What Is In Your Opinion The Biggest Issue Today? All opinions are welcome.

[unicornrose 0]

I want to know what everyone thinks is the biggest issue today.What I mean by this is what is the most important issue to you as a person? I would hope that everyone can be civilized in discussing this topic. Everyone I believe has their own thoughts on this. I believe that our feelings on what is important come from our current life experiences. I think this is a fact because at differant times of my life differant things are very important. I would like to see what other people say before I mention what is important to me. :(Beth

[electriic ink 1]

Knowledge. Every has to know to get:[+] the current news[+] updated versions of a gadget[+] a new gadget[+] into a conversation[+] a job[+] moneyand other big things that effect our lives.Knowledge.

[NeXDesigns 0]

the biggest issue today is gas prices and the little green aliens, ok so only gas prices, here in the US (florida) they are nearing $2 a gallon, imagine having something that eats gas like say a hummer, try to fill the tank on that and youll spend close to if not over $100 on one tank.

[serverph 0]

for me, it would have to be attaining WORLD PEACE and eradicating POVERTY. it's always painful to see and read and hear about people suffering because of wars, because of poverty. the first is harder to attain with all the BAD politics (and politicians) involved, but the second is just hard but not impossible altogether. IF ONLY people can join hands, there will be less worries in the world.

[Iarkalwen 0]

Poverty, cancer cure, world peace...Poverty - this has always been a big issue with me. To me, leaders whether it be the government, mayor, or president, are all talk. They never do anything it seems like.Cancer cure - today I just got through with doing a 3mile walk for it. Seriously, I was about to cry right then and there. Almost everyone had a "In Memory of..." sign pinned to the back of their shirts.World peace - I don't really need to explain.

[FuChelle 0]

I think that there a a lot of really big issues today. What I think is the most important though is education.Without education, we will never be able to find a cure for cancer (or any disease for that matter). Without education, we will never be able to advance in technology. We will never be able to find a way to end poverty. We wouldn't be able to understand politics to be able to elect a good leader and politions (really, I think it's hard enough to understand now WITH an education lol). So yep, education...then we can keep advancing to find solutions for all the other problems in the world.

[Neutrality 0]

What do I think is/are the biggest issue(s)? Well it's pretty simple.The world has so many big problems, but most of them won't be solved as long as the governments of the world continue to line their pockets will gold. With all of the money that they have, wouldn't they be able to feed the whole world a few times over?They have all of these commercials and charities that ask people to sendmoney and all that to suffering countries, and yet, those countries arestill in the same state, and it seems that many people do donate to them. Is the money not going to the people in those third world countries? It really makes me wonder.And about cancer. I think that they've found the cure for many cancers a long time ago, but they choose not to let it out on the market. Why? Well think about it. If they give the cancer cure to millions of people around the world, the hospitals would lose money on all of the medication and hospital care these specific people get.Even the pharmaceutical companies would lose alot of money since they make millions off of medicinal drugs. When people are in good health, they don't buy drugs, and when drugs aren't being bought, they [ the pharmaceutical places ] lose alot of money. See what I mean? Wouldn't they rather make as much money off of people as possible?World Peace? I think that there will be world peace soon. However, I have a feeling that the world peace won't really be what people expect it to be, or at least, what some people expect it to be. But this is just a personal view.I consider these to be the biggest issues. I don't see a really above and beyond issue in the world today. Of course there are things like the gas prices, the Iraq situation, Canada's governmental situation, but these are mostly civil issues and not global issues.But I digress.

[brainless 0]

I thought about answering to some of your suggestions first but then I decided that it would be hard to make the change from giving my opinion about other's most important issues to mine, so here's mine:I think the biggest regional issue right now is the European Constitution, which will, de facto, replace most national constitutions. My problem with the european constitution is, among other things, that it makes upgrading the military abilities compulsory for all member states ("each member state has to increase its military power on a regular basis" or nearly like this) and that a not too well-known additional protocol to this constitution, which is supposed to be ratified by all member states in the same process as the consitution is ratified, includes the death sentence, even though the consitution clearly says that the death sentence is abolished in all member states: "Violent protests may be shut down with the use of force. This includes the use of both non-lethal and lethal weapon systems by the police forces."Hopefully, the french referundum on this constitution results in the french people objecting this constitution as the polls say they'll do (from 52% up to 63% against and rising), even though this amount of people against it could not be reached without the European Nationalist Front [strange, huh? So many nationalist parties work together on an international level...], which I dislike almost as much as the constitution-to-be.On a worldwide level, I think it's the Globalization which we have to be most concerned about. I truly believe that it's not bad that it's so easy to have contact to people from all over the world, to travel to the other side of the world and spread informations all over the world (well, at least most parts of it. This exlcudes most people in "third-world" countries and the poor people in the "western world").The bad side about this process is that national governments, which are basically restricted to their own, small piece of land, lose their influence on laws, even though they are supposed to do what's good for their people, while huge, multinational corporations gain more and more power [according to Naomi Klein's researches in No Logo!, among the top 100 economic powers, there are only 49 nations but 51 corporations]. Corporations like Nike [or Adidas or Reebok or Gap or ... or ...], which let contractors produce their clothes by child labor in the Export Production/Free Trade Zones at costs of about $2 per piece (and wages of $2 per 14 hours working-day) really aren't the worst in this process. Even worse are corporations like Monsanto, which wants to control "only" 100% of the market for seeds by the year 2020. They achieved this for Iraq with a law passed by the "souvereign" Iraqi government, which forbids Iraqi farmers to use their own seeds and explicitely forces them to buy seeds from Monsanto.But there are also some small rays of hope in this: Monsanto's corn seeds have been forbidden by the government of the Indian state Arda Pradesh (I hope I got the name right. The spelling might be a bit different but I'm sure about the Pradesh) because these seeds have a negative influence on local plants and are a financial risk to indian farmers. I hope that the decision of a democratically elected government on this issue will have a positive influence on the way other governments deal with this. Unfortunately, if the government of entire India does not agree with this decision, it might make Arda Pradesh look like a rogue state :/Another positive thing about "the globalization" is that there are some people who use those things which enable the big corporations to conquer the world in a creative way - and resist the "corporate world" with websites like Indymedia or Wikipedia; cellular phones to coordinate different parts of large protests and comparatively cheap methods of transportation to travel to protests in a neighbouring nation, or, as a guy from an american organization for better/cheaper social serivces in the USA did, even to other continents -----inspired: yep, pharma corps actually invent illnesses when they discovered some new stuff while researching on a cure for a different disease. Some years ago, people got some sessions with a psychologist when they had depressions, nowadays they get some anti-depressants which make them feel comfortable for some time - but a not too well-known study showed that the suicide rate among people who were supposed to take these drugs is even higher than the suicide rate among normal people with depressions. Another thing is that people treated with antidepressants are more likely to be aggressive, because the pills just make them feel non-depressed without influencing into which kind of mood they switch. I'll stop here before I give away too much wrong informations because it's been some weeks since I read about this study...iarkalwen: it's a great thing what you've done for this cancer cure thingy. keep it up [and I think it's not only necessary to do something about an issue one is concerned with but also to encourage people who are doing something to keep it up]nexdesign: well ... I don't worry too much about gas prices because I'm usually going by bike (and therefore I'm more concerned about food prices). But if you think $2 per gallon is much: we spend about $1.50 per liter (-> about $6 per gallon, if I'm not completely mistaken) in Germany - and most people didn't stop going by car, even though we paid only $4 per gallon a few years ago. There's a reason why there are small cars which burn less than a gallon per 100km. Actually, our government gives tax advantages to people who use these cars and also give money to car producers so they keep on developing cars which burn even less...

[heavensounds 0]

Well I'd say that the biggest issue today is tryin to prevent TOTAL POLLUTION of our lil' earth and to think ahead for what we are going to use as a fresh-water resource in about 20 years. The thing is that with todays usage of fresh water and gas we don't have enough supplies even for 20,30 years because out climate is changing and looot's of fresh unsalty water that was frozen is now melting, which causes mixing with salt --> no more fresh water. The next thing is that with that melting of ice the whole earth is goin' out of ballance..and I could go on and on.So if you ask me we should be conserned about what are we goin' to drink 20, 30 years in the future and try to find a way to stop global warming asap which would prevent these disasters from happenin'...Greetz...

[spacemonkey 0]

What do I think is/are the biggest issue(s)? Well it's pretty simple.The world has so many big problems, but most of them won't be solved as long as the governments of the world continue to line their pockets will gold. With all of the money that they have, wouldn't they be able to feed the whole world a few times over?
They have all of these commercials and charities that ask people to send
money and all that to suffering countries, and yet, those countries are
still in the same state, and it seems that many people do donate to them. Is the money not going to the people in those third world countries? It really makes me wonder.

Initially, I agree. It has always perplexed me as to why those same locations are always needing our money. You would think that, with all the thousands of dollars that are donated, conditions would improve somewhat drastically. I have seen commercials that do show improvements, such as a local hospital or increased availability of medicine, or perhaps even a new school. But other than that, quality of life in those same areas hasn't improved. I have wondered whether or not the money that is donated actually makes it to those people, and although a few donation organizations take a few cents out of your donation, there are a few that do not. So yes, the money is making it there. But the reason those people aren't living in better homes or relocating to different areas is because of the very fact that they get free money through donations. With the money we give them, they aren't inspired to go out and actually try to improve things themselves through work. They can just sit around and donation money will pay for their next meal... maybe. But at least it is a chance for them -- they don't have to go out and look for a job or look for food. Do I think donating money is bad for these people? In large quantities -- yes. You can only start these people off on the right foot, you can't take it too far or they'll take advantage of it. Also, if all the rich people in the world donate all of their money to feed everyone on earth, that would be great, but a lot of other people would lose money, and it could possibly start an economic downward spiral right into the toilet. It just isn't a good idea.

. . . And about cancer. I think that they've found the cure for many cancers a long time ago, but they choose not to let it out on the market. Why? Well think about it. If they give the cancer cure to millions of people around the world, the hospitals would lose money on all of the medication and hospital care these specific people get.
Even the pharmaceutical companies would lose alot of money since they make millions off of medicinal drugs. When people are in good health, they don't buy drugs, and when drugs aren't being bought, they [ the pharmaceutical places ] lose alot of money. See what I mean? Wouldn't they rather make as much money off of people as possible?

If the cure for every type of cancer had been found, you would have known by now. These days the media tries to dig up every bit of information, ESPECIALLY information about medical and political policies. All the medical associations and pharmaceutical companies would be putting themselves at too high of a risk by witholding that type of information from the public. If someone found out, a lot of people would LOSE a lot of money. I believe your underlying logic is right -- money is the reason. But while they are trying to make it, they're not going to put themselves at such a risk that could result in bankruptcy. Besides, if everyone who had cancer was cured, the hopitals and pharmaceutical companies wouldn't lose enough money to put them out of business. The majority of people who seek medical treatment are NOT cancer patients. Plus, if everyone who had cancer was cured, there would be a whole lot more people alive and able to get hurt or get sick. I believe that in the long run, everything comes out even. Though a cure to a major disease like cancer (or HIV, for example) would start to bring up some population control issues, it is not a current issue as we have yet to see a cure for either of the two major diseases that I have previously mentioned.

. . . World Peace? I think that there will be world peace soon. However, I have a feeling that the world peace won't really be what people expect it to be, or at least, what some people expect it to be. But this is just a personal view.

I believe that 'World Peace' is what the world is like today. Yes, there is fighting still going on overseas and even domestically, but true, utopian world peace will likely never occur. Nor do I think that it should ever occur. Bad things tend to happen in "perfect societies." I think the world is currently in a near perfect balance of authority and diplomacy. If our troops weren't in active duty in Iraq I would say it is about as close to world peace as it can be. I should mention, however, that I fully support the invasion of Iraq. At any rate, yes, I agree that world peace is not going to be what people expect it to be. I just hope those people can learn to deal with it.

[Neutrality 0]

It seems like the world is always in a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation. No matter what is done in the world, it seems to result in another negative occurrence somewhere else.

 

Spacemonkey: Very well said on your behalf. I agree on most of the points you brought up, but I disagree on several small ones. No hard feelings though.

 

Do I think donating money is bad for these people? In large quantities --yes. You can only start these people off on the right foot, you can't take it too far or they'll take advantage of it.

 

Good point. Giving too much to them would be a bad idea. I think giving them enough so that they can live a decent life is good enough to start, then if they are willing to work up to higher aspirations/callings in life, they can try to do so.

 

Also, if all the rich people in the world donate all of their money to feed everyone on earth, that would be great, but a lot of other people would lose money, and it could possibly start an economic downward spiral right into the toilet. It just isn't a good idea.

Compromise has to be attained somehow, even if their companies lose abit of profit. But I never said that they should donate all of their money, either. That would be kind of silly. On the other hand, given a somewhat decent amount of money to those who are suffering in third world countries I don't think is a bad idea. They can still live well and still be able to help others. Sometimes you have to give alittle. Unfortunately, that's just a pipe dream on my part. Major companies and governments will NOT give that amount of money to help the world.

I think the public knows them well enough to know that they would rather stuff their pockets and get everyone into debt than to help as many people around the world as possible.

 

If the cure for every type of cancer had been found, you would have known by now. These days the media tries to dig up every bit of information, ESPECIALLY information about medical and political policies.

Not necessarily. I wouldn't doubt that the higher Achelon of the world know things that they don't want us to know, like for example, the cure to cancer and many diseases. It's happened in past regimes [ hidden propaganda ], and I wouldn't doubt that it's happening now.

 

All the medical associations and pharmaceutical companies would be putting themselves at too high of a risk by witholding that type of information from the public.If someone found out, a lot of people would LOSE a lot of money. I believe your underlying logic is right -- money is the reason. But while they are trying to make it, they're not going to put themselves at such a risk that could result in bankruptcy.

Let's say that someone finds the cure for cancer and almost every disease on the earth. Wouldn't they loose a lot of money on medicinal drugs and healthcare anyways? Who would go to the hospital or go to a pharmacy if they were disease-free and in the best shape of their lives?

That's one reason to conceal cures for cancer and diseases.

 

I forgot to mention this. Besides the money factor, there is also the population factor in regards to the "cure for cancer and all diseases".

If this cure was given out to a large portion of the people in the world that are suffering, the population would begin to grow at a fast rate. Hypothetically, concealing The Cure could be a sort of population regulator - keeping the population under control, or possibly, keeping the population at steady decline. But I digress.

 

I think the world is currently in a near perfect balance of authority and diplomacy. If our troops weren't in active duty in Iraq I would say it is about as close to world peace as it can be.

 

I don't know about this. I think the world isn't peaceful, actually. But that's my opinion and I'll reserve the rant for a more appropriate topic.

[spacemonkey 0]

Compromise has to be attained somehow, even if their companies lose abit of profit. But I never said that they should donate all of their money, either. That would be kind of silly. On the other hand, given a somewhat decent amount of money to those who are suffering in third world countries I don't think is a bad idea. They can still live well and still be able to help others. Sometimes you have to give alittle. Unfortunately, that's just a pipe dream on my part. Major companies and governments will NOT give that amount of money to help the world.I think the public knows them well enough to know that they would rather stuff their pockets and get everyone into debt than to help as many people around the world as possible.

I agree. Yes money should be donated. Yes, it would likely never happen. But I should make the point that perhaps we shouldn't think of all politicians and all wealthy people as having a lack of morals or ideals. The fact is that some of these people simply choose to ignore them and, although it is quite easy to stereotype these people, it is a bad and, moreso, unfair approach.

. . . I wouldn't doubt that the higher Achelon of the world know things that they don't want us to know, like for example, the cure to cancer and many diseases. It's happened in past regimes [ hidden propaganda ], and I wouldn't doubt that it's happening now.

On many levels, I actually agree to your statement. Maybe I just watched too many "Conspiracy?" shows on The History Channel this afternoon; but I do agree. I'm sure there's a LOT of information that we do not know. Really, it is for our own good though. I'm going to semi-quote Tommy Lee Jones' character from the movie "Men In Black" here: "The person is smart; but people are dumb, paranoid, and stupid and you know it." That's not an exact quote, but you get the idea. With regard to the cure for diseases, I do wonder about two scenarios:
1. If a politician were to discover the cure or other important information, why wouldn't he or she have "blown the lid" (so to speak) to expose the cover-up? Wouldn't he or she get VAST (and I mean VAST) public support for a political platform dedicated to exposing such secrets and making them available to everyone? A presidential candidate willing to give us a cure for cancer? I'd vote for him.

2. Bribery: its effects & downfalls. I would assume that behind every cover-up or conspiracy there's someone who wants to do the right thing. Some lab assistant who knows what's going on and wonders why the project he helped to succeed isn't getting released to the public (or the proper amounts of media coverage, for that matter). Perhaps this assumption is too far down the conglomerate ladder. Assuming that someone high up is being bribed to be quiet, maybe they demand more money, or maybe the deal doesn't work out. People can get greedy. I find myself with a loss of words to really describe this scenario, but you get the idea. Bribery leads to greed, or something else, which leads to exposure. "The truth will set you free." I suppose.

Let's say that someone finds the cure for cancer and almost every disease on the earth. Wouldn't they loose a lot of money on medicinal drugs and healthcare anyways? Who would go to the hospital or go to a pharmacy if they were disease-free and in the best shape of their lives?That's one reason to conceal cures for cancer and diseases.

That is a little different than assuming the cure for cancer was being concealed. If every disease, EVERY disease had a cure, then yes, I would agree. Hospitals might start to lose money because of the lack of disease treatment, but you must take into consideration that all these people being alive will be available to be hit by a car, or fall out of a tree, or even get shot. If they had died of cancer or some other disease, they wouldn't experience these things. It is really hard to say. I'm not sure. But you have a good point.

