Making Common Sense Common Again

[Arcesious]

I feel that Fox News is the one to have a better track record as far as being right. I can't verify this with others on Fox News but I know for a fact that if Glenn Beck said something false about a particular topic he'll come out and take back what he said once he realizes it's wrong while the New York Times will bury the subject in the back pages if they even acknowledge that they are wrong.

 

Oh boy...

 

Well, you can probably expect some pretty strident counter-debating on this from others.

[Jae Onasi]

What do Fox, CNN, and MSNBC (along with the other major news outlets) care about? Gaining viewership in order to sell more ad revenue to make more money for their companies and their shareholders. Unfortunately for those of us who like 'hard news' that is unfiltered and "un-spun", we're stuck with a lot of pseudo-news from both ends of the political spectrum as a result of this drive to increase ratings. People like drama, including in their news. The more drama and controversy there is (to a point), the more viewership/ratings go up, which makes the media outlets happy since they then can make more money. It's all about the dollar and what they can do to earn it, and providing hard unfiltered news doesn't cut the mustard anymore, unfortunately, for many viewers.

 

I watch or read both Fox and CNN. After reading or hearing the wording of both news outlets, I'm able to sift out the spin-crap and get enough of the facts to make up my own mind instead of having either group try to make it up for me.

[Jedi/Sith]

To solve one question the golden age or best years would be the 1920's. The problem with saying that it is the U.S. golden age is that you do not know the future of what will happen to the U.S. later on. That is the problem for all countries that still around today because they could end up having there actual golden age later on. There were no wars during this time unemployment and inflation were extremely low. The country was doing really good. This was the early period. If you say that there was a depression right at the end well in U.S. history there has always been downturn in the economy it use to come about every 10 or so years. Today it would be about every 6-10 years. The goal is to get out of the reccession not to prevent it from happening. You can predict about when a recession will occur within a economy. Not sure how it is for other countries though.

 

To solve the question about what we should decide what solutions there are for the world. Well for each country there are different solutions. Each economy is different in that they all have to be solved a different way. For example the United States could print money though they devalue the dollar but this solution could be done. This would be different from lets say Greece where they cannot print any money. There are many solutions out there that would work but some would not work out while others would work well but there is always a drawback. Just about all the solutions have a drawback to them. Some of them have drawbacks now or later while the solution is being used. Those decision that seem like they have no drawback could later on have a drawback later on. For example of this Social Security at first it seem like there was nothing wrong with until LBJ came to office and took money out of social security for Vietnam. Now social security is in huge trouble. A drawback could be from something that occurs later on within the country like this. Or it could be from a change in some other thing which will cripple any country. Unless you have a time machine and are the doctor I don't think anyone completely knows what a decision does to a country. This would only effect a long term decision not a short term one.

 

To solve the question about the New Media well all the news media have bias opinions no matter what you watch. They play to a crowd of people who come from the left or right. They do this to get there ratings up. I myself watch mainly Fox and CNN. I tend to conservative on about all issues. I am borderline Libertarian which are people who want no government control. I don't think that is true but I do think that a lot of government control should be eliminated.

[harIII]

To solve one question the golden age or best years would be the 1920's. The problem with saying that it is the U.S. golden age is that you do not know the future of what will happen to the U.S. later on. That is the problem for all countries that still around today because they could end up having there actual golden age later on. There were no wars during this time unemployment and inflation were extremely low. The country was doing really good. This was the early period. If you say that there was a depression right at the end well in U.S. history there has always been downturn in the economy it use to come about every 10 or so years. Today it would be about every 6-10 years. The goal is to get out of the reccession not to prevent it from happening. You can predict about when a recession will occur within a economy. Not sure how it is for other countries though.

 

You're exactly right. For some reason politicians believe that if they enact a bill what just happened can never happen again. But the laws of economics are like the laws of nature, they cannot be altered, added, or removed; they are permanent. What happens to an an economy is that it rises, falls, and rises again. There's no way to prevent it from happening but what we can do is decide on how devastating it will be. That's when Capitalist and Communist split. We have the Depression of 1920 which lasted for about 3 years while the Great Depression lasted much longer because in my opinion of the policies that were used. 1920 had Capitalist while the Great Depression had, let's use a nice term, Progressives.

[mimartin]

Not going to answer my questions? Very well.

 

1920’s as the Golden Age in American history.

 

Ku Klux Klan gained prominence and acceptance.

 

Prohibition leads to increase in organized crime.

 

Economically it was most likely American’s Golden Age. Too bad it was ruined by a little thing called the Great Depression.

