Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. CEOs aren't the enemy, but people question why the income of a CEO is 300-600 times that of an employee today, when it was around 30 times that of an employee two decades ago. Compensation has gotten out of line. I will be one of the first to tell you that a talented executive is necessary to steer a company. But that doesn't explain what has happened.
2. The issues at hand are primarily money influencing politics, removing the voice of individuals.
3. Cashman doesn't make 600 times what the players on his team make. $9MM over a couple years is not a lot of money in my opinion for a General Manager of a MLB team, given what he can add to the value of a franchise for the owners.
4. You reach a point where you can only vote with your purchasing decisions so much. The bottom line is, those boards and those CEOs you refer to spend a small fortune on making sure Washington keeps it's distance. That's the issue. I'm getting a lot of DMs and reps too, but i would hardly use that as a measure of whether you or I are right or wrong - that just shows who agrees with us.
Again, you seem to be missing the point. So I'll just make it clear, from my point of view the issue is not income inequality. The issue is the influence that the inequality buys in Washington(thank you for supporting that with your response). Take away the influence and the market will correct itself over time. Also your issue with defining points of view as "right" or "wrong" is somewhat confusing. My intention is never to say my point of view is the "right" one, only that it is a valid point of view with a sustainable supporting argument.
Would love to see a news organizatio profile several Wall St Pros.
Alas that will not happen anytime soon as the propagandist media endorses the mobs and enables the violence to continue.
Know anyone personally that would consider tossing a firebomb in public?
That person would not be a run of the mill friendly neighbor with a stellar reputation. Who are these people that make up the unruly mobs? Definiotely not mainstream America.
he doesn't think guns are evil. he owns numerous guns, and belonged to the NRA for most of his life. you've bought into Fox's interpretation of his representation of issues. good job.
this is typical of an elitist socialist, one set of rules for the political elite and another for the humble masses.
oh and i think you are confusing the moore buying a "lifetime membership" with him being a member most of his life. i wasnt able to find exactly when he joined, but he says he bought a lifetime membership to run for the presidency of the organization and push gun control through it (referenced charleton heston who was its president from 1998-2003 so id assume sometime during that period). he decided to instead make the movie bowling for columbine as running for president of nra would take too much time (more realistically he wouldnt be able to win that election).
and conveys the absolute wrong way in solving these "issues" and has no problem lying a misrepresenting facts in order to brainwash brainless *******s. america is evil, capitalism is evil, guns are evil, cuba is a workers paradise with great healthcare, blah blah blah pass the twinkies.
Have you ever actually watched one of the movies?
Roger & Me - Highlighted the destruction of America's manufacturing base and the impact it had on towns and families as auto companies which were at the time generating record profits continued to offshore their labor.
The Big One - Again attacking corporations for globalization and causing massive layoffs even in the face of record profits. He mainly attacks Nike for closing its US plants and moving production to Indonesia.
Bowling for Columbine - Questioned the necessity for people to possess assault weapons and the gun/violence culture that was en vogue at the time. It was not an "anti-gun" movie. It was a social critique and questioned the reason why people needed something like an AK-47.
Farenheit 9/11 - Questioned the motives for the US invasion of Iraq and most critically attacked the mass media for acting as "cheerleaders" for the invasion and accused them of failing to do their duty to inform the American people and present contrasting opinions.
Sicko - Highlighted the deficiencies of America's privatized healthcare system and contrasted it to those in other countries, not just Cuba. In fact the air apparent around the Cuban piece was the feeling that, hey, even this third world hell hole may have a better system than what we give to a lot of our citizens. The main comparisons were drawn against the Canadian, UK and French systems.
Slacker Uprising - This highlights and discusses the apathy of American voters, particularly those in the 18-29 demographic and attempts to inspire them to get out and participate in the system.
Capitalism: A Love Story - Examined the financial crisis and accused the government and the American people of being complacent in allowing corporations and banks to rob us of our wealth. His appeal is not anti-capitalism, it is again for the American people to reenergize themselves and participate in the democratic process. He sees democracy and capitalism as a ying and yang, where they control and influence each other. In our current situation, he simply points out that we've given the "yang" too much control.
I hate to say it to you, but you and Moore may actually agree on a lot of things, lol.
