Forum Post: greatest country USA
Posted 13 years ago on Dec. 2, 2011, 10:50 p.m. EST by jbob
(74)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
please tell me what country is better than the U.S. and why. i would love to hear what is better about them.
the US is a great country but its pretty much the most corrupt nation there is and is well on its way to a police state. So fuck that...its beautiful sure but there is so many ignorant sheep it makes me sick. I'm going to south america or canada
George Washington's Farewell Address
Read this. It shows us where we have gone astray:
http://vehme.blogspot.com/2007/10/george-washingtons-farewell-address.html
In any nation the government is about as corrupt as it is capable of being. If you build a system that can be gamed (and they all can) then you can bet people will game it. That's human nature. We in the U.S. actually have an advantage that most other countries don't have. We have a fantastic information and media delivery system. It's hard to hide corruption from us and it's getting harder every day. It's much worse in places where the people can't watch those governing them as closely as we can.
The actual truth is closer to this: We see more corruption in the U.S. because we can. That's a good thing, and now that we are aware of it, we can start doing something about it.
That is a simple minded argument. The media is much less controlled by the government in Canada than in US. You do have a lot more corruption than most other industrialized nations. To say that it only appears this way is naive. You system permits it because politics and money are intertwined. It's not like that in all other countries.
The simple arguments are often the best. The media in the U.S. is still far less controlled than it is in most other nations.
Sure Canada has a lot to be proud of. No one is arguing that, but it doesn't invalidate these facts. Surely you aren't trying to intimate that Canada is free of governmental corruption. They have as much corruption as they can have, just like us.
The trick, as always, is to be aware of the problems, to be vigilant and not to tolerate it. The key is educating the people, and to do that, we first have to get their attention. Hence OWS.
Simple arguments are often the best. Simple minded ones aren't. It's not the same thing ;-)
Oh, can you please stop that? You aren't gaining anything by trying to score cheap points with semantics. An argument has no mind, so that would mean that you are trying to imply that I am simple-minded and that isn't going to wash with anyone who reads my posts. You should know that.
My point is that your argument that we see more corruption in US because the media is more transparent is absurd at best. The media in US is far less transparent than in Canada, and Canada has far less corruption than in US. It's nice and dandy to come up with arguments, but you have to stay logical. I never said there wasn't any corruption in Canada. I agree that there will always as much corruption as a system permits. And, I believe the US system permits a lot more corruption than in most other industrialized nations, simply because money and politics are so intertwined. That is not the case in Canada, and most European countries.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results
US is number 22 on the 2010 list. Not too too bad, but could be better. It ties with Belgium, but is more corrupted than Chile.
My argument was not confined to merely the media. We have the internet as well, and a number of very talented investigative journalists blogging about what they are discovering. We need more transparency, I agree, but the only way to get that is to elect representatives who will actually do their jobs and then to watch them all like hawks. We can do that. We have already begun the work. We simply need to stand firm in our resolve, be relentless in our insistence and keep OWS vital until we have satisfaction.
Unfortunately, OWS is not interested in participating in the political discourse.
That isn't it's purpose. OWS is the living embodiment of our will to power. It simply needs to continue to do what it is doing. Make noise, keep the issues in the public eye, and not be ignored. OWS raises our awareness and gives us hope. Those are the keys to the kingdom, my friend.
It's on purpose. The statement is on all the OWS websites. OWS is organized as an anarchy and the goal is to cause a revolution. They are not interested in engaging in political discourse with the current government. Their dream is to topple the government like in the Arab Spring protests they so idolize.
Yes, I have read it. The OWS concept works better on a small scale than it will work nationally. We shouldn't have politicians in the sense we have them now, and that much is true, but we are going to need representatives until we have an infrastructure in place that is capable of replacing that system. It's going to take time to build that infrastructure, and in the meantime, we still need to return government to the control of the people. I am still of the opinion that this revolution will much easier to carry out with full support from the existing institutions. It will be smoother, less costly and far less bloody.
If you want to see the change that OWS is about take place, then a two-pronged strategy has far more chance of success than simply relying on a full frontal assault, don't you think?
Not necessarily. I believe having representatives is good. I think a democratic republic is a good system, and it shouldn't be thrown away for some untested theoretical one. The only thing that needs to be done is to add some laws to separate money and politics. Look at countries like Canada, Norway, Sweden, etc... for inspiration.
You also need a better educational system to counter the conspiracy theory mind disease that is spreading like wild fire throughout US. If you could somehow get ride of all the Christians that would also help. There's nothing worst than Conservative Evangelical Christians. They should be rounded up and stored in Alcatraz ;-)
I doubt we will see our representative system replaced completely anytime soon. It's far more likely we will develop a web-based model of a pure democracy that exists separately but alongside what we already have, and perhaps over the years we will see them merge into something new that does work as well as or better than the current system, but we are looking at a transformation that will take decades.
A close look at what has happened since the Arab Spring reveals that the best of the emergent governmental models are very similar to the representative democracy we already enjoy here. They are not developing anything that surpasses the system we already have in place, they are simply not as old, and so have not yet had time for the inevitable entrenchment of corruption which we all know will eventually take place. But watching the development of those government systems will be a great learning experience for everyone on a global scale. If we are lucky, maybe we will even learn something from them that we can apply to our own system (though, I doubt it, one can always hope).
We still have freedom of religion here, and for now, I think we need it. Maybe one day we will all outgrow religion as it is practiced now and realize that religion has become a crutch to keep us from accepting full responsibility for our own actions. But that is going to have to happen naturally. As much as you and I might wish we could skip to the end, we have to deal with the problems that arise from all fundamentalist approaches to religion (not merely Christianity, every religion has fundamentalists, and they are all equally dangerous). We have to be patient. It's a phase that we will outgrow eventually.
That sounds horrible.
You're kidding right? You think the Arab countries with new governments now will be doing good? You think we will learn from them? Wow, you are out of tune.
how about a digital town hall?
The Internet would be the perfect tool to force the government to be more transparent.
I can't speak for US, but in Canada the House of Commons is filmed everyday and can be seen on television. Of course, this is a sleeper to watch. You have to listen for 6 hours to catch the few glimpses of interest. Not very practical; too time consuming.
Instead, I'm imagining a website which would publish the highlights of the day with a detail transcript for those who want to indulge in the finer details. You have the highlights, and you can click them to access the details of that particular debate. You could also have a few points of view from journalists to explain what's going on. Lengthy articles for the most important points already exist in newspapers, so this wouldn't be the goal. Likewise, there could be a similar system for the town halls which would also be accessible on the same site. In a nutshell, everything that is openly talked about by the government is accessible, well-organized, and searchable online, all the time.
This website would have to be from the government. This way, it's not run by a company and is owned by the people. The people inserting the data on the website would also be government workers. There would be an overseeing independent comity who makes sure there is no corruption going on and that everything is kosher.
All the statistics from the country would also be available. There is a lot of information collected by the government which is public, but which is unfortunately only available at the library. All this data researched with the money of tax payers would be there for everyone to see.
We can also think of cross searches. Imagine a town hall is dealing with a particular problem. The system could check for a similar problem from another town hall that is also being dealt with, or that has already been dealt with. Hey look, Chicago had this problem 3 years ago and they used this method to solve it. We have a very similar problem in Kansas, maybe we should try their solution. etc... We could see data from Chicago after they implemented their solution so that we understand how well it worked in practice. Graphs could be in near real time. Every department of the government could be connected, and every time something happens or a decision is made, it is inserted in the system. For example, you could view the crime rates of any city to tell what happened after certain laws were passed. There are so many possibilities.
There could also be controlled forums were people post to discuss issues and ask questions to their representatives. This would keep everyone closer together. It would have to be a well moderated forum so that it doesn't descend into inferno like this one. Perhaps there could be a free for all section, and another section where the best questions are taken from the free for all section and posed there. There's a lot of think about on this issue. It's obvious this type of forum would not work.
This would make the government much more transparent and give a lot of power to the people. If this was combined with strict laws to remove money from politics, then we could hope to achieve a republic democracy without much corruption at all. We would still have representatives, but they would be kept honest. We would not vote in a consensus like democracy because we wouldn't have too. We could let the people who know what they are doing make the decisions because we could trust them.
I don't believe in 'pure democracy' for the reasons I underlined below: 1) Mediocre voters are harmful to the system. It's best to let professional make decisions about economics and politics, 2) I don't want to have to spend my time following politics in detail to be able to make votes that count on all the minor decisions and going ons. Such a system is much harder to follow, and, in my opinion, a lot easier to corrupt.
