Video of Gravel
http://www.gravel2008.us/
A presidential candidate whos head isn't stuck up his ass
Judging by what I've heard him say, he seems to be honest, reasonable, fair, and down to Earth. He also seems to genuinely care about preserving and enhancing the rights, opportunities, and quality of life for all Americans. Above all, he appears to care about letting the truth of our situation as a nation, be known to the public.
To put it simply this is the first presidential candidate (democrat/replublican/etc.) I've ever seen in my lifetime who I believe can put our government in a position where it can actually have a positive affect on the lives of every American citzen.
To put it simply this is the first presidential candidate (democrat/replublican/etc.) I've ever seen in my lifetime who I believe can put our government in a position where it can actually have a positive affect on the lives of every American citzen.
-
sue hindmarsh
- Posts: 1083
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:02 am
- Location: Sous Le Soleil
A man who speaks and acts from a balanced and rational mindset isn’t going to win the American Presidency. Americans NEED, due to their deep rooted inferiority complex, to have their culture talked-up at all times – thereby allowing them the peace of mind that their culture is superior to all others (or better put: that their’s is the only culture of any merit).
Gravel’s ideas of a fair-go for everyone, of keeping US policies at home, and speaking out openly about America’s cultural, political and economic problems, would be considered by most people as a bitter pill – and one they had no intention of taking.
Unless, that is, they are looking to begin to heal their long time existing illnesses. But that’s a big ask for any nation.
--
Australian’s are also off to the polls soon, and though our problems are on a much smaller scale than the US’s, they are basically the same. But even here, with a culture that enjoys mocking itself, a man like Gravel would be considered too outspoken and therefore too much of a loose cannon to suit Australian tastes.
--
Gravel would perhaps fit more into the European mindset – in a nation that has the confidence and stability to be able to take more chances. (Mind – there aren’t many of them either. Perhaps one of the Nordic countries would welcome his type?)
He might just have to do an AL Gore - that is, to keep trying to get the public and the politicians thinking about the consequences of their actions.
Gravel’s ideas of a fair-go for everyone, of keeping US policies at home, and speaking out openly about America’s cultural, political and economic problems, would be considered by most people as a bitter pill – and one they had no intention of taking.
Unless, that is, they are looking to begin to heal their long time existing illnesses. But that’s a big ask for any nation.
--
Australian’s are also off to the polls soon, and though our problems are on a much smaller scale than the US’s, they are basically the same. But even here, with a culture that enjoys mocking itself, a man like Gravel would be considered too outspoken and therefore too much of a loose cannon to suit Australian tastes.
--
Gravel would perhaps fit more into the European mindset – in a nation that has the confidence and stability to be able to take more chances. (Mind – there aren’t many of them either. Perhaps one of the Nordic countries would welcome his type?)
He might just have to do an AL Gore - that is, to keep trying to get the public and the politicians thinking about the consequences of their actions.
-
ExpectantlyIronic
- Posts: 411
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 7:11 pm
Gravel's support for the "fair" tax eliminates whatever small chance I had of voting for him in the primary. Such a thing has always been ill-conceived nonsense that shifts the tax burden off the wealthy and further onto the middle or upper-middle class. Despite what it's proponents claim, the flat tax is a regressive tax due to the fact that the wealthy spend a smaller portion of their income, and thus would pay less taxes under such a scheme (that's basic high-school economics). This isn't to say that proponents of the "fair" tax don't have the best intentions, as the American tax system does need an overhaul, but their idealism has blinded them into thinking that such a tax scheme magically generates money so everyone pays less without a hit to their standard of living. Such things only work, though, in the imaginary dream worlds of libertarian ideologues.
EI,
Did you even read beyond the first sentence about how he wants to change the tax system? He wants to eliminate the federal income tax all together, and tax only goods and services. Goods and services the wealthy obviously spend more on due to them having the money to do so. At least I certainly hope this is obvious considering the wealthy have larger homes, more automobiles, and more of just about everything else. Also, since the wealthy choose to indulge in the materialistic lifestyle, they ought to pay higher taxes due the the damage it does to the environment. There is no mention of a "flat-tax" in any of his proposals. You will only be taxed on what you spend, not on what you earn.
Not to mention that people who register for the program will recieve a prebate on all essential goods including food, shelter, clothing, and medicine.
Sue,
As sad as it is, I agree, he speaks too much truth to be widely accepted by the majority of Americans. I can only hope we're wrong.
*[EDITED TO ADD PREBATE PROGRAM]*
Did you even read beyond the first sentence about how he wants to change the tax system? He wants to eliminate the federal income tax all together, and tax only goods and services. Goods and services the wealthy obviously spend more on due to them having the money to do so. At least I certainly hope this is obvious considering the wealthy have larger homes, more automobiles, and more of just about everything else. Also, since the wealthy choose to indulge in the materialistic lifestyle, they ought to pay higher taxes due the the damage it does to the environment. There is no mention of a "flat-tax" in any of his proposals. You will only be taxed on what you spend, not on what you earn.
Not to mention that people who register for the program will recieve a prebate on all essential goods including food, shelter, clothing, and medicine.
Sue,
As sad as it is, I agree, he speaks too much truth to be widely accepted by the majority of Americans. I can only hope we're wrong.
*[EDITED TO ADD PREBATE PROGRAM]*
-
ExpectantlyIronic
- Posts: 411
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 7:11 pm
Nick,
I took such things into consideration when I suggested that the fair tax shifts the tax burden onto the middle and upper-middle classes. If it weren't for such things, the fair tax would be out-and-out regressive and predominantly tax the poor. I'll reiterate that the wealthy spend a considerably smaller portion of their income then those who are less well off. Think about the debt levels of the typical lower to upper middle-class family as compared to the fraction of yearly income spent by the uber-rich. Said uber-rich will still be able to afford whatever they want, whereas the prices on taxable goods will make them more inaccessible to the common Joe. This will increase the levels of perceived income disparity amongst the classes, which demonstrably results in an increase in crime and health problems.
I took such things into consideration when I suggested that the fair tax shifts the tax burden onto the middle and upper-middle classes. If it weren't for such things, the fair tax would be out-and-out regressive and predominantly tax the poor. I'll reiterate that the wealthy spend a considerably smaller portion of their income then those who are less well off. Think about the debt levels of the typical lower to upper middle-class family as compared to the fraction of yearly income spent by the uber-rich. Said uber-rich will still be able to afford whatever they want, whereas the prices on taxable goods will make them more inaccessible to the common Joe. This will increase the levels of perceived income disparity amongst the classes, which demonstrably results in an increase in crime and health problems.
Even though the wealthy may spend a smaller portion of their income, that "smaller potion" is still far more than the "larger portion" the less than wealthy spend. Take for instance a person who earns $250,000/year who spends 40% of his income each year versus a person who earns $50,000/year who spends 50% of his income each year. The wealthy person is still spending four times as much, ($100,000/year) compared to the middle class person, ($25,000/year).
And I'm going to assume that there are certain years in which this wealthy person goes on a bit of a splurge and spends far more than his average. Like when he decides to buy his new yacht in cash, renew his country club membership, buy his wife that necklace with a giant rock in it, or bribe his mistress to keep her mouth shut when she threatens to tell his wife about their affair after she realizes he's not going to divorce his wife and marry her.
And I'm going to assume that there are certain years in which this wealthy person goes on a bit of a splurge and spends far more than his average. Like when he decides to buy his new yacht in cash, renew his country club membership, buy his wife that necklace with a giant rock in it, or bribe his mistress to keep her mouth shut when she threatens to tell his wife about their affair after she realizes he's not going to divorce his wife and marry her.
-
ExpectantlyIronic
- Posts: 411
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 7:11 pm
Nick,
(Incidentally, from what I calculated, it seems like the tax rate would have to be much larger then 30%. Although, I do imagine that typical folks making $50,000 a year tend to spend much more then 50% of their income.)
... and the fella (guy 1) making $250,000 a year is only being taxed on 40% of his income, compared to the guy (guy 2) who's making $50,000 a year and is being taxed on 50% of his income. An annual prebate payment of $2,500 (approx. what a FairTax website claims a single individual will get) will increase the annual income of guy 1 by 1% prior to tax, whereas guy 2 will have his income increased by 5% prior to tax. Assuming a 30% tax rate, this means that guy 1 will effectively pay 12% of his income in taxes, whereas guy 2 will pay 13% of his income in taxes. Guy 2 ends up with the short end of the stick.The wealthy person is still spending four times as much, ($100,000/year) compared to the middle class person, ($25,000/year).
