America - The Official Thread

[FoRiZon]

Hello Americans. Seems like almost everyday has been all bad news, total screwups, and such. I feel that way.

Heres some good tidbits from a Reddit Thread:

Only people with strong opinions will ever have the drive to comment though. “I don’t know” fundamentally doesn’t add anything to this conversation, or any other, really, which is unfortunate, because you’re right, it does give the impression that absolutely everyone is starkly on one side of an issue or another.

And the real "woke" thing (in a non-ironic sense for once) is realizing it this is applicable to everything on social media.
Social media turns many of the social norms on their head. With a real-world circle of friends, a person being offencive and divisive makes the group of people gradually exclude them. This causes the natural moderation of their behaviors, or them being completely socially ostracized.
Online, this mechanic is completely inverted. The louder and more aggressive you are, the more attention and focus you get. To the point where people will actively fake people attacking them because that's what makes them important.
And people who quietly wait or have moderate viewpoints? You don't see the number of people who don't respond. Whereas in real life a friend saying something disgusting would be met with everyone sharing an odd look and ignoring them, none of that body language exists online.
and frankly, the number of people would actually moderate viewpoints (mind you moderate does not mean middle, or that you can't have opinions) continues to diminish simply due to exposure and ideologies as a sport becoming the norm.
we live in an age where the crazy person on the corner is now put on a pedestal because that's what drives attention. That's what gets clicks. That's what gets ad revenue.
We are not socially and mentally built for what social media has become. all of those natural moderating factors which keep people from becoming cartoonish extremes are working in reverse.

 

[Liquid]

It's horrifying to find out that President Trump has Welsh ancestry; his verbal slip of referring to "Tim Apple" to Tim Cook's face is strikingly reminiscent of Welsh dialect where you get nicknames based on what you do like John the Pop or Dave the Bus Driver.

I hope this is updated for the benefits of Jeff Book, Bill Computer and Ralph T-shirt.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I once got stopped by the Heddlu, the chirpy chappy called me "drive" the whole time. Fortunately there was a Proper English Policeman accompanying him who explained it's short for driver. Sir would have done

They let me off with my brake light though as we were round the corner from a Halfords.

Back on-topic... doesn't Trump have earlier, similar form with Jim Lockheed?

 

[PeterJB]

I once got stopped by the Heddlu, the chirpy chappy called me "drive" the whole time. Fortunately there was a Proper English Policeman accompanying him who explained it's short for driver. Sir would have done

They let me off with my brake light though as we were round the corner from a Halfords.

Back on-topic... doesn't Trump have earlier, similar form with Jim Lockheed?

Seems to be a Cardiff thing. People often say "thanks, drive" when getting off the bus.

 

[TexRex]

Back on-topic... doesn't Trump have earlier, similar form with Jim Lockheed?

I wouldn't expect anything more from Donald Golfing.

 

[Dennisch]

 

[Blitz24]

Ah, it's Tim "Apple Logo".

 

[Novalee]

Looks like Trumps pal gets 47 months


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...-campaign-chairman-be-sentenced-fraud-n980496

Next up for paul is district court where he faces more jail time

https://cnn.it/2ELTEPh

 

[PocketZeven]

I'm fairly sure that neither Russia nor Saudi Arabia are members of NATO.

The original premise quoted was that a country's own defence budget is spent on NATO, it isn't. NATO advises that an average of 2% GDP is spent on defence, that's all. The total NATO administration budget (contributed to proportionally by all members) is about 0.1% of the total military spending of the member countries. Europe doesn't "lag behind" as much is it shares resources between adjacent neighbours and goes for longer without large capital spends.

Wasnt the point I was making. I tried to put Defense/GDP spending in perspective with the rest of the world in relation to the pie you reposted. My point was that the defense budget of the US is kind of high proportionally and the US could really use that money.

They certainly top the list when it comes to NATO Countries though.

Yep. But one can argue if it is neccesary.

 

[Dotini]

Wasnt the point I was making. I tried to put Defense/GDP spending in perspective with the rest of the world in relation to the pie you reposted. My point was that the defense budget of the US is kind of high proportionally and the US could really use that money.



Yep. But one can argue if it is neccesary.

IMO the best use America has for money is to pay our debts, as we have an abundance of everything material but a dangerous excess of debt.

I agree we could do without without NATO.

 

[PocketZeven]

IMO the best use America has for money is to pay our debts, as we have an abundance of everything material but a dangerous excess of debt.

I agree we could do without without NATO.

The US doesnt spend that much on Nato. US contributed 550 million to Nato operating costs, while the EU contributes 1.8 billion.