In a quick jest, that's my take on it. Sorry if I wrote this quickly. I just kind of slapped it on here since I'm going to bed soon. I usually take more time to write.
No, I don't think we will learn from them. I said "I doubt it." but one can always hope.
Just what is so horrible about establishing a separate pure democracy online? If it can be done securely, then we can at least use it to establish a baseline of public opinion that we can use to measure how well our representatives are really doing what we elected them to do. You make it sound as if it will cause greater harm.
The idea of pure democracy is very harmful. I don't want nitwits participating in decision making. The idea that you get a better solution from polling everyone is extremely dubious, and has been proven wrong on many occasions.
For one, I don't know enough about politics, economy, and foreign affairs to make wise choices for the government. It's much better to have a good representative system where these people are qualified to make the correct choices, and where the system does not enable them to indulge in corruption.
For two, I don't want to have to worry about voting for each decision that is being made. I have other stuff to do. I'd rather have qualified people making these decisions.
In 2010, It was number 22 out of 178 nations for corruption. Quite far from being the most corrupt. Although, you do have the "Men in Black".
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results
Well i admit im going by my own opinion based on a limited set of observations, so im probably wrong, as i said in my other post below.
i cant help but laugh at your statistic though ^_^
where did you get such a thing?
It's the corruption index from Transparency International. They tabulate one each year. You would understand if you lived in a country like I do. Corruption in US is nothing really compared to other countries in the world. I see corruption on a daily basis. Ever get stopped by the police for no reason other than them asking you for some money? Not a ticket, but for money they can pocket. They'll even tell you straight up they need drinking money. Happens all the time here in Indonesia.
The most corrupt country? Really? I suggest you get out more.
Might I suggest N. Korea....no corruption there and open highways.....
then please leave soon.
What does greatest country mean? It depends what you like and where you want to live. Your question is very simple minded. Personally, I would rather live in Canada or Indonesia than US. Actually, there are only a few countries that I would choose after US. Somalia for example.
Here's something to think about:
“If we are to change our world view, images have to change. The artist now has a very important job to do. He's not a little peripheral figure entertaining rich people, he's really needed.” ~David Hockney
That's quite accurate and because of that it's both hilarious and ridiculously sad...
This is the most accurate thing ever.
ROTFLMAO! That is too funny Glaucon.
so go live somewhere else no one is stopping you. stop complaining.
Why should we? Moving out of America is the coward's way out; the right thing to do is to stick around and push for our country to become something better than it is. Being America doesn't mean we're automatically perfect or a superpower; it merely means that if we govern ourselves and manage our economy properly then we can become a morally conscious superpower.
As far as your reaction to the poster is concerned, that's ridiculous. That's not inflammatory or hateful or really complaining; it's a gentle poke in the ribs from our less powerful but more civilized neighbors up north reminding us to quit screwing around. We invaded Afghanistan in 2001. We've had a military presence there for the past decade. There are news broadcasts about it on a regular basis. 3% of the population could point to Kabul on a map if asked to. See a problem?
The “live and let live” mantra of my fellow Americans has me wondering how well that philosophy has served us; it is too akin to apathy in my opinion. Take for instance a conversation I had on Facebook with some friends of mine. After my sister-in-law returned from Wall Mart, I opined as to why people “are waiting in the parking lot at 11:59, Thursday night, and stammer in to be the first person to buy cheap, consumer products at Wall Mart. My sister in law, for what ever reason, made it there last night, and her impression was that it was a circus of children arguing with other children, with children in tow, for the sake of children's Christmas.” In the conversation I began with my opinion—that “I honestly believe that people partake in Black Friday because they are so lonely that they enjoy the human interactions. The fighting is just an outcrop of the way they deal with confrontation in the homestead. Or they honestly believe that their fellow human is going to think more of them because they have the money to burn, which was an older theory I held. But who knows why people do what they do. Maybe it is just the rush of confrontation…” After being rebutted by another respondent, “to think there are millions of people that were born into countries that don't have a damn thing...they would consider each and every one of us 'rich snobs' for spending time criticizing our fellow citizens on Facebook (materialistic communication devices) on how they choose to spend their time/money. I say lighten up or join the peace corps so that the hypocritical opinions are fully realized. Happy holidays to those that CHOOSE to see how fortunate anybody living in this country truly are....I wonder what the starving kids in Somalia will get this holiday season?” , I am left with further pondering.
I am never impressed with the “you don’t like this nation you should move” card, and any one of its multiple deviations. In fact, I believe that the opposite of that sentiment should be the norm. If you love your nation, you should hold it accountable in every facet of life, economical, political, and yes, social. I believe that the “me Generation of the ‘80s,” is a direct outcrop of live and let live. To take this point one step further, the live and let live mind frame, coupled with economic self interests, is the direct result of the one percent paradigm. These people are not social deviants; they are just too synchronized with the spirit of our age. So, does that make me a snob because I articulate ideas and preferences that are not the norm? Last I looked, I live in a nation whose people value multiple perspectives or was my interpretation of the First Amendment wrong. Now, the non-starter rebuttal I experienced won’t deter me in my pondering. Most of what the person said, I agree with. Volunteering in a professional manner, I.e Peace Corps, is a good one pronged attack on a three pronged serpent. A well informed voter, an intelligently frugal shopper and worker, and a tenacity to hold your fellow neighbors’ behavior accountable are the hall marks of a rational citizen. The “Love us or lose us” line is usually the last vestige of an inarticulate argument. But the whole experience has me questioning the logic of the autonomist individual which our agrarian ancestors loved so much.
I’ve read, maybe to my detriment, many books on the subject of the American cultural waste land, and I believe that the live and let live mantra coupled with the dying societal respect found in the culture leads to live and let die.
I recommend reading the constitution sometime.
what specific part should i reread?
I'm not living in US. You asked a question and I responded. Don't accuse me of complaining.
Glaucon has a point. Your original posts and replies have been petty and infantile at best.
Dont tread on me.
The first step to ending corruption
We have a large number of great, well thought out, COMPLICATED ideas that will require a huge amount of "selling" and “explanation" and will garner GREAT OPPOSITION.
Every one of our goals can only be achieved by cutting the incestuous link between washington and money - we MUST start here:
ACTION -- JOIN US
We need to be realistic & pick an issue that is simple – and that is proven popular -
that 83% of Americans already agree on -
That even 56% of TP already agree on -
that will bring together the people in OWS with the people outside of OWS.
Everybody wins! ACTION ----> JOIN US
Our only immediate goal should be to pass a constitutional amendment to counter Supreme Court decision Citizens United (2010) , that enable unlimited amounts of anonymous money to flood into our political system.
“Corporations and organizations are not a persons &
have no personhood rights”
We don’t have to explain or persuade people to accept our position – we only have to persuade them to ACT based on their own position. Pursuing this goal will prove to the world that we, at OWS, are a serious realistic Movement, with serious realistic goals. Achieving this goal will make virtually every other goal – jobs, taxes, infrastructure, Medicare – much easier to achieve –
by disarming our greatest enemy – GREED.
ACTION ----> JOIN US
THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE AMENDING PROCESS The Prohibition movement started as a disjointed effort by conservative teetotalers who thought the consumption of alcohol was immoral. They ransacked saloons and garnered press coverage here and there for a few years. Then they began to gain support from the liberals because many considered alcohol partially responsible for spousal and child abuse, among other social ills. This odd alliance, after many years of failing to influence change consistently across jurisdictions, decided to concentrate on one issue nationally—a constitutional amendment. They pressured all politicians on every level to sign a pledge to support the amendment. Any who did not, they defeated easily at the ballot box since they controlled a huge number of liberal, and conservative and independent swing votes in every election. By being a single-issue constituency attacking from all sides of the political spectrum, they very quickly amassed enough votes (2/3) to pass the amendment in Congress. And, within just 17 months, they were successful in getting ¾ of the state legislatures to ratify the constitutional amendment into law. (Others were ratified even faster: Eight —took less than a year. The 26th, granting 18-year-olds the right to vote, took just three months and eight days.)
If they could tie the left and right into a success -
WHY CAN'T WE ??????????
ACTION ----> JOIN US
I feel that we should stay with this simple text to overturn CU:
”corporations are not people”
for four simple reasons and one – not so simple:
1
83% of Americans have already opposed CU in the ABC/Washington post poll and the above
IS THEIR POSITION ALREADY.
2
We don’t have to work to convince people on the validity of our position.
3
Simple is almost always better.
4
This simple Amendment is REQUIRED to overturn CU.
