Ed....you really think so?!

Jerram

I posted this on the DVD thread but perhaps its more appropriate here...


So I'm finally watching the Italian dvd, have the day off and both kids are at day care.

So far its great. top notch performances, enjoying the little stuff in between songs....for the most part.

I do NOT believe (like some) that Ed should shut up and sing. So I always listen to his comments/rants/opinions etc. and often agree.

I guess I was surprised by what I consider naivete (sorry no accent there) when he waxes philosophical on the idea that "100 men from all over the world and solve the worlds problems, lock em in a room and don't let them out til they sort it all out"

Ed is educated, very well informed and well read from all indications. He knows some history and is old enough to have seen alot of stuff happen.
So it irks me to make such comments that completely belie the fact that
there are issues that divide people/nations/cultures that are SOOO deep that its just not that simple.

I mean its one thing to say that our leaders (and on an everyday level all of us) need to reach out with a true sense of understanding and genuine interest in the well being for all people, not just those one represents. This is a very important starting point. But these comments really seem to simplify the issues and man, he seems so sincere when he says it....he should know better.

Sorry to sound so cynical...

LikeAnOcean

I think he made it a point that it was wishful thinking that you could get a group of men together to fix all of the worlds problems.

Obviously a handful of men aren't going to fix all of the worlds problems. Thats how it is now and its not working quite right.

meme

I agree with you
Ed's heart is in the same place as mine, but I do think he has a tendency to make things a lot simpler than they are.
I'd still take him as president over this one though.

onelongsong

Jerram wrote:

I posted this on the DVD thread but perhaps its more appropriate here...


So I'm finally watching the Italian dvd, have the day off and both kids are at day care.

So far its great. top notch performances, enjoying the little stuff in between songs....for the most part.

I do NOT believe (like some) that Ed should shut up and sing. So I always listen to his comments/rants/opinions etc. and often agree.

I guess I was surprised by what I consider naivete (sorry no accent there) when he waxes philosophical on the idea that "100 men from all over the world and solve the worlds problems, lock em in a room and don't let them out til they sort it all out"

Ed is educated, very well informed and well read from all indications. He knows some history and is old enough to have seen alot of stuff happen.
So it irks me to make such comments that completely belie the fact that
there are issues that divide people/nations/cultures that are SOOO deep that its just not that simple.

I mean its one thing to say that our leaders (and on an everyday level all of us) need to reach out with a true sense of understanding and genuine interest in the well being for all people, not just those one represents. This is a very important starting point. But these comments really seem to simplify the issues and man, he seems so sincere when he says it....he should know better.

Sorry to sound so cynical...

i think you're spot on. the only people that can change golbal warming are the people. as for other conflicts; they have been there for thousands of years. it's human nature. we fight for our borders and we fight for what we believe in. but once again it's the people who make the difference.

Clarice

Jerram wrote:

I posted this on the DVD thread but perhaps its more appropriate here...


So I'm finally watching the Italian dvd, have the day off and both kids are at day care.

So far its great. top notch performances, enjoying the little stuff in between songs....for the most part.

I do NOT believe (like some) that Ed should shut up and sing. So I always listen to his comments/rants/opinions etc. and often agree.

I guess I was surprised by what I consider naivete (sorry no accent there) when he waxes philosophical on the idea that "100 men from all over the world and solve the worlds problems, lock em in a room and don't let them out til they sort it all out"

Ed is educated, very well informed and well read from all indications. He knows some history and is old enough to have seen alot of stuff happen.
So it irks me to make such comments that completely belie the fact that
there are issues that divide people/nations/cultures that are SOOO deep that its just not that simple.

I mean its one thing to say that our leaders (and on an everyday level all of us) need to reach out with a true sense of understanding and genuine interest in the well being for all people, not just those one represents. This is a very important starting point. But these comments really seem to simplify the issues and man, he seems so sincere when he says it....he should know better.

Sorry to sound so cynical...

I´m sure Ed knows is not simple... Metaphorically speaking is not so wrong, great part of problems is concentrate in few hands, i´m not sure if is hundred, but i think is few number of people who has power to make changes...Of course is not easy, we know, you can´t blocked them in a room til they reached one agreement...but may be you should keep the focus in the men/women who may make the difference and talk this to them,in music, movie, poetry, ongs...I dont know, may be you are right and was a little moment of innocence...you dont sound cynical.

DriftingByTheStorm

i disagree.
on a bus with 200 people shouting turn around turn around, ONLY the driver can make the move.

