Are eroding values compromising our freedom AND our economy?

Extreme Capitalism and Extreme Socialism (communism) meet at the far end of each spectrum. In both cases you have a very small group of people controlling all resources and means of production.

The US has somehow managed to combine the worse elements of both in an ugly monster. This monster is a fusion of Oligopoly-Bureaucracy and owns our political system.

One of the numerous heads of this monster is the Military. Total Military spending eats up over 1 Trillion dollars/year. This monster runs our foreign policy and tells our media and politicians what they can and can not say. Make it to congress and insider trading becomes legal. You can sit on a committee and give a contract to ABC company and invest in that company before the news hits the streets - I want in on that game !!

Sure you have a lone voice (Horton hears a who) from time to time saying this practice is messed up but that voice is drowned out by the cacophony of those on the take. It not like it is some cabal or star chamber. This monster is the natural outcropping of greed and self interest.

You have ex generals (paid lobbyists for the defense contractors) getting air time on various news outlets promoting war - somehow the commentator fails to point out (btw this dude has a serious conflict of interest so take what he says with a large does of salt).

Every time you have a tax law or regulation being made or changed the oligopoly has seat at the table (and they should have a seat). The problem is that the politician who is supposed to have the back of "we the people" is in the pocket of the Oligopoly. Over time, table after table, the tax laws and regulations (which keep out competition) get skewed in favor of the Oligopolies.

Healthcare is another head of this monster. Somehow we have no universal healthcare as every other first world country but manage to pay more ?

How the frick is that possible. These other countries systems are hugely bloated and inefficient bureaucracies yet they manage to provide more for less.

Its called price fixing and anti competitive practices. That is how it is possible. Sure you had a lone voice saying "perhaps we should introduce generic drugs- realizing that in places like Canada the same drugs can be bought for as low as 1/10th of the price" Such talk quickly gets drowned out by the cacophony of those on the take.

There are numerous other heads that I have not discussed ..

I think your comments as to why we do not teach kids the basics of Philosophy and Civics have merit. In this case I think it is more than simple greed and self interest like in the other examples. There is "intent" of some kind operating here. It is also of interest to note that many other countries are very similar and do not teach kids these things. Canada is on example but the other day I found out that Romania is the same.

 

Corrupting? How so?

And also, that's not the same as interfering with our rights and freedoms. Neither money nor heroin can interfere with our rights and freedoms.

 

Lack of respect for government is common at this time, but the problems in government are mostly due to our own political indifference and failure to require accountability from our representatives. If there is not a majority consensus on an issue, a congressman is free to vote whichever way would benefit him or her personally. I am sure that if we all would exhibit more interest in politics and have common values and common expectations for our politicians, they would need to start taking their jobs more seriously in order to earn our respect and our votes. At the present time, with a 50/50 split in our support, democracy is cancelled out.

An element that is clearly missing in MANY voters is patriotism, which is logically beneficial because it promotes US over ME, thereby contributing to unity. Consider soldiers on a battlefield. When a comrade is wounded, they risk their lives to carry him (or her) to a place of safety. It is their duty, their obligation. After all, others would do the same for them. But it is not only their duty. They have a sense of loyalty to each other, a unity that can only be attributed to those same values that our founding fathers wished to pass on to all future generations to ensure that their patriotic enthusiasm lived on. They felt that the lifeblood of our nation was in the spirit of its citizens, not in its banks.

I would like to present the following thought to every citizen reading this post: If you think that this is the greatest country on earth, it is in the best interest of you and your heirs to try to save it. If you don’t think this is the greatest country on earth, don’t you think that you have a responsibility as a citizen to try to make it better?

 

Waiting for an explanation here.

 

Corrupted populations need more law enforcement which spills over into us in many different ways.

 

Repeating myself: IT IS NOT THE LAWS THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED; OUR PEOPLE NEED TO CHANGE. Everyone is already aware of ALL of the arguments, but so many choose to satisfy their own self-interests and will not even consider what is good for the country. The media can't change these people; only a change in the status quo can do that.