And all other electoral reform can be passed through the normal legislative process.
5
OWS and these pages are chock full of ( mostly ) excellent ideas to improve our country.
All of them have strong advocates – and some have strong opposition.
None of them has been “pre-approved” by 83% of Americans !
Pursuing this goal – without additional specifics is exactly what Americans want.
What do we want? Look at that almost endless list of demands – goals - aims.
Tax the rich. End the Fed. Jobs for all, Medicare for all. So easy to state! Can you imagine how hard it would be to formulate a “sales pitch” for any of these to convince your Republican friends to vote for any of them?
83% of Americans have ALREADY “voted” against CU. And 76% of the Rs did too.
All we have to do ask Americans is to pressure their representatives – by letters - emails – petitions.
Wanna take your family on vacation?
Convince the 7 year old and the 10 year old to go to Mt Rushmore.
Then try to convince them to go to Disneyland.
Prioritizing this goal will introduce us to the world – not as a bunch of hippie radical anarchist socialist commie rabblerousers – but as a responsible, mature movement that is fighting for what America wants.
ACTION ----> JOIN US
I feel that using the tactics of the NRA, the AARP an the TP – who all represent a minority – who have successfully used their voting power to achieve their minority goals - plus the Prohibition Amendment tactics – bringing all sides together - is a straight path for us to success that cannot fail to enable us to create and complete one MAJORITY task.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
SEE NEXT POST FOR RESOLUTION DETAILS
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
We ask the N Y C – G A to adopt the following resolution:
The Occupy Wall Street New York City General Assembly endorses the
Peoples' Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution - House Joint Resolution 88
ending corporate personhood,
and demands that
each member of, and candidate for, the United States Congress and
each member of, and candidate for, all state legislatures
pledges his or her support for the amendment,
and will oppose any member or candidate who does not.
The General Assembly also calls upon its sister occupations to join in this demand.
We recognize that there are other demands working their way to the GA. However, the Peoples' Rights Amendment resolution has proven widespread support and should proceed on its own track:
1 The ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 83% of the entire US population -
85% of Democrats & 81% of independents & 76% of Republicans -
oppose the Citizens United decision, which declared that corporations are people.
2 The OWS Declaration of the Occupation of New York City (approved by the General Assembly on 29 September 2011) echoes these sentiments when it states that
"a democratic government derives its just power from the people, not from corporations."
3 Amendments such as the Prohibition amendment, and major legislation is only passed if significant organizations such as the AARP, or the NRA, or the TP or OWS actively fight to get them passed through the political maze.
We also recognize that by endorsing this resolution and by achieving this goal , the NYC - OWS will be clearly aligning itself with what the vast majority of the American people want achieved - giving us even more credibility - and attracting external support for our other goals.
GOALS ARE ACHIEVED BY ACHIEVERS – NOT BY ENDORSERS
House Joint Resolution 88
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to clarify the authority of Congress and the States to regulate corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.
November 15, 2011 - Mr. MC GOVERN introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to clarify the authority of Congress & the States to regulate corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
SECTION 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.
SECTION 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected State and Federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.
SECTION 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people's rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.''
i don'y know which countries are better than America. all i know is America has got some problems. I don't live in other countries so I don't judge them, but if they have some sage advice. I'm all ears.
here is a list of countries rated by "standard of living":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
and....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
You will note that the U.S.A. does not place 1st in any catergory. Of course these equations do not take inot account American culture, or the 'American dream', or other such variables.... however, as you will note, depending on how you define 'better', there most certainly ARE countries that are better off.... And better to live in... Sorry to anyone this info may offend, but it was asked for....
"Better" is a subjective term. There are plenty of things I think numerous countries do "better". I'd say the most important freedom that remains minimally intact in the US is the ability to speak out against leadership. Other than that, it seems most freedoms have been legislated out of existence (and that battle still continues in the wee hours). I hope for return of many freedoms and have more confidence in the American people now than I have ever had in my life. Until those freedoms return though, I'll spend my time where day to day freedoms are greater (even if there is restriction on freedom of speech).
There is no other place on Earth with more courageous and selfless Occupiers. The 99% will defeat greed and liberate the world.
selfless? how is litteraly asking for a hand out from someone else's pocket selfless?