I forgot to mention this. Besides the money factor, there is also the population factor in regards to the "cure for cancer and all diseases".If this cure was given out to a large portion of the people in the world that are suffering, the population would begin to grow at a fast rate. Hypothetically, concealing The Cure could be a sort of population regulator - keeping the population under control, or possibly, keeping the population at steady decline. But I digress.

I agree. This would be a major, if not the ONLY reason that that type of information would remain classified. Or at least that's why people in their semi-sane mind should keep it from us. Although the idea sounds insane, it makes a little bit of sense. An increasing population with a decreasing amount of natural resources spells doom for mankind. But, while this reasoning makes a 'little bit of sense,' nature, I believe, attempts to balance problems out by itself every now and then. Diseases could mutate and evolve into much deadlier and even gruesome diseases for which there is no current cure. There is a type of influenza that, while mildly treatable and preventable by vaccination, is much more intense and is even more fatal than the more common types. This topic is really hard to imagine, as we just don't know. But, like I said earlier, you have a good point, with which I agree.

I don't know about this. I think the world isn't peaceful, actually. But that's my opinion and I'll reserve the rant for a more appropriate topic.

By all means, let's discuss it here! Yes, you are right, the world is not very peaceful right now. Nor do I think it will ever be. But realistically, you have to ask yourself: can the comprehesibility of man's actions, or even his fate, be changed? What I mean is: is it possible to eliminate all of the insane and malicious thoughts of humankind? No, not likely. There will always be someone, somewhere who will have violent, negative intentions for their own reasons. So, assuming this is a correct statement, the only way to achieve "true" world peace would be to have good RELATIONS with other countries, but really, the psychological intentions would stay the same. This could be more devastating in the long run for the world. Let me give you an example:
Current world events: North Korea has admitted to having restarted its nuclear weapons program in order to possibly "bully" the nations of the world by threatening its deployment. U.S. spy satellite images may have recently discovered an underground nuclear weapon testing site, that, upon discovery, was covered up with (as of now) no confirmation as to whether or not a weapon was tested.

True world peace: North Korea is in good political standing with the world. Does not mention its nuclear weapons program, but builds one behind closed doors. There are no more U.S. spy satellites in operation, since there is world peace (perhaps a treaty is signed to comfort previously "bad" countries), so the testing site is never found. North Korea could potentially launch a nuclear attack on the United States and we'd never see it coming.

If there is no threat, there's no need for defense. When someone snapped, it'd be way worse than it is now. I can't really put my thoughts into clear words or descriptions. Maybe if you start arguing some points I'll find the right words. This just doesn't seem exactly like what I wanted to say, but, whatever.

And of course, none of this is to be taken personally. It is just a topic of thoughtful discussion. To talk like this with other people about important and thought-provoking issues is good for the mind. And really, if for no other reason, I like this discussion because it introduces new viewpoints that perhaps I haven't taken into consideration. I might agree with your agruments and have a clearer sense of what I should or should not believe.

[guangdian 0]

Well I'd say that the biggest issue today is tryin to prevent TOTAL POLLUTION of our lil' earth and to think ahead for what we are going to use as a fresh-water resource in about 20 years. The thing is that with todays usage of fresh water and gas we don't have enough supplies even for 20,30 years because out climate is changing and looot's of fresh unsalty water that was frozen is now melting, which causes mixing with salt --> no more fresh water. The next thing is that with that melting of ice the whole earth is goin' out of ballance..and I could go on and on.So if you ask me we should be conserned about what are we goin' to drink 20, 30 years in the future and try to find a way to stop global warming asap which would prevent these disasters from happenin'...

Greetz...

o,really.i think the important thing is speech freedom & democracy human rights

[icemarle 0]

Global Warming and Pollution. It might be my opinion here, because I live in a sweltering hot place, and I can't take the heat any longer! (OK I'm exaggerating, but it's hard to bear) Sadly, the house I live it absorbs a huge amount of heat, and it doesn't exactly bring in cold air too often. The Aircon's on most of the time, paving the way for more expensive electric bills.I hope the scientists hurry up with the Artificial O3, because the hole won't be getting smaller as the days pass. Why won't people listen and stop ruining the environment? This gets me worked up most of the time. We can't bear this sweltering heat forever! (Good for you people who live in countries with temperate climates, but if you had a day at my house, you'll feel like you were in an oven.)

[NeXDesigns 0]

well gas isnt the only big problem, thats just my big problem, loli think the world should stop having an arms race to see who has the best toys and who can beat whos a**. it never turns out good, so why even try? its stupid on their side.