(Incidentally, from what I calculated, it seems like the tax rate would have to be much larger then 30%. Although, I do imagine that typical folks making $50,000 a year tend to spend much more then 50% of their income.)
Last edited by ExpectantlyIronic on Mon Apr 30, 2007 3:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
keenobserver
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:01 pm
I see a demo debate presetly on tv, why isnt Gravel there?
I assume some dumbass rule excludes him.
Screw the taxes.
Why arent any of these candidates speaking out/about the seemingly millions of men and a few women lying on our cement sidewalks last night, speak out about the outrage and what their plan is to correct this inhumanity?
I wont vote for an inhumane person of eitrher sex.
What has Gravel said about the 36000 male suicides every year? what is his plan to balance things, to make opportunity and services equal between the sexes? Its obviously not
I just looked out the window, theres someone lying in the entrance way to some store across the street keeping out of the way of sidewalk traffic. These guys are peppered everywhere throughout the city.
Every nite 60 cars get smashed into out here, cant say i blame them.
As far as i can tell most Americans are heartless beasts. Women especially will rush to the aide of some filthy dog or kitty but let someones son suffer and rot away without so much as leaving them 25 cents.
These poor folks should gets medals simply for not acting out and ending up in jail. How incredible understanding and patient of them.
There was a time when American women were compassionate, those days are long gone. Now, as they try to prove their toughness, unaware what it really means to be a man, unaware completely of male psychology, they think they ought to be cold and mean. Pressured to act like men and be responsible as men, they've thrown up their hands and thrown in the towel and given away the warm qualities we've always appreciated in them. Even mothers are not mothers anymore. For those who do not live or come here the USA, I reckon they might be shocked to discover how terrible and hardened the hearts and minds of the citizens have become. With thousands being killed at tje ends of our guns abroad, whats the point of caring for our loosers here anymore, thats the idea i reckon.
Shameful. With Americans hated as they are and in constant anxiety about explosions and death eventually commonplace here, with fears of chemical and nuke poisioning appearing in the morning paper, why bother to care at all anymore, why bother, each is under pressure enough, we have nothing left to give our fellowman, we are rude to each other and extremely impatient, everywhere i go i feel and see it.
Im sure outsiders would be shocked to look through the eyes of the everyday man, but they are normally treated differently and consequently unaware of the severity and depth of the ....... really inhumanity.
Only the beautiful, wealthy and needed are treated with any respect here in America. I can only hope there is someplace in this land where the situation is not so horrific, but ive got my doubts.
Folks with regular routines, seeing the same folks everyday, dont see what i see. Each is forced to be more civil to each other since the next day they'll be together again like it or not.
People go about their business, shopping, ignoring each, telling each other to say little, as if our world is run by Nazis, to not get in trouble and chat up too much with strangers, people shopping for apples and meat side by side afraid to meet afraid to offend afraid to be human.
Unbelieveable.
I assume some dumbass rule excludes him.
Screw the taxes.
Why arent any of these candidates speaking out/about the seemingly millions of men and a few women lying on our cement sidewalks last night, speak out about the outrage and what their plan is to correct this inhumanity?
I wont vote for an inhumane person of eitrher sex.
What has Gravel said about the 36000 male suicides every year? what is his plan to balance things, to make opportunity and services equal between the sexes? Its obviously not
I just looked out the window, theres someone lying in the entrance way to some store across the street keeping out of the way of sidewalk traffic. These guys are peppered everywhere throughout the city.
Every nite 60 cars get smashed into out here, cant say i blame them.
As far as i can tell most Americans are heartless beasts. Women especially will rush to the aide of some filthy dog or kitty but let someones son suffer and rot away without so much as leaving them 25 cents.
These poor folks should gets medals simply for not acting out and ending up in jail. How incredible understanding and patient of them.
There was a time when American women were compassionate, those days are long gone. Now, as they try to prove their toughness, unaware what it really means to be a man, unaware completely of male psychology, they think they ought to be cold and mean. Pressured to act like men and be responsible as men, they've thrown up their hands and thrown in the towel and given away the warm qualities we've always appreciated in them. Even mothers are not mothers anymore. For those who do not live or come here the USA, I reckon they might be shocked to discover how terrible and hardened the hearts and minds of the citizens have become. With thousands being killed at tje ends of our guns abroad, whats the point of caring for our loosers here anymore, thats the idea i reckon.
