2024-11-22, 09:38 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
Wirehead Studios > General Discussion > Controversy Corner > Fahrenheit 911 (How do you feel?)
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  Print  
Author Topic: Fahrenheit 911 (How do you feel?)  (Read 20383 times)
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #20 on: 2004-06-10, 00:48 »
I suppose I should throw some facts on the table to balance this debate a bit.

There are two factors concerning the generation of tax money for the government.  The first is by tax rate, the second is tax revenue.  I'm sure everyone knows the old economics lesson of supply and demand?  Let's simplify this a moment.  Say you are selling popcorn.  If you price it too low, the demand will be high but you'll not make enough money because you can't keep up.  If you price it too high, demand will fall off and you'll not make enough money because you're not selling enough.  The same goes with taxes.  Lower taxes spur economic growth and increased revenue.  As more companies can retain more capital they can expand and increase their earnings, thereby increasing overal revenue.  High taxes choke economic growth because companies are left with less money to use to grow with, so net revenues will be lower.  There is a balance point in both of these situations, where the price or tax rate is at the point where both curves intersect, and you achieve the optimal rate of revenue.

The problem with the 1990's goes beyond high taxes.  I'm sure everyone's heard of Enron right now, as well as Tyco, among other things?  For those who would jump so quickly to say "BUSH'S FAULT!" on Enron I invite you to take a history lesson and do your homework before pointing fingers.  When was Enron making its money?  During the 1990's.  Same with Tyco.  In fact, it was the SEC under Bush's watch that caught a great number of large firms cooking their books and overstating their earnings.  The entire "Clinton Economy" was nothing but a corporate LIE.  They were ripping off the people by ripping off the government, and they got away with it until the SEC caught them red handed.  This had been going on for a decade, and is the fault of no president.  Nor, I might add, is the economy of the 1990's the credit of any president.  The Federal Reserve and SEC have more to do with economic success or failure, along with the legislature, than the President has.  If you want to credit Clinton with the "booming 1990's economy" then also "credit" him with turning a blind (or ignorant, whichever was the case) eye toward the criminal activities of Enron, Tyco, and the like under his watch.  Let's be fair here, and give the bad with the good.

As for the national debt, let's put some things in perspective.  Take the US national debt and compare it to the GDP of the entire country.  The rate is around 2%~3%.  Personal debt is much higher than that, somewhere between 15%~20% on average.  So if you want to compare debts the Federal Government is actually better off than the country's citizenship at controlling debt, and that's considering how wasteful the government is with spending, which, of course brings up the next point.

Spending.  This is where we can really start making cuts into the national debt if you want to get debt hawkish.  If 90 billion for Iraq is expensive, then let's take a look at a $400 billion Medicare prescription drug entitlement that nobody seems to want, but was in my opinion an attempt at placating Democrats and vote buying from the senior citizen crowd by Dubya.  Remember Medicare started out as being a $7 billion a year entitlement and now the cost of standard Medicare has skyrocketed faster than inflation ever thought to push regular prices of goods.  Now consider how much this prescription drug bill will cost in a decade when pharmaceutical costs keep spiraling upward!  If you want to cut the national debt I suggest start looking at these kinds of wasteful social programs and giving some the axe instead of wanting to raise taxes.  As for cutting military spending... wIth the world in constant turmoil I think it would be foolish to cut the military back at this point in time, especially when I'm hearing complaints about not even having enough .223 ammunition to handle the current operations.  My logic on this is simple:  You don't move into a bad neighborhood and sell your guns so you can buy Twinkies for the kids.

The problem is that the current political party system hinges on scare tactic rhetoric.  Anyone (from either party) who might want to cut spending on social programs runs into a stone wall.  If you're a Democrat you can't because it goes against the party line.  If you're a Republican you get shouted down BY the Democrats with lines such as "They want to take your Social Security!  They want to take your Medicare!  They want to take the food out of your children's mouths! (welfare)"  For those people who have become dependant on those social programs they are necessary to survive, so they'll always be opposed to them being cut back.  The problem is the way the laws are written you can't GET OFF those programs once you are on them.  I have friends on public assistance, and friends of those friends, and  anything they do to try to make it on their own they get punished for.  Social programs should be a safety net, not a fishing hook, and that's what they've become.  Instead of helping people get back on their own feet, they're strung up and hung out to dry.  There's only one reason I can see for this sort of legal entanglement - to keep the poor in their place, and dependant upon the government dole, so they can be an assured voting block for those who would use them to maintain control and power.  On the other hand, you have corporate interests who lobby on their own because they wield their own influence and power.  The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer and have to stay that way.  This has been the case for thousands of years, and it's no different today even if things are more complex than it was in the feudal days in Europe during the 13th century.  In the end it's always the common man who loses, no matter who is in power.

My point in all this is that it is extremely difficult under the current party system to maintain ANY fiscal sanity in the government for the simple fact that the system, as it exists now, only serves to perpetuate itself.  This constant class warfare and partyline warfare goes from one stalemate to another, with neither side maintaining absolute dominance, and if they ever do dominate, the people will ALWAYS be dissatisfied with the leadership, so the balance will pendulum back the other way.  In the end the only ones running the show are the economic powerhouses and mega-corporations since they're the source of the cash that keeps the entire mechanism at work, and as long as it works to their best interests all the finger pointing, blameshifting, and posturing isn't going to change a damned thing.
Logged

I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
BogoJoker
 
Guest
« Reply #21 on: 2004-06-12, 16:29 »
Whoa.

(speechless)
Logged
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #22 on: 2004-06-22, 04:01 »
For anyone planning to see this movie and, God forbid, take it seriously, I invite you to read this little scathing piece:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

Here's a quote of interest:

Quote
To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.

Logged

I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Atom235
 
Pain Elemental
****
Posts: 84
« Reply #23 on: 2004-06-27, 11:47 »
1) Have you guys heard of it?

Yes, by now, of course Slipgate - Tongue

2) How do you feel about the movie (info hopefully soon)?

I have nothing against it and it actually sounds good, except that it's clearly a political document.  

3) Will you see it?

I don't know, probably won't.

4) How do you feel about the articals i have read that the government is trying to STOP this movie from reaching the public?

They are clearly afraid of the reactions of the public. Then again,  general public is a sheepherd  which can easily be convinced  of many things. I do think there is a point in Moore's message, but it 's not presented in the best possible way.

5) Michael Moore: Idiot, Hero, Free Man, or Bluboring Imbicile
(Final questions at the bottom as well)

Free Man, but certainly not a hero. European inside the USA.  Nothing less, nothing more.
Logged
Angst
Rabid Doomer
 

Team Member
Elite
***
Posts: 1011

WWW
« Reply #24 on: 2004-06-28, 06:41 »
Quote
Free Man, but certainly not a hero. European inside the USA. Nothing less, nothing more.
isn't moore a canadian?
Logged
"Who says a chainsaw isn't a ranged weapon?"
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #25 on: 2004-06-29, 08:03 »
No idea.  I do know he's been quoted as saying the American public is stupid, however, so it's quite possible.
Logged

I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
McDeth
 

Makron
********
Posts: 388

Wildly Inappropriate
« Reply #26 on: 2004-06-30, 04:18 »
LOL! I knew it I knew it. First time I come back here in months and guess what I find, a topic on this fricken movie.

To completely be the anti-bird I find the movie very interesting. However, I am not going to argue  any side and point out something that needs to be known about this movie first.

It is propaganda and frankly, people like Michael Moore could make Mr. Rogers look like Charles Manson. I'm not saying Bush is good or bad here (because I am not about to pull a dev/null), all I'm saying is this movie failed to be unbiased.

I am quite liberal, but I find my fellow liberals to be idiots a lot of the times. If Moore would have pointed out a few things on both sides (negative things), it would have given the country more time to decide between the lesser of the two evils.

A few things about the movie that I found to be disagreeable though...

1) Usually presidents go to Camp Davis to get some work done in private (Do you think Bush was doing that?)

2) They showed Iraqi children running and playing gaily out in the streets. I don't think so Mr. Moore, that's pushing the envelope.

