American pessimism
One of the defining qualities of Americans must be their optimism.
To Europeans, it can sometimes appear to be an overly cheerful enthusiasm or a wilful reluctance to look harsh facts in the face.
Obama's election was one expression of that optimism - the audacity of hope - embodied in Bob the Builder's constructive phrase "yes, we can".
But gloom appears to be the new mood in the US these days.
Commentators on the left like Robert Reich warn of a double dip recession.
So do commentators of the right.
Those giving investment advice say they see the signs everywhere.
While cooler commentators keep their heads, there's no doubt whatsoever the jitters are out there.
In the country, rather than in print and on the internet, this may not be down to predictions but because of what is happening now - or isn't happening.
A recent survey suggests eight out of ten of those who lost their jobs in the last couple of years still haven't found a new one.
President Obama is sticking to his guns, unwavering in his big picture policy prescription.
He wants to refocus America, to once again become one of the world's great manufacturers and exporters - rather than just being one of the globe's biggest consumers.
This vision is how Mr Obama sees jobs coming back.
In a speech today he said, "This is where American jobs will be tomorrow. Ninety-five percent of the world's customers and fastest growing markets are beyond our borders. So if we want to find new growth streams, we've got to better compete for those customers - because other nations are. As I have said many times, the United States of America should not, cannot, and will not play for second place. We mean to compete for those jobs - and we mean to win."
While this may be excellent analysis of the problem, the difficulty is the policy prescriptions - such as more free trade and a rebalancing of the Chinese currency - hardly go to the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter being that America doesn't make enough of the goods the world wants to buy.
In a thought provoking article in Times, Anatole Kaletsky argues forcefully that Obama's prescription is right.
But he sees one big threat - pessimism itself.
He contends this is largely caused by intense political polarisation, adding that he hasn't seen such intense mutual hatred since Scargill and Thatcher faced each other in 1980s Britain.
Is it time to abandon bipolar bipartisanship and for Americans to pick themselves up and dust themselves down?
I look forward to your answers and will read them at my leisure: I am taking some leave, so I won't be posting for a while.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Mark:
Is it time to abandon bipolar bipartisanship and for Americans to pick themselves up and dust themselves down?
Of course, its' time to abandon the bickering among the political classes in the United States....And, I am sending you my best wishes while you are on summer break.
(d)
Complain about this comment
You can't re-build a world class industrial base and revive free trade by subsidizing innefficient producers which is exactly what Obama did when he bailed out GM and Chrysler. Obama gives great speeches but if you turn the volume down and pay attention to what he does instead of what he says you have to wonder if he wants to revive the U.S. economy or destroy it completely. As a case in point America's automakers can build world class cars--if government would stop telling them what to build and how to run their businesses and let the free market work.
I would agree that political polarization in the U.S. is increasing, we are being led down the path to European style socialism by liberals and conservatives are digging their heels in. It's a battle for the character of the nation and the stakes couldn't be higher: freedom and individual responsibility like the Founding Fathers envisioned or collectivism and dependence upon government. The outcome of the struggle is of enormous import to the world because if freedom can't flourish in the USA then the cause of freedom in the rest of the world is in deep doo doo.
Complain about this comment
There is pessimism because there is disilllsion from some of the left who thought Obama was going to bring a New Golden age.
and disgust on the other side who see Obama selling out allies pandering to special interests and caring more about the golobal world society than the U.S.
From the economy to NASA to other areas, Obama represents despair.
Complain about this comment
"Is it time to abandon bipolar bipartisanship and for Americans to pick themselves up and dust themselves down?"
One thing that has totally baffled me in the five years I have lived in the States is how a diverse nation of 50 very different states (that is really a continent) comprising some 300 million people can possibly be represented in its legislature by but two political parties !
Goodness me - there are more than two shades of opinion around most dinner tables !
My home country of Britain - a relatively small island nation of 60 million - has 10 political parties represented within the House of Commons.....
As far as the more general question about pessimism is concerned - if what mainly motivates you is the acquisition of large sums of money in the shortest possible time - you will indeed feel very sad at the moment....
Complain about this comment
We have a President who is not accomplishing anything with creating much needed jobs. Of course we are pessimistic, because he seemed so different. But, he is just another politician promoting his weird agendas.
BUT, we are optimistic that he will be voted out of office in 2012. That is the ray of light we all need to focus on. Plus, the elections this year may politically neuter him so he really can't do much anymore. George Bush may have been kind of short-sighted, but at least he was decisive. You felt like a captain was on the bridge, at least.
Complain about this comment
Anatole Kaletsky wrote: "The big question is why have Americans become so pessimistic? The most striking explanation is political polarisation. Many Americans at both ends of the spectrum are actually hoping for a double dip, since this will discredit the Obama administration." (from your last linked document)
What planet is he from? Our political polarization is a symptom, not a cause. The country is in difficult straits, so each major party blames the other. The minor parties blame both major parties, which may be closer to the truth.
American optimism (ignoring ancient history) developed during World War II and its aftermath, when the United States grew stronger while much of the rest of the western world was in ruins. In the 1950s and 1960s, we didn't worry much about finding a job, going to college, buying a home, raising a family, because we didn't need to. The tide was rising and a rising tide lifts all boats. Europe was rebuilding and China was nothing. The Soviet Union made us nervous, but the competition was good for our defense industries, which created a lot of jobs.
In the post-war era I never heard of cities, states, school districts, and other public bodies struggling to balance their budgets. People used to fret about the national debt back then, but the fact is that the national debt did not become a real problem until after 1980. (I have posted the link the documentation on this many times.)
These days, every public agency is struggling to balance its budget. People are out of work everywhere, many losing their homes and their retirement savings, unable to meet the ever-growing cost of medical care. Half of everything we buy is now manufactured in China, while our manufacturing (with its associated jobs) has collapsed. Of course we are pessimistic!
I don't expect I will live to see the US dig itself out of the hole it is in.
Complain about this comment
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
There is fast approaching a time when the word "American" and the word "optimism" will be deemed inappropriate to use together.
I believe that Americans have had it good for too long; they tend to believe that they are exceptional, more deserving...almost God's chosen people, if there wasn't already a Chosen People.
Obama promised the world and has come up empty. The hope has shrivelled. The vines are empty. I heard a politician say the other day, "We won't know what's in Health Care until it's implemented." Wow, that would be enough to make me feel unexceptional, undeserving and pessimistic.
I'm a little past Robert Reich & double dip recession;
I'm at the point of major economic collapse because the United States cannot support her sovereign debt which is now into the trillions; in fact, she couldn't possibly raise enough taxes to pay the interest on her debt. So what will she do: Run more money off the Federal printing press? For how long will foreign leaders accept worthless paper becoming more worthless faster than the printing presses can run it?
The signs are indeed everywhere - unemployment, default on homes, cities that look more like abandoned villages, T.S. Eliot's "The WasteLand" shimmering before our eyes. Jitters are out there because there is no stability, no light at the end of the tunnel, no future...
President Obama can stick to his guns until the printing press gathers dust and the last foreign country expels its last arrogant American and the situation will not change.
The United States gave most manufacturing to China and India.
The United States gave most manufacturing to China and India; thence went the exporting as well.
In doing so, it made itself into a producer of nothing and a consumer of everything. If Obama thinks that Americans can compete "for those jobs" and win, he is plain-speakingly delusional, misinformed, dreaming, or overly optimistic.
The United States of American is in a lot of trouble.
Complain about this comment
"Obama's election was one expression of that optimism - the audacity of hope - embodied in Bob the Builder's constructive phrase "yes, we can"."
No! Obama's election was an expression of self delusion, of people selling themselves on a bill of goods the Obama campaign was peddling. That a tyro can beat out pros, get and perform well on a job only someone experienced and knowledgable should be expected to handle makes a good story for a Hollywood movie but it is not the real world. Barack Obama was totally unqualified to be President of the United States but he was likable, energetic, enthusiastic, and intelligent. That is not nearly enough. He was also inexperienced to a degree that should not have enabled him to get through the primaries let alone to the White House. Those who apologize for his shortcomings do so for their own reasons but not because he has demonstrated his ability.
The passage of the health care legislation was a disgrace to our democracy and flew in the face of everything Obama campaigned on including openness and extended public debate on the bill. In fact there was no real debate, it was rammed through both houses of Congress having been revealed just before the vote with much arm twisting and backroom deals. Even so it barely squeaked by.
Tim Geitner can tell us how well the economy is doing but unless Americans see it in their own wallets between now and election day, many of the President's supporters in Congress will be history come January and he will be well down the road to being a one term President. He is not performing well and the election will be his report card.
"He wants to refocus America, to once again become one of the world's great manufacturers and exporters - rather than just being one of the globe's biggest consumers."
The cost of manufacturing in the US is relatively high. This is due to our laws including minimum wages, unemployment insurance, OSHA, EPA, and criminal and civil vulnerabilities as BP will find out the hard way. However, Americans produce the basic science, the R and D, design the products, design the machines and processes that produce the products, own the factories in other countries like China, and reap the profits. That is what matters most. That very cheap labor is used which Americans won't and can't compete against unless we institute strong protectionist policies is a fact of life. Retraining people for more difficult jobs they can earn higher wages at hasn't worked well for the most part. Again sloganeering is no substitute for well thought out policies. Saying yes you can is not the same as proving yes you can and so far the Obama administration has not shown us much in that regard.
The time for speeches is over. The time for leadership is long overdo.
Complain about this comment
7 GH,
Once upon a time when I was living in Houston, the city changed the speed limit signs over to metric. Folks saw 50 and stepped on it! That lasted about a week.
Complain about this comment
2. At 7:20pm on 07 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:
As a case in point America's automakers can build world class cars--if government would stop telling them what to build and how to run their businesses and let the free market work.
Scott, are you aware that GM and Chrysler are two of among only a handful of manufacturers in the country that can turn their operations to producing war grade materials in only a few weeks time? We've bailed out car companies before for this very reason. More was going on there than most people comprehend. It wasn't an act of charity. This was done with an eye towards national security.
Complain about this comment
At 9:06pm on 07 Jul 2010, rodidog wrote:
"Once upon a time when I was living in Houston, the city changed the speed limit signs over to metric. Folks saw 50 and stepped on it! That lasted about a week. "
By step on it, I hope you mean the brake. 50Km/hr is about 31 miles/hour.
Complain about this comment
There are many US citizens, myself included, who believe that the US should abandon the practice of requiring voters to register a party affiliation. We would like to vote for the candidate best qualified for the job without the limitation of party affiliation in the primaries.
Complain about this comment
Our biggest problem is the Baby Boom generation reaching retirement age and we have too few young workers to support the benefits and entitlements promised. Our fearless leaders, both Republican and Democrat, lack the courage to revise these programs and make them solvent.
Of course if we had more young workers this problem might be less dire, but these fearless leaders instead turn to "populist" (read "asinine") politics to deflect our attention from real problems onto scapegoats...namely "illegal aliens" (read "mexicans"). The really tragic part is that such immigrants are largely young and often willing to take any job, precisely the sort of labor force which could help correct the fallout of boomer retirement. Instead, they are described as the anchor around our necks, siphoning off social services without paying taxes (ignoring the fact that they pay sales tax every time they make a purchase). Also, we are told they are unassimilable, an absurd charge leveled at the Irish, Jewish, Italian, Polish, Chinese (etc. etc.) immigrants who came before and who ALL assimilated thereafter.
We are also instructed to be outraged at the violations of our legal system inherent in coming to this country outside of official channels. This is curious since many millions of todays native born americans trace their ancestry to people whose official application process involved stepping off a boat, swearing on a bible in a language they didnt understand, and then being herded into the local Tammany Hall style political machine to vote for whichever candidates their local businessmen/organized crime organizations wanted them to vote for. Considering the fact that these people left patriotic, English speaking, law abiding decendants I'm not sure what all the worry is about in the first place.
Stop promising services we can't deliver, and bring on the immigrants.
Complain about this comment
NitaG (#13): "There are many US citizens, myself included, who believe that the US should abandon the practice of requiring voters to register a party affiliation."
The US does not. Most election laws, including this one, fall entirely within state jurisdiction. All states allow voters to register as unaffiliated with a party. It would be unconstitutional to require party affiliation.
Complain about this comment
On one hand, I'd say you been spendin' too much time in the Press Bubble, honey. You should take a vacation. There's lots of fun and relaxing things to do over here that have NOTHING to do with Poli-Ticks.
On the other hand, the reason the "HOPE" platform worked is 'cause so many of us have been a wee bit frustrated lately... In fact, I agree about the polarization. Some folks are getting silly. Heck, Politics can be a heated topic at the family BBQ and is oft avoided in the workplace.
My professional Mom-Advice for the Greater USA?
Take a vacation. Relax.
Find a local pub and enjoy a local brew and a tasty sandwich.
Or, may I recommend a salad of local greens and some fine Napa Valley Wine?
Bake a pie filled with summer fruit. Yum.
Spend more time with your families and less time with your TVs.
Don't forget to call your mother.
-- And if necessary, have a few bran muffins. They're good for ya'.
Complain about this comment
7. At 8:19pm on 07 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:
There was a time, I think in the 1970s and 1980s, when the US government tried to encourage or even force conversion to the metric system. We had silly things like dual-scale speedometers in our automobiles. That seems to have gone by the wayside.
Yes, in the 70s and early 80s there was a whole campaign to change over to the metric system, though it was voluntary. There's been a push for metric every 30 or 40 years here since the system was invented. The Department of Weights and Measures spent millions in taxpayer dollars setting up the US Metric Board to change road signs, etc. in the belief that if people saw both numbers they'd eventually learn to be comfortable with the new system.
Well, as usual, it didn't take. In fact, I remember reading an article a number of years ago about how there were once whole divisions across every state set aside in local Weights and Measures offices devoted to the change over. At the time of the article, those many thousands of employees across the country had been reduced to one guy in a cubicle in Washington, DC in the Office of Weights and Measures - and his job was being phased out in a year.
Americans take what they deem they need from every culture and discard the rest as unimportant to them - like we've taken to tacos, fajitas and margaritas, but not the rebozo, though that item might be more useful than the other three, if less tasty. The Metric system is one of those things that most Americans find mostly useless. It serves no purpose here, except for those who need it professionally, or want to use it for personal reasons. Metric in the US sort of reminds me of Esperanto. A very nice thing to learn, but really, why bother?
Complain about this comment
BluesBerry said:
I'm at the point of major economic collapse because the United States cannot support her sovereign debt which is now into the trillions; in fact, she couldn't possibly raise enough taxes to pay the interest on her debt.
Blues. allow me to suggest you do some of your own thinking and simply quit parroting back propaganda you hear. Go to the url below which gives the interest paid on the debt and then divide that number by the population of the USA or the working populace, whatever your druthers are. The point is to illustrate that your statement "couldn't possibly....." is absurd.
http://tinyurl.com/2kwynl
Complain about this comment
ref #13
NitaG wrote:
There are many US citizens, myself included, who believe that the US should abandon the practice of requiring voters to register a party affiliation. We would like to vote for the candidate best qualified for the job without the limitation of party affiliation in the primaries.
_______________
not sure what you mean. Yu can register unafiliated. It amy be required to register to vote in a party primary.
If there is one thing that should be eliminated it is the Caucus and the primary schedule.
The result was Barack the Clueless
Complain about this comment
I worry that the US might become the next Belgium due to the efforts of Rupert Murdoch (and those he inspires on the other side) to radicalise the American right. The only way I imagine Americans might depolarise would be for FoxNews to reform itself and make honest efforts to destroy their stockpile of crazy in line with other media they've inspired that were trying to compensate for their motions. Otherwise, the political divide in America will continue to grow to levels where any sense of national identity and broad public good will be impossible. Were we to have that, we might eventually have the stomach for a long-term fix (a real multi-party system, teaching of critical thinking skills in public education, better public education, campaign finance reform a la Lawrence Lessig, etc). If we don't get that, we might look back in 50 years at the remnants of our nation and honestly say that Murdoch enabled us to find the worst in ourselves and that in turn destroyed us.
Complain about this comment
Much of the trouble that we are in regarding the sour economy has to do with the fact that our automobile manufacturers waited too long to design cars that were appealing to the masses. Then, to top it off, there were serious quality issues. Britain allowed the same to happen with their auto industry. It did not have to be this way either. General Motors, Ford, and even Chrysler had the know-how and the capital to keep their heads above water but let opportunity after opportunity slip by them. Jaguar, Rolls Royce, and Rover allowed the same things to happen too. It is quite an epic disaster that Rolls Royce, Jaguar, and Range Rover are no longer British owned.
The competition in Japan and Germany simply had what the consumer wanted in terms of quality and fuel economy.
In 1976, the cars being built in this country were some of the most beautiful, comfortable cars ever built on the planet. Many Americans are still clamoring for their return but, with better fuel mileage. In Germany, the big older American cars from the early to mid 70s are in hot demand. Indeed, if most Europeans had the pleasure of ever having ridden in the 1976 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham ( http://www.libertysoftware.be/cml/gallery/1976/76fleet03.jpg ) , they would understand why Americans snubbed their noses at the later offerings. Even the full-size Chevrolets, like the Caprice, were hot sellers. In the 1980s, American cars hit an all time low both in design and fuel economy, quality, and more importantly, power. Some people actually cried when they saw what had been done.
Bad quality, poor designs, poor fuel economy, and better foreign offerings almost killed the American car industry as it had to the British car industry.
People were no longer proud to own an American car because there were too many issues. No one wants to take time off from work every time something goes wrong with a car and no one wants a car that gives them trouble when they could buy a Japanese car that runs forever. Luckily, G.M., Ford, and Chrysler got the message and are finally building quality cars again that are appealing in both design and power.
Only time will tell whether it is soon enough or not.
Complain about this comment
wolfvorkian (#18), according to the site to which you linked, we (in the US) pay about $1000 per person per year just to service the national debt we now have. We can and do pay it, but it's high. We do have a problem with the national debt being too high, and the higher it goes, the more difficult it is to turn around, because the interest must be paid in any case.
Complain about this comment
People are pessimistic because of the instability they see all around them. It is better to assume the worst than it is to assume the best. Psychologically, the consequences are easier to deal with.
America needs action - not mere assurances - that this country's future will remain radiant. Obama hasn't done enough, but I don't blame him - I blame the political system of this country for keeping down the necessary reforms that this country needs. People will rather bicker than institute real change.
Complain about this comment
I disagree. Americans aren't pessimistic they just need real change. They might bitch and moan for a bit but that's a natural reaction to figuring out what Americans really want for their future. They don't want BOBAMA (Bush-Obama) they want something new, more aligned to a truly American solution. Something that represents the original values of their constitution. They are tired of corruption. They are tired of their political system serving a different master. Americans will throw off the yoke of opression and build something uniquely American. If that involves leaving the union, Americans will do it. The world should never underestimate the will and power of the American people. We are stirring from our slumber. The Giant is awakening and he ain't very happy.
Complain about this comment
Where I sit, American Optimism is still alive and well. I'm optimistic that the Obamanation will not be re-elected and we will return, eventually, to a true federal system with DC taking care of the external and the several states taking care of the internal. BTW, I know that The One did not start the slope to the centralized nanny-state we are now in, but I think he has pushed so hard for it; he has scared enough formerly non-involved Americans that the pendulum will start swinging back to the right.
Complain about this comment
I am not convinced of Obama's call to bring back jobs manufacturing jobs and the like to the United States. If we were to break the tax/union/bureaucratic strangle hold on manual labor in America the jobs would naturally come back. But we've made it so expensive to hire and maintain an employee that it's cheaper for a company to find its labor half-way across the world and ship the products back to the USA. Obama wants to bring these jobs back, not through deregulation but through restricting the business' options, which will only make them less able to compete with foreign companies. If we don't want to deregulate, which I'm not sure we do, then we have to view ourselves as a nation of managers, of white-collar workers. This can be done, but again, we cannot afford to coddle the unemployed, or leave any options than, 'make yourself as smart as possible to enter into the administrative class of the world or become a laborer in the service industry of that class.' Those should be the only two options in the USA, unless she is willing to deregulate and make it cost-effective for the American citizen to be a laborer, or blue collar worker.
Complain about this comment
More than the "optimism," I've always found the defining American attribute to be a sort of teenage "I don't have to listen to you, I'm going to do things my own way!"
Sometimes it's brought nice things as America's travelled new routes and tried new things. But for a long time now it mostly just seems to be a sort of obstinacy spawned by an unwillingness to accept that other parts of the world might have gotten some things right that America didn't.
American politics has been about the parties more than the policies for a long time now, whatever the rhetoric, the ultimate outcome of either Republicans or Democrats being in the White House seem hard to tell from each other. It's just a fight over whether red or blue is the nicer colour, both parties are just paying lip service to their voters and the hardcore party worship prevents any third or fourth parties from ever gaining any ground.
They're also finally feeling the burn from their own policies, unrestricted free trade, which once permitted them to take advantage of less developed nations, is now permitting less developed nations to take advantage of them. It's really the hubris of decades catching up with America over the last ten years. Economic and foreign policy debts finally crashing down on the world's "last superpower."
They'll probably survive, but I doubt they'll be resurgent again before their politics become truly multi-party or they take a large swing to the left, politically and economically. The world's changed a lot over the last fifty years, but America just doesn't seem to have learned anything, they're still pursuing the exact same short-sighted policies that're getting their ears boxed now.
Complain about this comment
18. At 9:49pm on 07 Jul 2010, wolfvorkian wrote:
"Blues. allow me to suggest you do some of your own thinking and simply quit parroting back propaganda you hear. Go to the url below which gives the interest paid on the debt and then divide that number by the population of the USA or the working populace, whatever your druthers are. The point is to illustrate that your statement "couldn't possibly....." is absurd.
http://tinyurl.com/2kwynl"
Wolfvorkian,
Could you please indicate where, on that site, exactly is the part where it shows HOW the national debt can be repaid in regards to the Federal Reserve?
Let me go through this one more time: The United State's Government buys money from the Federal Reserve (a private company) using bonds which it prints up. It buys that money AT INTEREST. Since all of the money that has EVER been purchased from the Federal Reserve Bank that is in circulation today is only the principle amount purchased...
Where is the money to repay the interest coming from?
In order to repay the debt, our Government would have to buy more money, at interest, which would cause more interest to be owed thus increasing the original debt! It is IMPOSSIBLE to ever pay back the debt to the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.
I don't know how you view it differently but, I would be more than interested in reading your view.
Complain about this comment
* 8. At 8:39pm on 07 Jul 2010, BluesBerry wrote:
There is fast approaching a time when the word "American" and the word "optimism" will be deemed inappropriate to use together.
I believe that Americans have had it good for too long; they tend to believe that they are exceptional, more deserving...almost God's chosen people, if there wasn't already a Chosen People.
The United States gave most manufacturing to China and India; thence went the exporting as well.
In doing so, it made itself into a producer of nothing and a consumer of everything.
------
You sound almost giddy relishing in your own ignorance and insignificant comments.
Here are some numbers for you. China and India comprise almost 40% of the world's population, and combine for a total of around $6 trillion GDP. Compare that with the USA's GDP of $14 trillion with merely 4.5% of the world's population. Sounds to me like Americans have been busy producing without regard to what petty, jealous people wish for them.
Complain about this comment
9 MAII Wrote.
Americans produce the basic science, the R and D, design the products, design the machines and processes that produce the products, own the factories in other countries like China, and reap the profits. That is what matters most.
===========================
Another high and mighty illusion. Was Einstien american? Is Rolls Royce american? the Harrier jet? Voltaire? The Millau bridge in France which u have nothing like in america? etc;etc;etc'icould go on forever.
I live in Australia and do business in China. No foriegner owns anything there especially factories,if anything only a flimsy tenure. Plus the Chinese gain most of the profit made.
Complain about this comment
One of the defining qualities of Americans must be their optimism.
To Europeans, it can sometimes appear to be an overly cheerful enthusiasm or a wilful reluctance to look harsh facts in the face.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To, me it is just a misplaced confidence... when the going gets tough in usa, that tough withdraws and starts changing the facts.....Look at Mccrystal...He talked tough before going to Afghanistan, and once there, chickened out, and conviently arranged an interview where he conviently let the pathan in him wake up and take over him, said a few personal things against obama and company and arranged a perfect exit for himself. With a few words of personal attacks, he made himself stand in line with those generals who were forced out by the american presidents..The americans were wonderfully punked.
Complain about this comment
Besides all the economic problems in the US and the world, I think Americans are starting to realize that President Obama is all talk, a facade of false promises that vary between which audience he is speaking in front of at the time, as well as being in over his head in solving them. He is as the root of it, just another typical politician that happens to be from the other party this time; a disappointment. On top of that, though he continues to talk of ending bipolar bipartisanship in America, he then re-enforces the same with every speech he makes. It is if he can't help but find room in a speech to trash or find something wrong with some person, group, or organization with blame of some kind during one. I for one have found him to be one of the most negative projecting Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. It can be somewhat depressing after a while.
Complain about this comment
It is kind of hard to be optimistic when your President puts foreigners ahead of our own citizens.
I absolutely think America will pull through. But it is going to take real Americans to do it and it is not going to be easy. Many of the politicians are millionaires and they do not relate to the majority of the population. The politicians are bunk and most need to be replaced in Nov. What they are doing now is not working.
Some of the most powerful people in the world are against us.
Even our own President. We cannot trust the politicians. Many of them have special interests, some even have foreign interests.
So it is up to Americans now to take our country back, state by state.
We cannot rely on politicians to do it for us. We have to replace as many as we can and do it ourselves.
Big govt. is trying to take the power away from the people.
We must make ourselves heard.
We must fight for our country.
We must demand new politicians.
We must stop borrowing money from foreign countries and pay what we owe.
We must put Americans first and foreigners second.
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure pessimism is the cause of increased polarization. For starters, what do we mean by polarization? If we mean polarization of the electorate then there's really been no change since the 1960s. If we mean elite polarization, i.e. polarization of politicians and parties, then yes, since the 1980s there has been a remarkable resurgence in polarization.
It's wrapped up in voter turn out. As parties fell into a rut of mediocrity in the 1970s there was little polarization amongst elites and voters responded by staying at home because they didn't care who won. This slump in polarization was, at least in part, due to something of an issue vaccum. With powerful economic growth, materialist, class-based cleavages in society became less and less relevant. The race issue was largely settled in the mid 60s, so there was little else for parties to disagree about.
With voter turnout in free-fall, parties responded firstly by strengthening themselves organizationally, making themselves more professional, and importantly by taking up and in some cases perhaps creating new post-materialist issues with which they could win back voters support. With both parties doing this at the same time, we got the polarization we see today, and the high turnout (at least by American standards) that goes with it.
The picture of voter pessimism is a mixed bag, it's not at all clear from survey data that voters are any more pessimistic today than they were in the 1960s, and they're almost certainly less pessimistic than in the 1970s and post-Watergate.
If the parties to de-polarize, the likely result will be increased apathy, decreased turnout. De-polarization does not necessarily mean a more decisive government. It's not clear that government in the 1970s was any more decisive or effective than at any other time. Even today, the Obama administration/Democrats control all three branches of the federal government (SCOTUS aside) so regardless of polarization they should be able to run rough shod over opposition, however vocal, and do as they like. Yet Obama and the Democrats are widely criticized for inaction, indecisiveness and ineffectiveness.
Complain about this comment
Obama hasn't done enough, but I don't blame him - I blame the political system of this country for keeping down the necessary reforms that this country needs. People will rather bicker than institute real change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
He knew all about the political system which he wanted to become part of, before he made all those promises...He hasnt managed to even close down guantanamo bay....He deserved to be atleast booed at, this is the extent of the power of the people in usa...Atleast use this right...Stand behind those baaracades and boo in a civilized manner, so that it doesnt create noise pollution or else the pollution police will come after you, and change the whole scenario, and you will spend lot of time arguing about how high or low the pitch of booing should be in order not to harm the envirnoment.
Complain about this comment
It seems that all of you, including you Mr. Mardell are not good students of history. This situation is very much like the early 1990s: Economic doldrums, low presidential approval, with the Republicans retaking Congress in the same way they will again in November. Remember Newt Gingrich? Contract with America? Replace Gingrich with Sarah Palin, and "Contract with America" with "Tea Party" and look what you have. Or how the Republicans in their cockiness then, as in now and you can see it in these posts how Clinton was as good as done in 96? Remember what happened instead? Pessimism and shortsightedness is not a good thing.
Besides, you can also see in these posts. Lots of finger pointing, blame gaming, and finger pointing, no problem solving. XX55XX is 100% right in that its our stagnant and retarded political and social climate, made worse by extremism on both sides, who pick election wedge issues that have no legality whatsoever like illegal immigration, Gay Marriage, or Oil Drilling just to win votes and get themselves into office and then act like the corrupt, incompetent politicians they were rallying against.
Complain about this comment
There is not enough money chasing after goods and services. Folks are using their savings and 401(k)'s to survive. Business's are holding onto their cash and reducing their labor cost's. Governments are broke and will continue to layoff workers and reduce services. Nothing Obama has done is working. At best he simply put off the inevitable. At worst he eroded any confidence and stifled investments which might have turned things around.
We're not facing a double dip, we merely went sideway's for a time while continuing downward. I would say this pessimism is born from reality.
Facing all that, I'm pessimistically optimistic about the future starting in perhaps 2012. And no, that is not because of the election. 2010 is gone. At best things might pick up in 2011, which would make 2012 a recovery year...or not.
Complain about this comment
30. At 11:06pm on 07 Jul 2010, Emps wrote:
Another high and mighty illusion. Was Einstien american?
Did you know that Einstein became a naturalized American Citizen? BTW, I see you are from Australia; if you are not an Aborigine, I assume you are of European extraction. Have you ever returned to "find your roots" in Europe? I have (returned to Europe in the service); and I now know why my ancestors left Europe and went to America, and I'm so happy they did.
Complain about this comment
Now that we have established that you would have voted for Obama had you been a citizen, I wonder what are your thoughts Mark on the blatant racism displayed by the Department of Justice (sic) in dropping the slam dunk case against the New Black Panthers for intimidation of voters at a polling booth during the election in November 2008. How can we Americans, including this LEGAL immigrant, be optimistic for the future of the country with such an administration in charge of our destiny? We are surely headlong on the road to out and out socialism, a philosophy so foreign to what America has always stood for.
Complain about this comment
"We have a President who is not accomplishing anything with creating much needed jobs. Of course we are pessimistic, because he seemed so different. But, he is just another politician promoting his weird agendas.
BUT, we are optimistic that he will be voted out of office in 2012. That is the ray of light we all need to focus on. Plus, the elections this year may politically neuter him so he really can't do much anymore. George Bush may have been kind of short-sighted, but at least he was decisive. You felt like a captain was on the bridge, at least."
- Bill Baur
I strong disagree with Bill. I'm currently a university student in the US and my viewpoint is that Obama is doing all he can, given the brain-dead bipartisanship here in the US, to enact policies that would protect the middle class. And please, don’t say that’s being a socialist, otherwise there’s no point in our democratic government. I sincerely hope that you and all the tea party movement members would definitively and clearly explain what Obama is doing that is so wrong. Don’t just say Obama has “weird agendas”, explain why they are weird! Is it healthcare reform? Well, the US healthcare system was and is still deeply dysfunctional. Doctors commit too much money on administrative fees, private health insurance companies charge as much as possible to provide as little care as possible, private insurance companies don’t insure those with pre-existing conditions, we lose our insurance as soon as we move or lose our jobs, etc. It’s ridiculous. And the government doesn’t have the power to make us have healthcare insurance? Well, everyone’s already required to have auto insurance and for good reason, right? That’s just one example. There’s no way that I could believe that Obama would spend so much time on the healthcare bill to screw Americans. You might say that Obama is being manipulated by special interests, but as a young America I have more faith in my president than that. Is there any way for you to do the same, Bill? Seriously and sincerely, I wonder.
Complain about this comment
24. At 10:43pm on 07 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:
“The world should never underestimate the will and power of the American people. We are stirring from our slumber. The Giant is awakening and he ain't very happy.”
He also ain’t very well educated and ain’t able to tell propaganda from reality. I was fortunate to go to a high school that taught Civics, Problems of Democracy and how to identify propaganda. I had some of my mother’s teachers so their program was very classical. I also learned to read and write fairly well.
I can watch neither FOX nor CNN because the propaganda is so obvious, not to mention destructive. The giant may be awakening, but has been so dumbed down [by left and right] that the result is likely to be destructive rage, not constructive change. I have to say that the people at CNN do a slicker and less obvious line of propaganda. FOX is just painfully, obviously right-wing.
Complain about this comment
The historical situation after the Second World War created an American economic domination of trade and manufacturing. It was essentially unchallenged and the great post-war boom surged through a country and it was as if it could never end. It has. We are now living on the credit of other countries and have yet to realize the economic addiction from which we are suffering. No politician of either party can tell the truth to a people who want to spend and consume as they have come to expect it all as a birthright. Americans do not call it greed; they cannot even recognize it. Yet it is here and if one wants to call that reality pessimistic, then so it is.
Complain about this comment
Every empire has a start and then an end. We are now seeing the start of the end of the American Empire. This is inevitable, it happened to every empire that this planet has ever seen. Of course it wont happen at once -it`s going to be as slow a decline as that of the Roman or British empires; but it is starting. And of course for the every American this is a terrible state of affairs; to see ones idol, ones country, brought low, when one has been taught that this would, could, never happen - is always difficult.
Welcome to the club U.S.A.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Emps;
"The Millau bridge in France which u have nothing like in america?"
Cable stayed road bridges? In this tally I count 27 in the US. There are many all over the world.
Here's Millau;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct
Here's a link to 27 of various types in the US.
http://www.johnweeks.com/cablestay/
The design is hardly unique, there are many all over the world. The largest one at the moment happens to be in China.
