apathy n. 1) Lack of interest or concern, esp. in important matters. 2) Lack of emotion; impassiveness.

I posted a little story on another thread about 8 friends getting together for a fun weekend and being asked what they thought about the Cap and Trade bill currently making it's way through congress. Only 1 out of 8 knew what it was about. I admit this is just an isolated poll but I wonder if society has reached some kind of apathy plateau where their only interest is entertainment "stars" or their own little daily orbits.
I just can't get this out of my mind since my wife told me the story. She is the one who asked the other 7 women the question.
I am a proud Boomer who has tried to live my life somewhat responsibly. I have paid taxes for 46 odd years and served my country during wartime. About 78 million Boomers are heading for the Golden Age of our life. There is going to be some major decisions and alot of bumps in the road with this part of my life. Is it me or are some people just treading forward with no care or thoughts what so ever about what is going to be happening to them?
Is apathy widespread????? Is apathy the way to go? Maybe not caring will help them live longer??? Maybe I should care less too?
Any thoughts? If there aren't any thoughts...I'll understand...apathy...

Originally Posted by Keedy

apathy n. 1) Lack of interest or concern, esp. in important matters. 2) Lack of emotion; impassiveness.

I posted a little story on another thread about 8 friends getting together for a fun weekend and being asked what they thought about the Cap and Trade bill currently making it's way through congress. Only 1 out of 8 knew what it was about. I admit this is just an isolated poll but I wonder if society has reached some kind of apathy plateau where their only interest is entertainment "stars" or their own little daily orbits.
I just can't get this out of my mind since my wife told me the story. She is the one who asked the other 7 women the question.
I am a proud Boomer who has tried to live my life somewhat responsibly. I have paid taxes for 46 odd years and served my country during wartime. About 78 million Boomers are heading for the Golden Age of our life. There is going to be some major decisions and alot of bumps in the road with this part of my life. Is it me or are some people just treading forward with no care or thoughts what so ever about what is going to be happening to them?
Is apathy widespread????? Is apathy the way to go? Maybe not caring will help them live longer??? Maybe I should care less too?
Any thoughts? If there aren't any thoughts...I'll understand...apathy...

I dont know about apathy, but there was a very short discussion on another thread about supporters of President Obama not posting on this board any longer now that the election is over.

There are many in this country that apply a very very broad brush to their politics. They do not want to be bothered with details, and I am not speaking of real details...I am speaking of ANY details. They rely on headlines and things they "hear" ! This, to me, explains how the current President was elected.

Those who fit into this catagory posted here when the election and primary was front page news and on the news each night. As evidenced by the posts on here during that time, these folks simply jumped on the bandwagon...whether it was Palin or being excited by another Obama speech. They paid little, OR NO, attention to what was being said or any facts. This coupled with the same attitude toward Bush and we have what we have.

These folks are not coming back here to post because they will not take the time to defend or discuss their candidates position. They will only be able to give you the

This kind of voter, now that the election is over, does not want to be bothered with any details of course in some cases until it is too late.

This is why we have such low turnout in off year elections and why as many on here have said, somehow, someway in 2010 that trend needs to be reversed.

This kind of attitude is what politicians rely on, BOTH parties by the way, evidenced by nobody makes HARD decisions right before an election !

Not to be resolved I dont think....but I want to one more time ask those who support what is going on this minute.....the TRILLIONS added to the budget in the last 5 months,the bail outs, the lying to come on here and make a case for why you still support what is happening. Maybe those folks are right we are going in a circle and they have the point that will straigten us out ! But the lack of interest by Obama supporters is breathtaking !!!

Bucco & Keedy make interesting observations, and parts are valid, but also apply to both sides of the spectrum. First the Dems/Liberals: Many of us are still very involved with political/social issues, but it's pretty clear to all but the most hard-headed (knock-knock) of us that answering attacks on this Board or in the Daily Sun serves no useful purpose since the "opposition" simply screams louder, twists reality, or simply have their minds made up.

Energy is much better spent focusing on those newly elected officials and the promised policies than in refuting idiotic comments like "Obama is a socialist-marxist-fascist-Muslim."

I'm even finding that MSNBC, which is just a counterbalance to the stupidity on FOX & EIB, gets annoyingly vindictive and sarcastic, now that the Dems. won so decisively in 2008.

