Global Revolution!

[JustARandomPanda]

This is what Democracy is all about

[manitou]

Serene Blue - your article talks about the IMF and the WTO. Seems to me that NAFTA deserves a special seat at that table as well.

[Birch]

SB, kindly google "Bill Gates + vaccines + microchip + depopulation."

 

Bill and Melinda Gates are eugenicists and active (and, gasp, even vocal, unlike the rest) proponents of the depopulation agenda -- gasp again, they do admit it openly, though they offer global warming as an excuse for the "need" to kill off a few billion. They envision vaccines as the primary vehicle to be used toward this goal. The vaccine of their charity work is a multipurpose weapon -- it scrambles the immune system, spreads pathogenic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic viruses and other substances, and delivers the wonder of nanotechnology, the microchip small enough to be injected with the needle.

 

Now when I say this, I expect to be torn apart by everybody who was given vaccines and then gave them to their kids without thinking twice, because short of tearing apart the messenger, what other response can they have to prevent the world as they know it from disintegrating?.. So, I don't get into these discussions anymore, been around the block a few times. I only say it because someone who still has a choice might come across some other piece of the puzzle somewhere else, some other day, and go, Oh yeah, I've heard this before, there was this crazy conspiracy theorist on that forum who said that... So, that's the only reason I would mention any of this. For future reference, so to speak. My power of doing anything about global indoctrination is, understandably, quite limited. So. Please no discussions from the platform of global indoctrination, I am very well familiar with the party line, and this line I have crossed a long time ago.

A quick gander at Wikipedia's "population control" entry doesn't mention them but does mention some other "well-knowns" and i found the references interesting.

Indeed, some days I'm surprised to be still alive despite everything:-)

 

I think as long as people who research and share information get labelled "conspiracy theorists" then some alternative solutions to many of our collective issues are going to escape the "people at the top". I'm already pretty used to having many of my "choices" nudged or "gently steered" as if i were patently incapable of making choices for myself. I find it infantilizing and downright disrespectful. In times like these, i crave for karmic retribution i would otherwise shrug off as an idiocy:-)

[ralis]

This is what Democracy is all about

 

I just saw that. Blatant arrogance!

[joeblast]

arrogance is "we are the 99%" when its really more like "we are the 6.75%"

 

really, 99?

 

really, 50? I dont think so.

 

really, 30? yyyeah, right.

 

contrivances, gotta love 'em

[manitou]

It just seems like the Profit Motive has outlived itself as a viable means of continuing society, at least here in the West. There may be other places in the world where the introduction of the Profit Motive may actually help at this point in time. But here...it seems to have outlived its usefulness. This was a perfect tool when we were in the Industrial Revolution - it all worked. But now, since outsourcing and placing factories where labor is cheaper....this is certainly the end result of where the profit motive has taken us.

 

This country, the U.S., had better rethink our motivation. It may be that the current demonstrations, when boiled down to the essence, is the current state of unfairness between Rich and Not-Rich. And of course the rich want to get richer and let's cut benefits to the people on the bottom of the heap to keep this Profit Motive society going.

 

At some point, wouldn't it be wonderful if the focus was on People, rather than Money?

The rest of us are just tired of being screwed, that's all. I don't hate hugely wealthy people. I just don't think they should be the ones getting all the tax breaks, etc. all the time. Perhaps the recent (and gradually growing stronger) unrest in this country is an extension of the Arab spring. My guess is that it is.

 

I still maintain (although I left my structured Christianity a long time ago) that the meek are inheriting the earth, in some sense. Not 'meek' in the sense of being timid or even humble....but 'meek' in the sense of the common guy - just the ordinary man. It appears to me that 'We' are inheriting the earth, and the interesting thing is that it took mass communications to get there.

Edited October 6, 2011 by manitou

[Desert Eagle]

http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/10/03/against-the-institution-a-warning-for-occupy-wall-street/

[Everything]

http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/10/03/against-the-institution-a-warning-for-occupy-wall-street/

Thanks for the Great video.

 

Youtube channel andrewgavinmarshall

 

Very few views unfortunately.

 

Good advice on creating the change we want to see instead of demanding it.

[Taomeow]

Very few views unfortunately.

