Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is the USA a big bully these days?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedIs the USA a big bully these days?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 9>
Poll Question: A simple yes or no, foriegn opinions valued most.
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
38 [64.41%]
21 [35.59%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 21:38
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

 If we codified anti-globalization policies capitalism wouldn't be compromised but manufacturing jobs wouldn't be lost. Can you imagine how complex the code should be? Capitalism is based on free markets. Stiff regulations are a threat to it. Protectionism is one of them. Actually, the latest debate is triggered more by the loss of white-collar jobs (manufacturing jobs migration is going on for years, see my original message), so most of it is political. Politicians don't do anything about it as nothing can be done, but they talk a lot as talk is cheap and people like it.
^ I agree. I think many people are against globalism because of nothing more than a romanticizing of the past.
 
 
People tend to romanticize the past, they turn extremely nostalgic when the times get rough. So they liked Reagan during the recession of 1990, now they remember Clinton not realizing he was greatly responsible for the present state of affairs. The same goes for globalization - people don't understand the nature of the process. Th ebest example is Lou Dobbs of CNN. The man had it for quite a while when at the end of his program he listed US companies outsourcing jobs (now he's on a crusade against illegal aliens)
 
Which is why I think that introductory Macro should be a standard high school level course.
 
Are you referring to macro-economics? That won't happen in the near future. THe system of public education is conceived in such a way that the population is given  minimal necessary education. It makes it easier to govern.
Back to Top
rileydog22 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 21:06
Actually, the VP has as much power as any other member of the senate.  If you calculate the power indeces (using either method), all members and the VP are equally powerful.  

Edited by rileydog22 - June 27 2007 at 21:06

Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 18:15
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

Originally posted by rileydog22 rileydog22 wrote:

Originally posted by StyLaZyn StyLaZyn wrote:

For anyone who might care (in the USA for this comment):
 
Send something to your representative to let them know about your displeasure in the Vice-Tyrant.


Alright!  We're gonna try to impeach the VP for acting on the information that was avaliable at the time!  That b*****d should have used a time-machine to see what would would happen in the future and act upon that! 


The problem with Cheney is he has covered up his wrongdoings and has tried to abolish agencies that were created to have oversight over his office. Now he's saying he's not part of the excecutive office of government, but rather the legislative because he is the "president of the Senate," a largely superfluous position with only matters in breaking tie votes, basically. He's a spinster and a flat-out criminal. But do we have enough evidence to boot him from office? Probably not, but I'm sure we could get a "no confidence" vote for him from Congress, as long as not too many balls are squeezed behind the scenes.
 
That actually is the more accurate description. He has no official excutive power unless the President dies. If that doesn't happen the only power he has is that as the President of the Senate (and something minor to do with the electorial college I think). That said I don't like the guy, but there's no grounds for impeachment.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 18:10
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

 If we codified anti-globalization policies capitalism wouldn't be compromised but manufacturing jobs wouldn't be lost. Can you imagine how complex the code should be? Capitalism is based on free markets. Stiff regulations are a threat to it. Protectionism is one of them. Actually, the latest debate is triggered more by the loss of white-collar jobs (manufacturing jobs migration is going on for years, see my original message), so most of it is political. Politicians don't do anything about it as nothing can be done, but they talk a lot as talk is cheap and people like it.
^ I agree. I think many people are against globalism because of nothing more than a romanticizing of the past.
 
 
People tend to romanticize the past, they turn extremely nostalgic when the times get rough. So they liked Reagan during the recession of 1990, now they remember Clinton not realizing he was greatly responsible for the present state of affairs. The same goes for globalization - people don't understand the nature of the process. Th ebest example is Lou Dobbs of CNN. The man had it for quite a while when at the end of his program he listed US companies outsourcing jobs (now he's on a crusade against illegal aliens)
 
Which is why I think that introductory Macro should be a standard high school level course.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 13:17
Originally posted by rileydog22 rileydog22 wrote:

Originally posted by StyLaZyn StyLaZyn wrote:

For anyone who might care (in the USA for this comment):
 
Send something to your representative to let them know about your displeasure in the Vice-Tyrant.


Alright!  We're gonna try to impeach the VP for acting on the information that was avaliable at the time!  That b*****d should have used a time-machine to see what would would happen in the future and act upon that! 


The problem with Cheney is he has covered up his wrongdoings and has tried to abolish agencies that were created to have oversight over his office. Now he's saying he's not part of the excecutive office of government, but rather the legislative because he is the "president of the Senate," a largely superfluous position with only matters in breaking tie votes, basically. He's a spinster and a flat-out criminal. But do we have enough evidence to boot him from office? Probably not, but I'm sure we could get a "no confidence" vote for him from Congress, as long as not too many balls are squeezed behind the scenes.
My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 10:01
Originally posted by StyLaZyn StyLaZyn wrote:

 
Which is why Hillary has a good shot at the Presidency if she uses the "I will use my Husband for...." card.  Many Americans still love Bill Clinton as evident by bumper stickers I have seen lately.  In my area, the "I MIss Bill" stickers are popping up all over.
 