On the other side, those few screamers like Ruthie Kelly, Joe Angione, Anne Coulter and Rush agitate a minority of right-wing meat-eaters. Admittedly, this group is larger than any other "unified" group in the nation, but they still represent a small minority of the overall population. That's why Reps. may get a red-meat candidate in the primaries, but that candidate is rejected by the majorityof voters in a general election. Rick Santorum is the prime example of this trend.

Conservatives could energize the base by throwing out "wedge" issues- scaring apathetic people into going to the polls to stop the abortionists, the death tax, the homosexual agenda, the attack on families, etc. etc.

But like all flashy fireworks, the ooh-ahh fades.
-Many people began to see that those issues really don't hinge on the individual or party elected, and were really just distractions for important issues confronting our nation. Consider a national party making "Joe the Plumber" and a wacko minister the center of an ENTIRE national campaign. And Joe wasn't even a real plumber and Wright wasn't running for President!

-Many people found that the excessive control of the Religious Right and ultra-conservatives crossed lines of decency, attacking candidates by innuendoes about patriotism, race, "family values" and the like. The more Ruthie Kelly screams about this being a "Christian" country, the more the moderates, the secular Christians and people who just don't agree with that radicalism are turned off. The more conservative free-marketeers claimed that unfettered Capitalism is some holy gift from God, the more people who were hurt by the irresponsible and illegal behavior of the wealthiest CEO's, lobbyists and politicians turned away from that ideology.

-Finally, once you've passed an anti-gay marriage bill, or a flag burning bill, or an "In God We Trust" amendment, those who voted out of conviction end up being apathetic or uninformed, and may not be motivated to vote again. That's why parties pick up tangible causes, not generalities. Now it's general "teabagging" instead of trying to talk intelligently about specific tax issues. It's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" rather than pushing general gay-rights issues.

People have only so much energy. After eight years of head-banging, Dems and liberals address concerns about their issues to those they elected, not to those who want a re-match.

Am I ignorant or am I apathetic? I don't know, and I don't care.

I mentioned Cap and Trade to someone that I consider politically astute. He just stared back at me. He didn't have a clue what I was talking about. What can I say?

ptownrob,
Well Said! And that's all I gotta say.

I think it is more of a butting your head against the wall too many times issue than it is apathy. Do you really think that we have any chance of convincing our reps to vote one way or the other on the cap and trade bill? Or any other bill for that matter?

The system is either broken or works seamlessly depending on who you ask. Either way about the only thing we can do is vote the people in or out. You can waste your time talking about it but nothing will change.

You can call me apathetic if you wish but I don't know what that bill does nor am I going to do any research on it. I'll just get frustrated knowing that it is going to pass in some form no matter how loud I scream.

Originally Posted by kittylecroix

ptownrob,
Well Said! And that's all I gotta say.

the same way as special interest groups do. One example is the NRA...as a member we are kept informed of any legislation that affects our gun rights. We are provided a synopsis of the bill....we are encouraged to write our representatives....and are supplied the added list and in some cases the template for what to put in the contact. Contacts can be made via phone, letter or email. Out of some 8 million members a fair number do just that....we contact our representatives.

This is approximately the way all special interest groups work......and it does affect the outcome.

Now as for we the people. One has to do their own research; reach a conclusion based on what they want; locate the contact information for your representatives; either call them or letter or email.
Unfortunately this just does not happen as we the people seem to always be too busy for such effort. And the short sighted view of it does not affect me so why bother.
Hence when it comes to lawmaking that affects we the people, the lawmakers know we the people will give them no guidance....hence the representaitves vote their favor or party and some don't even know what they are voting on...they haven't read it just like the recent cap tax law.

Yes, we the people elect the representatives.....and no we do not tell them what we prefer....the silent majority gets what ever it deserves.

btk

Originally Posted by ptownrob

Bucco & Keedy make interesting observations, and parts are valid, but also apply to both sides of the spectrum. First the Dems/Liberals: Many of us are still very involved with political/social issues, but it's pretty clear to all but the most hard-headed (knock-knock) of us that answering attacks on this Board or in the Daily Sun serves no useful purpose since the "opposition" simply screams louder, twists reality, or simply have their minds made up.

Energy is much better spent focusing on those newly elected officials and the promised policies than in refuting idiotic comments like "Obama is a socialist-marxist-fascist-Muslim."

I'm even finding that MSNBC, which is just a counterbalance to the stupidity on FOX & EIB, gets annoyingly vindictive and sarcastic, now that the Dems. won so decisively in 2008.

