All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
The worst thing about the 70s was this: no sense of hope. No sense that things would ever get better. As a historian I can tell you that that's never before happened in American history, except in the 1930s. So it's happened before. And I see something similar happening again. Brought on by more or less the same policies. But that's hardly fearmongering, considering this is 2012, the year of the apocalypse!
Having lived through the 70s I can honestly say there was most definitely hope. I was there and they were very good times. It wasn't until the early 80s that people lost hope and turned to greed. The US has been a greedy place ever since - completely centered on money and the accumulation of it. Fact is you can't live without money in the US so it's somewhat understandable (but even that requirement came into play in the 80s).
When you make sweeping opinionated statements Kevin - that doesn't make them true because there are people who have opposing views of history and different opinions.
The 70s were dark times. Were there good times? Of course. Just as there were during the Great Depression. Look at old 70s movies. Take a look at the polluted gutters.
Even the architecture of the 70s was drab and monstrous.
Greed is a part of the human character. I doubt it rises or falls. For those that wanted to get ahead in the 80s, there was actually opportunity. Very strange to call this a bad thing, but, and sorry, that's what the Left does. It distorts reality.
I don't mean that disrespectfully, Michael, I really don't. I say it with pure intellectual intent. This idea that people pursuing success somehow created a world where ordinary people suffered as a result. Man, the opposite is so true. The 70s were a time of struggle for the working poor. My family was in that category. We don't want to bring that back, and frankly it's selfish to do so.
As for sweeping generalizations... "The US has been a greedy place ever since - completely centered on money and the accumulation of it."
The 70s were dark times. Were there good times? Of course. Just as there were during the Great Depression. Look at old 70s movies. Take a look at the polluted gutters.
Even the architecture of the 70s was drab and monstrous.
As for sweeping generalizations... "The US has been a greedy place ever since - completely centered on money and the accumulation of it."
And most of your complaints about Obama relate to???
Historically, the US was founded on greed - land and business owners that didn't want to have to pay taxes.
Over the years it's been an attraction for people from around the world who wanted a better life than they had in their own country - having more than others - greed.
It's no wonder that there is a greedy culture there and that it has overtaken political ideologies.
Instead of wanting the government to help the populous, you're unhappy if it doesn't line your pockets with gold.
Sweeping generalization - hardly. I spent most of my life in the US, however, I didn't see the greed until I traveled around the world quite a bit.
I was kind of hoping all this political stuff would go away today. The election is over. Go do the best you can with the result.
I completely agree.
I strongly, strongly disagree, actually, on two counts.
1. The idea that politics or the frequency of discussion of politics should be linked to the election. Politics are an inextricable and on-going element of our daily lives and the fact that Americans weigh in every once in a while on whether they're roughly Democrat or roughly Republican, or that Canadians weigh in on whether they're roughly left, middle, or right, has very, VERY little to do with the greater concerns of politics, which are how the state should be run to most greatly reflect the will of its people.
2. The frequently occurring argument that this is a writing site, and therefore not for politics. At its best, writing is fiercely and fundamentally political; at its worst, writing is accidentally and irresponsibly political. The stories that we tell are the myths of our nations and communities, and they reflect and guide political thoughts and decisions; the characters that we create are our archetypes, and they influence how we perceive politicians and therefore who we elect. Dubya was for The Duke's crowd; Obama is for Gosling fans. As writers, we should be constantly engaged and challenged politically. Even if you're just in it for the money, I believe this is true. Writers create, analyze, tear down, and build up ideas, and there are few arenas of ideas more fundamental than the political one (the others, I think of religious, romantic, and sexual; but these all have strongly political sides as well). As writers, we should be constantly charging ahead into deeper territory, deeper analysis. We ask the questions and explore the thoughts that other won't -- even if we're just in it for the money. I think the General Chat area should be alive with debate on all topics at all times (and it often is, to my delight). We're a writer's group -- a big one -- and writers should push each other to reaffirm and reconsider.
I never called you an ogre. Thanks for sharing your views and I agree with some of it. The thing with Planned Parenthood, besides "other services", abortion is the lowest on the list. It only covers 3%. Contraceptives and STD testing and treatment make up the most of their services. Of course, each site is going to differ in which services are used more often. I'm also getting this information off the website, so who knows if it's true.
For millions of American women, Planned Parenthood is their destination for sexual education, birth control, etc. Not every woman is going to use them to have an abortion. That radical right wing claim is unfounded and a lie.