I think global policy is TRULY driven by a small handful at the top with their eye on the pie.

If you got them to focus on Peace, Prosperity, and Cooperation i guarantee Eds comments would ring true.

But they just don't care about that.
They care about cooperating with eachother for prosperity. That's about it.

Instead of sending armies to the middle east,
send i gianormous peace corpse.

Get american good will on the ground if you get anything there.

sheesh.

Jerram

I think you meant "peace corps" not "corpse" .....unless you meant it in some
oxymoron kinda way that just sailed over my head...

I don't think that any large percentage of our world leaders truly are in it for
their own prosperity....especially now that so many countries are democratic..if it was that blatant, they'd never last. Now dictators are a different story of course.

My point is, ,most probably think they are acting in the interest of prosperity for their particular nation. Its the idea that leaders can easily find a way to
meet those needs but not at the expense of other countries that is so absurd.

Its very, very difficult when every country has their own priorities and culture and resources etc.

Having said that, I do think that achieving some level of worldwide respect for basic human rights is acheivable...but to avoid conflict altogether is another story....

bootlegger10

I do not think Ed is too far off, maybe it is only 90 people. Think about how Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld have affected the United States over the past seven years. If three people can have a huge effect on the US, why can't 100 people have a huge affect on the world? The leader of China can single-handily control the leader of North Korea with his decisions. Most of the smaller countries will play "follow the leader" and align with what the bigger countries say. So those people don't even need to be one of the 100.

Here is what the breakdown could be:

6 Americans
20 Europeans
1 Russian (Putin runs the place)
1 Mexican
1 Canadian
8 South Americans
3 Chinese
10 from the Middle East
4 Japan
15 Africa
2 Australia
9 Misc.

That is 80 people. I think that could do it. Maybe even less. Think about your jobs. If you are the boss or not, the boss pretty much has the final say. Or it is the union leader and the boss. Everyone else pretty much follows in line.


Good quote Ed!

soulsinging

"It's just a handful of people that run everything, and that's provable.... I have this feeling that whoever's elected president, like Clinton was, no matter what promises you make on the campaign trail - blah, blah, blah - when you win, you go into this smoky room with the twelve industrialist, capitalist scumfucks that got you in there, and this little screen comes down... and it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before, which looks suspiciously off the grassy knoll.... And then the screen comes up, the lights come on, and they say to the new president, 'Any questions?' ... [President]: 'Just what my agenda is.'"
-bill hicks

spooky how even a decade later he is spot on and even the NAMES are the same... i think that's pretty much proof right there.

DriftingByTheStorm

Jerram wrote:

I don't think that any large percentage of our world leaders truly are in it for their own prosperity.

NOW whose being naive?
lol

and yes. my spelling is a-trow-shous

Danimal

"100 men from all over the world and solve the worlds problems, lock em in a room and don't let them out til they sort it all out"

Ummmm yeah Ed.....it's called the U.N.

Jerram

exactly....the UN has been trying this for years...with very mixed results

WMA

It is true that it is a handful of people who cause these problems.

While maybe that solution is flawed, it does convey the point. That a few peoples ego are the only thing in the way of eliminating many of the worlds problems.

Maybe he should have said a torture room, where they waterboard the leaders until they decide the publics interest is greater than them looking like tough guys.

Julien

i'd tend to agree with Ed's point of view.. you just have to see the influence of G.W. Bush... Imagine what 100 of them could do to the world

BinFrog

Of course his statement is a bit naive, but not in a stupid way. I always say that the world world be a better place if everyone just grew up. That's about as naive and simplified as you can get, but I don't mean it to be a deep philosophical statement. I just think the world is full of stupid and/or brainwashed people who always fail to see the big picture that we are all in this together, and if they took a collective step back and saw the world as it is we could conceivably be in a much better place.

even flow?

You mean as they pan by the American McE-Dees, Esso, and the lot behind him as he is going on and about to comment on the 100 guys. Take the whole picture into your mind and it makes perfect sense what he said.

Pearl Jam and toast

LikeAnOcean wrote:

I think he made it a point that it was wishful thinking that you could get a group of men together to fix all of the worlds problems.

Obviously a handful of men aren't going to fix all of the worlds problems. Thats how it is now and its not working quite right.

Yep. Also, sounds like something a stoned person might say... just throwin that out there. I haven't seen the DVD yet so I can't reference his eyes..

even flow?

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

Yep. Also, sounds like something a stoned person might say... just throwin that out there. I haven't seen the DVD yet so I can't reference his eyes..

