How to Counterspin "Ownership Society"?

Another of those Bu$hitler "reframe the debate" RW thinktank (like "death tax") terms meant to justify dismantling Social Security, and who knows what else? I thought of "marketized society" or "corporatized society."

It even works as a soundbite!

It means the finance companies own everyone.

maybe 1% of americans own their home....the bank REALLY owes it. In past generations people REALLY had mortagge 'burning' parties. WHO here owns their home FREE AND CLEAR?

But it took us twenty-five years to be able to say that.

they need to be referred to as 'the ministry of information'

?

... I like it!

In GW's ISOLATION society everyone is left to sink or swim, and there is no safety net to help families stay healthy and independent.

I have been trying to think of a catchy phrase that would express the opposite sentiment of Enlightened societies such as Canada, where the underlying assumption is "we're all in this together." Maybe "winner take all" society?

The thing Bushco has done so well at is attaching a positive word to something totally unrelated - like the Clear Skies Act.

I say just attach any negative term to his program -- hence, an Isolation Society.

If they're selling a defective product, shouldn't we be entitled to a full refund?

It's meant to energize people into thinking, "Hey, I want to own something too," but most of this country is already owned by corporations, from land and raw materials to intellectual rights and futures on anything you can imagine.

For the vast majority of the country, the only things we can count on owning are our personal belongings, the part of our house not still mortgaged, and the part of our car that's paid for. Bush wants to sell the idea of owning a stake in the future, but he's going to use that misnomer to convince people that privatizing Social Security and education are ways for American's to "own" those franchises too.

What we should be saying is that we don't want an ownership society but rather an investment society, in the sense that we invest our money, our sweat, and our devotion into institutions -- brick-and-mortar as well as conceptual -- where everyone holds a stake in seeing them succeed and reaping the benefits.

We already have an ownership society -- as Americans, as capitalists, we're granted the right to own whatever our available money will buy. But the grand dreams that fill peoples' heads are much too often not bought with cash or credit, but with care and tending that doesn't need to be legislated.

in the country as a whole anymore. Only in your individual retirement account.

We tried it. It's what led to the Great Depression.

Call it the "raw deal". Or, the anti-ownership legislation. Or, the big divide legislation. Or, the two tier society legislation. Or, insist they call it what it is, privitizing social security.

The Big Government Red Republicans want to own everything about you.
to own your body
to own your religion
to own your schools

The Big Government Red Republicans, through their Corporations want to own the rest.
to own your air
to own your water
to own your wages
to own your health care
to own your prescription drugs
to own your food supply
to own your communication

The list goes on and on. Yes, Bush wants an ownership society. He just doesn't tell you who the owners are.

The Old South, where money even entitled you to own slaves. The Reptilican mindset we face originates there, compadres, and make no mistake about it.

"Who will own YOU?"

"How much are your children worth?"

Ownership society is about healthcare too since they want to scrap the business deduction for insurance and make us buy our own policies instead.

So, if ownership and being on your own is so great, then I propose that we carry that idea into all aspects of life.

Hurricanes in Florida destroyed your home? Sorry, you are on your own.

You need a new highway to get your from the sticks to a good paying job? Sorry, you are on your own.

The free market won't pay you a living wage for the stuff you grew on your farm? Sorry, you are on your own.

You get the idea. If there is no safety net for social problems like failure of the stock market and poverty among the retired, then there should be no safety net for other problems either.

What we Democrats need to do is embark on an explanation of the reasons for our tax policies, our trade policies, and our social safety net, our military/foreigh policy. THat is what the public wants to hear. Why are our policies the way they are? And how are the Democrats going to chang ethese policies when in power?

Renounce sloganeering and spin and framing. Give America something fresh.

Speaking the truth no longer matters. This country has become so thoroughly "perception managed" the English language has lost it's meaning. Framing is simply stating the facts in a context that most people will understand.

John Kerry had policies, ideas, but no one bothered to go to his website to check them out.

We are a soundbite society and if we want to win again, we have to counteract every GOP soundbite with one of our own.

The "undecided" voters are too busy to listen to nuance, even thought that is what they say they want. They only have time to hear catchy phrases, not to absorb an entire story.

Reason doesn't penetrate the skulls of the easily misled. Terminology is everything.

I couldn't agree less. We tried explaining. We tried nuance and perspective.

There is a reason people spend so many $ marketing: it works.

There's no reason to NOT employ methods that are successful and also provide more full answers for those who want them.

The rightwing has spent decades using their propaganda machine and funding all sorts of crooked studies to make free trade and regressive taxation look good. And their media machine has spread these ideas about their economic platform far and wide.

But the Dems have never done the same. They just go along with the GOp on economic issues. And no wonder--the Dem. leadership is rich, and the GOP economic platform favors the rich.

You see, the Democrats are supposed to be what ya call an "Opposition Party." The thing about an Opposition Party is that they have to actually OPPOSE the opposition. THe Dem leadership does not explain their economic platform because they agree with the GOP.