On the other side, those few screamers like Ruthie Kelly, Joe Angione, Anne Coulter and Rush agitate a minority of right-wing meat-eaters. Admittedly, this group is larger than any other "unified" group in the nation, but they still represent a small minority of the overall population. That's why Reps. may get a red-meat candidate in the primaries, but that candidate is rejected by the majorityof voters in a general election. Rick Santorum is the prime example of this trend.

Conservatives could energize the base by throwing out "wedge" issues- scaring apathetic people into going to the polls to stop the abortionists, the death tax, the homosexual agenda, the attack on families, etc. etc.

But like all flashy fireworks, the ooh-ahh fades.
-Many people began to see that those issues really don't hinge on the individual or party elected, and were really just distractions for important issues confronting our nation. Consider a national party making "Joe the Plumber" and a wacko minister the center of an ENTIRE national campaign. And Joe wasn't even a real plumber and Wright wasn't running for President!

-Many people found that the excessive control of the Religious Right and ultra-conservatives crossed lines of decency, attacking candidates by innuendoes about patriotism, race, "family values" and the like. The more Ruthie Kelly screams about this being a "Christian" country, the more the moderates, the secular Christians and people who just don't agree with that radicalism are turned off. The more conservative free-marketeers claimed that unfettered Capitalism is some holy gift from God, the more people who were hurt by the irresponsible and illegal behavior of the wealthiest CEO's, lobbyists and politicians turned away from that ideology.

-Finally, once you've passed an anti-gay marriage bill, or a flag burning bill, or an "In God We Trust" amendment, those who voted out of conviction end up being apathetic or uninformed, and may not be motivated to vote again. That's why parties pick up tangible causes, not generalities. Now it's general "teabagging" instead of trying to talk intelligently about specific tax issues. It's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" rather than pushing general gay-rights issues.

People have only so much energy. After eight years of head-banging, Dems and liberals address concerns about their issues to those they elected, not to those who want a re-match.

Am I ignorant or am I apathetic? I don't know, and I don't care.

PTOWN, again you take it to the PARTY stuff !!! I will tell you that the networks and folks you mention are not going to change whomever is in office or not in office. THEY ARE ENTERTAINERS, not newpeople.

My point, and I know I am not very good at this making my point clear, but it was to the voter apathy and knowledge which I attribute to what they hear ON THE NEWS REPORTS. Listen, the folks you mention are only listened to by people who WANT TO LISTEN TO THEM to validate their points or whatever. THAT, that you mention, IS NOT NEWS !~

I am not speaking to PARTY.....and I mentioned that both parties are guilty of not addressing issues of importance right before an election.

My only comment about the current administration was because they are the current administration, and the question was why those who support the President are not telling us why they support what is happening...is it Apathy or what ? My point was that it is not apathy.

I am trying to stay away from the party stuff, but your entire post was along party lines.

I do not believe that apathy is the reason as I said and as is the point of this thread, as I see it !

Well, I just read through the posts and I had to go back and read my own original posts to see if I mentioned any party affiliations.( I have been known to lean a little to one side). I guess I was hoping we could have just one conversation about people in general and why some don't really get into issues that are going to affect them personally. Some where down the road these bills are going inter your pocket book or maybe your health.
Of course one "contributor" has given his usual left- leaning rant against the right-wingers. *sigh*
To echo a couple of people here....it would be nice if we could let our guard down for one thread and stop mimicking stereotypical party baloney. Why do I always see the same media personalities mentioned here so frequently?
A little off the topic.....but did anybody notice that when Fox News made the unfortunate decision to go 3 straight hours of M. Jackson Thursday night, viewers responded by changing the channel. Seems people were really looking to find some real news about the Cap and Trade bill that was being voted on the next day.(Friday)

Originally Posted by Keedy

Well, I just read through the posts and I had to go back and read my own original posts to see if I mentioned any party affiliations.( I have been known to lean a little to one side). I guess I was hoping we could have just one conversation about people in general and why some don't really get into issues that are going to affect them personally. Some where down the road these bills are going inter your pocket book or maybe your health.
Of course one "contributor" has given his usual left- leaning rant against the right-wingers. *sigh*
To echo a couple of people here....it would be nice if we could let our guard down for one thread and stop mimicking stereotypical party baloney. Why do I always see the same media personalities mentioned here so frequently?
A little off the topic.....but did anybody notice that when Fox News made the unfortunate decision to go 3 straight hours of M. Jackson Thursday night, viewers responded by changing the channel. Seems people were really looking to find some real news about the Cap and Trade bill that was being voted on the next day.(Friday)

Again, my posts mention the current administration because THEY ARE THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, and the current administration ESPECIALLY when they have control of congress will always be the one on the defensive...that has nothing to do with party affliation or anything...just a fact of life.

