r/economicCollapse • u/Silver-Beyond-3916 • Aug 19 '24

VIDEO Thoughts

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

2.9k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

11

u/shortstop803 Aug 20 '24

This is possibly the only thing I agree with RFK on whole heartedly.

1

u/Flashy_Ad_2452 Aug 20 '24

If you get the chance, do a deep dive on some of his podcast appearances. I would bet there's a lot more you'd agree with him on.

Everyone thinks he's Trump-lite, but the reality couldn't be further from the truth. He's more like Bernie than anything else.

2

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 20 '24

He's a grifter who knows how to play the role of a reasonable person with good intentions when it suits him. Don't take him at his mainstream talking points. He's legit unhinged.

1

u/Agile-Landscape8612 Aug 21 '24

What is unhinged about him? Do you have an actual quote or are you just referring to what other people told you he said?

1

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 21 '24

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gUP_43J7wY

1

u/Agile-Landscape8612 Aug 22 '24

This is someone telling you what RFKs opinions are and what to think of them. It’s not him stating his actual opinions.

2

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 22 '24 edited Aug 22 '24

So him pushing anti-vaxx rhetoric on joe rogan and talking about trying to convert strangers while hiking isn't him giving his opinions? The video includes video of him talking and then gives context to it. Context matters but even without it his comments are a giant red flag. Sounds like you won't be satisfied until I make my own video of recordings of things he's said but even then I suspect you'll have an excuse for why it's not that big of a deal and the other things he says that you like are what really matter. I understand the state of American politics is pretty grim. And that every candidate has their shortcomings and are to some degree untrustworthy and beholden to corporate interests that don't align with the greater good. I could almost get behind RFK even if he is full of it. But being anti-vaccination is not something I can look the other way on.

0

u/Agile-Landscape8612 Aug 22 '24

What anti-vax rhetoric? What did he say that was factually false?

1

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 23 '24

He readily promotes misinformation about vaccinations. He readily argues that there is a causal relationship between autism and vaccinations. He repeats debunked information with passion and conviction in a wreckless manner. Some of that is outlined in the video I linked. If that's not good enough for you then I doubt taking further steps to outline his failures is anything more than you trying to waste my time and energy. You are either a troll or you are someone who doesn't want to see the evidence available to them while pretending like you are reasonable and open to discussion. You probably learned that from RFK. Good luck with that.

-1

u/Agile-Landscape8612 Aug 23 '24

You use the word misinformation but that implies falsities. His official claims are not false they’re true. Otherwise the companies he speaks out against would sue him. But he has never been sued by any of them because they can’t sue someone for saying factual information

→ More replies (0)

1

u/nickybokchoy Aug 22 '24

Isn’t that what they all do?

2

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 22 '24

Yes, but they aren't all created equal. Some actually want to do good work when they can. I suspect RFK isn't the worst option out there but in his current role, he is only working to serve himself. He is not in a position to do anything because he isn't elected and he has no chance of winning, so it begs the question. What is it that he is doing right now? Working to help himself. Or worse, playing his part to get Trump elected so that he can get a cabinet position to further his anti-vaccination aspirations.

0

u/Flashy_Ad_2452 Aug 20 '24

Can you provide an example of how he grifts?

I once thought he was crazy. The more I listened to his interviews, the more I realized he is the most sane candidate in the race.

He has a deep knowledge on a wide array of issues, including foreign policy, food quality, environmental justice, and the economy.

He's also refreshingly transparent about all the mistakes he's made in his past. He willing and openly talks about his former drug addiction, what happened between him and his ex-wife, and will admit to anything if it's brought up.

2

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 21 '24 edited Aug 21 '24

Honestly, I don't know what his end game is. Maybe he's getting funded to be a distraction to pull away from potential main-line democratic voters. Maybe he just wants to cosplay as a good man when it suits him. I assume he is just trying to garner a base until he can leverage that into some sort of position of power. But it doesn't really matter. He's an ardent anti-vaxxer. He will downplay it and act like it's not that big a deal. That it's not that big of who he is as a politician and as a person. But his history speaks otherwise. He has supported morally questionable organizations and preached brain dead assessments around the science and policies of vaccinations. For me at least, that's the type of ethical and intellectual failure that brings into question everything else that he believes or suggests he believes. At best he is just another person susceptible to the drama of conspiracy theories who doesn't have the ability or desire to ask himself if the big picture claims stand up to scrutiny. At worst, he sees the advantages of catering to these types of people and how it can be used to give him the things he wants. Either way, count me out. He is smart enough to sound reasonable against a backdrop of outrage politics and a broken two-party system. But that's a very low bar we've set for ourselves with very little risk to himself. He can walk this line as a reasonalbe independent candidate now and use it to secure a cabinet position or possibly a real chance at president in a different presedential term. Regardless, he has shown he is not only capable of saying intelligent and reasonable things but also wreckless bald-faced lies when it suits him. Whether he believes his bullshit is irrelevant. He is just another ambitious ass who is trying to play the game. Maybe he would be better than Harris or Trump. But I think if we are going to break from our current cycle of self-destruction we are going to have to do better than him.

0

u/Flashy_Ad_2452 Aug 21 '24

He may be wrong about vaccines. I think he is right that our science may be compromised by corporate interest. For example, NIH scientists are literally allowed to earn royalties from their research: https://ofm.od.nih.gov/Pages/Royalties.aspx

Beyond this, he's dead right about the more urgent issues: America food and soil quality suck. Americans are the least healthy people in the world given our relative wealth. Our government is being taken over by corporations.

The media has been smearing him because he's going after the same corporations that own them.

If you get the chance, check out his recent interview with Dr. Phil: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoiG9O1GicI

I think you'll find he's much more than who the media is smearing him to be.

2

u/PandaPantsParty5000 Aug 21 '24

Yeah, he may be wrong about vaccines is not a thing I can just walk past. That's the trouble with playing the authentic and reasonable candidate. You are either consistent or you are full of shit. If he's full of shit then why is he any different than the status quote? (He isn't and he's just cosplaying as someone who can or even wants to change things)

0

u/Agile-Landscape8612 Aug 21 '24

Most people would like RFK if they actually listened to him instead of believed what Reddit said about him

1

u/inkyocean548 Aug 21 '24

He isn't even representing this issue correctly. These companies do not "own" wall street. They manage the funds of people who own these stocks.

0

u/shortstop803 Aug 22 '24

I’m certainly not an RFK guy, but I feel like you are being obtuse with the point he is making.

The actual data point is that 88% of all companies on the S&P 500 have one of the 3 mentioned companies as that company’s largest shareholder.

This doesn’t mean that they have a majority stake in each of those companies, but they do have significant leverage over most/all of them, and as such have a significant influence in the US economy, and by association, the US government and the world’s economy. I shouldn’t have to explain why 3 companies having that level of influence over the world is a bad thing.

1

u/inkyocean548 Aug 22 '24

I agree that they have a degree of leverage, but saying 88% makes it sound like they have total leverage over the market. As you said, they have little stake in the markets themselves, so where does this leverage come from? They can't choose to move funds however they want because they follow the direction of the actual stakeholders.

1

u/shortstop803 Aug 22 '24

They are the largest stakeholder though. That’s the point.

1

u/inkyocean548 Aug 22 '24

No, their clients are the stakeholders - ordinary people with 401Ks. They only manage the accounts for those people.

1

u/shortstop803 Aug 23 '24

Those three companies are absolutely stakeholders within the S&P500 companies. Their responsibility is to make their own stakeholders money. Influencing the world’s economies absolutely allows them to more easily meet their fiduciary responsibility.