There is nothing anyone can build anywhere that Americans can't build also. The reverse isn't true. 40 years ago America sent men to the moon and returned them safely...three times. Nobody else has done it even once. There are no non American Microsofts, Apple Computers, Intels, or Advanced Micro Devices just to name a handful of uniquely American technology companies. There simply are no other places that can compete against the US in the vast array of technologies of every type that exists. I thought that was obvious to everyone. I guess the word hasn't reached you yet. BTW, isn't Rolls Royce a German owned company? I heard a program about Rolls Royce automobiles once. It said they bought Borg Warner automatic transmissions made in the USA because they were unsuccessful manufacturing them under license themselves. Theirs wouldn't turn.
Complain about this comment
Well I'm sure you've stopped reading by now, but in case you haven't I'd hate for you to walk away thinking we've ALL given up on optimism - this American still sees more positive than negative in our future. Maybe that's because I'm one of the lucky few recent graduates who did manage to find a job, but still, the real problem here isn't the death of American optimism but the scrambling of the 24-hour news cycle for the next soundbite. News of impending economic disaster is simply more attention-grabbing. Of course it's true that the majority of my fellow graduates are still jobless, but we've been through these cycles before and come out fine (80s, early 00s, the list goes on and on). Having just finished a degree with mostly international students (who by and large are trying to stay in this country I might add), I think all you have to do is look around the world to see that the US doesn't have it so bad: debt and joblessness - look at Europe & Japan; political polarization - better than the political instability seen in so many countries.
As to your polarization comment, that is probably a more worrying trend than the economy. I really don't foresee the problem getting any better, largely because the extremely high mobility rate of the US population means people have started self-sorting themselves into communities they perceive to be politically like-minded, increasing pressure for politicians to pander to the more extreme elements of their respective parties. I would give my personal opinion on how this all started with the Rove-style Republicans, but that would only prove your point coming from a gay urbanite with a master's degree like myself.
Complain about this comment
Americans are always looking for someone else to blame, usually Obama or Clinton or Bush, failing that China, Middle East, the EU, Iraq, Osama.
There is always someone you can pin your problems on if you look hard.
Please excuse the bluntness, but the only way to make progress is to look inside, at the heart of the average person, and see the root cause.
The problem with doing that is what you see is very depressing.
America is driven by greed.
And scariest of all, greed with little or no governance on behaviour combined with unrealistic expectation of entitlement.
Everyone simply wants more than they can afford. Hence the massive debt, leverage and trade shortfall from buying cheap goods from overseas.
Industries that are inefficient (auto, air, manifacturing) or out of control (banking, defense, insurance, real estate) are all horribly slow to reform because unions, staff and owners just want more back than they actually contribute.
The financial crisis was triggered by bankers making massive $ from subprime for doing ... Nothing of value !
In the post-war era, US had everything, and life was great. People came to feel "entitled" to the best standard of living, but the best kept getting better, more pointless and excessive. The work efforts contributed no longer justify the lifestyle.
Less in - More out - It can and will only end badly.
There is nothing Obama, anyone or anything can realistically change to turn the equation the other way.
So its not pessimism, it is just realizing reality.
Complain about this comment
I live in Texas and the only common feeling around here is fear that Obama is going to run this country into the ground. He seems to be doing everything in his power to weaken the USA. We can only hope that come November the Democrats will lose the Majority in the Senate and drop Obama off his high horse.
Complain about this comment
re. 13. NitaG:
There are many US citizens, myself included, who believe that the US should abandon the practice of requiring voters to register a party affiliation. We would like to vote for the candidate best qualified for the job without the limitation of party affiliation in the primaries.
That's a state matter, not a federal matter. Not all states require registration of a party affiliation. Ohio doesn't.
Complain about this comment
33. At 11:33pm on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
"Some of the most powerful people in the world are against us.
Even our own President. We cannot trust the politicians. Many of them have special interests, some even have foreign interests.
So it is up to Americans now to take our country back, state by state.
We cannot rely on politicians to do it for us. We have to replace as many as we can and do it ourselves.
Big govt. is trying to take the power away from the people.
We must make ourselves heard.
We must fight for our country.
We must demand new politicians.
We must stop borrowing money from foreign countries and pay what we owe.
We must put Americans first and foreigners second."
You are so right. I must make one correction though. It is not big Government who is trying to take the power away from the people. It is BIG BUSINESS! They are the ones who are in control of this country. The Banks are at the top of the proverbial food chain. They are the ones who buy and sell politicians and make them do their bidding for them.
One good way to make sure people are not needlessly fired is to make ALL businesses comply with the U.S. Constitution. As it stands now, ALL privately owned businesses are exempt from the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, they can fire at will. Think about that. Everyone else in this country MUST adhere to the basic fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution EXCEPT privately owned businesses. Do you realize that you, or any other American, can legally be fired for posting in this forum if they are not employed by a local, state, or Federal employer and their employer does not like what is being written?
That is how much power they wield.
Our President has very little real power. Most people would be surprised if they knew just how little power the President really has. I think Obama has done a great job considering what was handed to him. It wasn't all Bush's fault either. It has been building up for a while now through reckless management of business ethical rules and more importantly, the lack of. Unfortunately, it will not come to a head until the whole system collapses. I thought that the recent depression/recession would be the wake-up call to many Americans but, it was not. I just hope Obama wasn't installed in our Government to be the fall guy for the whole impending collapse but, something tells me that he was.
Only with the total impending collapse will our Government stop allowing themselves to be bought and sold.
The people will no longer allow it and the new system will no longer have the loopholes that have allowed it in the past. Please read my post #28. Go to the Zeitgeist website on Youtube and see it all for yourself. You will learn more in those 4 hours than from anywhere else on the net, newspapers, T.V. News, or the radio. The first 5 minutes are rather boring but, after a while, it picks up and you will find yourself spellbound. I have seen it at least 5 times and learn something new each time I view it. Bill Clinton is an avid supporter of this site too.
Complain about this comment
re. 17. Gavrielle_LaPoste:
There's been a push for metric every 30 or 40 years here since the system was invented.
The metric system was invented in France in 1791. I don't think there has been a push in the US for that long.
Complain about this comment
re. 21. Worldcitizen1:
General Motors, Ford, and even Chrysler had the know-how and the capital to keep their heads above water but let opportunity after opportunity slip by them.
Actually, Ford started reorganizing and redesigning years ago. It did not take any bailout money because it didn't need it. It's doing just fine.
Complain about this comment
By the time the 2008 US elections were held, many voters told Bush and his cronies that enough is enough hoping for something better. What Obama was campaigning on seemed to make sense especially about curbing waste in government and being transparent.
Today, I look and Obama and our current senators and representatives, and am convinced that they are out to DESTROY America. They are systematically trying to control ALL facets of American life. What about the Internet KILL BILL that was introduced in the senate. There is NO politician alive today that I would trust to shut down the internet "for the good of the people". What about their bill to concerning your 401k. Eventually you are going to have to turn your 401k money over to the Feds in return for worthless US government bonds. Obuma said that he would bring the troops back asap but knows that he cannot. Can you imagine what would happen to our current level of unemployment if all of those troops returned next month? What about the jobs created by the US feeding the war machine. We are printing worthless flat money like it is going out of style just to keep the war machine going. Most of our elected representatives in Washington could care less about what we say. Harry Reid said it best when he said something to the effect that he could not stand the "smell" of the American people walking thru the walls of congress. Finally, Obuma and company are in the process of dismantling the American Constitution. Need I say more as to why I am pessimistic?
Complain about this comment
What a load of BS. Pessimism was rampant in the Bush years. Even though the economy was relatively healthy, analysts always talked it down. The second Bush recession was barely a real recession, but it was reported like the Great Depression. Day after day there were stories about an impending recession. Stories of encampments of the unemployed......
As for partisanship, was the writer in a coma through the Bush years? The right is just giving the left a taste of their own medicine.
Partisanship and political pessimism are nothing new in America. This has been going on for years. If anything, it's milder now. The only difference is Mardell was more comfortable when it was a republican dealing with the attacks.
Complain about this comment
Translation:
Even Mardell's small circle liberal circle of friends have lost faith in Obama's ability to lead.
Complain about this comment
@ #43.
This is the end of the "American Empire"????? America's economy alone makes up 25% of the world's economy. Which is basically equal to the entire European continent. With world wide trade these days, the entire world is connected to the USA and if it goes down, a world wide depression would be a huge understatement. People hoping for America's demise need a reality check. Besides, would the people of Earth want a world with no police force? I doubt it. If this is the beginning of the end (caused by Obama), it will be a very slow demise and the entire world will feel the effects.
Complain about this comment
Two words for the politicians, term limits.
Complain about this comment
With our endless supply of optimism also came our desire to live above our means. For the past 30 years Americans have lived for the day and gave little thought for tomorrow. Well tomorrow has arrived. We are so inundated with the latest fad and the newest trend that we have forgotten what made America great. Hard Work, Perseverance and a little Sacrifice.
It is now time to teach a whole generation of our citizens to come to grip with terms they have heard, but do not fully understand. Unfortunately, this is going to take some pain. For the first time in a century, America will have a generation of children that will not live better than their parents. We are likely to see some deflation, wage contraction as well as a reduction in the standard of living. This may not be so bad if we can properly define the term "Living".
America needs to come to understand, that there is a bigger world out there and we are just a part of it. Learning this now would make us better citizens of this planet and allow us to learn to cherish what we once had.
Complain about this comment
"At 9:20pm on 07 Jul 2010, diverticulosis wrote:
At 9:06pm on 07 Jul 2010, rodidog wrote:
"Once upon a time when I was living in Houston, the city changed the speed limit signs over to metric. Folks saw 50 and stepped on it! That lasted about a week. "
By step on it, I hope you mean the brake. 50Km/hr is about 31 miles/hour."
diverticulosis... no. Slow down and think about it for a minute. The signs were previously in miles/hour, by your estimates ~30mph. Then, the signs get changed to the equivalent in km/hour (50km/h). Obviously, the increase in number (30 to 50) would cause people to tend to speed up rather than slow down.
Complain about this comment
NBC and ABC are more likely to swing to the left.
They seem to mostly be unwilling or unable to show any of the negative effects of the illegals. Definite propaganda.
CBS is more balanced, although not always.
CBS busted a resort in the South that was hiring illegals to do pay at a low wage and within a week the resort replaced them with American workers hired for at least minimum wage.
CNN just loves any breaking news. They want to be the first. You gotta watch Turner. He owns a large piece of land in the West that sits on a large water reserve. He has bought state buffalos, which the state was forced to sell because they could not take care of them. He wants to make them buy back the buffalo offspring.
FOX although seemingly right wing, has a parent company owned by Murdock. Murdock, along with several other large corporations, wants to give citizenship to the illegals.
So, as someone who does not want to give citizenship to the illegals, I am neither rightwing nor left. I am Independent.
Complain about this comment
After reading the comments, it's become painfully clear Americans have forgotten their high school economics class.
Governments have two basic tools for regulating their economies, Monetary Policy and Keynesan Theory. Usually monetary policy is all that is needed. It is the raising and lowering of the interest rate and also inserting or extracting money into the supply to put the brakes on or to rev-up the economy. About Election Day 2008 the Fed Reserve lower the interest rate as low at it would go and still the economy continued to collapse. So when Obama reached office, he only had one tool left in at his disposal - Keynesan Theory. Keynesan theory says that when a recession/depression is severe enough that it does not self-correct and a government must supplement contracting private spending with public spending to keep people in jobs and money flowing. The only problem was the previous Bush Administration had already almost maxed the proverbial government credit card on a pointless war in Iraq.
So Obama inherited a No-Win situation. Rack up massive bills pursuing Keynesan Theory or let the country slide into a massive recession/depression and wonder how we'll get out of it. You can elect a Republican in 2012 if you want but that person will have the same constraints Obama does. So the United States is finally getting the posponed credit card bill and is a bit down in the mouth. Seems natural enough to me.
Complain about this comment
51. At 01:41am on 08 Jul 2010, timohio wrote:
"re. 17. Gavrielle_LaPoste:
There's been a push for metric every 30 or 40 years here since the system was invented.
The metric system was invented in France in 1791. I don't think there has been a push in the US for that long."
Personally, I feel that it is not that Americans don't want to use the metric system but, that our Government doesn't want it. It would cost billions and billions of Dollars to change every sign in this country ovet to metric and I think it is too daunting for our Government to be bothered with.
I think that is it in a nutshell.
Complain about this comment
Americans are not optimistic about our future. We are not optimistic that Obama has the best interest of the American people. I certainly am not optimistic for our future nor the future of Western Countries.
An example, Obama has been espousing Green Technology means American jobs. The U.S. Feds just awarded a Madrid, Spain company to build a Solar Power Plant South of Phoenix, AZ. This will spur 2,000 construction jobs. While 2,000 jobs are appreciated, an American company could have been awarded the billions in subsides granted to this foreign company. We are waiting to judge if the 2,000 construction jobs will be for native born Americans or will they be filled by the Illegal invader. As for the number of jobs that it will create after the plant is in use, not that many (will take what we can get). We are not ungrateful.
Your article hits the nail on the head. We have become consumers and not manufacturers. Our American companies have been allowed to relocate to other countries. America is paying a real price for this.
I will add that other Western countries are feeling the pinch for its actions and inactions with regard to moving its base industries to other countries.
Personally this Global Economy "thinghy" is not working out well.
Complain about this comment
Yes, the people are gloomy because the economy is gloomy. Let us be honest to ourselves and stop blaming Obama. This economy was already ruined beyond repairs by George W.Bush. He was interested in fighting wars and nothing else. He never understood the relationship between wars and failed economies- not even thinking of the economic consequences of fighting two wars at the same time. Each of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan costs about one trillion USD; thereby posting a cost of about two trillion dollars yearly for the two wars. No economy can survive two long wars as we have now. The money needed to stimulate the economy is burnt daily by the barrels of gun in Iraq and Afghanistan. The failed economy is the immediate legacy of George Bush.
Obama must save his presidency by resorting to a radical solution - stop the two wars and bring the soldiers home and rebuild the economy. Once the two wars stop, the economy will bounce back to a great amplitude not just for America but for the whole world. Where are the so called great economists in America? Can they not tell the nation and the president that the wars are retarding the economy and will push the economy into further depression?
Complain about this comment
45 MarcusAureliusII:
"BTW, isn't Rolls Royce a German owned company?"
If you're thinking of the mark (car) then yes, the mark was sold to Volkswagen. Made sense as RR cars never made serious money.
The marine and aerospace part of the company (the ones that make money) remain a British company.
" It said they bought Borg Warner automatic transmissions made in the USA because they were unsuccessful manufacturing them under license themselves. Theirs wouldn't turn."
Ah yes, Borg Warner - how I love that company! Their incompetence contributed to my bonus for a number of years!
Complain about this comment
Well obviously the U.S. is still in a precarious situation with unemployment headed up - housing prices still on the decline. What can Obama do but hope for the impossible? But like pointed out in the article, world competition is too tough to match in the manufacturing sector, w/ only a few exceptions: Google, Apple, etc. With the consumer sector of the economy on it's last breath, the U.S. may be required to withdraw into itself; i.e., protect local markets, etc. w/ regulations which will leave the rest of the world to their own devices and no help in financing economic expansion. IF only Obama would take note of some of FDR's New Deal type programs. Concentrating on infrastructure and moving away from oil and towards true energy independence - but all of this will have to be funded by the American taxpayers (no deficit spending). It is like stopping world wide global warming = an enormous undertaking.
Complain about this comment
61. At 02:25am on 08 Jul 2010, ScottL wrote:
"So Obama inherited a No-Win situation. Rack up massive bills pursuing Keynesan Theory or let the country slide into a massive recession/depression and wonder how we'll get out of it. You can elect a Republican in 2012 if you want but that person will have the same constraints Obama does. So the United States is finally getting the posponed credit card bill and is a bit down in the mouth. Seems natural enough to me."
Bravo!
You hit the nail right on the head.
Complain about this comment
51. At 01:41am on 08 Jul 2010, timohio wrote:
The metric system was invented in France in 1791. I don't think there has been a push in the US for that long.
I believe the first one was around 1800, but not led by the government - as most of them weren't - but by francophile newspapers and publications. Of which, as you might recall, there were many given our relationship with France post-Revolution. And only recently there was some talk after Obama was elected about reviving the idea. That was shelved for lack of either will or interest. I'm sure someone, somewhere in the next decade or so will come up with the bright idea again. Probably on the grounds that it will make us more competitive, as the buzz words go. Only to torture small school children by devoting a whole semester to learning the metric system - which they will promptly forget after passing the test, just as I did in the 70s.
Complain about this comment
62. At 02:29am on 08 Jul 2010, Worldcitizen1 wrote:
Personally, I feel that it is not that Americans don't want to use the metric system but, that our Government doesn't want it. It would cost billions and billions of Dollars to change every sign in this country ovet to metric and I think it is too daunting for our Government to be bothered with.
Nope, it's us. The government actually did change just about every sign in the country back in the day. They set aside a whole decade for the changeover in 1975 and to make us fully metricized by 1985 they even provided subsidies and incentives to manufacturers to change bottle sizes, packaging and labels. Where do you think the 2 litre soda bottle came from? That's about the only thing Americans decided they liked about the metric system. "Bigger bottles for the same price as before? Nice!" To quote my mother at the time.