During the Bush administration it happened, and all but the personal stuff, should be expected. Thankfully, we are so far without he personal attacks except by those who live to do that and none of us should be listening to what amounts to bull !

Again, my point because I dont make it well...I do not consider it APATHY, but just voters superficial look at what they consider issues which in most cases are not issues but personalities !

Originally Posted by Bucco

Again, my posts mention the current administration because THEY ARE THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, and the current administration ESPECIALLY when they have control of congress will always be the one on the defensive...that has nothing to do with party affliation or anything...just a fact of life.

During the Bush administration it happened, and all but the personal stuff, should be expected. Thankfully, we are so far without he personal attacks except by those who live to do that and none of us should be listening to what amounts to bull !

Again, my point because I dont make it well...I do not consider it APATHY, but just voters superficial look at what they consider issues which in most cases are not issues but personalities !

apathy n. 1) Lack of interest or concern, esp. in important matters. 2) Lack of emotion; impassiveness.
I wasn't referring to you Bucco...I was referring to the poster who ranted the typical left-right banter.
What I was thinking many hours ago when I started this thread was that the typical person on the street didn't know what the Cap and Trade energy bill was about. I was really shocked when my wife came home and told me that not one of her 7 friends that she spent the week-end with knew what the bill was about. As a matter of fact ..they never heard of the phrase Cap and Trade. I thought that was absolutely amazing.

My apologies if I jumped on the partisan wagon too quickly this issue. I reread all the posts, and would like to talk about two things:

1. The concern about apathy. I think that there is a certain "wall" of inevitability about the complexity of modern life that makes people throw up their hands and just not even try. I think about 90% of the population has always been apathetic in general when it comes to "civic" involvement. Period. Our revolution, and the Russian Revolution were actively supported by about 10% of the population.

Apathy grows, as Orwell warned in 1984, as our minds are filled with useless propaganda, lottery games, and other diversions that keep all but a very few from being able to focus on reality- and even then, those individuals may cancel each other out, or more conspiratorially, feel that they are being "singled out" by some governmental entity. I speak of things like Hoover's FBI, Enemies Lists and even the recent DHS reports on "radicals."

2. "Cap & Trade" specifically. I read, and I read, and I read. Folks, it's incredibly complicated legislation. Period. Right now, it's really a planning document that extends all the way to 2050. And I'm not even going to mention the pork and extras that will undoubtedly end up in the bill to secure votes.

Basically, the concept is to reduce overall national carbon dioxide emissions to certain measurable levels within a certain number of years (The CAP). Think in terms of the EPA order of increasing gas mileage over time- same concept.

The problem: Many industries are much more CO2 intensive in their production techniques- notably coal generated power and manufacturing. Think of the "Trade" as like the board game "Monopoly" The idea behind the trade is that the government will "start the game" with a certain bank of credits to allow CO2 production. As years pass, some industries will create more efficient "green" ways to produce their products. They will then be able to sell (TRADE) their CO2 credits to other companies that have not lowered their CO2 production to the prescribed level. (Remember,over the decades, the overall production of CO2 is "Capped" at lower and lower levels.)

The problems?
-Can companies invent and invest in products that reduce CO2 without breaking the bank- and the economy? Especially if other countries can produce the same widget without any concern over CO2 emissions.
-Ultimately,it's the consumer who will pay for those traded CO2 levels for companies that have to "buy" credits from less polluting ones. Today that means that coal powered energy will potentially pay the most- and pass that on to consumers.
- There is a complicated "tax" formula for who pays the most for traded energy costs- it's a progressive tax, so the wealthiest pay more. Estimates range from $50 a month to $400 a month for those who pay taxes now. That of course leads to the question of the poor paying no taxes for thhis energy cap.
- Some still argure that manmade CO2 pollution is not contributing to global warming, and so the whole thing is a huge government red-herring. Others (including the vast majority of climate scientists) claim that we need to act quickly. There's the politics of it.

So that's it for me- Hope this helps. Google "cap & trade" & search around- you'll find simple and complicated explanations from all sides.