It is the US defense budget that can be cut.

edit:
The US military budget is 680-700 Billion a year. Nato contribution is less then 0.1%

 

[Dotini]

The US doesnt spend that much on Nato. It is the US total defense budget that can be cut.

The US defense budget is bulked up by the requirement to simultaneously fight multiple wars. By coming into a grand alliance with Russia and China we can exert truly great control over the planet and at the same time greatly reduce ridiculous and dangerous expenditures on strategic weapons.

 

[Liquid]

a grand alliance with Russia and China

Oceania was never at war with Eurasia.

It sounds great but three superpowers coming together like that will never work because no-one will agree on who gets the coffee.

 

[Dotini]

Oceania was never at war with Eurasia.

It sounds great but three superpowers coming together like that will never work because no-one will agree on who gets the coffee.

Our planet is increasingly burdened with dependent population, costly and dangerous conflict, all the while top-heavy with debt. It is unsustainable for these and other reasons. It is passed time to cut the Gordian knot tying global civilization to perpetual war and debt. Sure, it will cost a lot in terms of rights and freedoms down at the level of some of the peasantry, but that will be made up in soma, not coffee. Be brave. Embrace the brave new world.

 

[Danoff]

The US doesnt spend that much on Nato. US contributed 550 million to Nato operating costs, while the EU contributes 1.8 billion.

Why are you comparing one nation to the EU?

It is the US defense budget that can be cut.

Completely depends on your perspective about what the US has to be able to defend against, what what the US is supposed to do with that budget.

But yes absolutely it can. And that money should be used to balance the budget or returned to the people from whom it was taken.

 

[Biggles]

Why are you comparing one nation to the EU?
.

Exactly! Those freeloaders in Luxembourg should cough up their fair share!

 

[Danoff]

Exactly! Those freeloaders in Luxembourg should cough up their fair share!

Or maybe the US should just join the EU. What would that be... Amentrance? Amerenter? US-IN?

 

[PocketZeven]

Why are you comparing one nation to the EU?



Completely depends on your perspective about what the US has to be able to defend against, what what the US is supposed to do with that budget.

But yes absolutely it can. And that money should be used to balance the budget or returned to the people from whom it was taken.

Again it was in reaction to the pie (with comment).

 

[Biggles]

Or maybe the US should just join the EU. ?

Yeah, that should work!

Even though the US is culturally relatively homogenous compared to Europe, it strikes me that it is just too big to function properly. Ranchers or oil roughnecks in Montana have little in common with hot dog sellers or stock traders in NYC. Hence the conservative/liberal friction in US politics. 'Course, it' s somewhat similar in European countries.

 

[Dotini]

Yeah, that should work!

Even though the US is culturally relatively homogenous compared to Europe, it strikes me that it is just too big to function properly. Ranchers or oil roughnecks in Montana have little in common with hot dog sellers or stock traders in NYC. Hence the conservative/liberal friction in US politics. 'Course, it' s somewhat similar in European countries.

Perhaps it's best if the US breaks up into even smaller states with greater division of interests? In California, there are attempts in work to divide into several smaller states. Here in my state of Washington, there are deep, latent and abiding differences between the east and west sides of the Cascade mountains.

 

[Biggles]

Perhaps it's best if the US breaks up into even smaller states with greater division of interests? In California, there are attempts in work to divide into several smaller states. Here in my state of Washington, there are deep, latent and abiding differences between the east and west sides of the Cascade mountains.

The problem is, almost every state has similar divisions between the urban areas & the rural areas. Seattle & Boston have more in common than Seattle & Eastern Washington state. I articulated this in my brilliantly concise analysis known as the Panera Principle.

"Any area more than 50 miles from the nearest Panera will have voted for Trump."

There are few exceptions to this rule.

 

[PocketZeven]

Perhaps it's best if the US breaks up into even smaller states with greater division of interests? In California, there are attempts in work to divide into several smaller states. Here in my state of Washington, there are deep, latent and abiding differences between the east and west sides of the Cascade mountains.

Whats wrong with the popular vote? The only true form of democracy?

 

[mustafur]

Whats wrong with the popular vote? The only true form of democracy?

US Likes to think it's many countries in one or something.

Truth is it's never going to change, Republicans know if they change it now their party will cease to exist in the future so they will do anything in their power to stop it.

 

[Dotini]

Whats wrong with the popular vote? The only true form of democracy?

Do you mean what's wrong with having an electoral college, giving smaller states additional importance in a national election?

I don't know that there's any one true form of democracy. I suppose the truest form comes when the voters directly enact the laws without going through representatives in congress, parliament, etc. Perhaps this was the case in ancient Greece, or more recently in Switzerland.