 

Maybe, but they do mess with the counters. I experimented at one point by opening something very anti-establishment ten times throughout the day from three different computers, and still the counter showed 0 views at the end of the day.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Maybe, but they do mess with the counters. I experimented at one point by opening something very anti-establishment ten times throughout the day from three different computers, and still the counter showed 0 views at the end of the day.

 

It might be similar to the view counts that are on this forum- sometimes in a new thread, it will show 3 responses with 0 views.

 

???

 

Well apparently the view counter only refreshes after a certain while.

 

So I guess if one were to... *ahem* adjust things here or there, it may create the illusion of... well, it'd create the illusion of whatever you wanted to create

[JustARandomPanda]

Here is an interesting article by The Atlantic Monthly

 

 

The author later expanded it into this book

 

 

Jihad vs. McWorld

 

 

The two axial principles of our age—tribalism and globalism—clash at every point except one: they may both be threatening to democracy

 

 

Just beyond the horizon of current events lie two possible political futures—both bleak, neither democratic. The first is a retribalization of large swaths of humankind by war and bloodshed: a threatened Lebanonization of national states in which culture is pitted against culture, people against people, tribe against tribe—a Jihad in the name of a hundred narrowly conceived faiths against every kind of interdependence, every kind of artificial social cooperation and civic mutuality. The second is being borne in on us by the onrush of economic and ecological forces that demand integration and uniformity and that mesmerize the world with fast music, fast computers, and fast food—with MTV, Macintosh, and McDonald's, pressing nations into one commercially homogenous global network: one McWorld tied together by technology, ecology, communications, and commerce. The planet is falling precipitantly apart AND coming reluctantly together at the very same moment.

[gendao]

[JustARandomPanda]

Yes, this is true. Many, many poor people do not pay taxes at all.

 

That's why many of the current Republican presidential candidates (with the notable exception of Ron Paul) are agitating to change that.

 

 

Republicans Want to Increase Taxes on the Poor

[JustARandomPanda]

Interesting article with accompanying map on where unemployment is/is not

[joeblast]

It just seems like the Profit Motive has outlived itself as a viable means of continuing society, at least here in the West. There may be other places in the world where the introduction of the Profit Motive may actually help at this point in time. But here...it seems to have outlived its usefulness. This was a perfect tool when we were in the Industrial Revolution - it all worked. But now, since outsourcing and placing factories where labor is cheaper....this is certainly the end result of where the profit motive has taken us.

 

This country, the U.S., had better rethink our motivation. It may be that the current demonstrations, when boiled down to the essence, is the current state of unfairness between Rich and Not-Rich. And of course the rich want to get richer and let's cut benefits to the people on the bottom of the heap to keep this Profit Motive society going.

 

At some point, wouldn't it be wonderful if the focus was on People, rather than Money?

The rest of us are just tired of being screwed, that's all. I don't hate hugely wealthy people. I just don't think they should be the ones getting all the tax breaks, etc. all the time. Perhaps the recent (and gradually growing stronger) unrest in this country is an extension of the Arab spring. My guess is that it is.

 

I still maintain (although I left my structured Christianity a long time ago) that the meek are inheriting the earth, in some sense. Not 'meek' in the sense of being timid or even humble....but 'meek' in the sense of the common guy - just the ordinary man. It appears to me that 'We' are inheriting the earth, and the interesting thing is that it took mass communications to get there.

I would love to see a coherent and rational explanation for why this would be so (profit motive outliving itself.)

 

This is not the year 4300, we dont have star trek ships, limitless free energy that we can harvest at will, or the ability to manipulate matter on a granular scale with energetic efficiency. That is just about the only thing that is going to kill "profit motive" and we are a hell of a long way off from stepping away from it.

 

I could say the same thing regarding unions with respect to the industrial revolution. These days the average union joe is but a supplier of dues and an unwitting participant in the union/democrat money laundering scheme - and I'm still sure they're receiving their instructions on how to vote; I recall my grandfather outright receiving letters (ffs) from his union reps in the 84 election because they were *that* vested in an infusion of taxpayer money (iirc he quit the union shortly afterward.) To whit, why again are unions completely tax exempt when their higher ups also make salaries stupendously beyond what the value of the job is? (Unless you're talking all of that taxpayer money, then I guess if you're considering that income/investment!!! )

 

"Tax breaks for the wealthy" was the biggest parroted statement regarding W's economic policies. Note that it continually gets left out that it was flat across the board at all tax brackets, but since some people didnt pay taxes at all and some paid a whole ton, what was given back was dishonestly labeled by media-with-an-agenda as "tax cuts for the rich." I'm sure you already know that, but it was worth pointing out again since some of the verbiage I just read mentions tax cuts for the wealthy.