 

Find it extremely funny that both ages came up for a Golden Age in America are following a World War. Perhaps we can bring another “Golden Age” to America by just starting a third World War.

[Astor]

I really don't know much of US history beyond the Revolution, War of 1812 and Civil War, and as an outsider I wouldn't begin to suggest a period that could be defined as the USA's 'Golden Age' but...

 

Didn't the 1920s see the rise of the Mafia and other Organised Crime groups, in addition to widespread racketeering, corruption, as well as black market and criminal activity as a result of the Volstead Act?

[harIII]

Uhhh, there's a reason why I said the 1940s. The 1940s was the start of what we have today as far as how our society works, but people have taken our mechanics and turned it against us and that's why we are where we are today.

[Darth InSidious]

Southern trees bear strange fruit,

Blood on the leaves and blood at the root,

Black body swinging in the Southern breeze,

Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees.

Pastoral scene of the gallant South,

The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth,

Scent of magnolia sweet and fresh,

Then the sudden smell of burning flesh!

Here is fruit for the crows to pluck,

For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck,

For the sun to rot, for the trees to drop,

Here is a strange and bitter crop.

[Darth333]

""Making Common Sense Common Again"

 

Sorry for being this late but having read your first post and the thread thereafter, I'm still trying to figure out what you mean by "common sense" (which is, IMHO, something we all think we have while the "other" doesn't).

 

(blah blah blah Dark Ages back to the Golden Age.

I am still trying to understand this statement...what golden age?

 

Uhhh, there's a reason why I said the 1940s. The 1940s was the start of what we have today as far as how our society works, but people have taken our mechanics and turned it against us and that's why we are where we are today.

What is this answer supposed to mean? Maybe answering some preliminary questions would help? 1. Where are we today? 2. The 1940's? I am not from the US and can't quite figure where this one comes either... So please, enlighten me...I thought that civilization has started way before the 1940s and that regions of the world have evolved in very different ways and under many different cultures... 3. also, which "mechanics"? 4. Which Mechanics were turned against "us"? 5. How so? 6. Who is "we"?

 

But the problem with doing what Europe is doing is that we already are. For the most part, and I can't explain why, but usually things that happen in Europe will happen in America after a while.

Maybe my English is not good but I am still trying to figure what you meant here

 

If one country starts to sag down, it drags the rest of the world with it and visa versa. Greece I believe was the one to start this domino affect. They are experiencing a rebellion and tough financial problems and because of the economic connections countries like Spain, Portugal, Italy, and others are about to collapse.

I admire your "saviness". But which "domino affect (sic)" are you talking about?...that the Grecian situation dragged the US into this financial crisis? How so? As we say in French, (without denying the Grecian mess), " c'est le monde a l'envers"... BTW, I found this book to be quite interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_Poker

 

I have never dug deep into what life was like for the average Joe but with what I do know I feel that the 1940s (with the exception of World War II) were America's Golden Years.

How about doing some research instead of guessing or "feeling"?

 

 

would run with all of your arguments but that would take far to long to do so

How about running with yours first?...then, if I find time, I could perhaps do so with yours ...

 

M4A1, Barret .50 Cal, M9, and Predator Strike.[/MODERN WARFARE 2]

 

Oh, you meant in real life. Actually, predator strike works surprisingly well but has foreign relations issues.

Ever wondered why there are "foreign relations issues" ? Btw, what of the civilian populations?

 

But today it seems that Whites, Christians, and Jews are being attacked.

Many others could say so as well, I believe...which takes us, in part, back to the initial question: what "common sense" are you talking about?

[Lord of Hunger]

Ever wondered why there are "foreign relations issues" ?

No I haven't because I know exactly why: The world is not a perfect place.

Btw, what of the civilian populations?

Are we talking missile strikes into terrorist cells in civilian areas or missile strikes into militant bunkers? Either way, it's pretty precise but there's always the chance of killing innocents in the process. Such is war, and that's the sort of decisions the Military makes. Never suggested it was easy.

[Darth Avlectus]

 

Ever wondered why there are "foreign relations issues" ? Btw, what of the civilian populations?

 

Curious. I'm trying to figure out just why you respond like this to...pretty much anything military or arms related, even if it is such obvious sarcasm. Touchy subject for you? With all due respect of course.

 

If it's deeply personal, you can PM me on it if you wish.

[Qui-Gon Glenn]

Ever wondered why there are "foreign relations issues" ? Btw, what of the civilian populations?