Ownership by the Mega-Rich Society

99.99% of us are actually members of the serfhood society.

The wealthy own the rest of the world.

That was my first thought and seems to fit under these 2 posts.

"It's gonna be an ownership society all right, the corporations are gonna own you."

you?

quote:

"Renounce sloganeering and spin and framing."


I can appreciate where you are coming from, but like it or not, they work. The masses love simple catchy phrases.


We need to re frame things for our benefit. Language is a very powerful tool.

I meant the term "Bubble Society", rather than Owner Society, for social security, to remind people, their money is not 'safe' in the stock market.

their booty. Neener neener. :puke:

Right now, we the people have Social Security - there is no risk to us, if you work, you are entitled to some retirement benefits so that you don't live in abject poverty.

Right now, stockbrokers must make their money off the folks with enough excess to invest on their own. That's a risky business - there is no guarantee that people will keep using stockbrokers, paying mutual fund managers etc, particularly if people don't have enough money to make ends meet.

So, now we turn the tables: We the people take the risk and the stockbrokers get the security. A percent of every working American's money will now go to stockbrokers and the stockbrokers have no obligation to provide a return on that investment.

so, let's call it the Stockbroker Security System from now on.

on edit, oops meant to post this to the main message. sorry.

"I don't think the message of Bush's health plan as it relates to his "ownership society" is really getting out, and it's a big, big issue.

Bush's healthcare plan calls for the elimination of employer-funded health insurance.

Let me repeat: Bush's healthcare plan calls for the elimination of employer-funded health insurance.

Did you know that?"

From Sept. 18:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/18/234035/652

Everyone gets a chance to own a home with an initial low interest mortgage. After a few years, the interest rate is adjusted WAAAAY up. You can't afford to pay even the interest. The Bank OWNS you.

Everyone gets to own stock in those big sexy corporations. Those big sexy financial management corporations will make a killing in fees off your uninsured investments. They OWN you.

You will be extended enough credit to hang yourself with it. You will somehow find yourself continuing to pay increasingly higher taxes regardless of tax reform.

Indentured servitude. Mortgage default. Credit debt bondage. Poverty. Hey, look at the bright side, you can always join the Crusades and be an Army of One. The first thing you learn in the military is they OWN your ass.

Ownership society! Can't wait! :party:

Ownership society -- "Who's owning who?"

The Owners own your ass for real.

"You will be extended enough credit to hang yourself with it."

And those who bury themselves in debt will not be allowed to file for bankruptcy (or sue anybody who leads them to make bad investments.)

"One Paycheck Away from Losing Your Home to Repuke Banks Society"

and so forth.

with the Owners (Cheap Labor Conservatives) paying the workers less and less and making them pay for more and more government sevices (after they've already been taxed to pay for them,) so they stay poor and NEVER can become owners.

... the fact that regardless of who has been in office, I'll not see a dime of my contributions. Fortunately, I've planned for that as well. As a baby-boomer I just couldn't fathom retiring without sufficient funds to do what I chose to. It's all about fiscal responsibility and priorities.

I mean, such as suddenly and traumatically getting cut out of every support system you have including your employment and family and so forth, and having to live on the credit card for quite some time, recovering from the damage?

Oh, I know. You're owned from the beginning!

Bush responds to nearly everything by proposing a tax-exempt account and by reducing taxes on anything that isn't salary, wages or tips. In other words, his strategy is to provide more ways for the wealthiest to sock away their assets without paying taxes. It also removes an incentive to contribute to charity, even though Bush has made such a big thing about charitable giving.

Anyway, the average Jane or Joe spends most of what's earned in a year and doesn't earn tens of thousands of dollars on investments. She or he is also probably very much in debt and trying to save for a down payment on a house, retirement, the children's education, etc. However, wages are not rising and most people live just at their means or beyond them. Just where are they going to get extra money for yet another obligation -- "private" Social Security accounts, medical savings accounts, etc.?

I also call the inheritance tax the Paris Hilton tax.

It is an insurance policy, like the FDIC. So far I haven't heard the RW spinmeisters coming up with a way to turn over the FDIC to the Private sector.



"Yeaaaah. Ownership society...I like it! Har Har!"

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

More bullshit dumped on the uninformed to scare up votes for an increasingly dishonest republican party!!More Money to the RICH






Please visit the link in the 2nd quote.

It is true that many Family Farms are sold off after the parents die. There are several reasons for this:

1) It is almost impossible for the Family Farmer to compete with the subsidized Corporate operations.

2) Most Farm families have more than one offspring. Battles among the siblings over the estate cause many sales.



Repealing the Estate Tax will be a bonanza for the the VERY RICHEST. It will affect the other 98% of the population by raising the tax burden on the non-rich! Somebody must pay the bills!
Think about it.