Here's a simple "pro" site explanation:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...dtrade101.html

and here is a Wall Street journal take of it:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124588837560750781.html

"2. "Cap & Trade" specifically. I read, and I read, and I read. Folks, it's incredibly complicated legislation. Period".....a quote from PTOWNROB...

AND our congress passed this "incredibly complicated legislation" with a 5 hour "discussion" and without reading it and with over 300 pages of ammendments given at 3 AM the day of the vote.

Yeah...lets vote these folks back into office !

Originally Posted by ptownrob

My apologies if I jumped on the partisan wagon too quickly this issue. I reread all the posts, and would like to talk about two things:

1. The concern about apathy. I think that there is a certain "wall" of inevitability about the complexity of modern life that makes people throw up their hands and just not even try. I think about 90% of the population has always been apathetic in general when it comes to "civic" involvement. Period. Our revolution, and the Russian Revolution were actively supported by about 10% of the population.

Apathy grows, as Orwell warned in 1984, as our minds are filled with useless propaganda, lottery games, and other diversions that keep all but a very few from being able to focus on reality- and even then, those individuals may cancel each other out, or more conspiratorially, feel that they are being "singled out" by some governmental entity. I speak of things like Hoover's FBI, Enemies Lists and even the recent DHS reports on "radicals."

2. "Cap & Trade" specifically. I read, and I read, and I read. Folks, it's incredibly complicated legislation. Period. Right now, it's really a planning document that extends all the way to 2050. And I'm not even going to mention the pork and extras that will undoubtedly end up in the bill to secure votes.

Basically, the concept is to reduce overall national carbon dioxide emissions to certain measurable levels within a certain number of years (The CAP). Think in terms of the EPA order of increasing gas mileage over time- same concept.

The problem: Many industries are much more CO2 intensive in their production techniques- notably coal generated power and manufacturing. Think of the "Trade" as like the board game "Monopoly" The idea behind the trade is that the government will "start the game" with a certain bank of credits to allow CO2 production. As years pass, some industries will create more efficient "green" ways to produce their products. They will then be able to sell (TRADE) their CO2 credits to other companies that have not lowered their CO2 production to the prescribed level. (Remember,over the decades, the overall production of CO2 is "Capped" at lower and lower levels.)

The problems?
-Can companies invent and invest in products that reduce CO2 without breaking the bank- and the economy? Especially if other countries can produce the same widget without any concern over CO2 emissions.
-Ultimately,it's the consumer who will pay for those traded CO2 levels for companies that have to "buy" credits from less polluting ones. Today that means that coal powered energy will potentially pay the most- and pass that on to consumers.
- There is a complicated "tax" formula for who pays the most for traded energy costs- it's a progressive tax, so the wealthiest pay more. Estimates range from $50 a month to $400 a month for those who pay taxes now. That of course leads to the question of the poor paying no taxes for thhis energy cap.
- Some still argure that manmade CO2 pollution is not contributing to global warming, and so the whole thing is a huge government red-herring. Others (including the vast majority of climate scientists) claim that we need to act quickly. There's the politics of it.

So that's it for me- Hope this helps. Google "cap & trade" & search around- you'll find simple and complicated explanations from all sides.

Here's a simple "pro" site explanation:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...dtrade101.html

and here is a Wall Street journal take of it:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124588837560750781.html

Interesting...

1. I agree with the public apathy comment. It's everywhere on this planet.

2. While I agree with you that the cap-and-trade legislation is very complex, the fact that is got ramrodded through the legislature with very little reading, debate or discussion regarding the content of the bill, is abominable.

Cap-and-trade sounds like the cure-all, end-all for US industrial energy waste and pollution, yet is destined to cause more harm than good. Unless I missed it in my reading of this bill, (and that's always a possibility) there is nothing in the bill which places any tariffs or other trade balancing tool on products made in China or elsewhere which are in direct competition with US companies making (and trying to sell) the same or comparable products in the US marketplace, but now tagged with new recurring and nonrecurring costs which their competition doesn't have. So much for a level playing field for American companies in the American market. And the balance-of-payments just gets bigger and bigger.....

So, the big winner in all of this is China, Vietnam and other (mainly Socialist or non-democratic) countries without this added industrial cost, but still with "most favored trading partner" status and another significant market advantage, complements of this administration and Congress. The big loser is the American worker and taxpayer, as the potential for an even higher unemployment rate and subsequent effect on taxes to those still employed is devastating.

But, what the heck, why should we care? We can just sit back, apathetically, and not give a hoot.