Is Revolution Doom to Fail in our Modern Times?

Started by Bardock423 pages

Originally posted by Mindship
I would imagine that, sooner or later (probably much later), as more and more wealth is accumulated by the Haves and Have-Mores (especially if it's at the expense of Those-Who-Don't-Worship-$$$), at some point Those-Who-Don't-Worship will say, Enough! and demand some kind of change.

But again, I don't see this happening in our lifetime.

There are none that do not worship money, they are just pretending to, so they can steal the money of those that earned it.

It's not the lower classes that are used....it's quite the opposite in our societies.

Originally posted by Mindship
I would imagine that, sooner or later (probably much later), as more and more wealth is accumulated by the Haves and Have-Mores (especially if it's at the expense of Those-Who-Don't-Worship-$$$), at some point Those-Who-Don't-Worship will say, Enough! and demand some kind of change.

But again, I don't see this happening in our lifetime.

If they don't worship money they won't say it anyway...

Besides in most western society's today the rich pay a lot for the poor.

It's not the poor I'm worried about; they do get a lot of assistance. It's the middle-class that's getting squeezed.

There are none that do not worship money,
I don't worship it. Never did, never will.

Originally posted by Mindship
It's not the poor I'm worried about; they do get a lot of assistance. It's the middle-class that's getting squeezed.

I don't worship it. Never did, never will.

How so?

Originally posted by Bardock42
How so?
Take college, for example. All else being equal, the less money you make, the more likely you will qualify for financial aid. And of course, if you're quite rich, money is not a problem. But the middle class is in that gray area: not poor enough to get aid (substantial aid, anyway); not rich enough to pay for college without breaking the bank or burying oneself in loans.

Originally posted by Mindship
Take college, for example. All else being equal, the less money you make, the more likely you will qualify for financial aid. And of course, if you're quite rich, money is not a problem. But the middle class is in that gray area: not poor enough to get aid (substantial aid, anyway); not rich enough to pay for college without breaking the bank or burying oneself in loans.

Hmm, I can follow this one. Got another exampe?

whats an exampe?

Originally posted by Bardock42

It's not the lower classes that are used....it's quite the opposite in our societies.

WTF is this talking about?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, I can follow this one. Got another exampe?

The other major financial expense would be housing. Here in NYC, a 2 bedrm apt can cost $200,000 - $500,000, depending on location...and I'm not talking Manhattan, either. A moderately sized house on Long Island (say, about a 1 hour commute away from Manhattan) can cost at least half a million (the market doesn't fluctuate much here in NY).

I know a young professional couple (late 20s) looking for a home. Their combined salary is maybe $120,000 tops (that is Not a lot of $$$ for living in NYC), and they can't afford a mortgage at current rates.

Maybe it's different elsewhere, but NYC (and as far as I can tell, other major cities as well) is rapidly becoming a place only the rich can afford to live comfortably in.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
whats an exampe?

Right.

Originally posted by chithappens
WTF is this talking about?

You followed the Kyoto thread, didn't you?

Originally posted by Mindship
The other major financial expense would be housing. Here in NYC, a 2 bedrm apt can cost $200,000 - $500,000, depending on location...and I'm not talking Manhattan, either. A moderately sized house on Long Island (say, about a 1 hour commute away from Manhattan) can cost at least half a million (the market doesn't fluctuate much here in NY).

I know a young professional couple (late 20s) looking for a home. Their combined salary is maybe $120,000 tops (that is Not a lot of $$$ for living in NYC), and they can't afford a mortgage at current rates.

Maybe it's different elsewhere, but NYC (and as far as I can tell, other major cities as well) is rapidly becoming a place only the rich can afford to live comfortably in.

How would you propose to change that though?

Originally posted by Bardock42
How would you propose to change that though?

Man, if I knew that, I'd probably have a Nobel Prize for economics on my mantle...and I don't even have a mantle.

I have nothing against people loving money, per se. But all too often, it seems, the money-worshippers use their wealth to "sculpt" their environment so that only those with wealth can partake in what should be available to anyone willing to carry their own weight in a society, even if it's just making enough to pay bills, set up a retirement fund (so as not to be a burden on others later in life) and enjoy a sunset.

I worship money....I'm a Capitalist Pig.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I worship money....I'm a Capitalist Pig.

Wouldn't that be Capitalist Dwarf? 😉

Originally posted by Mindship
It's not the poor I'm worried about; they do get a lot of assistance. It's the middle-class that's getting squeezed.

Interesting: you are the first to mention that in this thread. And it's very true of course. In a democracy the middle class is generally considered the class that supports the system. Interested and educated enough to form the rank and file of most organizations, both political and civic.
+ a large enough group to matter.

Originally posted by Mindship
Take college, for example. All else being equal, the less money you make, the more likely you will qualify for financial aid. And of course, if you're quite rich, money is not a problem. But the middle class is in that gray area: not poor enough to get aid (substantial aid, anyway); not rich enough to pay for college without breaking the bank or burying oneself in loans.

Now what you explained is true in some developed countries but not in every developed country. Seeing as there are western countries who do not have this problem with education, I think you can change your education system without having a revolution.

But in the end what is a revolution and what is just a change?

Originally posted by Fire
Now what you explained is true in some developed countries but not in every developed country. Seeing as there are western countries who do not have this problem with education.
I hope that is true (for now I will take your word for it), though taking a devil's advocate stance, I could say, "But in those other countries, the quality of education may not be as good--hey, you get what you pay for." Then again, I would be the last to argue that everything America does is always the best way of doing something.

But in the end what is a revolution and what is just a change?
When I think of revolution, I tend to picture gunfire, violence, looting and general mayhem. I don't think that necessarily has to be the case, especially in modern, developed countries. In the US, revolution--perhaps 'evolution' would be a better word?--might succeed only if the middle class exercised its political and economic might in a truly unified manner...though, again, I can't see anything like this happening within the next 50-100 years. I suspect Madison Avenue is far too crafty at brainwashing the masses to let that occur any sooner.

Originally posted by Mindship
I hope that is true (for now I will take your word for it), though taking a devil's advocate stance, I could say, "But in those other countries, the quality of education may not be as good--hey, you get what you pay for." Then again, I would be the last to argue that everything America does is always the best way of doing something.

Well here in Belgium you pay, at most, €600 tuition fee to get into uni for one year. From your first bachelor till your last master year that is. Master after Master or Bachelor after Bachelor costs more (the government doesn't support those as heavily). The poorest people pay €30 tuition and get scholarships for about everything else.

Now our universities might not be Harvard, Yale, Oxford or Cambridge, but they are good enough.

Originally posted by Mindship
When I think of revolution, I tend to picture gunfire, violence, looting and general mayhem. I don't think that necessarily has to be the case, especially in modern, developed countries. In the US, revolution--perhaps 'evolution' would be a better word?--might succeed only if the middle class exercised its political and economic might in a truly unified manner...though, again, I can't see anything like this happening within the next 50-100 years. I suspect Madison Avenue is far too crafty at brainwashing the masses to let that occur any sooner.

I think we have about the same idea as to what is a revolution.