With no offense to Hillary Clinton, she was the one picked to win by a certain class, and when individual contributions were able, in part, to help change that, what happens, they smash the economy. And every attempt to regulate or balance top heavy payouts is met by rate increases.
I earlier surmised that the crash was suppose to be done after the election, but have not crystallized why it was moved up. But it may have been hardened by the example in the movie the 'Quick And The Dead' where the town owner got mad at them hiring a out of town gun to take him down, and threatened to raise the hardships of the common people.
The ability for individuals to effect social policy, in the world of money, has to do with how much money they have. So making society poor in a zero sum gain world, gives more power to the people that do that thing.
It is really bad, but if you can squeeze your mind into the world of money first, some people would not care about the suffering and think on different terms like maintaining control.
But here is the big thing about that, they have to maintain enough hardship for people to vote out each party each cycle, without so much that people throw out the system of money.
So there is two ways to fix things, move it off that balance line of hardship by making it better for people through peaceful revolution, simply regulating the conditions that go on in society for society, not for a few in society. Or drive them into extreme riches where they come down the other way.
We were actually closer to hard revolution, but for the sake of everyone it is better to make things better and move to more moderate situations through reform, even though it would be easier to just add one more straw to the camel.
Might as well play some clips from Quick and the Dead
Trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfRrEUz62LwEnding scene
http://www.youtube.com/user/ValyraBeth#p/u/3/CmDsOXQVXWI
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