"Do you believe that all your machismo chest beating about how "great" this country is will make us suddenly realize how wrong we were to think it could ever be improved upon? Nothing is perfect. If you really love your country then you also are duty bound to do everything in your power to improve it and to make sure it will always live up to the claims you keep making about it. You sould be working with us, not wasting our time with this bs."
this ^
I don't think the US is the worst place to be in by far, dont get me wrong. But a lot of the corruption seen by other Gov's is orchestrated by our gov or our corporations
none are better none are worse
they just simply are
youre an idiot if you really think that spend about 2 days in north korea then tell me that.
No you're the idiot for not only getting raped in the ass by the elite, but trying to tell other people how nice it is and how they should stop complaining and be grateful to be raped so lovingly by the elite. You idiot.
what are you even talking about?
wake up. countries are illusory constructs whose lines are determined by ink excretions on paper similar to how monkeys territory is determined by fecal excretions on the ground.
Much like your birth certificate. You don't REALLY exist, you are just a nightmare your parents are having.
Here it is
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43287918/ns/business-world_business/t/us-doesnt-make-cut-happiest-nations-list/#.TtnJQmN-0SQ
we are not considered happy because of ungrateful f*cks like you complaing about things that you want.
Well most of these ungrateful f*cks are not going anywhere.
So the government and businesses better start paying attention or their going to get the boot sooner or later.
what is camping in a park going to do to "boot" the govt and businesses? and btw there arent rally too many people that care what you guys are doing any more. your fifteen minuets of fame is just about up.
Just curious, and I swear this is tangential to this topic: would you be for removing money from politics and educating people on how to use their power as consumers to enforce change? That is, would you be interested in a movement focused explicitly around removing "special interests" from campaigns and legislations, restrict lobbying, and forcing corporations to listen to customers?
And a few other things, like impeaching the 5 supreme courts who voted on citizens united and so on...
But yes. I'd say those are the main things.
Glad to hear, seems like there is something that resonates with everyone, regardless of party or region. I can only imagine if someone could seize on this specifically and strike an allegiance between red-blooded conservatives, bleeding-heart liberals, and everything between. : )
it is tangential. it shows that you cant rebute my statement. you guys are days away from being yesterdays news and i cant wait.
Not quite, you see, I don't give a damn about what you're saying in this thread exactly. My overall stance on the "If you don't like it, why don't you go somewhere else" is "fuck you, this is MY country." All points derived from that argument are therefore moot. I was curious however, in the confusion of OWS, if there was some unearthed common ground that was simply going unnoticed, this appeared to be that common ground. I am for OWS, but more so I am for the changes we all want, and I would be just as happy to see that it coming from any movement as I would OWS.
Also, refute, rebut, or rebuke, I admit it is impossible for me to rebute much of anything.
you can evict the protesters, but you can't evict an idea whose time has come.
You sound like a poster.
Your 100% correct! You are not going anywhere.....ever.
anyone?
The Czech republic. Why? http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/dec/02/czechs_decriminalize_peyote_magi
Of course if you prefer a police state, the US is a great option, and getting better by the day.
Iceland. They told the banksters to pound sand, and they are the oldest representative democracy on the planet.
they are failing horribly. they had to close all their mccdonalds because they couldnt afford the cheese and meat to put on the burgers. so i dont know what you are trying to get at?
Closing all McDonald's doesn't constitute failure as a nation. It may indicate that bucking the International Bankster Cartel has consequences.
who do you think regulates the banks? the government. who do you think controls weather or not the economy of the country can grow? the banks. if the banks cant afford to keep a mcdonalds open do you think they will be able to give people loans say to buy a home or start their own bussines?
Iceland is not an infinite growth society. If I weren't posting from my Droid, I would post a link to the article about Iceland indicting their banksters.
Iceland arrests bankster CEO. Would that our prosecutors had such integrity! http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE7AT2UX20111130?irpc=932
Why keep injecting these jingoistic non sequiturs into the discussion? They really aren't adding anything useful. Do you believe that all your machismo chest beating about how "great" this country is will make us suddenly realize how wrong we were to think it could ever be improved upon? Nothing is perfect. If you really love your country then you also are duty bound to do everything in your power to improve it and to make sure it will always live up to the claims you keep making about it. You sould be working with us, not wasting our time with this bs.
This question is pointless because the United States, as a superpower has basically created the conditions of poverty all around the world. Does there need to be a better country out there for us to work to emulate, or can we just see the logic of the situation and realize that something isn't right at all with the way things are?