I don't think Ed is stoned when he is saying it. It is a simple thing to say but it does have a lot of truth to it. Imagine just the leaders of the middle east in a room until they got that place right. And how many is that.

Pearl Jam and toast

even flow? wrote:

I don't think Ed is stoned when he is saying it. It is a simple thing to say but it does have a lot of truth to it. Imagine just the leaders of the middle east in a room until they got that place right. And how many is that.

It's also an old saying. I've heard it a thousand times as I'm sure you have. I was joking around about Ed being stoned (though I have heard a guy who looks like Ed say it while stoned ).

SoonForgotten2

Ed's just a fan of The Parent Trap.

my2hands

Julien wrote:

i'd tend to agree with Ed's point of view.. you just have to see the influence of G.W. Bush... Imagine what 100 of them could do to the world

destroy it in less then 5 years

my2hands

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

I haven't seen the DVD yet so I can't reference his eyes..

WTF are you waiting for?

vedderfan10

is there something wrong with being a cockeyed optimist? (other than being Billy Mumphry's downfall)

I thought he was going to say "if you took 100 monkeys and locked them in a room, they'd solve the world's problems"....That might actually work - although the marmasets might muck up everything just to be different...

JD Sal

Vedderfan10 wrote:

is there something wrong with being a cockeyed optimist? (other than being Billy Mumphry's downfall)

I thought he was going to say "if you took 100 monkeys and locked them in a room, they'd solve the world's problems"....That might actually work - although the marmasets might muck up everything just to be different...

Nice Seinfeld reference

PJ_Saluki

Jerram wrote:

I posted this on the DVD thread but perhaps its more appropriate here...


I do NOT believe (like some) that Ed should shut up and sing. So I always listen to his comments/rants/opinions etc. and often agree.

You're damned right. When you earn the mic, make sure you have something to say. People might not listen tomorrow.

Obi Once

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

i disagree.
on a bus with 200 people shouting turn around turn around, ONLY the driver can make the move.

I think global policy is TRULY driven by a small handful at the top with their eye on the pie.

If you got them to focus on Peace, Prosperity, and Cooperation i guarantee Eds comments would ring true.

But they just don't care about that.
They care about cooperating with eachother for prosperity. That's about it.

I think you make a very good point. At 1st I thought it was rather naive, but if the worlds leaders had Peace, Prosperity, and Cooperation as a common goal, sat around a big table and talked and talked, compromised and set aside ego a lot of the worlds problems could be solved. We have the know-how and money to really do good, why don't we?

Keep in mind that we the ppl elect these so called 'leaders'. Can't say the new 'leaders' of the world make me optimistic.. Putin, Bush, these 'socialistic' presidents in South America....

Eliot Rosewater

onelongsong wrote:

i think you're spot on. the only people that can change golbal warming are the people. as for other conflicts; they have been there for thousands of years. it's human nature. we fight for our borders and we fight for what we believe in. but once again it's the people who make the difference.

Bullshit. If that were the case we would be out of Iraq today. Leaders push for war and they don't need majority support from the "people" to do a goddamn thing once they're in office.

I agree with Ed and even if he's simplifying it, that doesn't mean he's naive. Sometimes the answers to huge fucking complicated problems really are simple.

MCG

If the 100 richest men in the world all got together with the goal of making the world a better place, they could make an astounding impact on society.

It will never happen, but it would be nice.

pjhabit

I think you guys may take him to literally

Ledbetterus

bootlegger10 wrote:

Here is what the breakdown could be:

6 Americans
20 Europeans
1 Russian (Putin runs the place)
1 Mexican
1 Canadian
8 South Americans
3 Chinese
10 from the Middle East
4 Japan
15 Africa
2 Australia
9 Misc.

Should export this to a new "list making" thread lol.

I don't think it's an awful thought.. Obviously it's something that would NEVER happen. But imagine if it did.. Lock people in a room and no one comes out until there is a full blown peace agreement. It's obviously meant metaphorically, but it holds water. Something so simple, that could never happen.

sweetpotato

LikeAnOcean wrote:

I think he made it a point that it was wishful thinking that you could get a group of men together to fix all of the worlds problems.

Obviously a handful of men aren't going to fix all of the worlds problems. Thats how it is now and its not working quite right.

not to mention, why 100 MEN? what about women? ed, darling, you're slipping, hon. might wanna keep your wine guzzling to a minimum when spouting political ideas. :rolleyes: