What about the 80/20 rule, which would indicate, (considering the state of things) that perhaps 20% of people are actively engaged in doing something about it, and the other 80% are, at best, saying that somebody should really do something about those things.
Ah, to be fair, far too many people are struggling so hard to survive these days, (and having a family is a total absorption in itself) that they face more immediate and grave concerns like paying the rent, having enough food, health care, etc.
Ideally, in a "civilized" country, more of your citizens would be enjoying the fruits of a wealthy nation and then have the time to investigate things, engage and pay more attention to what matters. An informed citizenry would be very beneficial and you would think we would be there already.
Would that be convenient for the vested interests with ulterior motives and their own agenda, though? Wasn't part of the era starting in the Reagan years a response to squelch the uppity protesting that emerged from a thriving middle class that may have been paying more attention. I have read some material on that period and it suggests that that was the case.
I mean, that being the case, it seems to have worked well. When you know that agenda was not just about wealth, it was about power and maintaining it, then you can see that the goal was to make sure that never happened again. Our economic situation may be more about keeping as many people who are not privileged on the edge as possible and having them burn up their time and energy surviving and worrying about it, not being safe, comfortable and secure.
= new reply since forum marked as read