As far as Obama flip flopping on gay marriage, I don't agree with that. His position on the matter has changed, but not overnight and not as severely as Mitt Romney has on other issues. Obama has always supported civil partnerships and even called the difference "semantics". Did Biden force his hand? Maybe. We don't know what strategy those two had up their sleeves. Point is, Obama has always been on my side. According to NBC news, in 2006, as a Senator, he voted against a constitutional amendment to say that there wasn't a fundamental right for gay rights. That was 8 years ago. Obama was also against DOMA. (Since I brought it up, and I wasn't very old during the Clinton years, but I think Clinton will even admit DOMA was a bad idea.) And not since has Obama gone back and said, "I now believe marriage is between a man and a woman." So, he flipped, but he hasn't flopped.
I think the General Chat area should be alive with debate on all topics at all times (and it often is, to my delight). We're a writer's group -- a big one -- and writers should push each other to reaffirm and reconsider.
Historically, the US was founded on greed - land and business owners that didn't want to have to pay taxes.
Oh, boy. And this shows how dangerous the Left truly is. Michael, you're brilliant at film analysis, I'm sure you're a great guy too. However, those ideas will harm so many millions if they ever bear fruit. Like they did so often in the 20th century
People escaping Europe to make lives for themselves...to escape the tyranny of a rigid guild riddled and aristocratic system...that is greed? That's freedom, my friend. Something the Left will never truly understand, except when it comes to pot and porn(and I ain't knocking either!)
The movie Americathon was made in 1979. I actually saw it at the theater as a kid. Only dark times could even make such a movie plausible. I would not wish the 70s on anyone.
Look, the Great Depression produced what many call our Greatest Generation. The generation which fought WWII and which rebuilt much of the world was one that had been hardened through the suffering of the 1930s. And the 1930s were a time of family values, especially compared to the 1920s.
But do we want to bring back the Great Depression? Do we want to have people begging and starving again?
Surprisingly, there are some here who would. Perhaps so they could finish what FDR started, as has been mentioned. It was the golden age of communism in the US too. Communist writers filled the newspapers, Hollywood, and the FDR administration(look it up).
This is why the Left is harmful. They would destroy us under some misguided notion of helping us. Man, oh man. The havoc that bad ideas can bring.
Chris
Yeah, why wouldn't it be welcome? No one has to open a topic they don't want to. I like clanging swords with you guys, but it's not disrespect. I try to support my positions colorfully and strongly. It keeps me awake. I trust it does not offend too much, and hope some day we all have a beer somewhere!
Obama's stated position was against gay marriage. Was he really? Of course not! He took the position for political reasons, as did...Romney!
Romney did not fight gay marriage in Massachusetts. He would not have opposed it as President. He might not have pushed it...why upset your base? But it would have been left to the states, as it should be.
You are correct on Planned Parenthood. But the government under Romney would not have taken away funding. As with the Democrats, there is a certain amount of noise that gets made at primaries. There were no Dem primaries to speak of this year because it was Obama's reelection. But in 2016 both side will have primaries, and both sides will say things that are less than serious.
That's what stinks. Many things we focus on as issues are non-issues. No one thinks Roe will be overturned. Foreign policy will remain mostly the same whoever wins. Both sides will try to avoid the issue of gay marriage one way or the other. Social change like that has to come from the bottom usually first.
There is a major difference between the two sides, and that's ALL the election should have been about. One side believes in big government, believes that government is the solution for all human woes and shortcomings. The other side believes that thinking is dangerous and ultimately leads to suffering and oppression. That was the debate. But people vote on other issues that are closer to their heart.
This is why the Left is harmful. They would destroy us under some misguided notion of helping us. Man, oh man. The havoc that bad ideas can bring.
Kevin, I'm not sure where you're getting your ideas from but they seem slightly paranoid and delusional to me. They're based on such little fact that it's difficult to find any points that justify a refute. So say what you will but I'm not the one standing at the corner clothed in my sandwich board shouting the end of the world is nigh. We all know it isn't.
End of the world just cuz you mentioned it....me and my girls are having an End of the World party December 21st in Charleston if anyone wants to attend
Hopefully it won't be 'the end' but we're going to go out happy if it is
I heard on the news that the last time the world was supposed to end (last year), some people bought into it so much that they gave away their stuff and money. I really wish I were friends with one of those people...
Lol, I predicted 6.5% unemployment and 2% growth. In what universe is that shouting that the end of the world is nigh? Spain would take that as glorious news.
No idea what a sandwhich board is.
No idea what idea I offered that could be considered paranoid. I believe that calling people coming to America in order to try to make a life for their family greedy is crazy talk. I used the word dangerous because it seems clear what it is: pure Marxism.
The idea that profit is a dirty word. That business is evil. Especially when compared to the glorious collective.
The collective is a romantic and seductive idea because it sounds like the opposite of individualism, which seems closely related to selfishness and...greed.
Those ideas result in human suffering. They always have and they always will. I'm fine if people want to join them voluntarily. As long as they are not forced on anyone.
Redistributing wealth, taxing businesses into oblivion, making people dependent on the government...these are all versions of this philosophy.
Michael, I will personalize the story in case that helps make my position a little clearer.
Remember, you joined this discussion in response to my saying Obama will recreate the 1970s, which I called a dark time. You responded that it was not dark at all, that it was the basically the last good time in America, and since then dark times brought on by greed descended and remain.
You've expanded that to say that greed has always characterized America, but lets stick to the 1970s as the last non-greedy time. Less greedy anyway?
I first entered the job market as a teen in the late 70s early 80s. Pay was 3.25 hr. That was min wage, and no one payed more. It was hard to get a job, which meant that when you did, you faced a somewhat miserable existence because whatever boss you had held you by the balls. You had to take it because you knew you would not easily find another job.
And as much as the money, that was what sucked. The crap you had to put up with.
But the money was a factor too. I worked every ounce of overtime that was ever available to me. During summers, I worked 60 to 70 hrs a week.
Around 1983, 1884, the Reagan plan to fix the economy finally took effect. You felt it, like a whoosh of air hitting the collective sail. And it had been so long since anyone had felt that whoosh that few believed they'd ever hear it again.
People had slaved in the 70s in their go nowhere jobs knowing the future was bleak. It's not like when a major disaster hits, and everything is destroyed but you know you will rebuild. There was a hopelessness to things in the 70s that permeated every day of existence. There are good times, of course, but despair becomes so mundane no one even recognizes it.
When the economy turned around, it was like being born into a new world. Not only did pay go dramatically up because of labor shortage, but you were treated with respect at work. Employers did not want to lose good employees.
So when I hear people say they would prefer things be like the 1970s because there was less greed, it drives me crazy. I don't care for myself, I'm getting old. But I think of my nephews and nieces going into the job market. I think of that young guy with three kids who has to suck it up at a bad job because that's all there is. All because we are trying to legislate against greed. All because we want to stick it to some rich guys who we are envious of.
I could care less about the rich guy. I haven't known all that many, and I'm pretty sure they will always be fine. It's the little guy and his suffering that bothers me. Those WERE dark times. The thought of going back to them is troubling. The thought that there are so many people who are eager to purposely bring them back is disturbing.
Up until the 80s the very rich were taxed at quite a high percent (Reagan slashed the top income tax rate from 70% to 28%). Are you trying to tell me the economy was shit through the 40s, 50s, and 60s as well as the 70s? If you are then you are lying to me and yourself.
In actuality taxing the rich at a high rate had an added benefit. Because the rich wanted to avoid those taxes they created their own foundations and charities. These foundations and charities helped the public.
Now that the very rich aren't being taxed - do you see them doing anything humanitarian? No. They are all busy pouring their money into PACs that are there to keep their taxes as low as possible. Are they building parks? Creating museums? Adding to culture? No, because there's no reason for them to do it any more.
Reagan may have sparked the economy for a few years but his policies where also directly responsible for a large number of bank failures and one of the biggest bank bailouts in history. And from 1981 to 1989, nominal debt held by public nearly tripled. He was increasing the economy using the country's credit card.
You might buy into the rhetoric of the conservatives and the 80s - but I was there with my eyes wide open and saw how it really went down and what it did to the US.
As far as your feelings about the 70s are concerned, they are just that, feelings. I've spoken with a number of people who lived through that time period ever since you brought this up and they all agree - it was a time of optimism and freedom.
Was it perfect? Of course not - nothing, nowhere and no time is - but it was as I said before - a good time and probably the closest to a free country the US has ever been.
Pages: 
Author
Election Day Is Over
Logged
End of the world 
Locked Board