Home More advice Politics & Law
I read a study about the breakdown in the US social structure...people have less real friends now than in the 70's, the commut about 15 minutes extra daily and work 3 hours more every week. All that adds up to a big breakdown in community and the net result is...the government, the corporations and the powers that be have got the populace by the short and curlies. I'd love the government to do the right thing...I just don't see it happening. How about you?
Sorry... so late to this thread...
According to some anthropological studies... neolithic man... [just prior to the bronze age] spent 15 hours per week fulfilling the demands of his survival. I'm not suggesting that we would want the same standard of living... but I bet that a neolithic existence wasn't all bad. People make the best of their situation and without the knowledge of modern amenities... neolithic man couldn't have missed them.
Before WWII a household could be supported on one spouse's salary. Houses were smaller... somewhat.
I see very little difference between the republic and democratic parties. Clinton gave us NAFTA and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act. Democrats have supported the lower class... mainly for votes... but also because it fits the agenda... keeping people at the mercy of government handouts... is great leverage... leverage is the goal and method of a strong central government... controlled by a central bank and its subsidiary infrastructure.
A landed middle class is the greatest threat to the leverage of any oligarchy.
In feudal states the gentry vassals paid a fealty to the king... who owned all land... for its usage. Everyone paid taxes to the king. The vast majority of people were tenant farmers. If anyone found themselves in disfavor of the king... for any reason... they had absolutely no recourse... they would have had to steal to eat and squat somewhere hard to find to find shelter.
When the Bolsheviks overthrew the Czar of Russia... they took the land from the people... and gave it to their constituents and the banking families who financed them... the same banking families who own our Federal Reserve.
The same thing is slowly happening here. The gap between the rich and poor is growing. The bankers and their cohorts have printed money to buy out the infrastructure beginning with our media. They have bought off republican and democratic legislators and had them introduce legislation that has been detrimental to the middle class. The goal is a body of people dependent upon the government under the control of the bank. People who cannot resist the will of the oligarchy no matter how greedy they want to be. People who must do what they are asked if they want to receive their monthly food stamps and live in their government owned housing.
Competition is a sin... they say. They seek complete control so that their power remains absolute and above the reach of those who could prove to be rivals.
The ugly truth is that Americans were sold a false bill of goods.
When Reagan was swept into office (I voted for him myself) he lowered the top tax bracket from 70% to 28% and embarked on a hugely expensive expansion of the military. The trend for corporations to pay less taxes had already been in effect for a decade and continued. All of the deficit spending did turn the economy around and most people did a little better while the rich made money hand over fist. Before Reagan most households had one breadwinner but during soon after Reagan was elected most households needed two breadwinners to get by. We were doing better but we were also working a lot more and we are now seeing the result of this generation of latch-key kids. When the false prosperity of deficit spending ran out of steam it was the lower socioeconomic groups the suffered. In short, conservative economic policies help the wealthy get wealthier when times are good and make the everyone else get poorer when times are bad.
Over the last 30 years only the wealthiest 1% of Americans have seen any significant increase in their earning power; everyone else's earnings have been stagnant even though we are working harder.
The more pressing question to me is how the Republican party has been so successful getting so many people to vote against their own self-interest. I also notice that many of the workers who would most benefit from being unionized are the most anti-union.
It's really a matter of what we feel is important and how we choose to live. We work extra hours to make more money so we can have more things, don't we? What if we choose to do away with a lot of those things and live a simple life? My house is not as big or extravagant as my cousin who lives in the city, but the cost of living here is dirt cheap and I have far more leisure time than city-folk - that's my choice. The government certainly does have a way of interfering, but it's up to the nation to stand as one and fight back against unfair practice...something that will unfortunately never happen.
i don't know about that particular quote but tht is occam's razor, a principle in philosophy that states that the simplest explanation is usually the best.