Certainly, I favor free speech, but I am sure that amending the Constitution would not have a positive outcome, and this "alter or abolish" clause could easily work against us.

Leave the radical proposals to the Tea Party. Desperation WILL NOT work out well for them.

 

The overall premis of this thread is right, but one must be careful when speaking of values. While there are univeral values, such as justice, there also subjective ones.

For example, according to the Christian right, gay marriage is destroying out nation. That is not a universal belief, but they work to force it on others through law.

It's good to fight for values which are universally held, such as justice, equality, etc....But you must watch out for people who try to add their own personal values to the mix, and act like they are shared by all.

 

Great points. And I hardly ever see Conservatives mention the problem of GREED... which is as REAL as anything they typically speak of.

 

You're talking in riddles. You said that both money and heroin can interfere with our rights and freedoms. Yet you have not explained how either of these in animate objects can accomplish this act.

 

The true purpose of this thread is to show the logical basis for unity, which is only possible when TRUE equality is universally recognized. Common values are needed to transcend situational differences in order to achieve the unity necessary to make government “by the people” successful, and tolerance is a vital facet of freedom. No rights may be denied to individuals that do not infringe upon the rights of others, and personal interpretations of religious tenets are not justifiable, as we are guaranteed religious freedom. FREEDOM CANNOT BE SUBJECT TO INDIVIDUAL INTERPRETATION.

 

A locked cell door in a jail is an inanimate object, but it certainly can be an effective impediment to freedom. The jailer USED the cell to accomplish the inarceration. Money can be USED to facilitate almost anything, including obstruction of rights and restriction of freedom. Money is not evil in itself, but it endows those who possess it with the enhanced ability to accomplish that which otherwise would not be possible. Is this sufficient clarification?

 

Thank you for clarifying. Yes, I agree that no one should not be allowed to interfere with our basic rights and freedoms.

 

Thank you for acknowledging, but you are entirely correct in assuming that HUMAN motivations and subsequent actions are ultimately responsible for ALL types of abuses.

 

Yes, many people are all too willing to violate the life, liberty, and property of their fellow man.

 

I'd say you who recognize such can do whatever you want as long as you don't violate the life, liberty, or property of your fellow man.

Not sure what you mean by "such actions".

 

I think anyone can do anything they want as long as they don't violate the life, liberty, or property of others.

 

As a democratic nation, we citizens are not fulfilling our responsibilities to influence the direction of our government. If we were somehow able to achieve the unity necessary to oblige government to pass and enforce laws reflecting the common will of the people, such laws would be sovereign and unchallengeable, rather than being suspect to contaminating partisan special-interests. With common values, standards of fairness and acceptable parameters would be universal.

 

Firstly, you need to answer and explain your answer to this paradox I define with inquiry. You completely left it out with your selectivity.

CAPS DO NOT HELP! Repetition does not help.

Reason, comprehensively presented does.

Correct, and they can only change themselves over time by sharing and understanding their varied perspectives, which takes a capacity for communication between us we should have but do not.

Ending the abridging of the purpose of free speech will do that.

That is not true.

That is an "all or nothing statement" or cognitive distortion. It is "over generalizing", another distortion.

As I said, the people can change the status quo if given an opportunity to be truly informed and develop informed opinions amongst themselves.

We have the technology to do this, but it is sequestered by corporations for exploiting us.

Ending the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech will return that natural
Law requirement for a civil, just and evolving society which can them develop true culture.

You need to explain exactly "WHY" you are sure amending the constitution would not have a positive outcome.

Your fear of using our right to "alter or abolish" appears unfounded. This while cops are shooting people that are upset because they are starving or mentally ill.

I was banned from the patriotaction.net forum, a tea party forum, for trying to propose these things. The tea party is controlled by Koch money through the information they are allowed.

 

Yes, comprehensive, proactive decision making that metes out the principles of the framing documents.

 

By necessity? No I don't think so.

Once they actually violate life, liberty, or property. That's the line.