Just think about it.
Logged
Beer? I'm down.
Woodsman
Icon of Booze
 

Beta Tester
Icon of Sin
***********
Posts: 827
« Reply #27 on: 2004-07-06, 14:22 »
I have now officialy seen the movie i can say without absolute certainty that fahrenheit 911 is nothing more than absolute dribble. Moore goes to great lengths to distort the truth and present facts in selective ways that help his arguments while excluding those facts  that do not. He  exploits the suffering of people both American and iraqi to further his unproven and ridiculas conspiracy theorys. There is nothing here that hasent been presented in the main stream media in some form or another but moore would have you believe that its all been covered up by the vast right wing conspiracy. What made me sickest about this movie is Moore's attempt to paint himself as a great free speach patriot while he goes to countrys like germany  (where he is whorshipped in a god like way ) and calls Americans "the dumbest people on earth". Being a liberal is not a crime i say this freely even as a conservative but distorting information and trying to effect world politics through lies and deception is. This film hasnt produced anything but conspiracy theorist nonsense and wont fool ANYONE who even casualy follows current events. In short if you actually let this movie change your stance on ANYTHING your a moron. its that simple. Micheal moore is the eni Riefenstahl of his time.
« Last Edit: 2004-07-06, 14:23 by Woodsman » Logged
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #28 on: 2004-07-06, 20:37 »
You forgot to add this link of note, which was posted in the chat room last night.  All the "Bush haters" should really take a look here and see just how much they've been lied to.

http://www.bowlingfortruth.com
« Last Edit: 2004-07-06, 20:38 by Phoenix » Logged

I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Kain-Xavier
 

Beta Tester
Icon of Sin
***********
Posts: 917
« Reply #29 on: 2004-07-06, 22:57 »
Reading about the shit he pulled with K-Mart during his movie "Bowling for Columbine," is reason enough for me to consider Michael Moore a worthless piece of trash.
Logged
My backlog: http://www.backloggery.com/KainXavier
Assamite
 
Hans Grosse
*******
Posts: 271
« Reply #30 on: 2004-07-07, 15:44 »
In defense of Michael Moore here, (Yes, I saw the movie) his movie does, indeed bring a sorely needed perspective into public discourse. And like it or not, people everywhere LOVE this movie, and it's going to have an impact on the election. I can say that as a first-hand witness.

That said, a lot of things in the movie were poorly executed, with implications of far-fetched ideas (Bush CAUSED 9/11, or at least let it happen). AND it was oversaturated with sap. But it DID contain nothing but hard facts, and factual footage. (Excepting that Afghanistan bit!)

Woodsman, it's easy to write off facts if it doesn't fit your ideology. And it's not like Bush and the Republicans HAVEN'T exploited Iraqi and American tragedies for political gain, HAVE THEY?  Banging Head against Wall And you obviously haven't heard of Disney shelving the movie, or Kaloogian's Move America Forward to deny that right-wingers are acting against this movie. (Right-wingers conspiring to bring down a movie that will damage their reputation? No way!)

Quote
this movie failed to be unbiased

WHAT DID YOU sporkING EXPECT, FAIR AND BALANCED JOURNALISM? Of course it's biased. It's every bit as Anti-Bush biased as FOX, CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. are Pro-Bush biased. Except that we don't get Michael Moore 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And that he isn't subsidized by the government.

On my final thought here: You guys claim that Moore called the American people "stupid". Well, given the popular reaction to this movie, he'll most definitely start lauding the American people as the smartest people on earth. Slipgate - Roll Eyes Regardless of what he says what we are, or even the movie's substance, this movie has given us a clear picture of what Americans believe, and it says that they are sick of Bush and his policies.
Logged
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #31 on: 2004-07-07, 19:29 »
Quote from: Assamite
Regardless of what he says what we are, or even the movie's substance, this movie has given us a clear picture of what Americans believe, and it says that they are sick of Bush and his policies.
I'd wait until after November before jumping to that conclusion.
Logged

I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Woodsman
Icon of Booze
 

Beta Tester
Icon of Sin
***********
Posts: 827
« Reply #32 on: 2004-07-08, 02:57 »
Really CNN and ABC are about as pro bush as i am pro eminem. I dont know what kind of CNN youve been watching.
Logged
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #33 on: 2004-07-08, 09:35 »
Well I'd say anyone who considers CNN or ABC to be conservative is about as far to the left as you can ever go.
Logged

I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
« previous next »
 
Jump to: