Opinion on the US

[elektibi75]

I use to have a dream to live in America...but nowadays...not so much...

[1715426664]

1715426664

[1715426664]

1715426664

[erikspoon]

depends where there are places in the US that are now hell
but a few spots are still sort of heaven

[AU]

depends where there are places in the US that are now hell
but a few spots are still sort of heaven

Yeah the major cities are full of welfare scum.. better head for the mountains

[hulk]

I heard USA is bankrupt.

Officially declared as such in 1971.

Didn't know it was once bankrupted.

[BitPappa]

Too bad you can only vote for one.

[Biomech]

Since governments rule by force and threat of force (if'n you don't do as we say, we are gonna come lookin' for ya), I have a low opinion of any government.  I can rule myself, thank you.

I hate you people that can pull off brevity! (j/k, I actually just wish I could be that brief and still get my point across.

I agree with this post 100 percent.

[Biomech]

I heard USA is bankrupt.

Officially declared as such in 1971.

Didn't know it was once bankrupted.

taking the dollar off of the Bretton Woods standard, making it 100 percent fiat, was as close to shouting 'bankrupt' from the rooftops as you could possibly get. It's probably the biggest debt default in history.

[superresistant]

I heard USA is bankrupt.

Officially declared as such in 1971.

Didn't know it was once bankrupted.

taking the dollar off of the Bretton Woods standard, making it 100 percent fiat, was as close to shouting 'bankrupt' from the rooftops as you could possibly get. It's probably the biggest debt default in history.

The more a government control money, the more artificial is its value.


A Dollar bill can't even wipe the ass properly.

[Biomech]

I heard USA is bankrupt.

Officially declared as such in 1971.

Didn't know it was once bankrupted.

taking the dollar off of the Bretton Woods standard, making it 100 percent fiat, was as close to shouting 'bankrupt' from the rooftops as you could possibly get. It's probably the biggest debt default in history.

The more a government control money, the more artificial is its value.


A Dollar bill can't even wipe the ass properly.

I wish I could disagree with you. But I can't. Since they changed the composition in '01, it don't even make a decent joint.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=580GyjDTlc8

[TomUnderSea]

...
If China become the most powerful country in the world. There will be no more war. Unlike the US, which love war. If you look at all the history, how many countries have they ruin? Just recent years; Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and they are targeting Iran next. How many war has China started in the recent years?

I do believe the world will be a much more peaceful place to live in. 

Unless you are unlucky enough to be a neighbor of China:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_(1950)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War

Such a peaceful people, the Chinese.  They even play nicely over fishing rights:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands


If the Chinese would play nice with their neighbors, the US 7th Fleet could come home.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Seventh_Fleet

DragonBoy, take your propaganda elsewhere. 

[hawkeye]

...
If China become the most powerful country in the world. There will be no more war. Unlike the US, which love war. If you look at all the history, how many countries have they ruin? Just recent years; Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and they are targeting Iran next. How many war has China started in the recent years?

I do believe the world will be a much more peaceful place to live in. 

Unless you are unlucky enough to be a neighbor of China:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_(1950)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War

Such a peaceful people, the Chinese.  They even play nicely over fishing rights:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands


If the Chinese would play nice with their neighbors, the US 7th Fleet could come home.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Seventh_Fleet

DragonBoy, take your propaganda elsewhere. 

It seems to be a rule that the more powerful a government gets the worse it's behaviour.  Logical when you think about.  They are just people.   People with very few restraints on their behaviour.  People who get away with invading and killing other people and destroying vast amounts of property over and over again.

[Taras]

[Mike Christ]

It seems to be a rule that the more powerful a government gets the worse it's behaviour.  Logical when you think about.  They are just people.   People with very few restraints on their behaviour.  People who get away with invading and killing other people and destroying vast amounts of property over and over again.

But it's a necessary evil

[Biomech]

It seems to be a rule that the more powerful a government gets the worse it's behaviour.  Logical when you think about.  They are just people.   People with very few restraints on their behaviour.  People who get away with invading and killing other people and destroying vast amounts of property over and over again.

But it's a necessary evil

I know that was tongue in cheek (and I think we're on the same page at least 90 percent of the time) but I would like the larger audience to think about that phrase.

"necessary evil" and "choosing the lesser evil" are two phrases that grind my gears.

I will state as a fact that while always present, evil is NOT necessary, and that if you are going to deliberately choose evil, as in elections, then you should not be a pussy. Go ahead and choose the greater evil. If you are actually trying to escape evil, arm up and don't participate in the farce known as democracy.

[Mike Christ]

It seems to be a rule that the more powerful a government gets the worse it's behaviour.  Logical when you think about.  They are just people.   People with very few restraints on their behaviour.  People who get away with invading and killing other people and destroying vast amounts of property over and over again.

But it's a necessary evil

I know that was tongue in cheek (and I think we're on the same page at least 90 percent of the time) but I would like the larger audience to think about that phrase.

"necessary evil" and "choosing the lesser evil" are two phrases that grind my gears.

I will state as a fact that while always present, evil is NOT necessary, and that if you are going to deliberately choose evil, as in elections, then you should not be a pussy. Go ahead and choose the greater evil. If you are actually trying to escape evil, arm up and don't participate in the farce known as democracy.

Yes, I do find we are always in complete agreement; what you're saying is the truth.  There is no such thing as a necessary evil, there is only the good we cannot see.  But to be frank, I can't think of any evil that didn't consider itself necessary; humans always believe the evil they're doing is necessary or else they wouldn't do it.  Behind every villain is good intent and a winding road to hell.

In the case of democracy, the necessary evil is propagated in the idea that a law passed by majority vote is moral, when in reality it can be anything; if 6 out of 10 people agree that rape is lawful, it doesn't become any more moral than before.  If the foundation of law is morals and ethics, then democracy is, by its very nature, an invalid form of government, for there is a paradox in democracy: if the people are knowledgeable enough to effectively participate in a democracy to ensure that all laws are ethical and justice is upheld, they would have no need for a democracy; they would be anarchists.

[Vod]

I can rule myself, thank you.

Really?  Can you drive your Honda Civic over rivers and through forests, or do you need a maintained road?

Some level of government is necessary when people gather in groups, if only to pay for shared services.  It's the reach of the government that is important - you guys have given your road builders way too much power.

[bitwit]

My significant other is from a country with a King. There's no asking questions, and your family may disappear if you say something like "He's an idiot".

Yeah, the USA is the worst country ever...

Maybe we need to be more like Gandhi and "be the change"  instead of sitting on a PC complaining about it. If there's anything bad about America, it's that we blame everybody else. Change some crap if you don't like it.

Corrupt politicians? Do you even know where the word lobbying comes from?
Starving kids? Easy fix.
Too much debt? Set the example first.
Too few services? GET INVOLVED.
Too many services? GET INVOLVED.
Don't like something? GET INVOLVED.

At least write a friggin' letter. It worked for America in 1776 and 1863.

[Biomech]

My significant other is from a country with a King. There's no asking questions, and your family may disappear if you say something like "He's an idiot".

Yeah, the USA is the worst country ever...

Maybe we need to be more like Gandhi and "be the change"  instead of sitting on a PC complaining about it. If there's anything bad about America, it's that we blame everybody else. Change some crap if you don't like it.

Corrupt politicians? Do you even know where the word lobbying comes from?
Starving kids? Easy fix.
Too much debt? Set the example first.
Too few services? GET INVOLVED.
Too many services? GET INVOLVED.
Don't like something? GET INVOLVED.

At least write a friggin' letter. It worked for America in 1776 and 1863.

I am rather dedicated. I'm better with words than with a placard in the streets (been there, done that), and I have been DEEPLY involved in politics.

What I found was that those who seek office should NEVER have any form of power over anyone but themselves, because they INTEND to use it for personal gain, or their personal vision of hell paradise. Being an anarchist at my age is not a reactionary or unreasoned position. It might be for the very young, a sort of diffuse teenage rebellion, but for those of us with some years under our belts, the philosophies of liberty are not abstracts or simply a topic for discussion amongst friends or internet fora.

Some basic truths about the United States of America. The corporation, not the nation of people.

One. The system cannot be reformed. Why? Because it works as it is intended. No, not the bullshit they sell you on the idiot box, the ACTUAL intent. Which is to gain as much power in the hands of a few "elites" as possible without fomenting a revolution. The "federalists" (imperialists, if we're to be honest and historically accurate) recalled very well the vast uncertainties and suffering caused by a full scale revolution. But unlike the "anti" federalists (who were ACTUALLY federalists rather than imperialists), the Federalists wanted a strong central government FOR THE PURPOSE of making the United States (plural, at the time) into one great empire. It took them a few decades and an otherwise unnecessary war, but they pulled it off. From 1865 onwards, nearly everything they have done has had the express purpose of expanding and consolidating the central authority. They have succeeded brilliantly. Alexander Hamilton would be immensely proud of the current government.

Two. Those who would rule want power like a drowning man wants air. I have personally met almost all of the current senate and about half of the current congress at earlier stages in their so-called careers. There is not one of them that I think this untrue of, except Dr. Ron Paul who I'm unsure of. That he is sincere in his beliefs, I have no doubt. But I'm not certain whether he has that lust for power. Unlike the whole rest of them, he was a gentleman to the staff. I give him points for that, and for much of his philosophy. But he sought power at the Imperial court, and he got it for many years. That makes him dangerous, even if his intentions are good. Which I am not certain of. The rest of them would throw their mother in front of a freight train for one more vote. And I AM certain of that.

Three. Voting is futile. You are given a very limited choice. You do not vote on law or regulation. You have no choice in that at all. The United States of America is not the Swiss Confederation. Citizens have privileges and duties, not rights. Nor real power. You can't even own the property you live on in any real sense. As Emma Goldman said, if voting could change anything, they would make it illegal. Contrary to the popular saw, voting TAKES AWAY your right to bitch, as you are supporting the system, regardless of the outcome.

I have much more, but that's enough to chew on for now.

[jaime]

Dose anyone talk about the Spanish killing millions of people in the south Americas NO THEY DONT

To all other members of this forum im sorry for my rage at this person

You're total ignorant.

[Mike Christ]

I can rule myself, thank you.

Really?  Can you drive your Honda Civic over rivers and through forests, or do you need a maintained road?

Some level of government is necessary when people gather in groups, if only to pay for shared services.  It's the reach of the government that is important - you guys have given your road builders way too much power.

This is a common argument: "if the government doesn't provide it, nobody will."

The state doesn't build any roads; the state pays people to build roads.  If you've ever given somebody money for or to do anything, you've accomplished what the state is capable of.

Now consider how a business usually functions:

Group A wants/needs something.
Group B can give/perform that something for a profit.

Ergo, business; this is especially true when Group B does not gain, except for profit, for helping Group A, such as building roads they'll never drive on.  So the question is: if the state no longer held a monopoly over road building, would nobody, not a single person, not even the road builders who are paid by the state to build roads, step up and form a business around building and maintaining roads?

I would like to believe, after so many successful businesses surrounding far more trivial matters, we're capable of roads.