. Americans have been "dumbed down" beyond belief. |
|
06 Oct 09 - 03:52 PM (#2739877) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Little Hawk Another good subject for his next film would be the Federal Reserve Bank, a supposedly public institution which isn't public at all...it's a privately owned bank! Whose interests does it represent? Why, the interests of its CEOs and major shareholders, that's who. It's there to make a profit for them. The Fed is worth doing a whole movie to expose its unsavory history and its true nature. Michael Moore said he'd have loved to take on the Federal Reserve Bank in the present film, but that there wasn't enough time or room left to do it. |
|
08 Oct 09 - 10:02 PM (#2741666) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: maire-aine Saw the movie this evening. Thought it was great. Being a person who lives in the Detroit area, a city which was featured in the film, I was glad to have the story told. I will probably buy it on DVD, just for the footage of FDR's speech. Maryanne |
|
09 Oct 09 - 05:58 PM (#2742403) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Donuel Amerigin, When I was speaking about HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES I said it was not like they were building a car or something else tangible with real value. They are skimming of 25% of the countries money to shuffle papers and decide who is to be denied the benefits they paid for, and who will get the benefits they paid for and live. |
|
10 Oct 09 - 12:59 PM (#2742875) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: Stringsinger There are those who have never heard of the Federal Reserve. What happened to the study of civics in school? Education is primary. |
|
10 Oct 09 - 05:15 PM (#2743090) Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism: A Love Story From: catspaw49 45% of the posters to this thread may well be just talking out of their ass. 55% of the posters to this thread are definitely talking out of their ass. I love your program 6! Spaw |