 

[mustafur]

Do you mean what's wrong with having an electoral college, giving smaller states additional importance in a national election?

I don't know that there's any one true form of democracy. I suppose the truest form comes when the voters directly enact the laws without going through representatives in congress, parliament, etc. Perhaps this was the case in ancient Greece, or more recently in Switzerland.

What It comes down to is America a country of people or a country of states?

 

[TetsuKobura]

Whats wrong with the popular vote? The only true form of democracy?

Popular vote exists for each state. The populations of those states determine who elects their state representatives and senators. The electoral college was put in place to prevent small locations from determining what the country as a whole wants. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s better than letting Los Angeles decide what Wyoming, Colorado, North/South Dakota, Kansas, etc. want.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

The problem is, almost every state has similar divisions between the urban areas & the rural areas. Seattle & Boston have more in common than Seattle & Eastern Washington state. I articulated this in my brilliantly concise analysis known as the Panera Principle.

"Any area more than 50 miles from the nearest Panera will have voted for Trump."

There are few exceptions to this rule.


View attachment 806460

So Democrats 2020 campaign message should be....

Build that....

Panera?


On the subject of democracy, sometimes I wonder if the US would be better served (in these times of loudspeaker/twitter politics) by having a prime-representative executive, rather than a directly elected President. So basically whichever party has a majority in the HOR would select a Prime (similar to Speaker of the House) who would assume responsibilities of the executive branch. This tends to prioritize the role of political parties...but I'm not sure it can get worse than it is now....so maybe it wouldn't be so bad? It also lends a more temporary character to the executive (just look at GB) but I'm not sure that's a bad thing at this point.

I also like the idea (I think I do anyways) of having a continuity of leadership, meaning there is substantial overlap between the previous & incoming administration. Probably not very cathartic for those who REALLY hate the current leadership, to have them drag on for a while after the new one is elected, but it could soften the upheavals over time.

Or maybe there is a Prime Majority leader and a Prime Minority leader who have joint executive authority? It would be tricky to establish the power balance, but maybe it could be done?

Lastly, sometimes I think the US would function better as a Confederation - similar to the EU. We would not likely be nearly as strong as we are, but there would also probably be a lot less drama.

What is problematic about Trump is that he is setting a precedent for American leadership to be very discontinuous....why work out any agreement with one administration if the next might invalidate it for spurious reasons? I think it will cost us in the long run, even from those countries who see Trump as an anomaly. He's an anomaly, maybe..but also maybe not.

 

[huskeR32]

Popular vote exists for each state. The populations of those states determine who elects their state representatives and senators. The electoral college was put in place to prevent small locations from determining what the country as a whole wants. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s better than letting Los Angeles decide what Wyoming, Colorado, North/South Dakota, Kansas, etc. want.

Why is letting Wyoming decide what California gets better than the inverse?

The "small states" already have their representation protected in the Senate. The Presidency should be a straight national vote, period.

 

[TetsuKobura]

Why is letting Wyoming decide what California gets better than the inverse?

The "small states" already have their representation protected in the Senate. The Presidency should be a straight national vote, period.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

 

[Dotini]

Trump as an anomaly. He's an anomaly, maybe..but also maybe not.

Trump is not an anomaly. Right wing populism began resurgence several years earlier. It began with the catastrophically insane invasion of Iraq, but the real crisis began in Libya. France backed with a few ******re European allies and the US created failed state in Libya. Bad actors there began human trafficking millions of people to Europe who could muster a few dollars to get out the hellhole thus created. That's when the rightwing populist blowback began to surge.

The Presidency should be a straight national vote, period.

Maybe it should and maybe it shouldn't. Lets have a vote on it so you can be happy. The procedure for this decision vote is specified in our highest law, the constitution.

Edit:
Occasionally, emergency situations will come along during which regular civil laws, rights and liberties need to be suspended for a time. Martial law, censorship, curfew, conscription, imminent domain, suspension of habeas corpus and other evils may be required. At such times, democracy no longer obtains and the power of the leadership becomes tantamount to absolute dictatorship. This is when we need the presence of a wise and benevolent leader the most. The strength and necessity of government is at its greatest and most important during emergencies. So this is why the greatest form of government is the wise and benevolent dictator, even if it is only necessary on a temporary basis. During times of peace and plenty, democracy is desirable since it produces the greatest happiness of the people. Crisis and catastrophe will always be on the menu for human civilization on Earth. The quality of leadership we elect should be considered very carefully, as should the chain of command and succession.