Shameful. With Americans hated as they are and in constant anxiety about explosions and death eventually commonplace here, with fears of chemical and nuke poisioning appearing in the morning paper, why bother to care at all anymore, why bother, each is under pressure enough, we have nothing left to give our fellowman, we are rude to each other and extremely impatient, everywhere i go i feel and see it.
Im sure outsiders would be shocked to look through the eyes of the everyday man, but they are normally treated differently and consequently unaware of the severity and depth of the ....... really inhumanity.
Only the beautiful, wealthy and needed are treated with any respect here in America. I can only hope there is someplace in this land where the situation is not so horrific, but ive got my doubts.
Folks with regular routines, seeing the same folks everyday, dont see what i see. Each is forced to be more civil to each other since the next day they'll be together again like it or not.
People go about their business, shopping, ignoring each, telling each other to say little, as if our world is run by Nazis, to not get in trouble and chat up too much with strangers, people shopping for apples and meat side by side afraid to meet afraid to offend afraid to be human.
Unbelieveable.
-
Kelly Jones
- Posts: 2665
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
I reckon that, if enough people value being conscious and aware of Nature, then that easily becomes a social policy.Carl G wrote:Any honest and truthful candidacy is of no consequence within the current political structure. It has no possibility of changing the situation, largely because of insufficient public awareness or care to alter the status quo.
I like how Sam Harris talks about "conversational pressure", especially about the end of faith and the future of reason.
I've been staying at a youth hostel recently, and having rational discussions about consciousness and the nature of reality, with other thoughtful quiet types.
So though I am within the current political structure, being truthful and aware is obviously altering the status quo.
-
Yes, if.Kelly Jones wrote:I reckon that, if enough people value being conscious and aware of Nature, then that easily becomes a social policy.Carl G wrote:Any honest and truthful candidacy is of no consequence within the current political structure. It has no possibility of changing the situation, largely because of insufficient public awareness or care to alter the status quo.
That's nice.I like how Sam Harris talks about "conversational pressure", especially about the end of faith and the future of reason.
I've been staying at a youth hostel recently, and having rational discussions about consciousness and the nature of reality, with other thoughtful quiet types.
One may change one's local environment, certainly, yet the dominant memes in society continue.So though I am within the current political structure, being truthful and aware is obviously altering the status quo.
Good Citizen Carl
It's because of belief in libertarian free will. In the minds of most, a dog or cat as a "innocent" creature which has no role in its own fate. A human being, on the other hand, is a counter-causal agent who has choice and "personal responsibility," meaning that any fate which "could have been avoided" through actions (usually those conforming to the believer's own worldview) is "deserving."As far as i can tell most Americans are heartless beasts. Women especially will rush to the aide of some filthy dog or kitty but let someones son suffer and rot away without so much as leaving them 25 cents.
As long as this belief persists, there is no reason to expect any significant change in society's attitude toward the unfortunate.
I live in a tub.
If he's insightful, he's doing the only thing that *can* be done about it - confronting the delusion that cause it in himself and encouraging others to do the same.What are YOU doing about it, keen?
This question is often asked in hopes of discrediting someone because they are not volunteering at the soup kitchens or whatever. While that sort of thing is all well and good in its own way, it is absolutely useless as a solution to the problem. As far as solving human problems goes, anything other than confronting the delusions at the root of them is a waste of time.
I live in a tub.
Thinking is action.sschaula wrote:Thinking is useless without action, in this case, Nat.
I get the impression from you that we should all put on our super hero capes and go around swooping up people tied up to train tracks and the like. Not only is this thinking of yours redundant, it is entirely ineffective because people will still end up making the same mistakes over and over.
Perfecting yourself through conscious thought is the only truly effective thing one can do to change the world. Imagine if everyone took the time to perfect their own minds. Nearly all of our worldly problems would cease to exist either immediately or the near future. Unfortunately most people are just too lazy to do this, they would rather just help at a soup kitchen once a year and think that they somehow made the world a better place.
I disagree. Thinking obviously doesn't solve our worldly problems. Working at solving them does. The gripe was about homeless people...so you see that there are a bunch of homeless people and you go home and think about it. Does that cause the homeless people to suddenly pick themselves up off the street?
Why not instead, think of things that can be done and then do those things?
Thinking is an action, but if you're thinking about tennis (for instance) and you never play, thinking is NOT action.
Why not instead, think of things that can be done and then do those things?
Thinking is an action, but if you're thinking about tennis (for instance) and you never play, thinking is NOT action.
- Scott
I agree with Nick. These "active" solutions, while arguably useful on a limited basis, are basically band-aids. Real change in the world occurs the same way it does in an individual - from within.
I'm not trying to discourage people from taking outward action. But without inward action, all we can do is run in place on a treadmill.
I'm not trying to discourage people from taking outward action. But without inward action, all we can do is run in place on a treadmill.
I live in a tub.
I wasn't suggesting that no one think. As I said - "thinking is useless without action, in this case". And as you've added, action is aimless without thinking.
I didn't say, "Thinking is useless. Action is all that's needed."
We can't accomplish much without having both a plan and a follow through. Both thoughtfulness and action.
It's true that real change in the world comes from within. If you could change homeless people from within, maybe they'd pick themselves up. If you could change lawmakers, you could somehow make sure there aren't people living in the streets. If you could change the minds and hearts of the common people, you could change the way poor people are treated.
But that's a long shot, and the results are definitely not immediate. What about the dude on the street tonight? Might as well put a bandage on the scar, as the body heals it from within.
Might as well get up off of your ass and do something if you find a problem with the world, instead of bitching about it and thinking without any action.
I didn't say, "Thinking is useless. Action is all that's needed."
We can't accomplish much without having both a plan and a follow through. Both thoughtfulness and action.
It's true that real change in the world comes from within. If you could change homeless people from within, maybe they'd pick themselves up. If you could change lawmakers, you could somehow make sure there aren't people living in the streets. If you could change the minds and hearts of the common people, you could change the way poor people are treated.
But that's a long shot, and the results are definitely not immediate. What about the dude on the street tonight? Might as well put a bandage on the scar, as the body heals it from within.
Might as well get up off of your ass and do something if you find a problem with the world, instead of bitching about it and thinking without any action.
- Scott
You don't seem to be getting it. As Nick said, thinking *is* an action. If you've got the time and inclination to go serve soup, there's nothing wrong with that. But a much better action involves thinking about the false ideas that cause poverty and homelessness. When one understands these, one will naturally influence others to understand them as well. Physical actions are fine and necessary, but unless they flow from understanding, they will not accomplish much. That's why if your energy is limited, it's better to think and speak than take less effective actions, such as band-aid solutions. There are plenty of people capable of serving soup but not of understanding philosophical causes. If you can think deeply, it makes no sense to use your energy doing anything else.
I live in a tub.
-
Kelly Jones
- Posts: 2665
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
So the status quo can change. Truthfulness has an effect, just as falseness has.Carl G wrote:Carl: Any honest and truthful candidacy is of no consequence within the current political structure. It has no possibility of changing the situation, largely because of insufficient public awareness or care to alter the status quo.
Kelly: I reckon that, if enough people value being conscious and aware of Nature, then that easily becomes a social policy.
Carl: Yes, if.
You're kidding, all hell breaks loose when one speaks openly about Truth. It's like putting a wild beast into a toddlers' nursery.Kelly: I like how Sam Harris talks about "conversational pressure", especially about the end of faith and the future of reason.
I've been staying at a youth hostel recently, and having rational discussions about consciousness and the nature of reality, with other thoughtful quiet types.
Carl: That's nice.
People don't usually say things like, "If someone is wrong, then it is also wrong not to correct them. One should talk about the nature of Reality, meditation, truth, beliefs, and whatnot, if there are generally social taboos and much confusion about these matters."
But even though it makes people feel uncomfortable, there is a chance that one will be at the right place at the right time, and meet someone who is ready to listen and think.
That someone could be a Buddha in an instant.
Only if they are valued more.One may change one's local environment, certainly, yet the dominant memes in society continue.Kelly wrote:So though I am within the current political structure, being truthful and aware is obviously altering the status quo.