Complain about this comment
SHEESH! This is NOT pessimism! At most, what the USA is going through is a little uncertainty about the future. There is a big difference between nervousness and the committed belief that things can not and will not get better.I simply haven't seen any of this pessimism that has been reported here.
I suspect it is more wishful thinking on the part of those who dislike the USA and Americans in general. Or maybe some sort of psychological projection on the part of Europeans who see their European Union and currency at risk because of their untenable spending habits.
When it comes to hitting rock bottom, that is a race I suspect Europe will win.
Complain about this comment
The idea that the success of any economy can be defined solely on the basis of its exports to other countries reminds me of the days of communism when the USSR acted as a parasite on the back of its other member countries. America and Americans to be successful must seek first to put their individual houses in order - like any and every other country and stop blaming other nations for its own failures. Every nation needs as much as is possible to be self sustaining - to produce as much of its own power as is possible - to produce its own livestock and food productions, to invest in its own abilities and support its own industry. Everyone can help in this endeavour but dependancy on imported goods and imported commodities, imported energy supplies and imported essentials make America vulnerable to the fluctuations of world economic stability.
Complain about this comment
In the USA today there does exist a divide between two very different views of the fundamental purpose of government. One view, shared by the current president and the vast majority of the mass media, is that the government should try to solve all the problems of society. In other words "Big Government". The proponents of this view of government are intelligent, sincere people, who view the constitution as interpreted with their ends in mind. The other group views the government to be limited to those responsibilities specifically detailed in the constitution. In other words " little government" The proponents of little government are also intelligent, sincere people who believe that society is better served with the least interference of government.
In a nut shell, Big Government people believe that humane nature is basically unselfish, with people wanting to care about the bigger good before their own self interest. Small government people believe that people are generally self interested and that policies of government should be strictly constitutional and bear in mind the self interested humane nature. Which do you believe about humane nature? Not what do you want to believe about humane nature!!
Complain about this comment
Dear Scott0962 (and all your peers out there),
Perhaps you've forgotten like most of the rest of the country, but Bush (that's right, "Gee Dubya") is the one who ordered the bailout--right before leaving office--and saddled Obama with it. If you want change, you first have to be willing to turn down the volume on your own biases and look at the truth--which more often than not will not resemble anything you've assumed.
Yes, America is pessimistic... but probably for the wrong reasons. Here are my reasons:
Americans have stopped thinking for themselves. They let news media and politicians (neither of whose agendas are *for* the people) tell them what to think instead, because, you know, it's just so annoying to have to think about reality. Why not pay someone else to do it?
The second problem is that while most Americans want to think of themselves as heroes, in fact if it can't be done in the drive-thru or on Twitter, they can't be bothered. Because I mean like, you know, the world is waiting to find out that we're rilly bored standing in line to buy a snow cone, right?
I'd say these are our biggest problems, and Obama cannot solve them.
Complain about this comment
Maybe the u.s can stop giving money to afghan warlords . that would be a start. the 2 wars are costing the u.s billions each month and british and u.s troops are dying for a complete lost cause. or maybe to fill the pockets of war mongers and oil companies.
Complain about this comment
#45, Marcus:
I don't doubt the ingenuity and the strength of research and development in the US, but to say that the US is the only country in the world able to provide an intel or an AMD is not true. By sales, Intel has a market share of 14%, but among the first ten companies the US is neck to neck with Japan. Even more, if you go to companies that provide technology for the semiconductor industry, again a country like Japan fares well when compared with the US, notwithstanding the role of Applied Materials as a leader in that market. You can find several classifications in many places, including wikipedia.
US is still a leader in research, but that position is being eroded and that trend will not change, because nothing is done to reverse it. As an anecdote, if 10 years ago most of grads students from all over the world that came to the US chose to become professors or joined the industry, nowadays many of them are going back to their countries. There are plenty of opportunities out there, and the US is not the paradise that it once used to be, it seems.
Complain about this comment
69. At 03:21am on 08 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:
"Nope, it's us. The government actually did change just about every sign in the country back in the day."
Well, I have been driving since 1978, while still in school, and I don't remember seeing anything metric in the Northeastern part of the country. Back then, I was restricted to just Connecticut but, I used to sneak around to New York City with my friends and as far as New Hampshire. We, as a family, would get into the car and drive thousands of miles together during the Summer. If there were metric signs, I am sure I would have noticed them. The only thing metric I remember seeing is the metric K.P.H. that was included on the speedometer on my Mother's "79" Malibu. Even then, the regular M.P.H. was made to appear more important. On the car I have now, I actually have to press the metric button for everything to convert. As far as the soda is concerned, it is not a big issue. That was taken in stride by everyone. At the supermarket, everything is still in pounds and ounces where I shop. In fact, I'm looking at my snack for the evening: Jumbo Chocolate Covered Cashews, net WT. 11.5 OZ. (326 g).
I'd like to know where you live so as to know where the Interstate signs were changed to metric. I'm not calling you a liar. Don't get me wrong. I am just curious. It never occurred here in New England.
Complain about this comment
Totally agree with Patrick - blog item 27.
Complain about this comment
65. At 03:00am on 08 Jul 2010, ninetofivegrind wrote:
45 MarcusAureliusII:
"BTW, isn't Rolls Royce a German owned company?"
It does not matter that the Germans own Rolls Royce. The fact of the matter is that it belongs in England, NOT with anyone else. It will be a happy day for all interested if the British Government purchases the Rolls Royce motor car company, regardless of price, and keeps it as the national treasure that it is/was. I am certain that the majority of the British wouldn't mind if the company wasn't subsidized to some degree in order to keep it running. Now that Rolls Royce knows what to do to keep it profitable, I am sure that the company would do well without any help.
When people think of Great Britain, they naturally think of:
#1). The Monarchy.
#2). The Royal Navy.
#3). Rolls Royce.
#4). Tea.
#5). Jaguar, Range Rover, Triumph, M.G., etc...
It has always been dificult to criticize the British Government as it usually does was is correct for all involved but, allowing the Rolls Royce to leave the hands of the British made no sense when it could have hired people to go into the company and then paid to have things changed to turn it into a profitable entity. In the long run, this would have seemed to be the way to go. The same can be said of Jaguar and Range Rover.
Rolls Royce is BRITISH and belongs back in England!
Complain about this comment
45 MAII Wrote,
There are no non American Microsofts, Apple Computers, Intels, or Advanced Micro Devices
============
Maybe u have never heard of Foxcon, the asian manufacturer of most of these products.(less intel, a company born long after micro technology was explained to the early Silicon Valley hopefuls,by the so called Fairchild's Fairchildren from Britain).
To qualify my statement re the Millau bridge,show me any anywhere in the world a bigger bridge. There is non, not even in China.
Complain about this comment
38 Oldloader Wrote,
Did you know that Einstein became a naturalized American Citizen?
==========
Now i do recall that fact and of course am also aware that most american achievements in industry, health,research etc, etc,have always been created by imported European Brains. Born americans should feel priviliged that Europeans have taught them all they know.
Complain about this comment
#61 Scotl,
Keynesian theory follows the idea of the "circular flow of money". When you spend money, you're paying for my earnings. When I spend money, I pay for your earnings. A recession occurs when one of us begins to hoard our money, which begins a vicious cycle. To cure this, Keynesian theory calls for increasing the money supply. A depression is when we continue to hoard our money regardless of the increased money supply. Keynesian theory calls for government spending to "prime the pump" and reestablish the "circular flow of money".
You stated that Obama is now left with following the Keynesian theory. My question is, did/is he? IMO, the vast majority of government spending under Obama has not been targeted towards "priming the pump" of our economic engine and reestablishing the "circular flow of money" according to Keynesian theory. Instead, the majority of spending has been targeted towards entitlements and propping up state budgets. The former decreases our discretionary spending while the later is just a temporary fix. Both increase the debt and neither primes the pump.
Complain about this comment
78 Worldcitizen1:
"Rolls Royce is BRITISH and belongs back in England!"
Please see my post #65. RR is still a British company and is a leading manufacturer in civil and defense aerospace, marine propulsion, energy and nuclear technology as well as services.
The RR car was always a sideshow for the engineering firm and was rightly sold off in order for the firm to concentrate on its primary businesses - as a shareholder I fully endorsed this approach.
Jaguar have never made any money so if the Americans (Ford) and now the Indians (Tata) want a go at buying a brand that will lose them money then go right ahead...
Complain about this comment
76. At 03:57am on 08 Jul 2010, Worldcitizen1 wrote:
I'd like to know where you live so as to know where the Interstate signs were changed to metric. I'm not calling you a liar. Don't get me wrong. I am just curious. It never occurred here in New England.
At the time of the changeover I was living in New York City, where I was born. Local municipalities were responsible for physically changing the signage, though I'm sure many also didn't bother and waited to see what happened before spending the money, because the whole thing really was voluntary. Most places at the time also only changed the distance signs, rather than the speed limit signs. As someone pointed out earlier, many people didn't realize those signs were KM/h even with the word METRIC written in large yellow letters above the number.
Btw, if you look at the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, you'll find examples of what are meant to be US metric road signs that were designed back in the day and can still be used, because it is not illegal for local municipalities or the various states in the US to post road signs in metric. They could if they wanted to. Most simply don't. Although I have heard that in some areas dual signage seems to be making something of a comeback.
Pockets of the old signage can still be found around the country. I believe there's a highway in Delaware that still has all the old dual signage, and Arizona's road signage is still all in metric. The New York City signage disappeared pretty quickly. As I recall, by the 1990s no new dual signage was being put up and the old signage was being taken down - or had been stolen by thieves as mementos.
Complain about this comment
79 Emps,
"To qualify my statement re the Millau bridge,show me any anywhere in the world a bigger bridge. There is non, not even in China"
I think you mean tallest, because it is by no means the longest or biggest.
Below are just a few examples of larger bridges:
Suspension Bridges:
The Akashi-Kaikyō Bridge (Japan)
The Xihoumen Bridge (China)
Cable-Stayed Bridges:
The Sutong Bridge (China)
The Pont de Normandie (France)
Complain about this comment
"Obama did when he bailed out GM and Chrysler..." Is this person serious? the bailout was committed to before Obama was elected for one thing. Another thing is that the deficit is being run by the credit payment for the wars in iraq and afghanistan, with not one WMD or bin Laden to show for it, and plenty of ill will.
It's not pessimism. The haves want Obama to fail. Could be racism, but it's likely just good old fascism and greed.
Complain about this comment
See all the comments from my fellow Americans in this blog and you will understand why the US is where it is today. It is good to have national pride what has brought the US to the number one position. Now that pride has clearly turned into a habitual arrogance. Look at the silly excuses for not being able to adopt metric system and for having polarized society and justification for personal adherence to one of the two poles even in this difficult time. It is rightly said that empires are not forever. God bless America.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Many of the problems in the US at the moment are exacerbated by partisan polarization. A case in point is the comment in this section by scott0962. Like many, he has a short memory when it comes to events. The Chrysler and GM bailout deals were initiated as part of a much larger bailout under the previous Bush administration in the fall of 2008, before Obama came to power. I agree the way the whole thing was handled was wrong, but such deals need to be dispassionately examined. You simply can't do this while wearing partisan blinkers. The woes present in the system in the US today need to be looked at in the cold light of day in terms of dollars and cents and regulatory issues, not whether you are red or blue.
Complain about this comment
The United States has been hijacked by a consortium of Wall Street and Big Business. The Republican and Democrat parties no longer represent the American people. Both parties are slaves to big business. The most recent demonstration of that fact is the complete and utter failure of government to effect any true reform of a very corrupt financial system. Capitalism tends towards monopoly and we are seeing the monopolization of America by a small number of the very wealthy. Both parties engage in polemics, hate and fear mongering as a substitute for governing, which they no longer have the power to do. The real power lies with their masters. Americans have by and large become a nation of watchers and blamers. And we are watching and blaming as our country declines into an oligarchy of the wealthy. We will continue to do nothing as our once magnificent country rots around us- all the time blaming some delusional figment of our imaginations for everything that has gone wrong.
We have strayed too far from the ideals that made us great. We have done a poor job of protecting our heritage. Our institutions of capitalism and democracy no longer serve to benefit the many, they have become the playthings of the cynical and corrupt few.
Complain about this comment
79. At 04:19am on 08 Jul 2010, Emps wrote:
You seem to be quite impressed by the achievements of the Asians. There biggest invention however, is the invention of paper. They basically improved upon products that were already being produced. A small country can be concerned with quality because they have a HUGE market to sell to. They don't have to be as concerned, as the Americans were, in terms of replacement parts, that made up as much as 60% of the profits at G.M. and Ford.
The Japanese and the Germans were interested in volume and long term owner commitment and achieved that.
American and British auto manufacturers were interested in keeping as many people employed as possible. Parts were made to wear at a quicker rate so as to keep more people employed. They have been forced to change because of the competition. We are seeing the end result now. Thousands of auto workers out of work and a strong following for Japanese and German automobiles. When some Americans and some of the British snubbed their noses at their own products, they also snubbed their noses at their own jobs which are closely associated with the auto manufacturers in more ways than they thought.
Alas, not everything that the Asians do turn out to be successful. The relatively new Kansai airport in Osaka, Japan is sinking and there does not seem to be a plausible remedy in sight.
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/kansaiairport.htm
Complain about this comment
84 Rodidog Wrote,
I think you mean tallest, because it is by no means the longest or biggest.
OK i wont split hairs, and having been over both,the Millau certainly was taller and longer than the Normandy bridge
Complain about this comment
82. At 04:41am on 08 Jul 2010, ninetofivegrind wrote:
"The RR car was always a sideshow for the engineering firm and was rightly sold off in order for the firm to concentrate on its primary businesses - as a shareholder I fully endorsed this approach."
I understand your view. I just don't agree with it.
Lee Iacocca was able to secure a loan for the faltering Chrysler corporation and turned the auto maker into a profitable company again. Although Chrysler is having financial troubles again, it is still employing thousands of workers. That is what is important.
With Rolls Royce, keeping it going was just as important but, in a different way.
Rolls Royce is a national icon.
It would be like our Government allowing China to purchase and dismantle the entire Grand Canyon and haul it away.
I feel that the Government of Britain should have hired experts to evaluate and make changes that could have made it a profitable company. Rolls Royce, out of tradition, never advertised their products. In today's world of hyped-up media advertising, Rolls Royce simply became forgotten, even by the people who could have afforded one. They have never had any major quality problem. They were simply over-shadowed by the thousands of well advertised luxury autos. They needed a complete update too. There again, is where the hired experts could have helped.
I guess, in this case, hindsight is 20/20 but, I would have thought there would have been more attention paid to protecting such a national icon. It would be nice to see it again in the hands of the British people even if most of the British could never afford one. It is a great source of pride for anyone of English descent and it should have been ESPECIALLY to the British.
It needs to be returned.
Complain about this comment
JMM,
Destructive or constructive rage will lead to change nonetheless. There's hope in change. I used the word "ain't" in a low brow manner because it was directed at you. The word "ain't" is an informal expression. A short form of am not, is not, are not, has not, or have not. Put that in your Mark Twain corn cob pipe and smoke it!
Complain about this comment
Peclet;
There are semiconductors and there are semiconductors. Intel may have 14% of the market share but when it comes to CPU chips, Silicon Valley based companies have 100% of the market share. without the CPUs the rest is meaningless. I do understand that the denizens of Silicon Valley does have some competition in high tech and its companies are relying on exploiting it and that is Israel. BBC reports tonight that Israel is big in high tech, especially startup companies and relies on Israeli Engineers and scientists to help it develop cutting edge technology. Perhaps this also explains the US military's close association and cooperation with Israel.
Complain about this comment
The election of a virtually unknown candidate with a bland (at best) voting record, without thoroughly investigating their past or demonstrated ideology, probably illustrates how desperate were the electorate for change, ANY change in November 2008.
The weakness of the alternative candidate that personifies "business as usual" coupled with unprecedented control of a partisan mainstream media certainly created the conditions for the one party dominance that has made a bad situation much worse.
It is of concern to many U.S. citizens that, if not for a few "renegade" media outlets and the blogosphere, they would not have been aware of the extreme Obama agenda. There is now a great deal of anger and resentment directed at the mainstream media, as an evident left wing bias compromised their role as watchdogs against government excess.
IF people in the U.S. are generally pessimistic, it is probably because they feel powerless, they feel they have been deceived and are now unable (or unwilling) to trust government. Perhaps these past two years have, at last, galvanized a population that was apathetic and even lazy in the political sense.
The November mid-term elections will be very telling about the mood and expectations of the U.S. people.
Complain about this comment
Correction on #90:
Sorry Emps. I meant to snip off the "wrote" part. It was meant to be a post to you, not a text of what you have written.
It's late and I guess I am tired.
Don't be too upset as I am on rather strong medication for ruptured discs. Normally, I have to re-read everything two or three times, make corrections, and then finally hit the "post".
