American Politics

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Governments are wasteful by their very characteristic of always making sure there are enough layers of bureaucracy to insulate any part of it from the blow back that general stupidity in making decisions, if they make one, returns.  It is like the overwhelming nature of statute law.  For every new law that comes onto the books, two old, unenforceable ones should be repealed until there things are much leaner and meaner.

@Delta 88 I hope you are aware that money is a myth.  There is not enough specie in the world (gold, silver, other precious commodities) to cover all the so-called "currency".  Money like history is a piece of fiction we've all agreed to believe in.  So what is a currency reserve?

[LexusInfernus 908]

2 hours ago, Delta 88 said:

But it really is that bad. Russia, African and South American countries don't hold the world's reserve currency. They don't owe $16 trillion in debt to China. Fiscal irresponsibility in those regions tends to stay within small circles compared to the United States. It's like when people think that the US doesn't have political corruption or is very minor in scale compared to eastern European countries - not true. Sure, some other countries are far more blatant about it, but the US is just better at concealing its own political corruption. Or perhaps the world has become numb to it. The US may not exactly be a failed state (yet), but we're sure as hell far from pure and innocent.

And see, heres the real problem. People yelling that the debt is so bad because China owns it all or something. Check your facts, China only owns 1.2 trillion dollars of the US debt, and the total of debt owned by foreign nations is only 6 trillion. Meaning the other 10 trillion is owned by the US itself. This is key to understanding how much of a non problem the debt is, because its debt you mostly owe to yourself. The government has been lending itself a lot of money, its not in the hands of someone else holding it over your head (and a risk analysis performed by the treasury department found that it would be a useless and self destructive tool anyways). 

Having this much debt is not great, sure, I get that, and it would be better to reduce the deficit, sure. But lets not pretend that the debt is about to crush the country, its not an immediate problem and its not nearly as big of a problem as some politicians are pretending it is. Those politicians are either lying or they don't know what they are talking about, probably both. 

And boy, you don't know true corruption if you think that what happens in the US, the occasional bribery scandal or the effect corporations have on politics is just as bad as what happens elsewhere. Again, those things are problems, yes, but there are a lot of places on the planet where the rule of law is literally absent, or is completely dependent on whoever is donating money into the right pocket. When we look at Russia, we don't just see corruption, we see systemic corruption, meaning that at this point corruption affects nearly all levels of society, all levels of the economy and basically turns laws into polite suggestions for chumps with not enough money to buy the outcomes they want.  

The US has problems, but they are problems that can be solved if people put enough honest work into fixing those problems, unlike in other countries. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

And, of  course, a big chunk of the U.S. national debt is held in pension funds as U.S. Government Bonds or Savings Bonds.  A lot of it has been floating around since WW I.  The government may owe, but it owes the American people and corporations who are the bond holders.

Another big chunk of the debt is due to trade deficits of one kind or another.  Generally speaking, I don't think the U.S. borrows from international lenders very often if ever.

[LexusInfernus 908]

33 minutes ago, A Nonny Moose said:

Generally speaking, I don't think the U.S. borrows from international lenders very often if ever.

Well it does in a way. I mean, not that they send a diplomat to China asking China for a loan like China is a bank or something. But government bonds are for sale, if you buy them from the government, the price you pay for them is essentially the money you loan to the government. 

And look, this is all very manageable as long as not everyone freaks out over it, panics and demands their loan back from the government this instant. 

[Larks2242 251]

16 hours ago, LexusInfernus said:

Unbridled greed, racism, sexism, xenophobia, ignorance and intolerance marinated in jingoism and military imperialism. So yeah, Ted Cruz embodies those Republican values perfectly but then again, so does Donald Trump. Maybe they both embody those values a bit to much, because no one likes them, not even the rest of the Republicans. I guess they don't like what they see when someone forces them to look at their own reflection in a mirror. 

I wouldn't be so quick to throw stones, The left is just as masterful in the art of fear mongering, First off Trump is a democrat, He had made this clear with his comments on abortion and now recently with Bruce Jenner, He is breaking away from the party and swinging to the middle, We tried that Mitt failed, McCann failed. Bush won because he was the right choice for the party, As was Reagan, Ted Cruz is the second coming of Reagan, We messed up in 2012 by not nominating Rick Santorum and we messed up in 2008 by not nominating Mike Huckabee, It is time to get it right and nominate Ted Cruz.

America cannot survive an election between someone facing a fraud trial (Trump) and someone about to be indicted by the FBI (Clinton).

[Ocram's Razr 964]

28 minutes ago, Larks2242 said:

America cannot survive an election between someone facing a fraud trial (Trump) and someone about to be indicted by the FBI (Clinton).

The cynic in me wants to see The Fall. Armageddon will be interesting. A corrupt system will crumble under The D'ump and will take our (economic, military, and political) partners with it. Citizens wanting to become expats may make bank runs. Citizens unable to leave will half arse, strike, desert (1 s or 2?), or undermine authority/management. One mess-up by The D'ump will result in political power shifting away from the US, with us getting sanctioned and Russia getting its sanctions lifted by our partners.

The End is nigh and I look forward to it.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

With any luck, the only casualty in this mess will be the two party system.  Perhaps the Commonwealth of Nations would look favourably on an application to join from the United States of America after the whole mess comes tumbling down, but somehow I don't think we'd be able to collect that stamp tax.

With over 300 million people, why can't this nation find itself a better set of politicians?

And, Marco, I seriously doubt you'll have angels blowing trumpets.  More like the Fenris wolf will be loose.  Yellowstone is quite a bit overdue, and that will wipe us all out.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36166591

The D'ump has the guts to drop an A-Bomb.

 

I don't remember reading about a Rapture in the Bible. I think that is just wishful thinking by fiction authors or (tele)evangelists. Armageddon is merely the penultimate battle. The world will continue to exist, though possibly not as we know it.

 

I still prefer Sanders and will vote for him even if I need to write his name in.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

While he's at it, why not throw in a few shells with Sarin gas?  It is a good thing that even POTUS must have agreement from another party to activate the football.  If Der Donald actually said that, it should be sufficient to certify him as insane.

[Odainsaker 2,136]

In fairness, Donald Trump himself didn't say that.  Legendary Indiana basketball coach Bobby Knight was brought forth as an endorser by the Trump campaign in the build-up to this upcoming Tuesday's key Indiana primary, and the bomb-dropping comment came from Bobby Knight.  Trump's funny facial reactions suggest he too silently thought Knight was confusing mistaken history with jingoist dementia.   Knight's endorsement was meant to represent that of blue-collar, small-town America, and I suppose such talk is what they must want to hear.

Ironically, in light of Knight's comments about nuking Japan, Trump has previously called for Japan and South Korea to instead arm themselves with nuclear weapons against North Korea and China or pay the U.S. for their nuclear protection.  Our allies Japan and South Korea were not impressed.  This is also after Trump and Cruz spent a foreign policy debate daring each other on who would nuke the Middle East first.

Fear not, for the Trump campaign already told the RNC behind closed doors that all this bombast is merely an act to sucker in voters, and that "the part that he's been playing is now evolving into the part that you've been expecting."  P. T. Barnum indeed!

Besides, surely It Can't Happen Here...

 

  Edited May 1, 2016 by Odainsaker  

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

^ Well, buddy, we have to remember that freedom it not free and needs to be guarded and protected at every turn, especially from phonies and mountebanks.  I don't care what Der Donald told the RNC, he fits both descriptions and the portion of the American people are drinking it in like it was manna from heaven.  He's free to say anything he likes, but the real politic occurs not at conventions but at the ballot box.  Let's hope all this bombast hasn't hoaxed the yokels. 

If you want to get a picture of what the Jewish community thought about rise of the NAZIs, read The Winds of War by Herman Wouk, and if you've the stomach for it, the sequel War and Remembrance.  It is fiction, but it is fairly accurate.

[Delta 88 262]

On 4/29/2016 at 7:58 AM, LexusInfernus said:

And see, heres the real problem. People yelling that the debt is so bad because China owns it all or something. Check your facts, China only owns 1.2 trillion dollars of the US debt, and the total of debt owned by foreign nations is only 6 trillion. Meaning the other 10 trillion is owned by the US itself. This is key to understanding how much of a non problem the debt is, because its debt you mostly owe to yourself. The government has been lending itself a lot of money, its not in the hands of someone else holding it over your head (and a risk analysis performed by the treasury department found that it would be a useless and self destructive tool anyways). 

Having this much debt is not great, sure, I get that, and it would be better to reduce the deficit, sure. But lets not pretend that the debt is about to crush the country, its not an immediate problem and its not nearly as big of a problem as some politicians are pretending it is. Those politicians are either lying or they don't know what they are talking about, probably both. 

And boy, you don't know true corruption if you think that what happens in the US, the occasional bribery scandal or the effect corporations have on politics is just as bad as what happens elsewhere. Again, those things are problems, yes, but there are a lot of places on the planet where the rule of law is literally absent, or is completely dependent on whoever is donating money into the right pocket. When we look at Russia, we don't just see corruption, we see systemic corruption, meaning that at this point corruption affects nearly all levels of society, all levels of the economy and basically turns laws into polite suggestions for chumps with not enough money to buy the outcomes they want.  

The US has problems, but they are problems that can be solved if people put enough honest work into fixing those problems, unlike in other countries. 

Nobody, especially not politicians, ever even mention the national debt (except for maybe Ron Paul, and he's actually right). The United States economy is owned by China at this point, the US can absolutely never repay its debts and both nations' treasury departments know it. The fact that China continues to hold on to US Treasury bonds (for a variety of sound reasons) combined with the dollar's reserve currency status are the only two things keeping the United States economy afloat right now. You're massively underestimating how much of a problem it is. The US economy is far more vulnerable to disaster now than it was in 2008/Lehman Brothers, and it's closely tied to the European debt crisis as well. Furthermore, I'm amazed at the sheer panic and terror that crawls down Americans' spines when the stock market basically crashes like it did in August of 2015 (only to be lulled back to sleep with a short-lived rally). "China gets a cough, the US catches the flu." China is a far more important player in the world economy stage than you think.

 I can't name them right now, but at least several documentaries have been produced addressing this problem in the last couple of years, I caught one on TV a while back. Do some research on the recent practices of the Federal Reserve, and their quantitative easing programs with artificially prop up the markets (and fail to do so when QE is not implemented during a given financial quarter). Research an economist named Peter Schiff, he accurately predicted the Great Recession and financial crisis years in advance, there is even footage of him being mocked and laughed at for these predictions at the time. The party isn't going to last forever, it's inherently impossible. I don't know when it will fall, but I don't think it's more than a few decades away.

Quote

The US has problems, but they are problems that can be solved if people put enough honest work into fixing those problems, unlike in other countries. 

Why are so many Americans so quick to point this out about themselves? We suck but we don't really suck, everyone else in other countries are just inherently more corrupt according to their genetics? What is that? Not to mention how many people on their home countries may like to pat themselves on the back and say the very same thing....somebody's full of it. Like, everyone. 

And I don't buy the "it's worse everywhere else" argument. Russia has already endured total economic collapse (throughout the 1990s), and they've proven to be an awfully resilient culture. Yes they're more fragmented than the US and the Mafia holds significant power in all positions there, but that wasn't the case before 1991. Their national crime rate was consistently lower than America's for at least three straight decades until the 90s (reliable crime data not available before 1960). What makes America so special? You think that Americans are just more pure and virtuous all of a sudden, and are not at all susceptible to economic and cultural shocks? Give me a break. I hear these quicksand-arguments from both parties all the time - like the US is absolutely economically invincible, destined for eternal technological greatness. It's delusional, fantasy-like thinking. "Meh it's not that bad" - nonsense. I don't know why Americans keep doing this to themselves. Like I said before (which you seem to have misunderstood), I'm not saying America is even remotely close to a failed state like some of the more tattered countries around the world. But political and corporate corruption are astoundingly high in this country, but of course when all major media outlets are owned by the hands of an interested few, you either won't hear about it at all, or the coverage will be minimal and slanted towards their favor as they see fit. I think you have a very prejudiced picture of what corruption really is. It's not just two shady eastern-European men using intimidation methods and offering briefcases full of cash; All of the American oil tycoons, pharmaceutical companies, big agri-businesses (Monsanto, for example), retail giants, banks, basic service departments (Flint water scandal?), easily-bought yes-men politicians, and the easily-bought selfish ignorant citizens that vote them in - are all immeasurably, and extremely corrupt. It's an objectively provable fact. And you're overlooking another thing - I think the people in this country are corrupted by consumerism, more than any other country in the world. We invented the game and claim that everyone must play (sometimes given the misleading title, "exporting democracy"). 

On 4/30/2016 at 5:08 AM, A Nonny Moose said:

With any luck, the only casualty in this mess will be the two party system.  Perhaps the Commonwealth of Nations would look favourably on an application to join from the United States of America after the whole mess comes tumbling down, but somehow I don't think we'd be able to collect that stamp tax.

With over 300 million people, why can't this nation find itself a better set of politicians?

And, Marco, I seriously doubt you'll have angels blowing trumpets.  More like the Fenris wolf will be loose.  Yellowstone is quite a bit overdue, and that will wipe us all out.

The two party system in the US is no more effective than the one party system in China. Ironically, China has shown that they can actually get things done with that system, unlike the US. High-speed rail, anyone? The US is too wrapped up in red tape, environmentalists, safety nazism, blatant corporate greed & corruption, lobbyists, the list goes on...

The United States can't find better politicians because there simply aren't any. America isn't capable of producing said politicians in this day and age, or surely they would have prevailed by now. The majority of Americans think the party is gonna last forever like I described in responses to other posters here. I don't mean to sound cynical, but that is what this country has demonstrated both to me and in the history books. I love this country but, my god. What a long, poorly thought-out, sick joke.

Then again, I stopped rooting for particular solutions long ago.

[Sabretooth78 808]

On 4/30/2016 at 8:13 PM, Larks2242 said:

I wouldn't be so quick to throw stones, The left is just as masterful in the art of fear mongering, First off Trump is a democrat, He had made this clear with his comments on abortion and now recently with Bruce Jenner, He is breaking away from the party and swinging to the middle, We tried that Mitt failed, McCann failed. Bush won because he was the right choice for the party, As was Reagan, Ted Cruz is the second coming of Reagan, We messed up in 2012 by not nominating Rick Santorum and we messed up in 2008 by not nominating Mike Huckabee, It is time to get it right and nominate Ted Cruz.

America cannot survive an election between someone facing a fraud trial (Trump) and someone about to be indicted by the FBI (Clinton).

With all due respect,

1. I believe the problem with the republicans is having too many people like Rick Santorum running roughshod through the party.  Funny how anti-government conservatives have no problem with said government trying to legislate morality (see also #5).
2. Republicans had a chance in 2012, but decided to marginalize Ron Paul - the only GOP candidate who, to my recollection, polled favorably against Obama at any point during a complete embarrassment of an election cycle outdone only by the current one.  If I'm correct, then we can assume that the democrats went wire-to-wire otherwise in 2012.  Running against a reasonably popular sitting president is tough to start with, and the GOP did nothing to try and help themselves.  How ironic that all that rule re-writing is now chomping on the party's rear end.
3. Mitt was less inspiring than a second coat of paint buried under a third and less in touch than a hydrogen atom in interstellar space.  I apologize if I'm going too easy on him.
4. McCain was (and continues to) growing more senile by the minute and selected a nutjob lousy governor-turned-media wh*** for a VP (see also point #1).  I really wanted to like him, but couldn't - circa 2000 McCain was dead and the VP selection was the six feet of earth.
5. Don't really care for him myself, but I'll grant you Huckabee.  I don't care for the holier-than-thou-let's-legislate-morality angle he tends to represent, but whatever.
6. Bush II won once on statistical fluke and another with the advantage of being a sitting president against a democrat party in disarray which nominated their version of Mitt Romney.  His policies then set the stage for Obama, his faithful successor.
7. Reagan ushered in the neoconservative movement which has since infested both parties and is part and parcel of our current situation.  I do believe he was a decent guy and did an OK job as POTUS (especially by current standards) but the bottom line is we don't need another disinterested narcoleptic again, either.

Let me close, however, by wholeheartedly agreeing with your closing statement.  You have to realize, though, that both of them will likely survive unscathed.  Trump's bafflingly untarnished reputation will survive no matter what he does, and Clinton is too ensconced in the system.  If anything, one of her staffers or otherwise associates will take the fall.

[Larks2242 251]

On 4/30/2016 at 11:54 AM, A Nonny Moose said:

While he's at it, why not throw in a few shells with Sarin gas?  It is a good thing that even POTUS must have agreement from another party to activate the football.  If Der Donald actually said that, it should be sufficient to certify him as insane.

It's worth mentioning that will not be an option much longer as due to the 1993 chemical weapons convention, The US has destroyed 89% Of biological/chemical weapons such as sulfur mustard, sarin and nerve agents such as VX and Tabun, While he could renig on the agreement, The US only has roughly 10% of it's stockpile split between Pueblo chemical depot and Blue Grass army depot, But the Pueblo chemical destruction plant is set to go on line later this year while Blue Grass is due to begin destruction in 2018 making all storage of chemical weapons in the US null by the year 2023.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

^ Except, of course, for the secret research stockpiles kept under wraps at some location that is not on the books.  Don't kid yourself, once a weapon is developed it will never go away.

[Larks2242 251]

Now Donald Trump is saying Ted Cruz's dad played a role in the death of President Kennedy. 

Not only is that ludicrous, But JFK was a worthless president so it would only make me like Cruz more. 

Indiana needs to set the course right and deny Trump the opportunity to work with Clinton to bring upon mass destruction of this country. 

[MushyMushy 3,618]

I find the fact that you would like any candidate more because one of their parents was part of the killing of JFK (or anyone else for that matter) rather disturbing.

Of course I'm not saying that I think that Trump's statement is true, but that should go without saying since he's full of it - same as Cruz and Clinton.

[Sabretooth78 808]

3 hours ago, Larks2242 said:

Not only is that ludicrous, But JFK was a worthless president so it would only make me like Cruz more.

In light of who we've had since him, I'd say JFK represents the last highest point in the presidency to date.  I do believe he gets too much credit based on his youth, overall popularity and just being a Kennedy, but I think he handled things quite well enough.  For instance, let's see how George W. Obama or any of the bozo candidates on either side since 2000 handle the Cuban Missile Crisis.  Or better yet, let's not.

My list of worthless presidents:  Both Johnsons, both Bushes, Obama and probably 80% of the 1810-1860 cast (and probably in that order of decreasing worthlessness).

You can have Cruz, I'll take Silent Cal or Ike.

*****

Edit:  This just in:  Say Hello to President Clinton

[Larks2242 251]

As much as I hate to say this, We have to work to elect Hitler to stop Clinton, I'd vote for the real Hitler before voting for Clinton.

At least he rebuilt Germany and made it strong, What would Clinton do besides weaken us?

[Mister Giggles 310]

5 minutes ago, Larks2242 said:

As much as I hate to say this, We have to work to elect Hitler to stop Clinton, I'd vote for the real Hitler before voting for Clinton.

At least he rebuilt Germany and made it strong, What would Clinton do besides weaken us?

You missed a sarcasm tag there. Right?

...right?

[Sabretooth78 808]

Meh.  When Hitler is running against Stalin or Pol Pot for POTUS, call me.  Until then I'll be spending my Election Day doing something not involving voting for a particular incarnation of evil.  Maybe I'll write in Barney the Dinosaur.

I will never understand why so many people so willingly place all of their faith on a single human being; a politician no less.  I just want to shake some sense into them.  "Were you awake....last time?  A minute ago?  Any time?"

[Larks2242 251]

3 hours ago, Mister Giggles said:

You missed a sarcasm tag there. Right?

...right?

No sarcasm implied, What he did wrong was fight wars that were unwinnable, There is no denying that Germany was in a better place right before the war then it was at the end of the first world war, You don't get time person of the year by accident.

That being said there were many wrong choices made but that is buried in the details, Had he not been so fanatical, He could have been one of the best. 

[Sabretooth78 808]

8 minutes ago, Larks2242 said:

No sarcasm implied, What he did wrong was fight wars that were unwinnable, There is no denying that Germany was in a better place right before the war then it was at the end of the first world war, You don't get time person of the year by accident.

That being said there were many wrong choices made but that is buried in the details, Had he not been so fanatical, He could have been one of the best. 

And then they went supernova, Hitler & Co. then blaming it on the Dem Deutschen Volke for entrusting the Nazi party with their
"mandate" for leadership.  (Doesn't that sound just like something Trump would blame on shareholders of a belly-up corporation?)  Granted, the postwar gave them the Wirtschaftswunder and they've been more stable than most ever since.  Don't see anybody helping us with that now, though.

On top of it all, I'm rather sick of this Keynesian boom-bust cr*p in the first place.  But nobody else seems to care.

[Mister Giggles 310]

2 minutes ago, Larks2242 said:

No sarcasm implied, What he did wrong was fight wars that were unwinnable, There is no denying that Germany was in a better place right before the war then it was at the end of the first world war, You don't get time person of the year by accident.

That being said there were many wrong choices made but that is buried in the details, Had he not been so fanatical, He could have been one of the best. 

A political career built upon hatred, nationalism, and scapegoating the Jews, among others, is not the recipe for success. And a country whose foundation is built upon such things is doomed to fail in extraordinary and memorable ways, regardless of physical objects constructed beforehand.

[ROFLyoshi 1,760]

One could debate the ethics of Hitler all day. Although I concede that Hitler did do some good things for Germany, here isn't the thread to do it.

Let's get talking about American Politics again.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Unfortunately, the race for POTUS seems to have fallen into the sear, ... the yellow leaf.  This could easily put paid to the U.S. federal system as we have known it since 1945.  As Mr. Jefferson said, "A little revolution is good once in a while."  If you are not there now, I wonder what it takes?

[Sabretooth78 808]

Beats me.  We fought the British for far less reason than this.  Turned out rather well for a while, too.  You'd think the cost-benefit ratio at this point would be staggeringly favorable.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

U.S. DOJ declares N.C. LBGT law unenforceable.

Has anyone noticed that the principle of "The greatest good for the greatest number" seems to have gone down the drain?  Seems the squeaky wheels are getting all the grease.

I agree with P. E. Trudeau: "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation".  At the same time all these LGBT public declarations are both distasteful and rather gauche.  Private matters need to remain private.

[igotthis 12]

17 hours ago, A Nonny Moose said:

U.S. DOJ declares N.C. LBGT law unenforceable.

Has anyone noticed that the principle of "The greatest good for the greatest number" seems to have gone down the drain?  Seems the squeaky wheels are getting all the grease.

I agree with P. E. Trudeau: "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation".  At the same time all these LGBT public declarations are both distasteful and rather gauche.  Private matters need to remain private.

This thread has turned bizarre since it's creation.

Nonny, I am not sure about your meaning. How does "The greatest good for the greatest number" come into play when it is not about "The greatest good" at all. It is about supporting bigotry, which is "The greatest harm for the smallest number".

IGT

[LexusInfernus 908]

On 4-5-2016 at 3:18 AM, Larks2242 said:

No sarcasm implied, What he did wrong was fight wars that were unwinnable, There is no denying that Germany was in a better place right before the war then it was at the end of the first world war, You don't get time person of the year by accident.

That being said there were many wrong choices made but that is buried in the details, Had he not been so fanatical, He could have been one of the best. 

Strong? Well the only thing that most remember that they think is strong are the highways he build, or more accurately, got credit for, they were designed by the previous administrations. Oh yeah and he got the unemployment rate down. That part isn't to difficult if you are a dictator and you can just send everyone to work whether they like the work or not. Of course, everyone who publicly disagreed would also be put to work, only they would wear striped pyjama's.  Seriously what you are suggesting is dumb, Hitler made nothing strong, he at best merely gave it an illusion of strength. A sexy package containing nothing inside. Is that what you want for the United States?