 

"Outsourcing and placing factories where labor is cheaper" - please tell me how that came about! What made it so much more expensive for a company to do business within our own borders? What happened here that it became no longer profitable for certain companies to operate here, expand business here? Why over the last few years have businesses been either leaving or dying in CA at a rate of about five per week? (I believe I saw that stat from John Lott, dont have time to dig right now.) Why did the CEO of Intel cite an additional 1 billion in costs as the major factor in discouraging the company to expand and build a plant there? (something like under 15% of which was labor, the rest almost all tax & regulatory compliance costs.)

 

So to put it mildly, the localities simply chased businesses away. Making policies that tell a business "we dont want you to make money here, go away."

 

And go away they have.

 

*That* is why Herman Cain said "if you're not rich, blame yourself!" If being rich was important to you, you'd pursue it, for better or worse - you'd at least try. If your locality being rich was important to you, you wouldnt cast votes for people who punish businesses "to protect the consumer" or "protect the environment" and - looking at that link, where is the pic from? Detroit. Who destroyed Detroit? Unions had quite a hand in the downstream result of being able to find a house in detroit for under $20k. That is the downstream results of things like the dodd-frank durbin amendment - claiming to protect "the people" while at the same time giving a favor to certain constituencies, and then subsequently treating the entire situation as static, as if changing some of the equations by which businesses run will not affect their behavior in the least! (If that aint stupid...then what's dumb?)

 

When you want less of something, you tax or regulate it. When the state wants to do more than it is able (or mandated to, in the case of the federal gov,) it can only do so by punishing its citizens.

 

So - republicans simply want to raise taxes on the poor - my, what ever happened to "pay your fair share?" That's yet another thing that goes right out the window once the math comes out and you see oops, the rich by and large are "paying their fair share" and it is "the poor" by and large who absolutely are not "paying their fair share" simply because they are either unwilling or unable to get the impetus - but where's the impetus when you can get mad subsidies by doing next to nothing, whereas there's this HUGE cost curve to deal with in actually making that "decent wage" that people are always after? How much debt have the states recently incurred because the feds mandated we extend unemployment incentive hugely? 38 Billion that they have to come up with?

 

 

Look at the maps of where the unemployment is and tell me what the taxes and regulations are like there and you'll see some stuff. Of course its not "the entire picture" because you're not taking into account many other things, but since these snapshots are mostly fractal, that's why context is always something to consider.

 

Of course, the maps get broken down into counties because if you show it state-by-state then that would paint a pretty bad picture for the democrat dominated states whose fiscal houses are in shambles from politicians there promising too much to certain constituencies - and punishing others to make it happen.

 

Incidentally, a lot of regulation simply helps entrench bigger businesses who have the capacity to deal with the overhead efficiently; things that might prevent a smaller entity from ever even getting off the ground. Stifles competition - why else would any of the actual businesses who "supported" obamacare have supported it when they knew it was going to cost them dearly? Because their support was purchased, and "affordable" is just another in the long line of misnomers (pr, blatant falsehoods, of you want to get technical) we see.

 

and now, I'm late for work.

[de_paradise]

Morality has gradually eroded in the economy, and that is what can change or improve, because we know that "de" is not just philosphy to be debated but actually the glue that holds the universe and us as beings together. The masses and intelligentsi do not know this therefore have gone more and more astray. Morals inform society and companies and their actions. It is the base. The modern society is skating on thin ice because instituted selfishness can only lead to self-destruction of the society. Issues such as free-trade, too big to fail, corporate domination, or changes in the taxation, and regulations are merely derivative of the main issue of "de" and lack there-of. The solution is relatively simple.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

... The solution is relatively simple.

 

 

That's an understatement, really! But the irony is that people fear the simplicity of REAL life. I emphasise real because we already live real life, sure, but the reality of civilizations/societies is to AVOID and HIDE true reality, pampering ourselves to "creature comforts" that arent necessary, they are not necessities.

 

Necessities are so simple even a caveman can do it! but the "civilized" and "modern" man prefers geico to self reliability and responsibility.