Complain about this comment
I don't think we're pessimists. My opinion is that we Americans need another Revolution. The precedent for governmental change was even set in the Declaration of Independence. We need to save ourselves, and that simply will not happen by keeping the status quo, letting the politicians impose their will on us and meekly accept it like a herd of sheep. George Washington can almost be said to be a "political prophet." In his Farewell Address, he warned of the dangers of political parties (he was not a member of any party), of the governmental system regulating itself out of usefulness, and of the greedy and corrupt taking offices and turning the country to their personal gain. Case in point: our politicians today see their positions as basically a birthright. They deem themselves America's "elite," and even believe that they must "save" us, The People, from ourselves. How ridiculous is that? When our Republic was formed (no, people, we are NOT a democracy in the true sense of the word) George Washington did not want to be President; he even stated that he was unfit for the job. Of course, he had said the same thing about being named Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, too. But he saw the job as a DUTY, not as a RIGHT. He specifically warned against letting the wealthy (which he was) vie for positions because they were too greedy to the job properly. No, he didn't WANT to be President, he was simply afraid that his peers would have been so biased to one side or the other that the new Republic would be torn apart before it even had a chance to fully form. He set precedent for everything from term limits (he only served two terms) to even the formal address of the President; of more lofty, regal-sounding terms suggested, he preferred a simple "Mr. President." If our forefathers were aware of how the country is run today, they'd be puking in their graves! No, if Americans were pessimistic, we'd be run my a plutocracy or autocracy or even have gone crawling back to beg the Crown's forgiveness. But we are optimists, we always believe that tomorrow will be better than today, and that we will somehow make things better. Problem is, we keep thinking only certain, "special, privileged" people are allowed to run the government; what we need is a return to basics, and people who see service in a political office as a duty, maybe even a burden, but CERTAINLY not a "right!"
Complain about this comment
The only manufacturing the US is efficient in is in the production of weapons! And the only reason that is successful is because they are also the biggest end users of those products.
Complain about this comment
I am pessimistic about America's World Cup side, but not about its political system. The electorate may not have got what it wanted in 2012... the idealistic Obama proclaimed by his speeches... but it got what it expected... the orthodox liberal Obama predicted by his Senate voting record. Assuming that the Republicans nominate someone like Palin in 2012 and neither Tel Aviv nor New York are glowing in the dark (courtesy of Iran) by then, Obama will be comfortably re-elected in 2012 but the Democrats will lose the White House to someone better than Palin in 2016.
Complain about this comment
Many of us here in America feel our individuality is under attack by the current administration more than any other time. Us libertarians, constitutionalists & independents are outraged at everything from the recent dismissal of the case of the black panthers, obama's incompetence on the oil spill, his assult on the free market and the ridiculous healthcare plan. No phantom government comforts can buy our sovereignty this quote from Thomas Paine holds true for us - He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. Obama's class warfare efforts dont work on all of us, we arent for sale and reject this authoritarian nanny government. Pessimism? that is putting it lightly.
Complain about this comment
America and the rest of the Western World, has spent the last three decades exporting their jobs to the developing world in the name of globalization. Those jobs have now gone for good and the developed world is poorer for it. Globalization has been, and will continue to be, a disaster for the working class of the West.
Complain about this comment
Im a British ex-pat working and living in Dubai, I work in recruitment for the real estate industry. So I know first hand about the hardships people are facing in loosing jobs currently; a large number of my candidates are American citizens either already working in the Middle East or looking to leave the US for better prospects abroad.
It endlessly amazes me reading some of the comments that come after these sort of posts about how America is struggling under the weight of its debt or that there is general pessimism in the country and how quickly it comes straight back to how bad Obama is and his socialistic ways of government. Surely even to the most casual of viewers its obvious that the US debt has grown and grown since the 50’s with no administration willing or able to make the tough choices that will address the problem. This is only been added to by a grossly mismanaged Afghan conflict that has rumbled on for 10 years and an unneeded and essential illegal war in Iraq, thus literally throwing away trillions (trillions!!!!!) of dollars. This has nothing to do with the current administration who is trying to pull the country out of Iraq as soon as possible and look at an end game in Afghan.
Reading some of the blatantly Republican views on this page just makes me feel sad for the state of the US at the moment. As appose to working in unity for a greater cause it seems people are more interested at pointing a misguided finger of blame at a government that was not in anyway responsible for the market crash!! On top of that people talk about the money that was put into saving the US car industry??? While it was badly managed in terms of offering a product the market was obviously no longer requiring it is still the keepsake of US industry and the provider of the one thing people say there doesn’t seem to be in the US right now……jobs!
So you talk of pessimism Mark and I can only agree with you. But it’s a more general pessimism for the human race that as appose to trying to sort out its problems honestly and practically it would rather play the blame and the ‘who dunnit’ game!!! The US, Israel/Palestine, Afghan/Pakistan, Kashmir………the list could go on!
God save us all!!!!
Complain about this comment
I was in Texas last year and was surprised at the lack of optimism that people showed. Texans are not easily stymied, but after Enron and after Bush was finally out of office, I noticed that my formerly so cheery Texans seemed rather worried about the future.
Wasn't it Franklin D. Roosevelt who said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself?"
This said, I now live in Denmark, where Søren Kirkegaard long before FDR wrote about The Nature of Angst.
And my guess is that some of us have been too fat and happy too long and we have not made the changes that the Earth needs.
So I can only applaud Queen Elizabeth II, who spoke to the UN General Assembly and named climate change as a major problem.
As a middle aged woman, I believe that climate change and the inequality of women are, along with wars and famines our biggest challenges.
Solutions? Radical Changes in our Habits of Consumption and Education!
Complain about this comment
94. At 06:14am on 08 Jul 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
"There are semiconductors and there are semiconductors. Intel may have 14% of the market share but when it comes to CPU chips, Silicon Valley based companies have 100% of the market share. without the CPUs the rest is meaningless."
Once again, a mindless, and wildy approximate version of the facts.
The CPU market is NOT a competitive market - consumers are not free to go use another CPU manufacturer - compatability issues make this impossible. Consumers are not buying US chips because they are any good - they are buying US chips because the expensive hardware and software they have bought will only run on US made chip.
Next you'll be telling us that US companies have created 100% of the computer operating systems used around the world. Or maybe it'll be mobile telephones next. Or satellites. Or cars.
Complain about this comment
America has the capacity and vision to bring about the changes that are needed to turn around their economy. American technology is still amongst the best in the world and can compete on the world stage. However with emerging nations now far better educated and willing to work for a pittance and able to produce quality goods that the world wants, America along with the rest of the Western economies are up against it.
President Obama's vision to create more green jobs is indeed a good start, when you consider the lack of investment in solar energy in a country that can benefit so much from it. In Cyprus there is not a house built that does not employ a solar panel for heating it's domestic water. Perhaps one of the highest consumers of power in a household and yet I have failed to see any in North Carolina when I was there.
So where does America go from here. I firmly believe it needs to radically think it's foreign policy and commitments. The cold war is over and major savings could be made if it embraced a better realism of America's changing position on the world stage. President Obama engagement with Russia over further reduction in the nuclear stockpile is such a sensible step forward and further gains can and will be made if he is not undermined by those who have but a different agenda. Russia however needs to understand that any concessions made are indeed mutual and Hillary Clinton was correct recently to describe Russia's presence in Georgian breakaway regions as an occupation.
Are the American's pessimistic about their future. I do believe they are and this is based on having been involved recently in two protracted wars and the recession. For America to regain that drive and optimism that has been such an envious facet of American culture, they have to believe. President Obama was voted into office under the banner of change and "yes we can". I do believe they can and this president is the man for the job. The big problem I see is there are so many waiting to trip him up at every turn. I hope the president is able to do what he needs to do and not be sidelined by those who have but their own interests at heart.
Complain about this comment
The defining characteristic of US-Americans is that, by comparison with citizens of all the rich nations, they are, on average, by far the STUPIDEST. By this I mean the least intelligent and the least knowledgeable. Google for hosts of surveys which will confirm this.
(My apologies to the many millions of US-Americans who are not stupid. Their embarrassment at their countrymen usually knows no bounds.)
It serves no purpose, therefore, to over-analyse the cause of national emotions in the USA, for the actions or feelings of the profoundly stupid are subject to an enormous range of influences.
The sad fact is, due to its diminishing but still vast economic power, when the USA sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold.
Complain about this comment
When I was a British kid 50 years ago, America was a nation renowned for hard work and generosity, that stood for democracy and rule of law and helped other nations out of the messes they had made (there were some stains but hey! nobody's perfect).
Bush's America by 2008 was a nation that despised democracy and law anywhere beyond its own borders (maybe even within), thought the world owed it a living and was spending itself into bankruptcy. Struggling with a self inflicted financial crisis, it had also insulted all its friends and got itself embroiled in 2 crazy wars. Don't know what Obama's done wrong to compare with all that.
Oh - and on the metric thing. The USA (5% of world population) is the only major (or minor) non metric country - if you want folks to buy your stuff (which you do to pay for the imports you NEED) it needs to be metric. Sorry.
Complain about this comment
45. At 00:59am on 08 Jul MarcusAureliusII wrote:
>There is nothing anyone can build anywhere that Americans can't build also. The reverse isn't true. 40 years ago America sent men to the moon and returned them safely...three times. Nobody else has done it even once. There are no non American Microsofts, Apple Computers, Intels, or Advanced Micro Devices just to name a handful of uniquely American technology companies. There simply are no other places that can compete against the US in the vast array of technologies of every type that exists. I thought that was obvious to everyone. I guess the word hasn't reached you yet.
Hilarious! May I have some of what you're smoking? ;-)
The achievements of the USA are usually the achievements of its first-generation immigrants. By the time they stay in the USA for a few generations, their abilities regress to the norm for the USA - i.e., well below the relevant international averages.
The achievements of NASA and of Silicon Valley, which comprise your "evidence" of US superiority, are in fact two examples of what first-generation immigrants to the USA achieved.... ;D
Research the engineers and physicists who delivered the V-1 missile and V-2 rocket for the Nazis, and see where they were taken immediately after the end of World War II, and you'll learn how NASA came to be.
A little knowledge is such a dangerous thing.
Complain about this comment
# 56 TJMGold wrote:
"People hoping for America's demise need a reality check. Besides, would the people of Earth want a world with no police force?"
There's a documentary called 'Team America:World Police' that I think you would enjoy....
Complain about this comment
The key is energy. The nation that comes up with a viable alternative to oil will rule the planet for the next 400 years.
The USA needs is a new "Manhattan Project" which focuses its best and brightest on solving this problem. It should be given top priority and promoted full force.
Surely this is not a new idea. Why can't we focus?
Complain about this comment
I am British, so I know comparatively little of American 'problems'.
One thing seems obvious, however. The USA has reached a critical point of exhaustion of the pile of raw materials - notably oil - it was sitting on.
Whilst the loss of the British Empire is seen by many as a political or social loss, I mean of some mythical grandeur, it was mainly a loss of raw materials at preferential prices.
Perhaps the USA is just going through resource exhaustion with all of the political unpleasantness attendant on it. It certainly stirred things up here politically, perhaps in a similar way to the USA.
If that's true, the USA has to come up with a better idea. I am sure it (collectively) will. It just needs the entrepreneurs to adjust. I doubt that's manufacturing - except in some niche areas or primarily domestic areas where transportation costs are important. Much of the raw materials for that are already nailed down.
I believe people are pretty much the same the world over. We clump into nationalities, which is convenient for various purposes - but we all strive for the same sorts of things in the same sorts of ways. I cannot see the Master Race of US citizens depicted by MarcusAureliusII - any more than most Americans can, I would think.
Complain about this comment
#2
'As a case in point America's automakers can build world class cars--if government would stop telling them what to build and how to run their businesses and let the free market work'.
The 'free market' outside America has decided that American cars aren't worth having. You rarely see any in Europe. Even the Fords and GM's over here are mainly designed and built in Europe.
Complain about this comment
@Mark: "He wants to refocus America, to once again become one of the world's great manufacturers and exporters - rather than just being one of the globe's biggest consumers."
"The heart of the matter being that America doesn't make enough of the goods the world wants to buy."
In order for America to hit Obama's goal, and to again make things that people want to buy, American manufacturing has to be cost-competitive with that from the rest of the world, AND has to produce things that the rest of the world wants. It's possible, but several facts have to be faced.
a. To be cost-competitive, our total expenses (including labor, environmental protection, liability, etc.) have to be in line with (ideally slightly better than) those of other nations. It just can't work any other way. If we are going to consistently spend more on environmental protection because it's important to us, or consistently spend more on labor, then we have to adjust somewhere else. This is pretty simple economics.
b. Unfortunately, our other business costs (enviro protection, liability, etc.) aren't likely to move, which leaves reducing the costs of labor as the chief variable. What this means is that even if we do bring back manufacturing to this country (which I think we should do) the jobs CANNOT and WILL NOT come with it, because we can't be cost-competitive with the US costs of labor. Much of the manufacturing will have to be highly automated to bring the costs anywhere near in line with what the rest of the world can do with their labor force.
c. If we aren't going to increase private-sector jobs with increased manufacturing, then we will have to (a) retrain our adults (as hard as that will be) and (b) ensure that your youth and young adults are already prepared for continuous retraining. This is probably a bigger challenge than dealing with manufacturing, because it's going to require us to stop treating our education system as another "front" in the ongoing Cold Civil War between the partisans of left and right, and start treating it as what it was supposed to be: the vehicle by which we transitioned children into adults prepared and committed to execute the responsibilities of citizenship. It is unclear that we can do this, frankly.
@46 (k): "As to your polarization comment, that is probably a more worrying trend than the economy... I would give my personal opinion on how this all started with the Rove-style Republicans..."
I'd gently suggest that you review your history starting in about 1914, and come forward. Karl Rove was just another "turn of the screw", as is President Obama; there were many, many causes, personalities, and effects that preceeded both of them. The "past ten years" was in far too many cases just an extension of the previous ten years, with only the voices and the directions slightly altered. The past 20 years represent the playing out of events that started in the mid-1960s, with roots extending back into the 50s, 40s, and 30s, and even further back.
@58 (dww):"With our endless supply of optimism also came our desire to live above our means. For the past 30 years Americans have lived for the day and gave little thought for tomorrow."
More like 80 years (Social Security didn't really have a stable funding source), but your point is the correct one. The GAO reminds us repeatedly, as have the Heritage Foundation AND the Pew Research Center (in a joint presentation!), that the unfunded obligations to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid tack on another 43 TRILLION or so on the current debt of about 13 trillion dollars. That reinforces your idea that there will be a generation of Americans that won't live as well as we did. I suspect it will be two or possibly three generations, and the longer we wait to deal with the issue, the harder it's going to be for them. At some point our refusal to act may make it structurally impossible for them to deal with; that prospect should concern all of us.
@47 (x): Very good post.
Arclight
Complain about this comment
Mark, get out and meet some real Americans. Do you really think,
"He wants to refocus America, to once again become one of the world's great manufacturers and exporters - rather than just being one of the globe's biggest consumers."? If that were the case, why wasn't his focus on that instead of of loading us down with untenable debt in order to make us into a socialistic European clone--a prototype that is failing as we speak. Actually, now that we know Obama better, I hope he doesn't try to "mess" with manufacturing in the US. Judging from past performances, he would both take over decision-making and give it to clueless government appointees and unionize putting us even farther behind in exports. Our only hope is the November elections. Most voters aren't polarized by party. How on earth could Obama have been elected had that been the case. Rather, we are polarized by wanting a little common sense put into play. Bills whose sheer size were written to put off anyone actually reading them and confuse those who tried. Every bill (no matter what it is named) has so much trash and pork added that people of conscience cannot support it. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi still think that they can be rammed down our throats. Finally, most of those now in power (especially Republicans) have seen the handwriting on the wall and realize that if they have any chance of re-election, they must oppose Obama's outrageous schemes.
Go out and meet some of the Tea Partiers. (No, I'm not active in them but I do applaud their actions.) Get out of the Northeast and the left coast and talk to people who just want opportunity. We know that businesses--not government--should be making jobs. They can't do it when their hands are tied by taxes, unreasonable healthcare premiums, or by being forced to hire only union workers. Talk to some of those 8 out of 10 who lost their jobs more than a year ago and have still not found work. In other words, meet the real America. We are still optimistic when "the boot is off our necks." (BP, we feel your pain.) After all we felt it first.
Complain about this comment
76. At 03:57am on 08 Jul 2010, Worldcitizen1 wrote:
69. At 03:21am on 08 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote
I won't speak for all of New England, but on the South Shore [MA south of Boston] there were signs in both mi and km or rte. 24, I saw them every day as I commuted to and from college.
Complain about this comment
I think my favourite thing about this blog piece is that Mr Mardell writes, "Is it time to abandon bipolar bipartisanship and for Americans to pick themselves up and dust themselves down?", and the majority of reader comments have mirrored said bipolar bipartisanship.
Complain about this comment
108. At 11:08am on 08 Jul 2010, Wiser than you wrote:
Hilarious! May I have some of what you're smoking? ;-)
The achievements of the USA are usually the achievements of its first-generation immigrants. By the time they stay in the USA for a few generations, their abilities regress to the norm for the USA - i.e., well below the relevant international averages.