It's going to be another election filled with candidates that offer nothing promising.
 
We may be that unfortunate indeed
 
 


Edited by IVNORD - June 27 2007 at 10:02
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 09:52
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

but impeachment, though not synonymous with removal, is a powerful statement.
 
That's the problem - it's been used only as a statement lately, thus becoming counterproductive and harmful. It's always been a tool in political struggle, but while the Andrew Johnson and Nixon impeachements had a political goal, Clinton's was a mere statement, a slap in the face. Not that I have ever been his admirer, but his impeachement was a politically motivated revenge even though he had been very much politically neutralized at the time. THe proceedings against Clinton paralized his administration to the extent that the man was afraid to authorize precision-bombing Osama because of potential misinterpretation of it as his diverting attention from Monica. THe present talk is totally baseless (purely technically Clinton's impeachement had more legitimacy than any Bush/Cheney bullsh*t talk), aimed to distract attention from real problems.
Back to Top
StyLaZyn View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 22 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4079 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 09:44
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

 If we codified anti-globalization policies capitalism wouldn't be compromised but manufacturing jobs wouldn't be lost. Can you imagine how complex the code should be? Capitalism is based on free markets. Stiff regulations are a threat to it. Protectionism is one of them. Actually, the latest debate is triggered more by the loss of white-collar jobs (manufacturing jobs migration is going on for years, see my original message), so most of it is political. Politicians don't do anything about it as nothing can be done, but they talk a lot as talk is cheap and people like it.
^ I agree. I think many people are against globalism because of nothing more than a romanticizing of the past.
 
 
People tend to romanticize the past, they turn extremely nostalgic when the times get rough. So they liked Reagan during the recession of 1990, now they remember Clinton not realizing he was greatly responsible for the present state of affairs. The same goes for globalization - people don't understand the nature of the process. Th ebest example is Lou Dobbs of CNN. The man had it for quite a while when at the end of his program he listed US companies outsourcing jobs (now he's on a crusade against illegal aliens)
 
Which is why Hillary has a good shot at the Presidency if she uses the "I will use my Husband for...." card.  Many Americans still love Bill Clinton as evident by bumper stickers I have seen lately.  In my area, the "I MIss Bill" stickers are popping up all over.
 
It's going to be another election filled with candidates that offer nothing promising.
 
 
Back to Top
StyLaZyn View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 22 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4079 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 09:40
Originally posted by rileydog22 rileydog22 wrote:

Originally posted by StyLaZyn StyLaZyn wrote:

For anyone who might care (in the USA for this comment):
 
Send something to your representative to let them know about your displeasure in the Vice-Tyrant.


Alright!  We're gonna try to impeach the VP for acting on the information that was avaliable at the time!  That b*****d should have used a time-machine to see what would would happen in the future and act upon that! 
 
You forgot to add an adjective before information.  "Fabricated" comes to mind.
 
Bad and arrogant choices were made. If the administration did make an honest mistake, I really would have hoped they would have done the right thing and abandoned their invasion. In my perspective, the fact they continued indicates they have ulterior motives. I won't sit here and defend forced agendas by my "leaders". I wish I never voted for Bush back in 2000. He has made a debacle of Conservatives.
 
 
 
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 09:17
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

 If we codified anti-globalization policies capitalism wouldn't be compromised but manufacturing jobs wouldn't be lost. Can you imagine how complex the code should be? Capitalism is based on free markets. Stiff regulations are a threat to it. Protectionism is one of them. Actually, the latest debate is triggered more by the loss of white-collar jobs (manufacturing jobs migration is going on for years, see my original message), so most of it is political. Politicians don't do anything about it as nothing can be done, but they talk a lot as talk is cheap and people like it.
^ I agree. I think many people are against globalism because of nothing more than a romanticizing of the past.
 
 
People tend to romanticize the past, they turn extremely nostalgic when the times get rough. So they liked Reagan during the recession of 1990, now they remember Clinton not realizing he was greatly responsible for the present state of affairs. The same goes for globalization - people don't understand the nature of the process. Th ebest example is Lou Dobbs of CNN. The man had it for quite a while when at the end of his program he listed US companies outsourcing jobs (now he's on a crusade against illegal aliens)
Back to Top
rileydog22 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 01:05
Like I said, I'm not saying the administration is right.  I'm just saying the impeachment arguments are misinformed at best and simply idiotic at worst.  

Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 01:00
but impeachment, though not synonymous with removal, is a powerful statement. I don't think Cheney should be impeached (it's too late anyway), I think his legacy should be what it is: a man who truly, foolishly believed that invasion was a good idea. Plus all the other reasons not spoken, like a tactical advantage in the Middle East or the apparent notion that fighting over there will keep the bad guys busy (which may be partly true but is unsustainable).





Edited by Atavachron - June 27 2007 at 01:02
Back to Top
rileydog22 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:48
The point that people miss in this matter is this: unless you have physical evidence that the administration knowingly committed actions that violated laws, you cannot remove anyone from office.  You can impeach all you please (note that impeachment merely brings the officer to trial), but you aren't gonna get a conviction. 

I'm not defending the administration, I just get really pissed off when people (not necessarily anyone here) have their heads jammed up their asses and start talking about impeachment. 


Edited by rileydog22 - June 27 2007 at 00:50

Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:45
it's not, but the U.S. incursion may have been.

Back to Top
rileydog22 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:40
Oh, I didn't realize that making unpopular decisions was illegal.  

Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:39
^ or maybe just good judgement, like Bush Sr. had in the first Iraq war by wisely pulling out

Back to Top
rileydog22 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:36
Originally posted by StyLaZyn StyLaZyn wrote:

For anyone who might care (in the USA for this comment):
 
Send something to your representative to let them know about your displeasure in the Vice-Tyrant.


Alright!  We're gonna try to impeach the VP for acting on the information that was avaliable at the time!  That b*****d should have used a time-machine to see what would would happen in the future and act upon that! 

Back to Top
Dim View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: April 17 2007
Location: Austin TX
Status: Offline
Points: 6890 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:30
I'm pretty rude!
 
I voted for me!
Back to Top
BroSpence View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 05 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2614 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 27 2007 at 00:26
Originally posted by Drew Drew wrote:

Sorry, but "bullies" don't send billions of donated dollars, supplies and aid to Tsunami victims.  Say or think what you want but the USA is more generous than any other country on earth.  Check out how much aid the huge China sent to their needy neighbors.



I think the one you call "bully" is putting out extremely mixed messages.

here

here

and

here too
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 26 2007 at 20:57
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

 
THe US is the main pillar of global economy. Excluding ourselves from it is ridiculous. Blaming it for the loss of manufacturing jobs is even more ridiculous. Global economy is a self-regulating mechanism. THe process of globalisation is at leas 100 years old, they just  didn't call it that way back then. Migration of jobs and entire industries began probably with the debasing of the steel manufacturing if not earlier. When it became economically profitable to produce steel closer to the sources of iron ore at much cheaper labor cost while the shipping costs declined. Textile, chemicals, agriculture and many more followed suit. 20 years ago engineering began its displacement. Nobody said a word. All this latest crap is pure politics. Manufacturing will not be spared. But eventually new jobs will be created as new technology will appear. And some old jobs will return to the US when the world salaries level off thanks to global economy. Right now we are simply priced out of some industries.
 
Right now manufacturers are able to enjoy the booming American market without the burden of paying American taxes or labor. Correct. Capitalism always strives to maximize profits. 
To say globalization is not the cause of the loss of manufacturing jobs is ridiculous. Of course the global economy is the cause of the job loss, my entire post attests to that. BLAIMING it for the job loss is ridiculous. It's like blaiming the wind for blowing your hat off your head. The capital will always seek cheaper labor markets. Prohibiting it will result in ultimate demise of capitalism.
Capitalism can exist perfectly fine confined to a country's borders. Prohibiting these actions wouldn't be a leash on capitalism; it would just be a recognition of borders. I understand why jobs go overseas. I even support jobs going overseas, but I don't see how you can say globalization doesn't cause them to go to cheaper labor markets. Sorry for the confusion. We're saying the same thing here. Blaiming the loss of jobs on the global economy is correct. Blaiming (castigating) it for the loss of jobs is silly as it's a natural process. Fighting it is pissing against the wind.  <Couldn't agree more
 If we codified anti-globalization policies capitalism wouldn't be compromised but manufacturing jobs wouldn't be lost. Can you imagine how complex the code should be? Capitalism is based on free markets. Stiff regulations are a threat to it. Protectionism is one of them. Actually, the latest debate is triggered more by the loss of white-collar jobs (manufacturing jobs migration is going on for years, see my original message), so most of it is political. Politicians don't do anything about it as nothing can be done, but they talk a lot as talk is cheap and people like it.
^ I agree. I think many people are against globalism because of nothing more than a romanticizing of the past.
 
If we were to put protectionist policies in place producers would be forced to move their factories back to American to sell to the market that they depend on.  And prices would rise immediately causing a recession; foreign govenments would respond in kind closing international markets for us, not to mention we would be out-priced first; the global economy would collapse, etc.
Real Wages and employment would also rise though. Then you would have to raise wages across the board or risk pricing a huge segment of the population out of the market. In the former case you would face horrendous inflation, in the latter - a recession. I don't think a recession would necessarily follow. I largely agree with your second point which is a large reason I'm for globalization.
I don't see how you can say otherwise.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 9>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.117 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.