[Ulises]

"No one deserves to live in a world built upon the degradation of human beings, forests, waters, and the rest of our living planet. Speaking to our brethren on Wall Street, no one deserves to spend their lives playing with numbers while the world burns. Ultimately, we are protesting not only on behalf of the 99% left behind, but on behalf of the 1% as well. We have no enemies. We want everyone to wake up to the beauty of what we can create."

 

"Occupy Wall Street has been criticized for its lack of clear demands, but how do we issue demands, when what we really want is nothing less than the more beautiful world our hearts tell us is possible? No demand is big enough."

 

"I wasn't put here on earth to sell product." "I wasn't put here on earth to increase market share." "I wasn't put here on earth to make numbers grow."

 

 

http://www.realitysandwich.com/occupy_wall_street_no_demand_big_enough

Edited October 7, 2011 by Ulises

[manitou]

If there was a protest anywhere near Bumfuk, Ohio I'd be carrying a sign.

 

Joe, your points are so far over my head it's ridiculous, but i'm sure they're very viable. As I see it, your final point was that the rich are already paying their fair share? I don't know - I'm no accountant.

 

The thing that I just can't seem to get past is the folks in the high-rises involved in the money trading game make out like bandits. The rest of us here seem to take it in the shorts. Sure, Herman Cain makes a good point - if you want to get rich, go out to work and get rich. But what Herman Cain isn't taking into consideration are all the people who aren't capable of doing that. People with all sorts of disorders and who don't possess the mental acumen that someone like Mr. Cain does. I see these people all over the place here. They're depressed, they're unmotivated, they're fat, and life has passed them by because their skills have been rendered useless.

 

I need to get pretty controversial here. Let me apologize to anyone in advance if I offend someone. We know that time is an illusion. Einstein proved that. In essence, everything is Here and Now. It's easy to blame conditions on what our ancestors did, but we have to realize that we stand directly on the shoulders of our ancestors, and by that measure everything we have and enjoy today is because of our ancestors. What I'm getting at is what our caucasian ancestors did. They kidnapped people from an entire continent, enslaved them in chains, and forced them to work at the end of a whip to build up our country. Even our capitol was built by slaves. I think our national karma started the day we kidnapped our first African.

 

Okay, so the slaves were ultimately freed. And then what happened? Were these folks supposed to suddenly rise up with sophisticated thought processes and build a viable economic future for their family? People who had come from a tribal society? Or would they most likely rely on the government assistance, just like they were forced to rely on the plantation owners? I think the answer is choice two. I don't think our forefathers had the whole picture in mind. Sure, the Industrial Revolution was gearing up shortly thereafter and there was plenty of menial work for everyone - including freed slaves entering the market. But with the shipping off of the more industrialized and menial jobs, these again were the very people who were left out in the cold.

 

We have never taken the personal responsibility as a nation to rectify the horrible things our ancestors did to those they kidnapped, and their descendants. We've never taken the time to offer any sort of reeducation on a large basis for the condition of this societal remnant. But whether one wants to see reparations, or merely a continuation and betterment of the system already in place (government assistance) I think we all must admit that 'we' created the problem of the many people living in projects and not doing very well in life at all.

 

Another part of the equation, I think, is that unions must get more realistic in their demands in the future. The unions will have to keep an eye on the financial health of the business which they are protesting against and not assume that the pockets are bottomless. Those times seem to be gone.

 

What I'm getting at, is that I would certainly be willing to pay a little more if it would help to rectify the unjustness of all of this. There's no way the upper 1%

can maintain their status if the 99% on the ladder below them fall. A few of the one percenters see this, but not nearly enough.

[Ulises]

The next phase of human development should be one of conscious evolution and co-creative collaboration, when we recognize that society is, in itself, an art project. We have the power to use our intelligence and imagination to reinvent society's operating system so that it fulfills humanity's highest hopes and age-old aspirations. If we can develop and construct a new economic foundation that strikes a balance between the gift exchanges of the archaic past and our modern system of swift global transactions, we might manifest a magnificent art project, an ever-evolving social sculpture, together. Such an expression of our collective human genius will benefit our kin and our descendants, and support the greater web of life. Facing a crisis unleashed by human greed and ignorance, we have an extraordinary opportunity to bring about a new-or renewed-society that is far more comfortable, harmonic, relaxed, peaceful, and humane.

~Daniel Pinchbeck

 

http://www.realitysandwich.com/impossible_alternative

[Informer]

This is in regards to the statement somone made regarding these large companies paying their fair share.

