grampa Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 k. Well documented, not at all conspiracy theory nuttery, by the end of the Civil War the military/industrial complex that Eisenhower would warn the world about 90 some years later, had already begun its' inexorable entrenchment. The mass manipulation of the USGovernment by profit motivated groups of individuals that we call corporations may not have begun during the Civil War, but it sure was honed, refined, some would even say perfected. Agriculture as an economic foundation was already seen as over. Using slaves to pick cotton was hardly the issue, picking cotton was soon to be overwhelmingly overtaken by events, that is, the mechanization of most of the farming process. Again, well documented, not invented at all. As agriculture was slipping away as the primary economic engine, some would say daily, the need for the Worker Of Tomorrow was already clear. Rich Guy wasn't going to actually do anything in his factory, he was just going to own it, along with the providers of the capital it took to get that factory, and profit from it. The massive minus(es) of having an entire class of people easily identified by their skin color was not lost on the emerging industrial magnates. What better way to "abolish" slavery than just making it invisible? So they did, they "abolished" slavery for Africans, paving the way for... The Modern Age. Your kids and mine will work what? Two, three jobs? None of which pay decent benefits at all, that is surely a thing of the past. Retirement? Already not going to happen for many of my generation, I can't even imagine what will be in place for my kids and their kids. The post WWII "prosperity" was an anomaly, a blip, the companies that were making the most also employed the most, and "wealth" did trickle down. Compared to working someone elses land for someone else to eat, 10 hours in a factory in exchange for a house with indoor plumbing was a pretty good deal, that can't be denied. My young days starting out, the 80's, saw what? 16% - 18% mortgages? We sure couldn't buy a house, so a "starter" condo was our option. We passed. Problem was, at those rates, the money changers could only stand to move so much money because nobody could really buy houses, it took an awful lot of capital(downpayment), so money was stalling. Money not moving, not changing hands, is not profit money, it is stagnant. The Real Estate Bubble began, slowly at first, quietly. Anyone remember when EVeryone was getting their RE license? heh. Rates began to come down, slowly, moving more stuff around, people buying and selling became...sport I guess. Creation of entire markets of real estate was the foundation for the Tired Old Man We Elected King and his "trickle down" economics. It was, in a word, insulting, knowing we would benefit from the drippings of the weiners of the wealthy. 90's came and they saw that we needed to expand the ability of the proles to buy stuff, starting with houses, next cars, and then the sundry consumer spending that drives the economies of the corporations. The Economies Of The Corporations. That's the important words, the last three, them are the words they always leave out when they say The Economy. Credit cards? When I was a kid, I was told clearly I would never see one of those, they were for Rich People, not white trash like us. Anyone else remember those days? I'm sure some of you do. Onward went the humming engine of money, all on the backs of the by then 100, 125 year old class of slaves called "middle". Basically, everybody. Housing took the eff off, that is, the people that made money on housing took the eff off. Et Cetera, Et Cetera, Et Cetera. Most of that stuff is recent enough to find on the magazine shelf, if the local bookstore still exists where you live. Corporate interests purchased The Turn Of The Century election in order to take back losses heaped upon them by the Evil Left. The hen house doors were literally removed, the foxes feasted right on up until the last election, then they sh1t all over the place on their way out. Who did we save after all this mess? Who? If you don't know, if you didn't see what "bailout" meant, if you don't know what it took to "save" the economy, if you didn't see this all what we all just lived through, I at once admire your ability to ignore the fire even as I pity you for not having the courage to speak the words. We are all slaves, and we leave our children to future slavery with even less benefit, less return, no security of any kind, always on the very edge of fincancial, marital, kid related disasters that those just barely making enough to survive have always had to deal with. All while being told how great it is to be an American. Always remember how BAD BAD BAD it is everywhere else, you got 24 hours a day of filthy maggot "journalists" reminding you. Unions, child labor laws, huge committments to retirements and the associated benefits, all for an ever aging population have seriously put the screws on those that matter, the coroporations that foot all the bills. Today the coroporate/infotainment/government muck called "media" actually work 24/7 to pump out the mind numbing buzz that adds up to nothing more than telling the proles they are wealthy because they just SCORED by standing in line at Wal*Mart to get a couple flat screens for their kids bedrooms. Good times. rct Capitalism probably works best when the work force is slaves. Capitalism regards "workers" as a liability that cuts into profit. They would rather not extend any benefits to the workers because it costs them money which is the only thing important to them. When slavery was finally abolished, immigration picked up which was just a slightly more costly alternative to slavery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Well, yeah. We have devolved into a nation of dumb, mind numbed consumers happy for the crumbs we are allowed to have. I too am worried about the nation my children are going to inherit. Sorry, son, your old man and his generation let you down. I so want to blame all of this on the Baby Boomer sellouts that paved a clear path for the "me first" generation that still thrives today, but what gearbox I have I thrown a monkey wrench into? Like most of you I am just fighting to make it through today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Well, yeah. We have devolved into a nation of dumb, mind numbed consumers happy for the crumbs we are allowed to have. I too am worried about the nation my children are going to inherit. Sorry, son, your old man and his generation let you down. I so want to blame all of this on the Baby Boomer sellouts that paved a clear path for the "me first" generation that still thrives today, but what gearbox I have I thrown a monkey wrench into? Like most of you I am just fighting to make it through today. Whatever "Me First" attitude us "Boomers" have was taught to us by the "Greatest Generation", our parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Whatever "Me First" attitude us "Boomers" have was taught to us by the "Greatest Generation", our parents. But this demonstrates very well the actual, real message we've been taught, and that is that the things wrong are our fault, we asked for all of this, the inequities and absolute zero justice that exist are all our doing, the peoples and corporate interests that run things have had no part in it at all no sirree bob, it is all on us little folks gettin all uppity in our britches and such with our me first mentality. Couldn't possibly be that the very companies we brand ourselves with are screwing our eyes out. That can't happen, only governments do that. Or us. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Whatever "Me First" attitude us "Boomers" have was taught to us by the "Greatest Generation", our parents. Not sure I agree with that. The "greatest generation" was the greatest generation because of their self-sacrifice during WWII. We may have gotten it from them, but not because it was taught to us by them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Whatever "Me First" attitude us "Boomers" have was taught to us by the "Greatest Generation", our parents. Sorry for spitting on your generation. I love my parents, I really do and I hate throwing out a generalization like that when I know it isn't everyone (my parents are/were Boomers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 But this demonstrates very well the actual, real message we've been taught, and that is that the things wrong are our fault, we asked for all of this, the inequities and absolute zero justice that exist are all our doing, the peoples and corporate interests that run things have had no part in it at all no sirree bob, it is all on us little folks gettin all uppity in our britches and such with our me first mentality. Couldn't possibly be that the very companies we brand ourselves with are screwing our eyes out. That can't happen, only governments do that. Or us. rct Gah! Stop making me think. You're messing up my blame-me-first-learned-at-Old-Vatican-Catholic-school mantra. So you're saying swimming against the current and failing is by design? That the cards are stacked against us, casino style? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 How many kids do you have Searcy? :blink: B) Me? I have zero kids. That proves I'm brilliant right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not sure I agree with that. The "greatest generation" was the greatest generation because of their self-sacrifice during WWII. We may have gotten it from them, but not because it was taught to us by them. The "greatest generation", after saving the world from Hitler, really thought that America deserved to have the best and most of everything. The 50's was a period of obscene materialism and the over glorification of America. We thought that every other country had to have America's best interest in mind and if they didn't, we would make sure they did. Viet Nam and Iran in the early 50's were going in a direction we didn't like so we imposed our will on them. The 50's and the "Greatest generation" brought about the notion of the "Ugly American". We became big and overbearing. The only ones who benefitted was the "Military-Industrial-Complex", the same ones benefitting the most now. But since we have been so "dumbed down" we think that what's good for "business" is good for all of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 So many of us rebel against the status quo, who/which does not have our best interest at heart. The only answer to beat the system is to be a part of it. To do that, you have to be smart enough to know how to play the game. Edit: Sorry gramps, I posted this before I saw yours. I see your point, and agree to a point. The '60s and '70s were all about rebelling against that '50s mentality, but we "boomers" sold out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Interesting... Not really. I'll tell you what is interesting though. I believe the capitalism is the only truly fair system we could ever possibly hope for. Those who work are given money in exchange for that work. If they save that money they build wealth. If they have no desire to become rich then of course they could always just take a simple minimum wage job and get by and relative comfort. It's really beautiful thing. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I agree, but that's where you get into the greed thing. And also, capitalism does not work without a healthy middle class. And this is where my contributions stop because we are getting into politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not really. I'll tell you what is interesting though. I believe the capitalism is the only truly fair system we could ever possibly hope for. Those who work are given money in exchange for that work. If they save that money they build wealth. If they have no desire to become rich then of course they could always just take a simple minimum wage job and get by and relative comfort. It's really beautiful thing. ;-) Money has become an end in itself instead of a representation of something earned. Wall Street made huge amounts of money without producing anything except profits. That is the fatal flaw of capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brundaddy Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Money has become an end in itself instead of a representation of something earned. Wall Street made huge amounts of money without producing anything except profits. That is the fatal flaw of capitalism. Treasure has always been an end in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Well... technically I'm too old to be a "baby boomer." But I recall easily how I got into a bit of hot water telling a "greatest generation" guy I worked for circa 1970 that as long as populations increase, personal freedoms will decrease. I pretty much decided around that period of time that children born from then on would not enjoy the freedoms I had experienced and that I'd not care to offer a world of that sort to any of my blood. We got rid of "child labor" and such during the "liberal" era following the U.S. Civil War that also did bring a huge expansion of mass manufacturing, banking and "robber barons" of finance. Let's face it, there wasn't even a sewing machine for store-bought clothing much prior to the Civil War. The wartime needs brought not only the US but also especially England a huge market that then saw factories retool for non-military purposes. Think about this one: It was the first time in history when more than a million pairs of trowsers, a million sets of buttons were needed for uniforms. Think just of the increased pressure on the mills making the fabric. Shoes weren't usually made left and right at that time and mostly were hand-made. In the following economic boom - the world-wide financial system screwed up several times bringing recessions and/or depressions that kept returning through 1895 or so. Teddy Roosevelt tried as a true progressive/conservative to set things up for the 20th century. Then much got undone with the depression and dustbowl and finally WWII. After WWII there was a huge economic boom in America created by the work, wants and needs of the wartime generation building everything from streets and sewer systems to families. Yeah, Ike warned against the "military industrial complex," but pretty much what we have now ain't what he feared given the experience of WWII. Bought any Kaiser Foil lately? Seen a TV show sponsored by US Steel? Then their children in the 1960s decided all that was something to reject. "The Pill" gave girls supposedly the same sexual "rights" as boys. Then we saw the workplace virtually double as all those girls went into the job marketplace, burned their bras and over the next time period we saw radical changes in each pay check because... Double the number of workers, halve the paychecks. So "families" to maintain the 1950s living standard had no choice in the late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s but to have both parents continue to work to match or slightly surpass the economic standard their parents enjoyed. Now the younger generation is questioning that, but the damage was done then through the 1990s. Even the shrunken average paycheck was too much to compete with a growing third world job market in that time period. Meanwhile the government - Congress - decided that banks should be forced to offer loans in areas and to people who weren't likely able to pay them back. The housing market surged and greedy folks saw a chance to buy into the bubble that the bubble-makers quite well realized was a bubble. But the bubble makers hoped they'd be able to protect what they'd made from it in the inevitable crash. At the same time the taxes and government regulation were increasing and credit apparently unlimited. Corporations bought the heck out of other corporations. Norlin and CBS purchases of Fender and Gibson are perfect examples. Major "leveraging" made such things possible into the first decade of the 21st century. That was a Ponzi scheme of its own that kept going through the 90s with dot-com stuff, cable channels and tech growth. Increasing numbers of bureaucrats, business (including "labor") and governmental alike, protect their turf as best they can whether they're actually producing anything or not. Fewer actually are. We've sewn the wind and are reaping the whirlwind of social change and population growth. The "pie" hasn't changed, really. We've just got more people who want some of it. Double the U.S. population from when I was a kid, for example. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieman15061 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Well said M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Treasure has always been an end in itself. It's not a good idea to base an economy on finding out what's at the end of a rainbow or at the X on a treasure map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieman15061 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 It's not a good idea to base an economy on finding out what's at the end of a rainbow or at the X on a treasure map. We'll just keep printing money till we find the rainbow's end. Really it's gonna be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 OK, m, so how does all this relate to the OP- the dumbing down of the western world? Are we becoming stupider? Is the media becoming stupider? Have we lost our work ethic? Are we softer? Are we seeing a decline in values or morals or perspective? Is the reason for our social/cultural decline due primarily to an increase in population? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 The "greatest generation", after saving the world from Hitler, really thought that America deserved to have the best and most of everything. The 50's was a period of obscene materialism and the over glorification of America. We thought that every other country had to have America's best interest in mind and if they didn't, we would make sure they did. Viet Nam and Iran in the early 50's were going in a direction we didn't like so we imposed our will on them. The 50's and the "Greatest generation" brought about the notion of the "Ugly American". We became big and overbearing. The only ones who benefitted was the "Military-Industrial-Complex", the same ones benefitting the most now. But since we have been so "dumbed down" we think that what's good for "business" is good for all of us. I don't know if I can agree with the statement "The 50's was a period of obscene materialism".. I would say the materialism of today makes the 50's looks like the parking lot of a Amish bar... There just wasn't as much stuff to buy back then as there is today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannusguy2 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I don't know if I can agree with the statement "The 50's was a period of obscene materialism".. I would say the materialism of today makes the 50's looks like the parking lot of a Amish bar... There just wasn't as much stuff to buy back then as there is today... I think this is a valid point but I also think that whatever level of materialism that emerged in the 50s was an understandable reaction the the great sacrifice that preceded it during the war years. Great sacrifice that was shared by EVERYONE. No such thing exists today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannusguy2 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 People getting dumber? I think this sums it up at some level. What a maroon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 The 50s... People had emerged from a dozen years of economic depression, lost farms and small businesses and homes - then went into a war that had everyone in America really going at it in one way or another. Lots of boys never returned to families, wives, girlfriends and children. For years the excise taxes of the war remained. I remember that from buying Mom a Christmas present. Everybody still saved as much "stuff" as possible just by habit. Just the "infrastructure" was horrid by modern criteria. I remember homes with cess pools in a town of some 1,500 people and virtually no paved streets; by 1959 most streets were paved, sewer and water were to every home along with electricity. I had a second cousin who ran the switchboard - there was an operator on duty 24-7 because there were no dial telephones. At night you'd hear the big diesels of the town's power plant that kept the lights on. I filled the coal stoker every night to keep the furnace running; cleaned out the ash before school. We sold the house when the folks went back to college and the new people put in a gas conversion furnace with the new pipeline gas. Grandpa and Grandma still had a gravity heat system for their coal stoker. We got the first new school building in 30 years because by the time I was in 6th grade there were just too many kids for the old buildings. I had two years in the basement of a "community building" and our classrooms had curtain dividers and no blackboards or much of anything else. We kids loved it, of course, because it was on the fairgrounds and the boys could play in the barns. Dad and Mom worked their butts off, him in a small business and her as a teacher, to make enough money so both could go back to college in '59 through '65. A war widow was the town librarian. A classmate whose mother was in a similar situation lived in an 8 x 24 1930s trailer. Nobody had television when I started school, everybody when we left in '59. Coop phone companies were getting phone lines into the country that didn't require cranking to make a call and to ensure everybody could have one. Ditto electricity in rural areas where kids studied by an Aladdin mantle lamp. I guess if that's "materialism," I don't see that much wrong with it. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 The 1950s had cooler cars.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.