Hey, how come I can't post photos anymore??? Does anyone know the procedure? What the..... I've been doing this a while, and suddenly I can't post photos. :(

Many of our Founding Fathers favored voting rights for property owners only!
Luckily, those that favored Democracy prevailed.

Those now in power in the Republican Party (and some elephants in donkey suits) are working to overthrow our Democracy and replace it with a system where ONLY THE VERY RICH are enfranchised (Oligarchy). The RICHER you are, the MORE votes you have! (Kinda like that now)

Most us would be merely a source of cheap labor.

I know most people here will disagree, but Americans like to own their own home, business, car, etc. They like to control their own life. This is a country founded by pioneers and the "can do" people Kerry spoke about, even though many of them were bad people. The American spirit is one of rugged individualism and libertarianism - not collectivism/socialism.

Democrats were only successful when they advocated for collectivist policies which were seen to be an auxillary to capitalism and individualism, not replacements for them; collectivist policies seen by the public as an aid in the quest for the American dream of ownership, independence and self suffiency. Kennedy and Clinton, probably the most successful and popular Democrats in the past 50 years advocated for such moderate libertarian policies - one of an "opportunity society" whereby goverment would help people only in so much as they were willing to help themselves, and that it would be a stepping stone upwards to the capitalist mainsteam, i.e. to own a home, to work for a good salary, to live freely of racial and other discrimination, to have equal rights and equal opportunity upwards -- where Democrats offered what seemed like a pro-growth, pro-success, pro freedom, pro self betterment vision.

Once the Democrats became a party associated with leftist/"nannyist"/anti-growth/suffocating economic and social policies and an overly activist governent - they have struggled as a minority party.

Americans are still very much libertarian - not liberal or conservative. When it comes down to it, everyone is a libertarian when government makes an unwanted intrusion into their life. It's easy to advocate for authoritarianism/collectivism/society reshaping policies (which both conservatives and liberals do - just in different areas) from a position where it doesn't affect you negatively. Once it's your business or home being overtaxed, your gun being taken away, your civil rights being compromised, your sexuality and morality being questioned, your vice (fast food, cigarettes, music, porn, marijuana, strip clubs.. whatever it is) being taken away .. then everyone instantly becomes a libertarian.

Republicans are the majority because they are slightly less authoritarian than the nannying Democrats (especially on taxes and everyday economic issues where ownership is concerned), and the public isn't aware of their evils which are hidden from view and/or too complex ( i.e. their moderately fascist economic policies, their imperialist foreign policy).

getting elected and reality are two different things.

Ownership society is Bogus from the get go.

If everybody owned their own home they would be worthless.

Rich landlords would be put out of business overnight.

The American dream is just that. It is nicely marketed to the American voter as something the candidates much prove themselves against.

You're suggesting if we in the democratic party want to regain power we must do better at proving our candidate will project the myth farthest and widest, regardless of its accuracy or validity.

...ladeled over with heap of buzz words.

The Plain Fact is:
the majority of Americans are in favor of single payer healthcare, the FDIC, the Highway System, Public Schools, The VA, regulated utilities, The Armed Services, the Fire Dept, the Police Dept,Social Security, the FDA, The Corp of Engineers, the Park system,the Weather Bureau,DOT, and many other collectives.

If you talked one-on-one, you might be surprised to learn that the majority of Americans are in favor of regulating or re-regulating utilities, energy, and extraction of Natural Resources, maybe even public ownership.


I've been at DU a loooong time, and I have never heard a legitimate member of DU advocate giving up uwnership of our homes, cars, or businesses. If someone attempts to collectivize my property they better come ready for a fight! I don't believe that we have a single Communist member.

*

The American People will not 'own' anything if they don't have money or resources to purchase anything with!

It takes a trade of resources or acknowledged currency in order to 'own' something.

With 10-11% of the working population not working (5.X% unemployment doesn't cover the people who aren't working and who have given up looking for work) and 95% of the population earning under $25K - $50K per person for their family... no one but the rich (top 5% of the population) will 'own' anything.

Face it, the Bush Administration Pwn's You!

Listened to this segment at work, and seethed.


http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4185886

Talk of the Nation, November 24, 2004 · In his second term, President Bush has indicated that he wants to promote more personal responsibility among Americans, arguing that it fosters security, dignity and independence. We'll discuss the concept of an "ownership society."

Guests:

Stephen Moore, author, Bullish on Bush : How George W. Bush's Ownership Society Will Make America Stronger

James Surowiecki, writes the business column, "The Financial Page," for The New Yorker. Author, The Wisdom of Crowds

Frank Luntz , Republican pollster and specialist in political communication

The caller at 26:00 was wonderful! And the next caller says that the Social Security privatization is just a gift to "greedy money managers".

Unhappy events abroad have retaught us two simple truths about the liberty of a democratic people. The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of a private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. (FDR: message to Congress proposing the monopoly investigation, 1938)