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

[Neutrality 0]

Spacemonkey: I like this discuss too. Many good points are being brought up from both sides. This is good. We're understanding each other and we aren't being close-minded about the argument either.

 

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'll agree with you on that. But the sad thing is is that alot of these politicians do fit this stereotype of being greedy and corrupt. And history has shown very few leaders who have been moral and upright. Sure, there must be afew of them that want to reveal hidden information to the public, afew of them who are moral and upright, but what about the consequences that could come with doing the right thing?

They might lose their job, or they might get killed if you want to become really farfetched. They have to stay quiet or else they might lose that job. So really, the greedy ones are really in control, not the upright ones.

 

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."

 

Well, I agree in a sense. We don't need to know everything that they keep hidden, but, we also can't stay ignorant to the fact that there is also alot information that we do need to know that they keep hidden. The thing about holding back information back from people is that it basically leaves people to be easily misinformed (brainwashed even?) in certain issues that may be very important.

 

Since there is so much information being directed towards us through media, through TV, radio, etc., we would assume that we know enough, right? But what if these medians of information do not always tell the "whole story" if you know what I mean. It's a kind of brainwashing technique if you think about it. When people are misinformed, they don't realize it, and thus, don't really know whether it is true or not. Maybe I'm sounding a little too anti-media. That's not it. I'm justing saying that the media has the power to hold back information and be able to tinker with information at will.

 

This is another point that I thought about that may seem abit off-topic. Alongside misinforming the public, there is also desensitizing the public.

When you watch a news show, how many depressing stories will you see? Basically, the whole news show is about depressing stories other

than the sports, weather and entertainment segments.

 

Seeing day after day of sad, possibly morbid, stories on the news eventually desensitizes a person. I'm seeing this as an agenda to desensitize the public so that when something terrible happens to their community, their loved ones, etc., they don't feel much compassion for them anymore. It's a good brainwashing technique actually - desensitization. But I digress for now.

 

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.

 

True. But, what politician is brave enough to do something as bold as that? What politician would be willing to risk his job (possibly his life?) if this plan to release The Cure should backfire in some way? He/She better be able to convince other leaders to support him/her also, because as the old saying goes, "There are power in numbers".

 

I won't comment on the other scenario since I totally agree with it.

 

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.

Yes it is a bit different to assume that. I actually meant to add "all diseases" at first as well. But since I can't edit my posts... Anyways, I forgot the fact that people get injured also...silly me. However, there are more people dying of disease and cancer than there are people getting shot, getting into car accidents, etc. Other than that, I agree with what you're saying.

 

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.

So, based on your response, I was right: World Peace won't be what people expect it to be. Violence won't be eliminated. People won't stop being racist, prejudiced, etc. People won't become "moral" towards each other. The only thing that will change will be that nations will start to have good relations with each other. Basically, this will lead into a destruction of mankind eventually. People can't be like this for millions of years and still be able survive on this planet. It'll have to end sometime.

 

And you're right. If the world is "peaceful", it would be much easier to attack another nation because no one would see it coming ( naturally, people would think "what nation would have the gall to start a rift against another nation in a "peaceful" world?", right?)

 

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.

Nothing is personal here. Everything is done for the sake of exchanging ideas/views/opinions, for gaining more perspective on certain issues, and for fulfilling certain curiousities. And I'll have to say that you bring up very well thought-out points and I can see that you are very well-spoken. I hope for another response from you Spacemonkey. This is becoming very interesting.

[Cammy 0]

Environmental..global warming, fresh water supply, endangered species

Poverty and Child Exploitation....So much is related to this problem alone

Health...Cancer, HIV/AIDS epidemic, Flu/Respiratory, Stroke and Heart Problems

Violence...Warfare, Terrorism, Gangs

Drugs & Alcohol... illegal use and abuse of alcohol and prescription drugs

[shigajet 0]

For me, there are several issues that come to mind:Poverty, global warming and the depletion of the ozone layer, widespread famine in underdeveloped countries, cancer, AIDS, world peace (terrorism is included under this general issue), the availability of knowledge and how potentially dangerous it could be, pollution.

[kri 0]

No doubt you've heard the scary news reports:The number of overweight children is three times higher today than it was 25 years ago; more than 15 percent of school-age kids are too heavy; weight-related childhood diabetes has skyrocketed; and the risk of other health problems continues to climb."Today's American children may be the first generation in modern history to live shorter lives than their parents did," says Kelly D. Brownell, Ph.D., a Yale University obesity expert, in his just-published book, Food Fight: The Inside Story of the Food Industry, America's Obesity Crisis, & What We Can Do About It. With such dire warnings, it's natural for parents to worry: Could this epidemic affect my child?That's tougher to predict than you might think. Most of us figure we can tell whether our children weigh too much. But research suggests parents are frequently off the mark. In one study, even when moms had weight problems of their own, 79 percent failed to recognize when their pre-schoolers were too heavy. At the other extreme, some parents fret over routine weight gain. "It's not always easy to tell whether children are overweight, because at certain stages, some fat is healthy and normal," notes Dennis Styne, M.D., chief of pediatric endocrinology at the University of California, Davis, Children's Hospital.One thing is sure: It's worth keeping an eye on childhood chunkiness. Even if your child's weight is appropriate now, if his dietary habits are bad, he may be headed for trouble. The good news is that many obesity risks can be controlled -- and warning signs for future weight problems are clear if you know what to look for. Here are the questions you need to ask.

[dark 0]

HiThe biggest issues in the world right now are for me, the war in Irak, the recent riots in Uzbekistan where hundreds have been killed and the european constitution vote.It is sad to see that when a corner of the planet stops killings and mass murders it starts somewhere else.As far as my own little life, staying healthy and married to my wife and pay my bills quickly so I can travel.Patrick

[thebluekirby 0]

My opinions on the biggest issues today? none. I don't pay attention to the news because I don't find it interesting, I mean, is it interesting that people are losing thier homes, dieing, or war? I'm not that type of person to see stuff like that, so I barely update myself on what's currently happening. I only hear the news around school by overhearing people's conversations.

[spacemonkey 0]

My opinions on the biggest issues today? none. I don't pay attention to the news because I don't find it interesting, I mean, is it interesting that people are losing thier homes, dieing, or war? I'm not that type of person to see stuff like that, so I barely update myself on what's currently happening. I only hear the news around school by overhearing people's conversations.

141778[/snapback]

While no one can force you to keep up with current events, I would highly, HIGHLY suggest that you do so. Not only will you gain a better understanding of the world and be able to make important decisions later on in your life, but you will be able to exercise your mind and gain other points of view by having discussions regarding what's happening in the world. While it's nearly impossible to shut yourself away from the world and its happenings, you shouldn't strive to make that achievement.

 

Inspired: I agree with your comments. Especially about the media desensitizing the public with disturbing and morbid news stories rather than positive and uplifting ones. Turn on the news in the evening and what do you see? Three or four stories about robbery, murder, or other crimes, and maybe one or (though it is unlikely) two stories about the community or a new program at the local school. The media, it seems, would rather frigthen the public than inspire it.

 

I watched "Bowling for Columbine" a month or so ago, and I must say that this is, quite frankly, THE ONLY point with which I agree with Michael Moore (but we won't get into that here). I had somewhat wondered about this issue but his presentation really put it into perspective.

[sunster13 0]

My biggest issue for me is the Michael Jackson child molestation trial. Just because a 13 year old thinks he can convince everybody he was molested for money, dosnt mean that Michael Jackson is a criminal. I think his career being over is enough, but putting the guy in jail for 74 years max is just plain BS. If the witnesses cant give a confident answer to the questions they are being asked, they really have no big proof. I think he is innocent, and that the court should ust let the guy be. So what if he likes to run around and play tag with children. And a maid THOUGHT she heard giggles in the shower, he likes to play with kids. It makes him feel like a kid, and i think they should leave him alone.

[Neutrality 0]

Spacemonkey:

 

While no one can force you to keep up with current events, I would highly, HIGHLY suggest that you do so. Not only will you gain a better understanding of the world and be able to make important decisions later on in your life, but you will be able to exercise your mind and gain other points of view by having discussions regarding what's happening in the world. While it's nearly impossible to shut yourself away from the world and its happenings, you shouldn't strive to make that achievement.

Well, I can't really blame him/her in a sense. Sometimes world issues can become so annoying and depressing that some people just want to shut themselves away from it all. On the other hand, some are

"desensitized" to it, so they just continue to watch without really feeling compassion or whatever, like I mentioned in an earlier post.

 

Turn on the news in the evening and what do you see? Three or four stories about robbery, murder, or other crimes, and maybe one or (though it is unlikely) two stories about the community or a new program at the local school. The media, it seems, would rather frigthen the public than inspire it.

 

Exactly. Fear creates confusion, which makes it a less daunting task to misinform people, which may inturn lead into easier brainwashing of the public. Did you also know that news show ratings go up when they air depressing stories? That's probably one reason why they don't air too many good, comforting uplifting stories. The more violence and disaster they show, the more audience they attract [ due to the desensitization tactic ], the more viewers they get, and the more ratings they receive. It's a very simple process. A very effective process at that. It's kind of like a station-to-station competition: the one who can attract the most viewers with disasterous news stories will win the ratings.

[Goosestaf 0]

My biggest issue for me is the Michael Jackson child molestation trial. Just because a 13 year old thinks he can convince everybody he was molested for money, dosnt mean that Michael Jackson is a criminal. I think his career being over is enough, but putting the guy in jail for 74 years max is just plain BS. If the witnesses cant give a confident answer to the questions they are being asked, they really have no big proof. I think he is innocent, and that the court should ust let the guy be. So what if he likes to run around and play tag with children. And a maid THOUGHT she heard giggles in the shower, he likes to play with kids. It makes him feel like a kid, and i think they should leave him alone.

143879[/snapback]

yeh thats really crap. Its all the controlling mother. Right head case i say. Altho he is quite an odd and mysterious man. . . . like him denying he's had any surgery, insisting that "people jsut change" . . .lol not as much as he has.

 

but for me the biggest issue is the spread of jamster and that F**King crazy frog bol*ox.. . . i mean, its constantly on all the music channels, and its moved onto Channel 4 now aswell (UK) and not to mention the million of add banners all ova the web which play the tacky S**t when u roll over them. . . grrrrrrrr i bloody hate them. . .

 

But politcally a major issue is the USA's pollicies. Their foreign pollicy, Their foreign aid policy and there ignorant and selfish policie on Global polluting, global warming etc. . . . . grrrrrrr

 

the new european consitution and eventual forming of a european super state is a quite a big issue too.

[bluewater 0]

The big issues really depend on where stand in todays society, for the sick it would be there health, the poor it would be money, for the homless it would be somewhere to sleep at night and for the rich its staying away for the above.From here the issue's we face everyday run into the hundreds, from the time we wake up in the morning to when we go to bed we are bombarded with information.What we should or should not eat, how much exercise you should or should not do, GM foods, bird flu, sars, ebola, Marburg haemorrhagic fever, Oil prices, Aids, job security, kids, north korea, iraq and don't forget those killer comets running around the solar system just waiting for our planet to be in the right spot to take us all out!The less we worry are life the quicker we get to live it. We should only worry that others get the help they need.The people should never forget Rwanda, because their Governments did.

[spacemonkey 0]

Spacemonkey:

Well, I can't really blame him/her in a sense. Sometimes world issues can become so annoying and depressing that some people just want to shut themselves away from it all. On the other hand, some are

"desensitized" to it, so they just continue to watch without really feeling compassion or whatever, like I mentioned in an earlier post.

 

...

 

Exactly. Fear creates confusion, which makes it a less daunting task to misinform people, which may inturn lead into easier brainwashing of the public. Did you also know that news show ratings go up when they air depressing stories? That's probably one reason why they don't air too many good, comforting uplifting stories. The more violence and disaster they show, the more audience they attract [ due to the desensitization tactic ], the more viewers they get, and the more ratings they receive. It's a very simple process. A very effective process at that. It's kind of like a station-to-station competition: the one who can attract the most viewers with disasterous news stories will win the ratings.

143972[/snapback]

I just don't think that ignorance to the world, whether for the purpose to prevent depression or otherwise, should be encouraged. That's the gist of what I wanted to say.

 

In response to your comments on violence versus ratings: you are spot on. As I began to read your agreement with what I had initially commented, I thought the same thing, then I read it from your post, so that's one less subject I have to type out. Yes, I agree. Society doesn't matter anymore -- ratings (i.e. - money) is what matters.

[Neutrality 0]

I just don't think that ignorance to the world, whether for the purpose to prevent depression or otherwise, should be encouraged. That's the gist of what I wanted to say.
In response to your comments on violence versus ratings: you are spot on. As I began to read your agreement with what I had initially commented, I thought the same thing, then I read it from your post, so that's one less subject I have to type out. Yes, I agree. Society doesn't matter anymore -- ratings (i.e. - money) is what matters.

Oh, I'm not saying that anyone should be totally ignorant or anonymous to world events, news, etc. I'm just trying to look at it in a different perspective. Sometimes the news and the issues around the world do get abit annoying and depressing. And I'll be honest - sometimes, I hate listening to news. It gets me down in the dumps sometimes. Not all of the time, but there are moments where I wonder.

And you're right - ratings, money and audience size is what really matters. There are some behind the news programs that do care about what happens out there in the world, but I think this group is overshadowed by the greedy majority. What a sad world this is.

[ana 0]

I really do believe the enviroment is a pretty big issue right now. More than one person said "gas prices" which more than anything is directly tied to the environment. not in the least because of largely contributing to (deadly) pollution.but the way that our current population uses up energy resourses incerdibly wastefully with the luxury of not having to know how expensive that wastefullness is (particularily to the environment), is pretty alarming. I definantly think the raise in gas prices is a good thing. It is prompting people to try to conserve that resource by buying hybrid cars or investing money into alternate sources of energy.does anybody know about ANWR? congress approved oil drilling to be done in the arctic National Wildlife Refuge! it is a devistating loss for the environment for a measly short supply of oil. but we are desprate for it... :-( the benefits of drilling there don't nearly compensate for the draw backs(also it is a fact that the united states uses about 90% of the world's energy resourses.)

[mama_soap 0]

I'm sure there are plenty of big issues out there, and it would probably be theoritically impossible to prioritize them. For instance, enviornmental problems and financial problems (poverty et al) each demand a lot of concern in their own right.

 

As a matter of opinion, I would think discrimination is a pretty big issue. If the general social mindset could change so that nobody discriminated on the basis of caste, creed, nationality, gender and so on, a lot of things would probably be much nicer. I have never been a particularly patriotic person because I think some of that philosophy sounds synonymus to discrimination of the grounds of nationality. Although I'm sure things are much more complicated than that, I still believe that everyone - to the extent possible under his/her circumstances - should try and be a citizen of the world and follow the 'religion' of humanity. It probably sounds cliche, but this is something I stand by.

 

Apart from that, I quite agree that the environmental issues seem to be getting out of hand and are a big concern. I would also be very worried about the quality of education if I was the government. Poverty is an issue that may never be sorted out, but perhaps there is hope in the sense that financial status is not the only way to feel good about life. I am an optimist, and I like to imagine that happiness is an inherent part of our system, and can be independent of surroundings and circumstances if we try hard enough. Well, maybe that was a tad too optimistic