This is very narrow-sighted and involves paper money which has little effect in determining the cost to the earth from the pollution and corruptions it causes and leads to.

 

"By Jia Lynn Yang

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, July 27, 2010; 11:56 PM

 

BP said Tuesday that it plans to cut its U.S. tax bill by $9.9 billion, or about half the amount pledged to aid victims of the disaster, by deducting costs related to the oil spill.

 

 

A portion of that could be refunded from taxes BP paid in earlier years.

 

The company disclosed its intentions as part of its second-quarter earnings report, in which it said it would record a $32.2 billion charge to reflect the costs of the spill.

 

Under U.S. corporate tax law, companies can take credits on up to 35 percent of their losses.

 

The credit for BP could mean, however, that taxpayers will indirectly foot part of the bill for the $20 billion fund that BP established to compensate people and businesses harmed by the disaster.

 

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said U.S. taxpayers would not be responsible for the cost of the spill. When asked whether BP should be claiming a credit, Gibbs said, "I don't think anybody would prefer that they do that."

 

Gibbs would not say whether the president would press BP on the tax deduction. He said, though, that "there are tax laws in this country that have been written for quite some time."

 

Lawmakers called for BP to renounce any claim for a refund. "I call on BP to show, for once, a glimmer of humanity in this situation and halt its claim for this tax break immediately," said Rep. Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.).

 

 

Policymakers crafted the tax code this way so that companies can spread their profits and losses over more than just one calendar year. Let's say a company makes $100 billion one year and pays the U.S. corporate tax rate of 35 percent, or $35 billion. The next year, the economy goes south, and the company loses $100 billion. Over those two years, the company made nothing but still paid $35 billion in taxes.

 

From the tax code's perspective, the company overpaid in previous years. To rectify this, companies can claim a credit, also at the 35 percent rate. Companies can seek a refund for taxes paid from the previous two years or, if there's money leftover, carry the credit forward up to 20 years.

 

"What they're trying to do is take the arbitrariness of what you did this particular year over the life of the company, or over a long period of the life of the company," said Douglas Shackelford, a tax professor at the University of North Carolina.

 

It's how a company such as General Electric, which reported $408 million in losses at its U.S. operations last year, not only paid nothing in U.S. corporate income taxes last year but also received a refund.

 

Robert Willens, a corporate tax expert, said it's unlikely that BP will give up its tax credit, even if faced with public opposition. The company voluntarily established the $20 billion escrow account for victims of the spill and never promised the government that it would not seek any deductions associated with the spill, he said.

 

This month, Goldman Sachs promised not to ask for tax credits associated with the $535 million it paid in penalties to the Securities and Exchange Commission to settle a fraud charge. But as Willens says, that was specifically negotiated in Goldman's agreement with the SEC.

 

"The cost associated with the cleanup and the damage and all that -- that's just another cost of doing business from the tax perspective," Shackelford said. "It's viewed no different from paying salaries or other costs they might incur.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/27/AR2010072704437.html

 

When these companies are telling the government what they are going to or not going to do, something is very, very, wrong.

 

Like Bolivia, the US should consider given personal legal right to the earth and strip them from companies/corporations.

[joeblast]

This is in regards to the statement somone made regarding these large companies paying their fair share.

This is very narrow-sighted and involves paper money which has little effect in determining the cost to the earth from the pollution and corruptions it causes and leads to.

------------------

When these companies are telling the government what they are going to or not going to do, something is very, very, wrong.

 

Like Bolivia, the US should consider given personal legal right to the earth and strip them from companies/corporations.

So the US's laws are somehow BP's fault????

 

This is the kind of stuff I am talking about. Bitching about BP for looking at the rules and adjusting their game plan to reflect realities of the rules are in no way shape or form BP's fault.

 

If you want to rightly point the finger at those who create and manipulate the laws to reward this or that constituency, then you have proven you're at least taking root causes into consideration. But hating the players because of the game's rules is misdirected and silly.

 

Note context - BP took shortcuts and with regulatory appeasement did things badly - but this particular issue is a red herring.

 

----

 

manitou, my overarching point is that if you're going to point at issues with the system writ large, then you must consider all the things in the system and not just the things that are politically correct to crab about.

 

Slavery...? If anyone in the situation is being "post racial" it is tea party and people like herman cain who are calling the situation accurately. Obama comes into the picture purporting to be the introducer of post-racialism, and then subsequently returns to race so often that its plainly obvious that he's anything but post racial. People like Samuel L Jackson and Morgan Freeman are showing their true ideological colors by dishonestly (yes, dishonestly, because they both are smart enough to know better, and they know they are playing PC-politics) claiming that the tea party is racist when - who are among the most celebrated? Those that walk the walk (Rubio, Cain, etc) that espouse the values and the support they receive is based on that - truly in MLK's vision, by the content of their character - unlike those along the lines of our affirmative action president who will make a choice based on race first.

 

top percentages, roughly:

1%, pays ~40%

10%, 70%

~40%, ~90something%

 

Who's "paying their fair share?" I dont give a crap if capital gains are taxed less - the cg are taxed twice.

 

By all rights, the poor are able to buy so many "nice-to-haves" that their standard of living far exceeds that of most any other country. Cel phones, their cable bills get paid before car insurance...tough choices indeed. I'm not saying its fantastic to be poor, unless you have willingly given it up, but cripes...punishing those who invest and create jobs is NO way to get an economy going, as we've all seen these past few years. That is the reason why we have had no recovery.

 

and about getting there in the first place...for another time.

Edited October 7, 2011 by joeblast

[Informer]

So the US's laws are somehow BP's fault????

 

This is the kind of stuff I am talking about. Bitching about BP for looking at the rules and adjusting their game plan to reflect realities of the rules are in no way shape or form BP's fault.

 

If you want to rightly point the finger at those who create and manipulate the laws to reward this or that constituency, then you have proven you're at least taking root causes into consideration. But hating the players because of the game's rules is misdirected and silly.

 

Note context - BP took shortcuts and with regulatory appeasement did things badly - but this particular issue is a red herring.

 

----

 

manitou, my overarching point is that if you're going to point at issues with the system writ large, then you must consider all the things in the system and not just the things that are politically correct to crab about.

 

Slavery...? If anyone in the situation is being "post racial" it is tea party and people like herman cain who are calling the situation accurately. Obama comes into the picture purporting to be the introducer of post-racialism, and then subsequently returns to race so often that its plainly obvious that he's anything but post racial. People like Samuel L Jackson and Morgan Freeman are showing their true ideological colors by dishonestly (yes, dishonestly, because they both are smart enough to know better, and they know they are playing PC-politics) claiming that the tea party is racist when - who are among the most celebrated? Those that walk the walk (Rubio, Cain, etc) that espouse the values and the support they receive is based on that - truly in MLK's vision, by the content of their character - unlike those along the lines of our affirmative action president who will make a choice based on race first.

 

top percentages, roughly:

1%, pays ~40%

10%, 70%

~40%, ~90something%

 

Who's "paying their fair share?" I dont give a crap if capital gains are taxed less - the cg are taxed twice.

 

By all rights, the poor are able to buy so many "nice-to-haves" that their standard of living far exceeds that of most any other country. Cel phones, their cable bills get paid before car insurance...tough choices indeed. I'm not saying its fantastic to be poor, unless you have willingly given it up, but cripes...punishing those who invest and create jobs is NO way to get an economy going, as we've all seen these past few years. That is the reason why we have had no recovery.

 

and about getting there in the first place...for another time.

 

Who said anything about punishing anything? You went way off-track, this is about penalizing them for destroying the earth. Yes' I agree that the politics involved are just as much to blame for these injustices as are the companies. It takes two to tango, and the majority are not being represented in these affairs. Individual interest are heavily favored without regard to the earth at all. Favored for these little pieces of paper, cut from the very heart of earth.

 

The entire planet deserves a right to a say just as much as the 100% of the people in regards to things that are detrimental to the well being of all those involved, present and future.

 

I don't see how it is for a small percentage of humans to decide these matters that effect not only this small fragment of time that we will utilize it. Insanity is to think anything is going to change on it's own.

[Vmarco]

For those following this topic,...many of those revolting have been inspired by Peter Joseph. Check out minute 11:00 to the end (21:00),...quite brillant!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCWNgSa7GvA&feature=related

[JustARandomPanda]

Who here of the participants in this thread is a practicing Contract Lawyer? Or at least a law student studying Contract Law? A paralegal/student for a Contract Law firm?

 

 

Anybody?