If we are talking about the wealth concentration conspiracy, here is a good link.
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://www.infowars.com/marxist-wealth-distribution-for-the-bankers/
People can feel it. I don't think the public dissent is due to the 'austerity', people can bear austerity with good humour and fortitude like in the war years when everyone pulled together.
The problem arises when disparity raises its head. The rich getting richer whilst the poor get poorer... that is the problem.
Billions in quantitative easing which do not help those in need, (and I mean by creating jobs and services). Instead, all the money printed goes to the banks which invest the money in the stock market which pump up the price of the stocks and the banks earn more money but that is where it stays. There is a 'trickle up' effect rather than the 'trickle down effect'. Personally I would call it a 'rush up effect' but then I would be accused of hyperbole.
But no matter how bad things get there is one thing that can rely on funding and that is the military industrial complex which is the U.S. No matter what, it continues to spend as much as the rest of the world put together on weapons of war and wars. The very same wars that many of the .01% of the wealthiest profit from whilst the poor continue to pay... with their lives.
AJ, brings that message to the masses and whilst it may be presented in a sensationalist way, so what... it is pretty sensational because most people do not understand what is going on here, (and deliberately so) and people do need to be shocked by it in order to counter the inherent social inertia. Only then will there even be a hope of change.
The mass opposition to the Syria war propaganda was a result of getting this stuff out to the public... the lies and scheming that go on to control the people and enrich the few.
Edit: I would argue that AJ and others provide a much needed service in providing those who need to be made aware at a basic level about the type of machinations which are perpetrated. That even if it is not entirely accurate or it is sensationalised, it needs to be said in such terms so that those who are unable to fully comprehend the intricacies of the deception, still get a good idea of the broader issues at a level they can understand and engage with. A counterbalance to the 'official,(and equally sensationalised), BS that is pumped out by the government MSM propaganda machine', if you like.
Perhaps that argument is worthy of its own thread?
As an aside, I listened to Jeremy Vine yesterday, (BBC Radio 2 presenter), discussing the financial situation and even he admitted he had no idea what the term 'fractional lending' referred to. A BBC spokesman then came on to 'clear the matter up' and stated it was 'banks not lending all their money out and keeping money back to ensure they were financially solvent in the event of a crisis'. I couldn't believe what I was hearing.
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
Infowars/Kurt Nimmo viewpoint is:This document focuses on the "Top 1%" as a whole because that's been the traditional cut-off point for "the top" in academic studies, and because it's easy for us to keep in mind that we are talking about one in a hundred. But it is also important to realize that the lower half of that top 1% has far less than those in the top half; in fact, both wealth and income are super-concentrated in the top 0.1%, which is just one in a thousand. (To get an idea of the differences, take a look at an insider account by a long-time investment manager who works for the well-to-do and very rich. It nicely explains what the different levels have -- and how they got it. Also, David Cay Johnston (2011) has written a column about the differences among the top 1%, based on 2009 IRS information.)
http://www.infowars.com/marxist-wealth-distribution-for-the-bankers/
Which I tend to agree with. It appears to be about making the super rich super richer, the middle classes poorer, the poor desperately poor and the desperately poor to curl up and die.Of course very little of the money stolen from you and me is used to feed and shelter the poor. It is used to make payments on the national debt and fund the Pentagon.
Moreover, simply stealing money from the producers and showering it on the poor is not how the game is played. The game is about debt and turning the little people into serfs and slaves.
Earlier this week, Dave Lindorff went over the numbers. “The budget for the 2011 fiscal year, which has to be voted by Congress by this October 1, looks to be about $3 trillion, not counting funds collected for Social Security,” he writes. “Meanwhile, the military share of the budget works out to about $1.6 trillion,” more than half of the total.
So far this year, the Treasury Department has spent $201,928,781,952.77 on interest payments to the banksters who hold the national debt — not the principle, mind you, but merely the interest owed. The principle is right around $12 trillion, although some say it is actually higher.
IMF Chief Economist Simon Johnson was remarkably candid last year when he said “that the finance industry has effectively captured our government” and they will continue the spiral of debt “at least until the riots grow too large.”
Happy people buying groceries with redistributed money usually do not riot
People can feel it. I don't think the public dissent is due to the 'austerity', people can bear austerity with good humour and fortitude like in the war years when everyone pulled together.
The problem arises when disparity raises its head. The rich getting richer whilst the poor get poorer... that is the problem.
Billions in quantitative easing which do not help those in need, (and I mean by creating jobs and services). Instead, all the money printed goes to the banks which invest the money in the stock market which pump up the price of the stocks and the banks earn more money but that is where it stays. There is a 'trickle up' effect rather than the 'trickle down effect'. Personally I would call it a 'rush up effect' but then I would be accused of hyperbole.
But no matter how bad things get there is one thing that can rely on funding and that is the military industrial complex which is the U.S. No matter what, it continues to spend as much as the rest of the world put together on weapons of war and wars. The very same wars that many of the .01% of the wealthiest profit from whilst the poor continue to pay... with their lives.
AJ, brings that message to the masses and whilst it may be presented in a sensationalist way, so what... it is pretty sensational because most people do not understand what is going on here, (and deliberately so) and people do need to be shocked by it in order to counter the inherent social inertia. Only then will there even be a hope of change.
The mass opposition to the Syria war propaganda was a result of getting this stuff out to the public... the lies and scheming that go on to control the people and enrich the few.
Edit: I would argue that AJ and others provide a much needed service in providing those who need to be made aware at a basic level about the type of machinations which are perpetrated. That even if it is not entirely accurate or it is sensationalised, it needs to be said in such terms so that those who are unable to fully comprehend the intricacies of the deception, still get a good idea of the broader issues at a level they can understand and engage with. A counterbalance to the 'official,(and equally sensationalised), BS that is pumped out by the government MSM propaganda machine', if you like.
Perhaps that argument is worthy of its own thread?
As an aside, I listened to Jeremy Vine yesterday, (BBC Radio 2 presenter), discussing the financial situation and even he admitted he had no idea what the term 'fractional lending' referred to. A BBC spokesman then came on to 'clear the matter up' and stated it was 'banks not lending all their money out and keeping money back to ensure they were financially solvent in the event of a crisis'. I couldn't believe what I was hearing.
Last edited: