Notes on the Decline of a Great Nation

[Borachio]

Don't forget either, that the Chinese people are immensely resourceful. It doesn't pay to underestimate them, simply because they've been half asleep for the best part of the 20th century.

 

[kochman]

Who cares if China surpasses the USA.
They should be well ahead of us, as should India, based on population, IQs and resources.

So, if/when they overtake the USA, that doesn't mean the US is in decline in any sense other then GDP... there's a lot more to a nation than that.

The decline we are experience is much broader than that.

China accelerating to it's natural place doesn't mean we are in a faster rate of decline though.

We just need a good president or two to get us going in the right direction. Anyone see any up and coming? I don't.

 

[Leoreth]

We just need a good president or two to get us going in the right direction. Anyone see any up and coming? I don't.

The president can't and doesn't do everything.

 

[sophie]

Don't forget either, that the Chinese people are immensely resourceful. It doesn't pay to underestimate them, simply because they've been half asleep for the best part of the 20th century.

This sort of thing is the reason this thread is driving me crazy.

I can't believe people still say stuff like this.

 

[Tee Kay]

People forget that positive-sounding racism is still racism.

 

[Bamspeedy]

You shouldn't try comparing apples to oranges in such an absurd manner:

Disasters > Tsunami > Funds pledged (per $ GDP) (most recent) by country

So Kuwait donated $6 million and the US $23 million. If you were receiving the money would you prefer $6 or $23?

The 'pledge' amount is meaningless.

The pledged amount is only what the government says it will pay (not what it actually will pay), the pledges can take years to pay (where it comes in too late), and it doesn't usually count donations made by private individuals, companies, and non-profits. (The pledged amount doesn't include any money from the Red Cross for example).

And more importantly is the assistance that comes immediately and not in the form of cash, but the delivery of supplies within hours or days of the disaster and sending helicopters to save people's lives, not writing a check months later after the UN puts their stamp of approval on it.

 

[kochman]

The president can't and doesn't do everything.

They lead. Something we haven't had in a while.
It has a major impact in the USA...
No other single person has nearly the same capacity for sincere change in our country as a president.

Reagan didn't just have his economic advisors do a couple of things, he inspired the whole country's mood.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

ASo now if Presidents don't do what you want them to do, they aren't 'leading'? I remember Bush leading us into 2 wars and Obama leading us out of them and fifty random big deals that have happened...
Then again blah blah blah SUBSTANCE

 

[Borachio]

This sort of thing is the reason this thread is driving me crazy.

I can't believe people still say stuff like this.

Oh right? I see.

I can't guarantee to talk sense all the time (or even at all) of course. But just what exactly is crazy about it?

Is it casually racist or something?

All I'm really arguing against is the casual racism that seems to imply the Chinese are somehow different from the US. In that, you know, the US has enjoyed this big hegemonic deal with the globe, and naturally, you know, no one else could EVER do the same. Or even would want to.

This is the sort of attitude that will quickly drive me crazy!!!

But pardon me for opening my big mouth. When plainly someone important might happen to be in the room.

Consider this to be snark of the angry variety.

 

[Crezth]

I can't believe people still say stuff like this.

Come now, if not this thread, where would tedious would-be philosophers wax poetic about the enigmatic Chine?

 

[kochman]

ASo now if Presidents don't do what you want them to do, they aren't 'leading'? I remember Bush leading us into 2 wars and Obama leading us out of them and fifty random big deals that have happened...
Then again blah blah blah SUBSTANCE

When did Obama lead us out of Afghanistan? Remember, that was the "good war"...

Leading isn't a sometimes action. He has hardly been a strong leader... his priorities have been questionable at best, especially on the international scene. He kind of lost me, honestly, when he failed to back to opposition riots after the Iranian election, the "Green Revolution" I believe it was called. That was such an amazing opportunity to help those people self-determine themselves away from a-hole theocrats.

There's a litany of issues I think he's poorly led in:
*Cambridge PD thingy (jumped to conclusions, in a very local matter no less... leaders develop the situation)
*Took back seat on Libya, especially poor on the Benghazi situation
*Snubbing Netanyahu, repeatedly, but making time for Jay-Z and Big Bird...
*Making Obamacare, his hand out to insurance lobbyists, the priority instead of a meaningful jobs package as the economy was in dire straights

I'll grant he's gotten better, specifically in the leadership department, but he had a long way to improve, so it wasn't that hard to improve a bit. He's a lawyer, not a leader.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

All your gripes are pretty strong raves to non-partisan hacks.
And the critism of your posts about how you cherry pick parts to try and tear down is totally off base cuz u didn't skip over Bush Jr and your initial 'lack of leadership' point didn't also skip Bush Sr or Clinton or the fact that the US has many more leaders than just the prez. You're totally legit son.

Oops I forgot moar substance!

 

[kochman]

All your gripes are pretty strong raves to non-partisan hacks.

Oops I forgot moar substance!

You did, actually.

There are two groups that don't like Obama much...
1) Conservative/Repubs
2) Independents

Dems tend to like him.
So, if you want to say that seeing things he does and not liking them makes you part of group 1, your post is, again, lacking substance. You don't have to be an R to dislike Obama, see Oliver Stone for more evidence.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

You did, actually.

Word, homeslice.

 

[Crezth]

1) Conservative/Repubs
2) Independents

this is kind of disingenuous. Independents are not moderate. In fact, most of them are conservative.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

this is kind of disingenuous. Independents are not moderate. In fact, most of them are conservative.

And enough of them still voted for Obama despite this to reelect him.

But naw, his reelection isn't proof ppl like him and he is definately a weak-kneed liberal non-leaderbot because Davy Jone's locker.

 

[Farm Boy]

this is kind of disingenuous. Independents are not moderate. In fact, most of them are conservative.

Only if you count whatever the tea party has mutated into. Most independents I know are indeed moderate by commonly used nomenclature. Unless you happen to be a liberal and say "oooh, those people look conservative to me" or you happen to be a conservative and say "oooh, those people look liberal to me."

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Sorry Farm Boy, but in this case I have to say that personal anecdote =\= fact. Show me your papers! sources, please.


Argh, same for Crezth out of fairness.

 

[Farm Boy]

Sorry Farm Boy, but in this case I have to say that personal anecdote =\= fact. Show me your papers! sources, please.


Argh, same for Crezth out of fairness.

Yes. Source. Fine. I'll take my anecdotes and shove it. Happy?

 

[Murky]

I haven't seen anything official that says Independents are leaning more conservative or liberal. Being Independent just means that you're not tied down to either party.