Kozmos
Jew Detective
US retreating from the UN would be to everyone's else benefit considering the amount of wheelin and dealing that gets done over there.
I mean just because the UN's lost credibility is over everyone seeing it as a US puppet it doesn't mean that it actually is, and the rare times when it does the right thing about the US are when the other 6.7bn people on Earth see some hope in it.
As an aside, you guys seriously need to write a new Constitution. One with a decent election method, sensible rights, and no references to 3/5ths of a person.
I agree but feel this is probably not going to happen any time soon. Many people consider the Constitution to be what essentially amounts to a holy relic (even with the multiple amendments in US history in mind). A revamp would 'spoil the spirit' of the US.
(Which might be a good thing, really.)
Careful what you wish for. I understand that there are groups working towards a constitutional convention there, and are near to be capable of achieving the required majorities. You will probably not like the constitution they would produce if they had a go at it now.
The US pays $611m 22% and China pays $220m ($200m nett) 8%
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=ST/ADM/SER.B/955
Whereby my personal preference would be Geneva, Switzerland, as long standing neutral nation.
I would support a move to Geneva.
Geneva is closer to more countries than New York.
And in response to that, Canada increased our funding for these programs. The right-wing here is livid, of course, not able to comprehend that if there are fewer babies born to families who can't care for them, there would likely be a bit less of a problem of refugees (and they're paranoid because as of a couple of cabinet shuffles ago, our new Minister of Immigration was himself a refugee from East Africa when he was young).The US stopped for example under Trump the funding of anti-conception programs in Africa
The ones that stick feathers in their hair."Pure Blooded Canadians"(whatever that means)
Which "they"? The Liberals embrace multiculturalism. The Reformacons are all about "Old-Stock Canadians" (the sort of people civver_764 approves of). Our former PM (Stephen Harper) defines "Old-Stock Canadians" as any European-descended person whose ancestors came here in the 1800s or earlier. So by his definition, warpus and his family aren't "Old-Stock Canadians" and I'm not either, since my family has only been here a century (give or take a few years, depending on which grandparents or great-grandparents are mentioned).Are they the ones that only want "Pure Blooded Canadians"(whatever that means) in government?
I agree but feel this is probably not going to happen any time soon. Many people consider the Constitution to be what essentially amounts to a holy relic (even with the multiple amendments in US history in mind). A revamp would 'spoil the spirit' of the US.
(Which might be a good thing, really.)
Okay, this is a side-track, but many of them wore wigs, and believe it or not, there were centuries during which time men had long hair, or at least it wasn't considered unusual for them to have long hair. In actuality, a lot of them really had short hair but the wigs were long.Just because it was written by a bunch of guys in girly hair
Well New York has a $85bn budget so maybe it could pay $611m. I am not sure if the city would gain $611m but it would be close.
http://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-m...eleases-executive-budget-fiscal-year-2018/#/0
Okay, this is a side-track, but many of them wore wigs, and believe it or not, there were centuries during which time men had long hair, or at least it wasn't considered unusual for them to have long hair. In actuality, a lot of them really had short hair but the wigs were long.
So they were quite fashionable for 18th-century men.
Wouldnt it be easier just to ban racisim ?
Problem SOLVED
Many people consider the Constitution to be what essentially amounts to a holy relic
Oh, pity the intolerant who whine about being called on their reprehensible attitudes with wails of "Why won't you let me discriminate against the people I don't like? YOU'RE PERSECUTING MEEEEE!"And that's the way it should be. A person should be allowed to express any opinion they want, no matter how hateful or wrong it might be because expressing an opinion does not violate the rights of anyone else. Remember: racists are still human beings and they are entitled to the same rights and protections the rest of us are entitled to. I think that's a concept that a lot of non-Americans whose governments don't give everyone the same rights and protections struggle with.
Oh, pity the intolerant who whine about being called on their reprehensible attitudes with wails of "Why won't you let me discriminate against the people I don't like? YOU'RE PERSECUTING MEEEEE!"
This is the sort of attitude that makes me very glad I wasn't born in your country, and glad that I've got no compelling reason to visit.