Curious. I'm trying to figure out just why you respond like this to...pretty much anything military or arms related, even if it is such obvious sarcasm. Touchy subject for you? With all due respect of course.

 

If it's deeply personal, you can PM me on it if you wish.

I would not answer for the Dark Lady, but for myself, I am personally angered by anything arms or military related, because with all due respect to the soldiers that survive it, war is still a little too distant and impersonal for me in the modern age. [i am not denying that it is very personal to take home less than your whole body, or to have psychologically had to deal with what your job was and what you saw doing it]. So talk of fancier arms, fancier defenses, is all chest thumping and Country Club old boy-ism in my eyes. I feel strongly that we should have to go to war in loinclothes, mano a mano, like god intended. We would have far less bloodshed, and better TV. Of course, I like fistfights. More honest. The combatants have an actual personal interest in what's at stake.

 

I find talk of military superiority and arms races of the same nature as the American Condition of "beating the Jones'". A Sisyphusian endeavor if ever there was.

 

That is my common sense on this particular subject. That is the thread concept right? Make Common Sense Common Again? Well, I call that common sense. If anyone agrees with me 100% then it actually is common.

 

Common Sense in the political buzzword FOX PHRASE of the Week is just another talking point to nowhere.

[mimartin]

Common Sense in the political buzzword FOX PHRASE of the Week is just another talking point to nowhere.

Agree with you 100%

 

Common sense was also a pamphlet written by Thomas Paine. It advocated America’s independence from British rule.

 

I guess the right wingers are advocating dismissing Obama Presidency. Funny when the left did it to Bush the right considered them un-American. Dixie Chicks anyone?

 

Even funnier is they also said Clinton was the worse thing ever for this country. I however, now look back at the Clinton years as the “golden age” of my lifetime.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

Can I post a certain Deadpool demotivational?

[ForeverNight]

/me looks at title

 

/me looks at thread

 

Mmmk then.

 

I guess the right wingers are advocating dismissing Obama Presidency. Funny when the left did it to Bush the right considered them un-American. Dixie Chicks anyone?

 

Speaking as a right ringer, he's the President for better or worse. I'll support the office, but disagree with some of his politics. People who claim he's not the president/is un-American/whatever are people that shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Working Class Hero]

No I haven't because I know exactly why: The world is not a perfect place.

Are we talking missile strikes into terrorist cells in civilian areas or missile strikes into militant bunkers? Either way, it's pretty precise but there's always the chance of killing innocents in the process. Such is war, and that's the sort of decisions the Military makes. Never suggested it was easy.

Exactly, we should never try to fix or prevent things because it's impossible to be perfect.

 

Uhhh, there's a reason why I said the 1940s. The 1940s was the start of what we have today as far as how our society works, but people have taken our mechanics and turned it against us and that's why we are where we are today.

You do realize the 40s were the burgeoning of the progressive menace you so despise?

 

You're exactly right. For some reason politicians believe that if they enact a bill what just happened can never happen again. But the laws of economics are like the laws of nature, they cannot be altered, added, or removed; they are permanent.

There are no unalterable laws of economics. We started as hunters and gatherer and now we have a global economy.

[harIII]

You do realize the 40s were the burgeoning of the progressive menace you so despise?

 

We have to start viewing political parties not on the left and right but up and down and look at forms of government as left and right. The up and down are what we in America call the Republicans and Democrats while the left and right is Big Government and Small Government (respectfully). The farther left you go the more Communist a country is, the farther right the country turns to Anarchy. There is a middle ground where enough political intervention that keeps the people in order yet allows them to enjoy their freedom.

 

The political parties really don't matter in the short term but over time if one particular part dominates, they can push the country into a particular direction whether it be communism or anarchy. For the most part they are suppose to bounce back and forth.

 

If the government didn't allow the people to have particular rights in their companies, the companies would just go on and use us more as slave labor rather than paid employees. Like I said there is a middle ground between what is right and what is wrong.

 

There are no unalterable laws of economics. We started as hunters and gatherer and now we have a global economy.

 

You're right, we did make the laws, but these laws were slowly generated over time as economies because more and more interconnected and more dependent on each other. I should correct myself that these laws can be changed but that is not something that we can see within our lifetime, it takes many, many years for something like this to happen. What I am saying is that you just can't wake up and expect that printing more money won't create inflation or not paying a debt will not make it lower.

[Lord of Hunger]

Exactly, we should never try to fix or prevent things because it's impossible to be perfect.