Well the United States is the center from which the vast majority of exploitation comes, so of course it's going to look relatively better than most of the nations surrounding it, but just because it is the semi-solid building on top of a heap of rubble doesn't mean that it isn't fundamentally flawed. The kings of rubble can only remain so until the whole ground shifts and the walls come tumbling down. You are so far removed from the reality that you think people on the left wing side are you enemy, and I feel bad for you.
"The man who would choose security over freedom deserves neither"
i disagree and think they deserve both. But you get my point (on second thought..i doubt you do)
Most Americans DO have both, thanks to the 2nd Amendment.
yes the good old usa used to be the greatest country on earth- and ows with help from the rest of the world will return this once great nation to its former greatness. training web page http://tinyurl.com/7rvpv43
so whats better than the US?
the usa 30 years ago
Exactly. We should be trying to get back to that. Not trying to get further away from the good times in America.
If you ever left your trailer you might just find out.
you mean my college house? ohh you prolly wouldnt know about college. its a place to go so you can get a job and wont have to rely on the government.
Really, There are no roads to your campus? (Government supplied). No safe drinking water (Government inspected). NO doctors and medications in the infirmary? (Government licensed and government tested) No flu shots? (Government supplied). No student loans? (Government guaranteed) No electricity? (Installed by government licensed electricians meeting Government safety codes) No buildings? (Government fire and safety codes, and mandates for load-bearing walls). No police or fire department nearby? (Obvious) You've never been to public school to prepare you for college? (Obvious) Is your college not accredited? (Government accreditation boards)
Shall I go on?
Gee, I guess you are pretty independent of any reliance on government.
who is paying for all this? me and my family along with everyones tax dollars. idiot. just because it it government supplied doesnt mean its not coming from our pockets.
While you are in college, you should take a class or two in civics. You should also sign up for one in logic.
Of COURSE that is pated for by taxes. Of COURSE your family pays taxes (and likely at a far higher rate than the wealthy.) Government has ALWAYS collected those taxes.
That is the cost of living in a civil society.
But that does NOT mean you don't rely, for your very health and safety, let alone your ability to prosper and succeed, on government, which you contend you can miraculously do. Your non-reliance is nothing but a narcissistic delusion.
i dont want to rely on the government for anything. i want to work for what i get. i only deserve what i work for and able to pay for. i know how to live in my means. i dont want government run health care because there would be people that take advantage of the system. and you are wrong about my family paying higher taxes than the wealthy. i dont know how many times you people have to hear that the top 1% pays a higher tax rate than anyone. thats a fact. you cant argue that.
You don't know your facts. Learn them now while you are in schhol. THe top 1% get virtually ALL their money through capitol gains, not income. Since the rates on capitol gains are a mere 15%, they are paying less of a percentage of their income on taxes than your parents, who are likely paying 27%, PLUS payroll taxes.
You have NO CHOICE but to ely on the government. You are living in a developed country that has already been built be it: the roads, bridges, the internet itself we are using, food and water safety, Police, fire, trash collectors, teachers judges. The list id HUGE. Mostly what you rely on is invisible to you because you have always had it, and take it for granted.
Look at this: http://governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=1
You are also wrong about the health care bill: it is NOT government run. It just mandates you get it, and it makes sure that insurance companies can't screw us they way that have been. Claims of a government take-over are simply LIES that the insurance companies have gotten the GOP to shout repeatedly.
If you write papers in college as poorly researched as your posts here, you will flunk out.
And the fact that you are more afraid of a few people who would "take advantage" of the system than you are about the MILLIONS of WORKING people who are desperate to have health insurance for their families and kids, the TENS OF THOUSAND who DIE every single year because they can't get it, makes you a spoiled selfish prick.
I'm studying neuroscience in college and your understanding of the US and world is embarrassing. And College doesn't mean shit. It means you didn't flunk high school (big deal) and have money. Woopidy doo..i know a million idiotic college students who can jump through hoops just fine but have no practical knowledge of anything and swallow their culture whole just like you do
maybe THIS http://www.businessinsider.com/secret-bill-to-be-voted-on-today-would-allow-the-military-to-sweep-up-us-citizens-at-home-or-abroad-2011-11
his name is Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron LawlRon Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl Ron Lawl