I hate to say it to you, but you and Moore may actually agree on a lot of things, lol.
i dont doubt that. i understand your point that he highlights problems in our society that needs fixing. but i think its the solutions where we differ the most on things. before obamacare came to be, everyone agreed that our healthcare system needs reform. but that doesnt mean that any reform is good reform. i also disagree with some of the problems even being problems (americans should be able to own assault weapons). i also disagree that corporations are a problem, i blame government. but the fact that we disagree isnt an issue nor is whether or not he is a "great american." i believe that he misrepresents facts in order to make a point. thats great for him that he can make lots of money making these films and i really have no problem with his misrepresentation (thats how he makes a living). but people who watch his movies should understand that he isnt exactly putting out a fair and honest view of the issues. i dont have strong feelings about him, i dont think he is particularly influential. im happy for him that he is rich and gets to have dinners with his favorite people like fidel castro and hugo chavez.
i tried watching a couple of his movies but didnt get too far in. i wanted to be able to talk about his work with actual experience, but i find his movies very boring.
He had a Junior membership probably in the mid 60's as it was only because it was required for his Boy Scout activities sponsored by the NRA.
He was NOT a member until he wanted to use it to further his needs for the movie and a requirement for running for a position in the NRA was five years prior membership or a lifetime membership. The $750 was no doubt written off as a business expense during the movie.
i dont doubt that. i understand your point that he highlights problems in our society that needs fixing. but i think its the solutions where we differ the most on things.
FWIW, he strongly resists suggesting solutions in his films. He is merely bringing attention to an issue and leaves it up to the audience to discuss.
Quote:
before obamacare came to be, everyone agreed that our healthcare system needs reform. but that doesnt mean that any reform is good reform.
Absolutely and for the record Moore personally hates Obamacare and is highly critical of Obama. Of course, his position is that the reform should have been the abolishment of privatized for profit healthcare.
Quote:
i also disagree with some of the problems even being problems (americans should be able to own assault weapons).
Debatable as I am for the right to own guns, but am also for gun control, it just makes sense to me. No one can give me a practical reason why folks should be allowed to own assault weapons other than the Founding Fathers said the right of the people to bear arms (muzzle loading muskets) should not be infringed.
Quote:
i also disagree that corporations are a problem, i blame government.
He does not blame corporations. He blames a government and more directly apathetic Americans for allowing corporations to do what they do. He views democracy as good and capitalism as evil. He does not want to abolish capitalism, he merely wants to see it balanced in the interest of democracy.
Quote:
but the fact that we disagree isnt an issue nor is whether or not he is a "great american." i believe that he misrepresents facts in order to make a point. thats great for him that he can make lots of money making these films and i really have no problem with his misrepresentation (thats how he makes a living). but people who watch his movies should understand that he isnt exactly putting out a fair and honest view of the issues. i dont have strong feelings about him, i dont think he is particularly influential. im happy for him that he is rich and gets to have dinners with his favorite people like fidel castro and hugo chavez.
All media represents the side of the story that they want you to hear. Fox News condemning Moore for careful editing is almost as commical as their tagline "fair and balanced". We have a much greater issue in this country of "sheeple" failing to think for themselves and seek out information beyond what their favorite talking head wants to tell them. This isn't anything unique to a Michael Moore movie. Spend a couple days reading CNN, FoxNews and MSNBC online. Notice which stories they put up as headlines and read what they write about each one and which angle they are playing to and contrast them against each other. There is no such thing as an unbiased media.
Quote:
i tried watching a couple of his movies but didnt get too far in. i wanted to be able to talk about his work with actual experience, but i find his movies very boring.
Many of them can be quite tedious and he does repeat things in order to hammer home his points. Some of his movies could have been condensed into a 30 minute slot ala Penn and Teller's "Bull$%it". Still though, I would encourage you to take the time to watch at least some of them. In particular, Sicko, Roger & Me and Capitalism.
Almost as ridiculous as asserting ones "constitutional right" to own an assault weapon. You never know when you're going to need a burst of 7.62mm to put down a charging deer.
i tried watching a couple of his movies but didnt get too far in. i wanted to be able to talk about his work with actual experience, but i find his movies very boring.
That's understandable. But Roger and Me is quite entertaining and worth your time.
It's from the 80s so it's before he got somewhat high and mighty.
Almost as ridiculous as asserting ones "constitutional right" to own an assault weapon. You never know when you're going to need a burst of 7.62mm to put down a charging deer.
Signed, a gun owner and hunter.
its fortunate for americans that we are in a position to suggest we only need guns for hunting and protection of our homes from invasion. i do believe the right exists for tyrannical government and we should have access to weapons that could be meaningfully used if the government is our enemy. it seems crazy to us, but maybe not so much to the people of repressive regimes. current examples may be libya, egypt, africa, cuba, north korea. maybe the jews in europe around the time of ww2, im sure there are many other examples (ill include the "palestinians" in the "occupied terrotories" for balance). you use the example of a musket being the weapon when the constitution was made, but that was the best weapon available at the time.
i actually called governor paterson to comment on gun control last week (he has a radio show on wor). i like his show. i did not like it when they had ron kuby filling in a whole bunch of times.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