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was not implying we shouldn't try to reduce war or be more humane about it, but rather stating the truth of the matter:

 

-War is ugly.

-War will, in some way, always be ugly.

-People die in war (at least, actual wars as opposed to a single individual "declaring war" on another).

-To win a war, you must sacrifice some sort of resource to achieve a goal. -According to 1984 by George Orwell, the most directly effective yet least benevolent method is for the goal to be the sacrifice of that resource.

-Resources can range from human beings to the materials that are used to create the weaponry used in war to a strategic position.

-A war without bloodshed or weaponry is not actually war. More likely, it's either economics, politics, or a video game.

-[FALLOUT]War...war never changes.[/FALLOUT]

[Liverandbacon]

People have never acted with common sense, and there was no Golden Age. Whether people will eventually develop common sense, and move in to a Golden Age is debatable. Personally, I doubt such a thing will happen unless certain somewhat technological advancements are made (and honestly, as with all tech, who knows what new problems they'll create).

 

As for the threat of terrorism, I have two answers.

 

If we are referring to Islamic extremist terrorism, the only way that it will truly be cut down to a near negligible level (no form of extremism is ever truly eliminated), is if the moderate Muslim population rejects the extremists in a more active fashion. Right now, many moderate Muslims talk about how they disapprove, acting passively. Leaders within the community need to take a more active stance in separating the extremists from the general community.

 

If we are referring to terrorism in general, it will never be eliminated. People will always have differing views, and there will always be those who try to force their views upon others with violence and intimidation. The most we can do is try to find out about attacks before they occur, and prevent them.

 

Exactly, we should never try to fix or prevent things because it's impossible to be perfect.

 

Trust me, we do try to minimalize civilian casualties, often to a degree that puts us at more risk. It just hurts sometimes that people get so angry whenever a tragic accident occurs, seeing it as evidence of our 'evil', when we could be saving hundreds of millions of dollars by using slightly less fancy weapons that would achieve our objectives just as well, albeit with more civilian casualties. We are investing huge amounts of money and personal risk to avoid this sort of thing. There's a reason that the number of civilian deaths in the entire Iraq war (including civilian-on-civilian crime, which is quite common, and those killed by our enemies) is only about double the amount of civilians killed in a single 8-day bombing mission in WWII.

 

Improvements are being made, it's just irritating and a bit upsetting that so many people think we can just press a magic "make it better" button and eliminate the problem.

[Ping]

Improvements are being made, it's just irritating and a bit upsetting that so many people think we can just press a magic "make it better" button and eliminate the problem.

 

I'm finally glad that someone came out and said this fact that's all too true.

[Q]

We need to dump both parties. NOW.

[Sabretooth]

Why don't you guys make this guy the President?

 

(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

[Doomie]

(Communism and anarchy)

 

I'd just like to point out that the opposite of anarchy isn't communism, it would probably be totalitarianism, and those aren't the same thing. In fact, it is my understanding that the ultimate goal of communism is something not too dissimilar to anarchy, with the elimination of the ruling class and the communal ownership of resources and all that.

[Qui-Gon Glenn]

I'd just like to point out that the opposite of anarchy isn't communism, it would probably be totalitarianism, and those aren't the same thing. In fact, it is my understanding that the ultimate goal of communism is something not too dissimilar to anarchy, with the elimination of the ruling class and the communal ownership of resources and all that.

Interesting catch, although I am not 100% sure about your analogy, Doomie.

 

Big Gov -> Small Gov = Communism -> Anarchy is harIII's argument.

= Totalitarianism -> Anarchy is yours.

 

In anarchy, nobody rules nuthin'. Yeehaw, wild wild west style.

In a totalitarian regime, Kim Jong Il sings about loneliness. So rohnree.

In a commune, everyone rules.

 

I personally would argue that real communism and anarchy are close to the same thing. Governments that have been labeled as communist in the past have been far from what the concept was supposed to be. The problem with communism is that people are inherently s-bags and cannot help themselves to more pie than they are due. So abuse of power happens..... just like in our capitalistic government! S-bags know no foreign land, they are everywhere, they are hard to stop, and must be dealt with harshly at any opportunity presented to you. If someone is dirty they should go down. That is another piece of my common sense.

 

If your perception of the world depends on a nationalistic belief that your flavor of political representation is the best and should be the model, you have never used your mind other than as a recording device.

[Ping]

If your perception of the world depends on a nationalistic belief that your flavor of political representation is the best and should be the model, you have never used your mind other than as a recording device.

 

This should be a famous quote right here.