----
You really have no clue what you're talking about do you? Check out what percentage of scientific and medical Nobel prizes have gone to Americans over the years. Many if not most winners aren't first generation.
As for regressing to below international averages, sorry to burst your bubble, but the US is the most sought after foreign destination for scientists and college-bound students. Perhaps you should mention to them that the country is regressing. It may change their minds.
Simply put, you believe the US to be inferior even with overwhelming evidence of the opposite, to justify your prejudices for that country.
Complain about this comment
93. At 06:13am on 08 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:
JMM,
"Destructive or constructive rage will lead to change nonetheless. There's hope in change. I used the word "ain't" in a low brow manner because it was directed at you. The word "ain't" is an informal expression. A short form of am not, is not, are not, has not, or have not. Put that in your Mark Twain corn cob pipe and smoke it!"
I was not criticizing your grammar, I was repeating it for effect. I am an English teacher, so if I had intended to criticize the grammar, I would have done so in a professionally trollish manner. I recognized the homage to Samuel Clemmens and participated in it.
My professional opinion matches that of other posters, including the right-of-center engineers. Our education system is failing us, particularly in teaching people to think for themselves especially, IMHO, in politics. Calling Obama a socialist or McCain a nazi is just plain ignorant. It is also destructive.
Complain about this comment
MM: "He [Barack Hussein Osama] wants to refocus America, to once again become one of the world's great manufacturers and exporters - rather than just being one of the globe's biggest consumers."
And what is Barack Hussein doing 'bout that? Specifically?
Complain about this comment
"The 'free market' outside America has decided that American cars aren't worth having."
So all those Hummers, Lincoln Town Cars, Cadillacs, Jeeps Grand Cherokees, Wranglers, Ford Focuses and Mondeos I see in Europe are what?
A fata morgana? :-)
Complain about this comment
94. At 06:14am on 08 Jul 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
"There are semiconductors and there are semiconductors. Intel may have 14% of the market share but when it comes to CPU chips, Silicon Valley based companies have 100% of the market share. without the CPUs the rest is meaningless. "
Think so? I suggest you google a company called ARM Holdings (NASDAQ:ARMH). 1st off they are a British Firm (spun off of Acorn Computers). They are the predominant RISC CPU is mobile devices. The ARM9 is the brains in the IPAD.
Complain about this comment
BTW, isn't Rolls Royce a German owned company? I heard a program about Rolls Royce automobiles once. It said they bought Borg Warner automatic transmissions made in the USA because they were unsuccessful manufacturing them under license themselves. Theirs wouldn't turn.
You're talking about Rolls Royce cars. Rolls Royce which makes Aero engines is a different company. The two were one comapny until the early 1970s when the RB211 aero engine bankrupted the comapny and it needed bailing out. After that it went on to be the main non-US supplier of commercial aero engines.
Complain about this comment
107, John.
"Bush's America by 2008 ... was spending itself into bankruptcy. Struggling with a self inflicted financial crisis, it had also insulted all its friends and got itself embroiled in 2 crazy wars."
Whoa! Europe was also spending itself into bankruptcy, and is suffering the same financial problems we are. As for the crazy wars, I agree with you.
Complain about this comment
94. At 06:14am on 08 Jul 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
Peclet;
There are semiconductors and there are semiconductors. Intel may have 14% of the market share but when it comes to CPU chips, Silicon Valley based companies have 100% of the market share. without the CPUs the rest is meaningless.
I think you'll find that the most widely used microprocessors in the world (used in 98% of mobile phones as well as in PDAs and mbile devices such as iPads) are based on designs made under license from Britain's ARM.
Complain about this comment
The impact of the greatest transfer of wealth upward with the bailout of the banks with no one being held accountable is at the heart of the matter. The President as with Bush, has made no effort to point out or seek accountability on the financial collapse. Of course this is partly because it was all facilitated by Congress. Those who have lost jobs and retirement accounts are angry at not being given answers. The Republicans and their banking friends have protected the interest of the banks while trying to shift the blame to the President..the Republicans have never viewed honesty as an important political tool. Redirect the anger and create divisiveness and protect the bankers, that is their work. The Asian markets are down as well and energy resources will continue to rise in price. Congress is a cesspool of special interest and lobbyist. There is an American sense of fair play and the banking bailout was not fair play as the American people, like peoples of other countries understand political corruption and the influence of wealth, but they also have an expectation that when events like the financial crisis occur that those repsonsible will be held accountable and that has not happened.
Complain about this comment
I am laughing myself silly at all this debate about metric versus imperial units.
I haven't seen anything yet, but I am quite sure that its will, inevitably, become a partisan issue:
1. Someone, somewhere, might dare to suggest its a good idea.
2. Middle-of-the-road politicians will propose soem legislation.
3. The ranting right wing will protest, decrying a loss of freedom, infringment of rights, blah, blah, blah.
4. And the politicians give up.
For example. Roundabouts. Roundabouts everywhere in the rest of the world. They are safer than US stop junctions (forcing drivers to slow down), there are no moving parts, no traffic lights, no electronics, and are almost impossible to vandalise. So they are cheaper to run, do not require cleaning - and can even be used for signposts and advertising.
Alas, the campaign in the US got crazy. "Circles of DEATH". The right wing sneered down their noses, people broke out the US flags, objected to their having "freedoms" infinged, and spread smear stories about roundabouts.
Thie first roundabout in the US was built in 1990, and there are still only 2,300 roundabouts in the US as of Dec 2009. The UK has 25,000 and France has 30,000.
Complain about this comment
106, Wiser than you.
"The defining characteristic of US-Americans is that, by comparison with citizens of all the rich nations, they are, on average, by far the STUPIDEST. By this I mean the least intelligent and the least knowledgeable."
You have that wrong. Americans are the most politically naive. So, in terms of politics, they are definitely stupid. Part of this may be due to being so isolated geographically. Most Americans have never been abroad and those who have tend to visit Mexico and Canada. They do not speak foreign languages, because they don't have to. They study them in school and forget them through lack of practice or need. This further isolates them.
Perhaps another area of naivete is the inability to see the venality in big business and the government agencies they deal with. Or the corruption in Congress. But we are getting back to politics....
Complain about this comment
Re: the achievements and superiority of Americans
Isn't there a joke about that... wait... here it is:
Emigration to the USA is a good thing. Every time someone moves to live in the USA from their home country the average IQ of both countries goes up.)))
Complain about this comment
120. At 2:31pm on 08 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
Powermeerkat... Hummers, Lincoln Town Cars, Cadillacs and Wranglers are very rare in the UK... Granted there are a few Jeeps....Of course there are Fords, we have one of the biggest Ford plants in Europe in East London.... GM & Chevrolet are only a tiny part of the European car market as Europeans do not like the design or quality of American motor cars. There are far better cars made in Europe and the Far East these days....
Complain about this comment
'120. At 2:31pm on 08 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
"The 'free market' outside America has decided that American cars aren't worth having."
So all those Hummers, Lincoln Town Cars, Cadillacs, Jeeps Grand Cherokees, Wranglers, Ford Focuses and Mondeos I see in Europe are what?
A fata morgana? :-)'
The Focuses and Mondeos you see in Europe are European (different from the US versions). And as for 'all those Hummers, Lincoln Town Cars, Cadillacs, Jeeps Grand Cherokees I see' ....you either live on a film set or on a scrapyard.
Complain about this comment
re. #11. At 9:14pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:
2. At 7:20pm on 07 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:
As a case in point America's automakers can build world class cars--if government would stop telling them what to build and how to run their businesses and let the free market work.
Scott, are you aware that GM and Chrysler are two of among only a handful of manufacturers in the country that can turn their operations to producing war grade materials in only a few weeks time? We've bailed out car companies before for this very reason. More was going on there than most people comprehend. It wasn't an act of charity. This was done with an eye towards national security.
-------------
You would think then that with all the criticism President Obama got about his decision to bail out Crysler and GM that he would have raised that point in his defense but I don't recall hearing it at the time.
Complain about this comment
Obama has done nothing but speak about what he thinks is right for America. His actions, on the other hand, have been bad for America.
ObamaCare is a very bad plan, which has already raised health care costs to both employers and citizens. That is only the tip of the iceberg.
He has zero, zip, nada.....plan for jobs. None, whatsoever. Biden, has already said, the jobs lost will NOT return. Biden is admitting, there is no prospect for putting people back to work. (He is an insider, so he should know the truth.)
Obama has spent billions in fruitless programs, aimed at imitating FDR's public works programs......all of which failed miserably, because the differences in situation and conditions, were NOT calculated. (That should also indicate the truth......this IS a depression, and not a recession.)
Obama has done little to realize any changes in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, and indeed, when his general in Afghanistan became disillusioned with the politics, he was relieved......not because he didn't know what was going on, but because he let the rest of the world know what WASN'T happening.
There is still lots of violence in Iraq, with little prospect of improvement.
The future of the US has been severely mortgaged, with debt, and there is no way to pay that debt, without severe personal sacrifice from the citizens, in the form of lifestyle sacrifice, and taxes paid. Otherwise, we will be become in default, and a take-over target.
There is no "work for the common good" in Washington, because Obama is totally partisan, and will not meet the other party half-way.
Obama is planning a legalization of all the illegal Mexican immigrants, with the concept of a large new voting bloc, that will prevent any other political party from being able to challenge the Democrats in elections, as the illegals permeate every part of the US. This sets up the potential for dictatorship in the US, and is extremely dangerous to our entire political system, and government.
Europe has already pegged Obama as "Jimmy Jr.", as most like Jimmy Carter, whose administration saw the worst financial conditions in the US for its citizens, since the Great depression. carter was a social program spendthrift, and Obama is the same.
Obama is realizing what I feared all along......he is mostly rhetoric, he knows not what he does, and he is very bad for America.
Complain about this comment
Atomic Mash & Wiser than You:
Re: Nobel Prize winners & nationality.
320 American citizens have won the Nobel prize to date. 79 of them were born outside of the US. So that's almost exactly a quarter.
However - in all fairness - when dividing number of Nobel prizes won by total population, America falls to 15th (1.04 prizes per million capita), Britain sits at 9th (1.88 prizes per million capita) and the Faroe Islands is first (20.4 prizes per million capita). Bottom of the list is China, (with 0.004 prizes per million capital - or 4 prizes per billion).
Complain about this comment
"Norwegian police say three men have been arrested suspected of plotting terrorist attacks and being members of al-Qaeda".
I guess (re #128) the IQ of an average European has just increased.
Above that of a scallop.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Obama is part is the reason people are pessimistic. He's long on talk and darn short on action.
He promised he would have the most vetted/clean cabinet ever - never happened.
He promised his cabinet wasn't going to be Washington Insiders - never happened.
Promised he was going to heal the rift between the Republicans and Democrats - then turned around and blamed the Republicans even though he has a majority in both the Senate and House. Strategy which is outright dumb and while he might have strengthened his base he lost his credibility and the Independent vote.
Obama has been a major disappointment full of campaign promises of hope but just another typical politician with no substance.
Complain about this comment
For help in understand how we came to this place a book I find very useful is From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life 1500 to the Present by Jacques Barzun. Thanks for all your interesting comments.
Complain about this comment
Dissent in America, Pessimists in America? Yes, there is -- to whatever degree, there has always been and there will always be such.
The most notorious contemporary of disfranchised groups, the ‘TEA-Party,’ dominated by its seemingly psychotic leaders, e.g. Glenn Beck, Bill O’ Riley, Rush Limbaugh, and Sara Palin (these being but merely a few of the most notorious) attempts to cloak their true concern for the future of America under the guises of such of ‘take back America,’ ‘taxed enough already,’ ‘Obama’s a Muslim,’ Obama’s not an American citizen,’ … Alongside a plenteousness of other tactics.
Such strategically calculated Schemes are conceived, nurtured, and harvested by the creative minds of these Neo-Conservative Zealots. Their newly batches of infected crop becomes another Fodder for the TEA-Baggers; a less-than-educated caste within the America populace. This caste -- these tediously monotonously mechanical-mouthpieces of the Neo-Conservative Zealots, they too quickly grow obese and slothful due their gobbling down their abundantly supplied ailing provender.
Thus, rendering these ’wannabes’ of the Neo-Conservative Zealots to devolve into ‘Neo-Con Piglets’ … wholly, tolerant-blinded, enlighten-deprived, as well as incapable of possessing any means to an individual, self-rationalizing thinking process.
The naïve Neo-Con Piglets feed upon the regurgitated fodder spewed forth from their zealots leaders whilst washing it down with another helping of their favorite drink … a ‘special blend’ of 'Kool-Aid’ … laced with strong doses of ‘Bull-Crap & Stupidity’ -- infamously Toxic! (Kool-Aid spelled in correctness … not any of wistful alternatives of the TEA-Party’s demented “O’ Great Leaders”)
O‘, how sad to witness … those pitiably pathetic, simplistic, crass, one-dimensional, racist TEA-Baggers, whose one obsession is that addictive Poisoned Fodder & Toxic Kool-Aid used to fuel their delusions, incoherence, and their Distorted Perceptions versus Reality.
Complain about this comment
redwards36 (#129): "GM & Chevrolet are only a tiny part of the European car market ..."
Opel is a GM brand and has been for decades.
Complain about this comment
113. arclightt:
"In order for America to hit Obama's goal, and to again make things that people want to buy, American manufacturing has to be cost-competitive with that from the rest of the world, AND has to produce things that the rest of the world wants. It's possible, but several facts have to be faced.
a, b, c"
*********************
Just my opinion... Obama really seems unschooled in economics and capitalism, for that matter. The government's directly providing money (ex., for state budgets or for unemployment benefits) is different from the government's stimulating an economic engine. When Obama lifts the hood and sees that engine, I suspect he closes it quickly and just pumps more gas.
As for pessimism, my own stems not from the Great Recession but from the thought that our president and his economic advisors are off the mark. Yes, they are doing their best, but what happens when that falls short?
On a positive note, this recession is turning out to be bigger than partisanship. As with the Gulf spill, results speak louder than words (or narrative).
Complain about this comment
126. The Toothbrush Man:
"Alas, the campaign in the US got crazy. "Circles of DEATH". The right wing sneered down their noses, people broke out the US flags, objected to their having "freedoms" infinged, and spread smear stories about roundabouts."
************
Good grief. Are you actually implying that the dearth of roundabouts is a result of right wing behavior?
And that all happened...let me guess...during the Bush years?
Complain about this comment
Is it time to abandon bipolar bipartisanship and for Americans to pick themselves up and dust themselves down?
It is time, indeed, but it won't happen. The political middle ground has all but vanished. When a US Senate candidate advertises himself as the
"41st no vote", and wins handily, the days of reason are over. Everywhere, Iowa included, people are struggling to make it. I voted for Obama and agree with most of his philosophies, but it's not about issues anymore - it's about who bet everything on W Bush and lost. That group, and they are tens of millions, says "no" to everything, automatically. And if Sara Palin wins the presidency in 2012, God help the entire world.
Complain about this comment
What does anyone expect of us? Should we put on blinders and go whistling in the dark? I think we are both realistic and optimistic. It's because we have faith in ourselves that makes us optimistic about our future. It's hard to put on a happy face when people are our of a job; besides, this damn heat is killing me!
Complain about this comment
You are correct that we need to do away with a two party system. I as a US citizen have no party that represents me. So when I vote I'm always voting against things that I support and for things that I don't.
That said, the US needs to make some serious changes. Obama is correct that jobs and industry need to be brought back State side. However, I don't think conservatives will allow that kind of government regulation. Many have so bought into the idea that anything government is bad, and anything corporate is good, that any efforts at reform are instantly demonized.
To be honest? I think that we need to bring our industrial infrastructure back home, re-regulate the corporate sector, and possibly take on responsible austerity measures like Europe is doing. It will hurt in the short term but help in the long run. But again I don't think that conservatives will go for that. I think that most would see any decline in standard of living as a slap in the face of strongly held notions of American supremacy. Something for nothing and all of that.
Complain about this comment
Despite the fact that many claim to be a newly enlightened "sleeping Giant" of independent voters, judging from:
-the capitalization of code words like "Native" and "Founders"
-the claim that the real Americans don't live in the northeast or Pacific coast even though those areas have by far the largest proportion of the population not to mention diversity
- an almost religious reference to the people who wrote the US Consitution and Declaration of Independence
-the shoot-first-ask-questions-later cries of socialism
-the implications that Americans are somehow inherently different from people in other countries
-the fact that people angry with Obama are fond of mentioning his Arab first and middle names
- the frequent use of trivial tangents, usually culture war stuff, rather than talking the nuts and bolts of policy
- going after the Black Panthers yet ignoring, even condoning, the white militias who basically do the same thing
- a particular obsession with Europe whether they've been there or not as a symbol of everything that's wrong with the world (and yet crowing about saving Europe in both world wars)
- hinting that they represent the real voice of America, a nation of 300 million, rather than just themselves and their demographic
I would say that these people are what they have always been, which is conservative; and probably always Republican voters too.
They also seem to have a fairly naive view on how things operate. If that's how their leaders think as well, I think they will be eaten alive by reality once they get back into power, no matter when that happens. The Democrats will surely have problems in the future, and I'm no fan of theirs, but I am not seeing anything that's going to help America in this new century from the GOP "sleeping Giant" either.
Complain about this comment
Dear Mr Mardell,
Enjoy your leave: Time flies; nothing stands still -- least of all where there are children!
The New Pessimism you allude to is not confined to the US, by any means. Some of it is indeed fueled by economic distress. But a great deal has to come from the realisation dawning on more & more human beings the world over -- and to be sure in the USA, particularly -- that their leaders are not very well qualified to actually fix things.
Matters less wherein the problem lies. Gulf Oil spill a case in point: much of the misdirected rage at the 'cause' is simply masking the more painful discovery that we have entered a period of environmental instability we are all ill-prepared to navigate.
President Obama's kind words about the future of employment & competition will change nothing in a world when there are so many participants vigorously fighting over the right to access the last remaining crumbs of revenue not spoken for.
Those of us who full understood what was at stake at COP15 are not surprised. But that makes the spectacle no easier to observe -- and we are all a part of it, players & audience concurrently.
I fully expect Obama & the Democrats to remain in power for the foreseeable term; however, I doubt that there will be more coherence or "problems solved" as a result. God willing, there will be substantial gains made in stabilising Afghanistan & degrading the capacity of terrorists to harm civilised people. That is about all I see coming in the Improvements Underway column. Oh, and perhaps some additional advances in medicine and quality-of-life concerns.
The swing back into Cold War mode, on the other hand, bodes ill. Look for more policy blunders to come, on both sides of the Russia/USA divide, because a choice has clearly been made at the level of the Kremlin to revert back to failed tactics from the Soviet-era playbook. Why would that be? My husband's theory is that the former Soviet leadership with its unreconstructed mentality has decided to apply some primitive leverage to discourage its own citizens from seeking new lives abroad. By making it seem to Westerners as if there is a renewed risk of "infiltration", the Kremlin kooks imagine they will make it less appealing for a young Russian with a decent education & good English to seek employment in Canada or Australia, for example.
In fact, the opposite will occur. By acting like the Soviet-era thugs of yore -- tripping all over themselves in their hurry to rescue a harlot-in-distress & sundry stock characters from what in Russian dramatic culture was known as the balaganchik (a variation on Punch-and-Judy or commedia dell'arte) -- the spy-swappers have ensured that any respectable Russian will only distance themselves even further from that dysfunctional, demented society that has been taken over by men & women of ill-repute... The result will be a further deterioration in communications, consensus-building opportunities & "teachable moments" in international relations. Cold War II has begun. Oh, well. Too bad. I had been hoping for a nice collective English tea party on the lawn, of the type Henry James described so perfectly. Instead, it's Spook City all over again. And guess who will lose this round? The same side that lost the last one.
At moments such as these, I am reminded of that wonderful line in the Gospels: "When God chooses to punish, He takes away reason." Russia has blown it, yet again. Nothing new there.
We shall be watching the grand finale to the quadrennial painful rite of the World Cup with a bit less agony this year, owing to the fact that we love both teams & expect a clean, delicious game. I know whom I would prefer to see in First Place, but it won't upset me if they get Second.
Thorvald loves football, and Europe awaits. Looking forward to seeing & saying more, soon.
Lots of love to anyone out there still trying to make the planet a better place for the young ones who still have their lives ahead of them... And thank you, Your Majesty, for that stirring & inspiring speech at the UN.
Stay healthy, one and all!
Complain about this comment
It's hard not to be a little down right now.
1. We learned that what we thought was a virtually unstoppable economy was the result of fraud and manipulation of the markets.
2. We're seeing almost every day that senseless violence continues in Iraq even as we, the hated infidel invaders, are withdrawing. We were kind of hoping that the law against Muslim on Muslim violence would stop all that. Guess not.
3. We're realizing that the plight of the Afghan people is close to hopeless.
4. We're seeing our budget deficit skyrocket, and it looks as if we're going to start turning families out into the street in a few months anyway.
5. We're seeing the bureaucrats in Washington simply fail to do their jobs, often willfully because they've got their hands in the cookie jar.
6. We're seeing our southern coastline fouled with Louisiana sweet crude.
7. We're seeing the failure of American technology to stem that flow of oil.
8. We're seeing an entire economic sector threatened with destruction because of that oil spill.
9. We're seeing most of our states teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.
* heavy sigh *
But, as they say, wherever you're at, there you are. If tomorrow proves better than today, there's hope. So, let's take it a day at a time. We may just catch a break or two. We're certainly due.
These things, too, shall pass.
Complain about this comment
131. At 4:15pm on 08 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:
You would think then that with all the criticism President Obama got about his decision to bail out Crysler and GM that he would have raised that point in his defense but I don't recall hearing it at the time.
Right, because he would want to make them a target. That would certainly be helpful.
And the point wasn't raised back when Chrysler was bailed out the first time, though that was the main reason even then. It's not something you would want widely known, the fact that they've got the capability to retool quickly in order to produce basic tanks, jeeps, plane engines, etc. on a large scale almost instantly if required. Who do you think mass produced most of our WWII arsenal? They also have the largest, most skilled workforce in the country capable of handling a job of that size at a moment's notice. Whether you agree that there is an actual need for such capacity now is immaterial, this is Cold War politics still at work.
Complain about this comment
When did Republicans start reading the bbc? Anyways, I believe the time has come for Americans to start calling into question many of the idealogical institutions we have long held dear. For example our election system is vastly outdated. Most modern first world nations use a more modern system of government, such as using Proportional Representation or a Parlimentary system. Then there is the free market dogma we have all been preached since birth. It clearly isn't working for us anymore when the poor in this country are getting poor and the rich are getting richer. For God sake the average CEO's are making 400 times the amount of the average worker. Yet, socialism is still seen as a pejorative word, puzzling. Last time I went to Denmark I found it to be a pretty nice place.
P.S American cars are crap and everyone
knows it. Buy German.
Complain about this comment
rtcon (#144): "You are correct that we need to do away with a two party system. I as a US citizen have no party that represents me. So when I vote I'm always voting against things that I support and for things that I don't."
Political parties are essentially free associations of people joining for the purpose of exercizing their constitutional rights of assembly, speech, press, and petition, in order to achieve a common political objective. That there tend to be two which dominate politics is merely a consequence of electing members of Congress in single-member districts, and electing a president separate from members of Congress. It is not a "system" in any legal sense.
You cannot coerce the parties, either the big ones or the small ones, to represent your views. Your choice is to join with other like-minded individuals to form another party which represents your views. If your views are those of a tiny minority of the population, that's just too bad.
A lot of Americans these days, myself included, choose to remain unaffiliated with any party.
Complain about this comment
126 The Toothbrushman Wrote,
Alas, the campaign in the US got crazy. "Circles of DEATH". The right wing sneered down their noses, people broke out the US flags, objected to their having "freedoms" infinged, and spread smear stories about roundabouts.
Thie first roundabout in the US was built in 1990, and there are still only 2,300 roundabouts in the US as of Dec 2009. The UK has 25,000 and France has 30,000.
I cany believe i,m reading this...roundabouts new to the US?
and i thought the united states was forefront in most things.
Complain about this comment
pleonism (#149): "... more modern system of government, such as using Proportional Representation or a Parlimentary system."
There is no way the US will ever get that, thanks to (and thankfully) the federal compromise written into the Constitution.
We've done pretty well with our "outdated" election system.
Complain about this comment
149. At 8:11pm on 08 Jul 2010, pleonism wrote:
P.S American cars are crap and everyone
knows it. Buy German.
Hi pleonism,I built up a series of businesses & made them profitable & sold them on.In my early years served my apprenticeship as a heavy lorry(truck) mechanic it took 5years in those days.One of those businesses was a van & car rental set up.At the top end of the car rental fleet we tried many different marques including Mercedes & BMW.For every
day abuse & hard treatment Merc & BMW just could not take the thrashing
that Vauxhall (GM) or Ford could take with ease.I had a Mercedes 190 E,
I had to work hard for that car,& looked after it ,kept it for 9 years. It was not trouble free,auto box,timing chain tensioner,front wheel bearing & suspension ball joints all failed.People,me included like
prestige marques,but thoroughbreds are temperamental.Ford & Vauxhall
are very very good,the Ford focus & Vauxhall astra have now the edge over
the VW golf. European designed & built American cars are second to none.
I have in the past teased some on this blog about American stuff but
credit when credit is due...
Complain about this comment
Emps (#151): "I can't believe I'm reading this...roundabouts new to the US?"
It must have been a joke. Washington, D. C. has had these (which we call traffic circles) since the city's street grid was laid out by Pierre L'Enfant in 1791.
Complain about this comment
Obama was seen by many as exactly what he is,pitifully inexperienced community activist.After spending trillions of dollars to maintain 10% unemployment,2012 is going to be a time of reckoning no more of Bushes tax relief and we will have to face the music of Obamas agendas.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#151
This statement about roundabouts is completely inaccurate,Beaumont tx had a roundabout in the 1950's so did orange tx
Complain about this comment
My post #156 merely suggested that roundabouts should more properly be compared to cloverleaf interchanges in the US, of which we have many thousands.
Complain about this comment
@GH1618
Your words:
"There is no way the US will ever get that, thanks to (and thankfully) the federal compromise written into the Constitution.
We've done pretty well with our "outdated" election system."
If everyone had this mentality then there would be no human progression. You know people did pretty well with steam engines and typewriters too. That is no reason to keep them around when something better is readily available. Unfortunately there are so many Americans with this mentality that are holding us back.
@UkWales
Totally agree the Ford Focus is a fantastic car. I do have to make a point. You stated: "European designed & built American cars are second to none." If its designed by Europeans and made by Europeans then its a European car. I can't see anything American about it except the name.
Complain about this comment
138 The Rum Monk wrote: a great post.
Complain about this comment
Some people say the first roundabout (as opposed to mere traffic circle) in the US was Columbus Circle, built in New York City in 1905.
Complain about this comment
pleonism (#159), your comparison to steam engines and typewriters doesn't hold up. When alternatives to these and other items of technology became available, and were shown to be an improvement, they were adopted.
We have had a long opportunity to look at alternate structures for national government, and it is not at all clear that a parliamentary system, especially a proportional one, would be an improvement for the US. In some places such as Denmark, where the country is small and the populace relatively homogeneous, it works well enough. In other places, such as Italy, it results in chronic instability.
Most of the people in the US who advocate proportional representation are among those with fringe political views, as they feel disenfranchised. I would argue that it is their views which cause them to be disenfranchised, not the electoral system. I agree with Sydney Bailey, author of British Parliamentary Democracy, who wrote (I am paraphrasing) that the purpose of an election is not to provide representation for all views of the populace in the government, but to elect an effective government.
Everybody thinks their own view, no matter how marginal, represents "progress." I disagree.
Complain about this comment
re. 148. Gavrielle_LaPoste:
And the point wasn't raised back when Chrysler was bailed out the first time, though that was the main reason even then.
Chrysler is more that a company that could quickly convert to defense production. It's been a defense contractor for decades. Chrysler Missle Division built ICBMs on contract for the Defense Department; some of their Redstone and Jupiter rockets were used in the Mercury program. The M-1 tank was designed by Chrysler and was built at the Chrysler-operated Lima Army Modification Center at Lima, Ohio. That plant is still in operation but is operated by General Dynamics.
Complain about this comment
@GH1618
The purpose of Democracy is not to be most effective, its to provide equal political representation for ALL citizens. You want effective government? live in a dictatorship, they are very effective.
"In some places such as Denmark, where the country is small and the populace relatively homogeneous, it works well enough. In other places, such as Italy, it results in chronic instability."
Nothing could be further from the truth. The more diverse the state the more representation should be given. I have to also point out that Italy's "chronic instability" has nothing to do with Proportional Representation. If PR caused political instability then how would you explain the fact that: Australia, Switzerland, Sweden, Scotland, Norway, Netherlands, New Zealand, Luxembourg.....and so on all use PR and are all stable countries with no "chronic instability".
I don't see anything "fringe" about any of these countries GH1618. If you have to be in the "fringe" to think PR is a good idea for the US then what does that say about Americans? Instead of resisting the idea of PR because its foriegn and therefore scary, why not try and come up with ONE reason why are system is better. good luck
Complain about this comment
American muscle cars are among the beautiful in the world.
There is just something completely special about them.
Its not just the power of the V-8's.
Its the design of the car- the way it moves, feels, glides, and is overall designed to drive.
My personal favorite is the illustrious and enthralling Pontiac Firebird.
To me, it is the coolest and most awesome car in the world.
Complain about this comment
165.
"My personal favorite is the illustrious and enthralling Pontiac Firebird."
Pity the Pontiac is no longer being made.
Complain about this comment
126. At 3:15pm on 08 Jul 2010, The Toothbrush Man wrote:
“I am laughing myself silly at all this debate about metric versus imperial units.
Thie first roundabout in the US was built in 1990, and there are still only 2,300 roundabouts in the US as of Dec 2009. The UK has 25,000 and France has 30,000.”
Your facts are way off. We in NEW England have had rotaries [roundabouts] for quite a long time, possibly since colonial times.
There is one monster on Rte.1 in Dedham, MA, that would blow you away. It has traffic lights and a straight through set of lanes as well. I remember well when it was a simple rotary, like several others in the town.
There’s a reason [or two] why we are called New England, but not only are we part of the USA we are where it started.
Complain about this comment
Dear Mark,
It seems that you are down yourself (at least, that is how I interpreted your short sentences, and mildly conflicting statements...it almost seemed as though you were having an argument with yourself about how much that pessimism is justified). I hope that you feel better if that is the case.
For my own part, cycling through extreme optimism and extreme cynicism has left me in a place that I would call post-cynicism. I realize how childish both are, and strive to see things as they are, while accepting that my interpretations will never be the absolute truth.
Obama's administration may not have been perfect thus far, but I deem it acceptable. At least not horrible. I think that America ought to create a new economy, the information economy, solidly and that will be the key to our economic woes. It will require effort: the population must become extremely well educated, our university systems must keep their edge, our R&D must be well funded and efficient. But that is the future of jobs in developed nations. The same goes for the UK.
As someone working on becoming a biochemist, I hope we can do this. Two sectors will be of the utmost importance: cornering the market in genetic technology and in new communications (Internet, etc).
Again, I hope your spirits improve, maybe take a break and go camping. Nothing like nature to help us to remember that this political world is not all there is, and is certainly not the most important.
Life will go on, if only for the purpose of life itself.
--Marie
Complain about this comment
165. LucyJ:
"My personal favorite is the illustrious and enthralling Pontiac Firebird.
To me, it is the coolest and most awesome car in the world."
***************
Had one. Remember also looking at more practical cars like the K car. Bought the car that gave me the most power for my budget. That thing could move.
Complain about this comment
I have driven several Pontiacs and they have never failed me once.
Fabulous design, but most of all, very dependable and strong cages.
In the end, they have always come through.
When you are spinning around in a circle on black ice, you aren't thinking "Oh, I'm glad I saved money!" You are thinking, "I'm glad I got the car with the strong cage and body!"
I owe my life to my good Pontiacs and to God.
America, we can make it. When times are tough, we can lean on each other.
Complain about this comment
pleonism (#164): "I don't see anything "fringe" about any of these countries ..."
It's not countries which are "fringe," it's Americans who think prop rep would be an improvement for the US who are "fringe," just based on numbers. I'll bet there isn't one American in a hundred who is in favor of that, and it's probably much less. I can only think of one person I've ever known after a lifetime of discussing politics who thinks pr would be a good idea for the US.
How other countries choose to structure their own political system is no consideration whatsoever for what we should do here. There are a lot of interesting differences between the UK (and elsewhere) and the US (like driving on the left and putting 20 fl. ounces in a pint), but that's no reason we should do the same. To each his own.
Complain about this comment
149. At 8:11pm on 08 Jul 2010, pleonism wrote:
“When did Republicans start reading the bbc? Anyways, I believe the time has come for Americans to start calling into question many of the idealogical institutions we have long held dear. For example our election system is vastly outdated. Most modern first world nations use a more modern system of government, such as using Proportional Representation or a Parlimentary system.”
Where to start? You start with the assumption that a parliamentary system is inherently better and more modern. It isn’t necessarily so. The system is out of kilter right now, but Britain’s parliamentary system has had its problems.
Sorry Canadians, but the president can’t prorogue the US congress. I would say that the current political situation in Canada is hardly more to be desired.
As to proportional representation, hasn’t that worked out SO well in Italy and Israel? Some American posters like to say the US system is superior; it isn’t, but neither, necessarily, are the others.
In addition, our present government has been in office uninterruptedly since 1789, during which the US went from primarily poor and agricultural to developed and prosperous. It has generally served us well, so why risk major changes when tinkering might work?
We do need to fix some problems, and I agree with some of your points.
Complain about this comment
It is amazing how lightening fast the Firebirds move.
And that sound. You can recognize the growl of the motor from almost anywhere.
Firebirds are enchanting.
Complain about this comment
"If PR caused political instability then how would you explain the fact that: Australia, Switzerland, Sweden, Scotland, Norway, Netherlands, New Zealand, Luxembourg.....and so on all use PR and are all stable countries with no "chronic instability"." (from pleonism at #164)
It's a lot more difficult than that. For example, Switzerland has two chambers in its parliament, one of which is modeled after the US Senate, with two members per canton (or one for a half-canton). In Australia, the House of Representatives (which forms the government) is elected by "Preferential Voting" with single-member districts. The Senate is elected by "Proportional Representation -- Senate model." This is how that is described in dfat.gov.au:
"The ‘Senate’ model elections increases the chances of minor parties and independents winning seats compared to the single member constituency system used for the House of Representatives. It produces closer results in the struggle between the major parties and makes it difficult for a major party to gain control of the Senate ..."
Not really a "pure" PR system. Australia's system is so complicated that they have to have compulsory voting to get people to vote.
Scotland's system is also "impure" but I'm not going to go into an analysis of every country's electoral system to make a point. In any case, my view is that it doesn't matter what other nations do. Our system works well for us. In particular, it produces a strong president even when the country is divided. Sometimes we might wish that our president were not so strong, but on balance I believe that it's a good feature of our system of electing the president. There are not many Americans, I believe, who want the president (I mean the office, not some particular president) to be weak.
Complain about this comment
Proportional systems do on paper appear to be the most democratic i.e. if 5% of the population votes for party x, then party x has 5% representation in parliament (or equivalent legislature).
One of the problems that can arise with this approach however is that sometimes the 'tail wags the dog'. I was living in New Zealand when the system was changed from "first past the post' two party system to 'Mixed Member Proportional' system. The change needed to be made as governments regularly got into power with much less than 50% votes but secured victory by winning key swing seats.
The first election under MMP unsurprisingly yielded no party with a clear majority so a coalition gov't was formed after considerable horse trading. Now a small marginal party (with a veiled xenophobic stance) became the king maker and that parties leader became deputy PM in the new coalition government. So it worked out that someone who +90% of the electorate did not vote for became their deputy PM.
There's no perfect system but I believe one of the trade offs of the highly democratic Proportional system is that fringe parties can gain significantly more power than the electorate would wish for.
Complain about this comment
LeBron turned his back on Cleveland.
That's cold.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
JMM,
I'll refer you to Ghost of Sichuan who always expresses my thoughts so eloquently. What is so destructive about the government matching its actions with its rhetoric? Unlike you, I look for the action behind the words. I'm not interested in brilliant, funny speeches that are very entertaining but contain empty promises. The American people deserve more than lies from the right and the left.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
170. At 00:44am on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
"I have driven several Pontiacs and they have never failed me once.
Fabulous design, but most of all, very dependable and strong cages.
In the end, they have always come through."
I purchased a Pontiac Firebird back in 1985. It had the optional Trans Am suspension. It was a beautiful burgundy red with a grey interior. At the time, I thought nothing of the ultra firm ride. Being young, I was always driving it around. I put on 59,000 miles in just 8 months. At some point, I started to feel pains shooting down from, and including, my hip. It escalated to my lower back. Eventually, I drove myself to the emergency room and they took X-rays and informed me that I had ruptured one disc and one was slipped (L-3 and L-4 and S-1 was affected too).
My Chiropractor told me that if I didn't get rid of the car, I would never walk again. The car eventually went for--other reasons. I have driven Cadillacs ever since because of the softness of the suspension. Once when I went to pick up a prescription for pain meds, which I am still on, the Pharmacist told me that the same thing happened to her son who had a Corvette. He had problems with his L-3 and L-4 discs. Both the Corvette and the Firebird are firmly sprung cars. I don't recommend firmly sprung cars for anyone who desires to drive long distances the way I did.
At the time, I thought that a firmly sprung car was designed that way for the sake of handling, which is what is claimed by the manufacturers of those cars. However, after driving in the softly suspended Cadillacs, I know that a firmly sprung suspension is not all that it is cracked up to be. I have taken corners in my various Cadillacs at a faster rate of speed than I could have in the Firebird even though the Firebird was always equipped with the best tires available (Eagle G.T.s). Weight was the deciding factor in taking corners at a higher rate of speed, not the suspension or so much the tires.
Another thing is this: Camaro, a car with a stiff suspension, has one of the highest fatality rates per mile driven of any car being sold today. It is purchased by younger people who tend to drive them faster, true but, I have still found that when the rear end of my Firebird would break lose at a high speed, it was next to impossible to regain control of the car because it would break its grip faster than the steering ratio was able to correct it. Ever lose the back end at 120 M.P.H. on a corner? Don't do it in a sports car. In the Cadillac, on the other hand, the back end tends to lose its grip at a slower and more controllable rate that is in line with the steering ratio designed into the car. True, in a softly sprung car, it is a little sloppy trying to correct things but, things happen a little slower too which gives a little more time to react.
By the way, one of the cars that was rated as one of the worst handling cars ever made: the 1976 Mercury Grand Marquis Brougham, a 5,000 pound car with long, soft springs, was also one of the autos that made the list as having the fewest fatalities per mile driven. True, the owners of those big boats were usually older drivers but, many of them were handed down to younger buyers as second hand cars. The point being that if the auto manufacturers continue to build cars that are meant for racing, without adjusting the steering ratio to compensate for the car's handling characteristics, you will see more high speed racing-type accidents. The stats are backing me up on that.
I never thought I would ever own a Cadillac at such an early age as I always thought of it as an older person's car but, I would never drive anything else and really couldn't because of my back. There is nothing like going on a long trip, setting the cruise control to 75-80 M.P.H., and just floating along the highway in unadulterated and unruffled comfort.
No more Firebirds or firmly sprung cars for me, thank you.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
All my comments removed were all facts.
But I understand why they were removed.
Because what Obama is doing to this country is actually so horrific and so terrible it has to be censored on the BBC.
Because it is absoloutely outrageous.
You have to read it to believe it.
One was about the former USA official testifying about the Black Panther Case that he was working on. And what the Justice Dept. did.
Another was about what Obama told NASA's chief. It has to do with Muslims, NASA techonology and Indonesia.
Another was about American ocean techonology and Indonesia.
The last was about how Indonesia treats its Christians.
Obama is the devil in disguise.
Complain about this comment
Wow so many people to respond to: To start Yes, PR governments are not perfect, that should be an automatic given. The main point I'm trying to get across is that a PR system is better then the first past the post system we use now. This does not mean we have to use a pure PR system, if you look at other governments you will see a wide range of pure PR systems, hybrid systems, and MMP systems. The German governments PR federal system is a good model we can look at ourselves.
The point is: our government is no longer meeting the needs of our public. Instead of relying upon one man to pull a nation of 300 million people out of the dumps we could be slightly modern and actually improve the way our government functions.
@GH1618 I actually would like to see a weaker executive branch. A president that is too strong can lead a state into dangerous waters. Belarus let their president get a little to strong and look what happened to them. Yeah, not a good idea. Jesus look back to the Bush years..uhhhh
Complain about this comment
184. At 03:34am on 09 Jul 2010, pleonism wrote:
"The point is: our government is no longer meeting the needs of our public. Instead of relying upon one man to pull a nation of 300 million people out of the dumps we could be slightly modern and actually improve the way our government functions.
@GH1618 I actually would like to see a weaker executive branch. A president that is too strong can lead a state into dangerous waters. Belarus let their president get a little to strong and look what happened to them. Yeah, not a good idea. Jesus look back to the Bush years..uhhhh"
The way I see it is like this:
The problems which are associated with our Government are not, for the most part, created by the President, as he has very little power due to our check and balance system. The problem, and I think most would be in agreement with me, is the CONGRESS!
Take the national health care system, for example. The Republicans recently fought against the very system they tried to get through in the past, NOT because they didn't believe it is still needed but, because a Democrat was successfully getting it implemented and they didn't like that. That pretty much sums up why our Government is constantly in gridlock.
Another issue is energy.
We, as Americans, want cleaner and more affordable forms of energy. I think I can safely write that we are ALL in agreement on getting away from oil----period! So, you have no choice but to look at it this way: If all Americans are for getting off the oil kick and all of our elected officials are chosen from the same body of Americans who want to get away from oil, then WHY HAVEN'T WE?
Because our politicians are bought and sold before they even get into office. They ALL say that they want "change" yet, when they get into office, the only thing that seems to change is their bank account balances. Think about that for a moment. All Americans want cleaner and more affordable forms of energy and our "elected" leaders are telling us: NO! If this were France, the blood of the politicians would have been running in the streets by now. We, on the other hand, just sit back and complain but, do nothing!
We need a more responsible Government. We need a system whereby, WE THE PEOPLE can impeach a politician who is not doing what he/she was elected to do or is not doing what is in the best interest of the people who elected him/her. An impeachment process that can be easily brought to the forefront so that the politician can be warned if his/her actions are unacceptable. Big business, who gives us these politicians, is NOT working for the best interest of the citizens of this or any other country. They are working for the best interest of their own wallets with complete disregard for the wallets of the average person.
That MUST stop!
What is the one law that ALL people reading this forum should be concerned with now and CLAMOR to get pushed through?
A law which would make it illegal for ANY company (especially an oil company) or person to purposely keep an energy saving device off the market and one that would make it a Federal crime to buy a patent (e.g. battery) that would keep alternative forms of energy from becoming a reality with HARSH jail terms for anyone who breaks this law.
Then, and only then, will changes start to happen in regards to getting away from oil.
If this isn't done, nothing will change.
Complain about this comment
In times of crisis mature democracies end partisan battles and try to respond to extraordinary problems with a unified leadership. In the normal course of events partisan battles are part and parcel of the political process. In the case of the US, however, one or perhaps both sides are so entrenched in ideology that I believe they are now incapable of ending bipartisan battles, even if it harms the country as a whole. Take, for instance, the now oft-repeated performance of Senate Republicans who have over and over refused to extend unemployment benefits. You mention that 8 out of 10 Americans who have lost their jobs over the last couple of years haven't found a new one. Well, if they have been unemployed for over a year, and over a million Americans are in that situation, they had all their income cut off at the beginning of June. This because Republicans ideologues insist they must start cutting the budget somewhere. Yet they had no problem handing out billions to the banks. We hear that 200,000 people will be dropped from the rolls every week until Congress passes the re-authorization. This is not only sadistic and inhumane, it causes far-reaching harm to an already doubtful economy. How many more foreclosures have there been since the failure to re-authorize? How many people made homeless? How many children hungry? In Arizona, where I live, the food banks are constantly depleted now. Some 50 people applied to a local dishwashing job that paid minimum wage (7.75) - what is that? About three British pounds. As long as Congress witholds the re-authorization, the situation will get worse for everybody - not just the long-term unemployed, but the businesses they patronized when they had an income ($265/week with Federal topping-off of $15). I know many people who only used their unemployment check to pay their rent, and had about $100 left over for food. Without an income of any kind, people are much less likely to be able to drive or pay for transportation to job interviews. If they get a job, they are much less likely to be able to take it if it involves any kind of re-location. What Congress has done is shameful. And maybe there is bipartisan unity on this. Not only Republicans but several turn-coat Democrats voted against the re-authorization. Maybe they are hoping to be re-elected by right-wing voters? They are certainly not showing signs of mature leadership, but that doesn't matter to ideologues. Reality doesn't matter to ideologues. All that matters is that they make decisions based on their fantasy-ideology.
This has also happened in Arizona with regard to immigration. The recent passage of SB1070 allows the police to detain people with whom they have "lawful contact" if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that person is an "alien." (Full-text of 17 pg bill available if you search google.) This law is due to come into effect at the end of this month unless a federal lawsuit can stop it. The tragedies this bill has already caused are innumerable. Both "legal" and "illegal" Mexicans, both citizen and non-citizen mexicans, have begin to leave the state in droves. Children have been terrorized at the thought of their parents being arrested. The governor has said that all illegal Mexicans are drug smugglers, thieves, extortionists or kidnappers. (As a fourth generation Anglo Arizonan, I deeply resent the ignorance of this remark. Mexicans built this state, and the overwhelming majority, citizen and non-citizen alike, are extremely hard-working family-oriented people.) The law and the rhetoric around it are now a daily racialized assault on Mexicans throughout the nation. Tell me how any police officer or any human being is going to be able to get a "reasonable suspicion" someone is here illegally? Will it be their accent? Their skin color? What about white Mexicans? Latinos throughout the world come in varying shades. The Arizona legislature's obvious racism in passing this law is internationally embarrassing. Yet they don't seem to know how dumb they look. They keep defending their new law, which is bound to fail in its aims. To help explain this, it would probably be helpful for your readers to know that about one-third of Arizona legislators have never completed any higher education. (Of course, that also helps explain the multi-billion dollar budget cuts for the state's universities and colleges. What a way to win in the new global economy, eh?) Alienate your closest biggest trading partner, half your population, and waste money on the frivolous pursuit of working people when you could actually save money, earn money, and earn international respect if you simply opened the borders. With open borders, you know anyone out in the desert is probably up to no good, because who really wants to die a slow death from dehydration in 115 degrees Farenheit if they have a workable alternative?
Both the problems with the unemployment extension, and the problems of immigration in Arizona, are largely caused by right-wing ideology trying to defeat reality. The reality is that Mexicans have always been here. In fact Arizona was Mexico until about a hundred and sixty years ago. Controlling the border, beefing up the border, getting more boots on the border - whatever the political rhetoric, it will fail as a policy. The reality is, humans don't work like that. The reality is, every international agreement on "free trade" will only work if labor is free as well, with all the privileges of cross-border migration currently enjoyed by both capital and goods. Regulate the border with Mexico by opening the border with Mexico and giving the millions of workers already here some basic human dignity and rights - citizen or not. In the future, open borders will be recognized as the only pragmatic policy, as the only humane and economically vibrant policy, as the only policy that aligns itself with the actual reality of life here, instead of with an outworn and dangerously divisive ideology.
Complain about this comment
186. At 07:11am on 09 Jul 2010, Progress Happens Get Used To It wrote:
"With open borders, you know anyone out in the desert is probably up to no good, because who really wants to die a slow death from dehydration in 115 degrees Farenheit if they have a workable alternative?"
"The reality is, every international agreement on "free trade" will only work if labor is free as well, with all the privileges of cross-border migration currently enjoyed by both capital and goods. Regulate the border with Mexico by opening the border with Mexico and giving the millions of workers already here some basic human dignity and rights - citizen or not. In the future, open borders will be recognized as the only pragmatic policy, as the only humane and economically vibrant policy, as the only policy that aligns itself with the actual reality of life here, instead of with an outworn and dangerously divisive ideology."
You raised some very good points. To further those, I feel that the workers in Mexico need to be paid the same wages for their work as are American workers. Otherwise, their economy will always be so weak that some of its citizens will always want to leave.
What happened to N.A.F.T.A.?
Complain about this comment
At 00:03am on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
American muscle cars are among the beautiful in the world.
There is just something completely special about them.
American Muscle cars against the European sports cars.... I think most would agree that Europe wins hands down...
Ferrari... Lamborghini... Aston Martin.. Porsche... I could go on but its unfair !!! I think few would chose a Firebird over one of the European makes...
Complain about this comment
Ref# 185 Worldcitizen1
Congressman and Senators go through every second election without the appropriate scrutiny of their records, policies or character. The Presidential election takes the focus away. Even in the elections that don't coincide, the presidential agenda will be a critical factor as the president will remain in power for the foreseeable future.
Elections should be held completely separate, say one year and three years into a presidential term, with the senate races also fitting in to that schedule.
If there were elections in 2011, there would be more scrutiny and talk of the politicians and parties non-executive agendas. Running for president would be a risk for a congreesman or senator as you would stand accused of abandoning your constituency and there wouldn't be the danger of every top political job in the country changing at once.
Complain about this comment
To all you guys out there,who enjoy engineering this may be of interest,
Its a bit slow to start,(documentary not the engine) hope my link works..
http://beta.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00t0yx9/How_to_Build..._A_Jumbo_Jet_Engine/
Failing that, Google BBC how to build a jumbo jet engine..
Complain about this comment
183. At 03:32am on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
"You have to read it to believe it."
************************
Easier said than done. The NYT finally had an article on the Justice Department/Black Panther accusations. It mostly focused on the party affiliation of those involved -- that is, links to republicans.
If what Adams said is true about a Justice Department employee discounting the problem because it was reported on FoxNews, we have a serious problem there.
Complain about this comment
Obama's own actions of forcing legislation that 70% of America opposed, filing a law suit against a State for passing a law identical to the federal law on immigration, redistributing wealth to stimulate the economy, and the list goes on... has awakened a sleeping conservative base which makes up this center right country. People are simply paying attention and waking up to the real time lesson in Chicago politics.
Hope and Change is Bait and Switch to satisfy an ideology inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution. As was the case with Bill Clinton, we simply have another slick politician that is very good with words and semantics.
Complain about this comment
@185r (wc1): "The problems which are associated with our Government are not, for the most part, created by the President, as he has very little power due to our check and balance system. The problem, and I think most would be in agreement with me, is the CONGRESS!"
I agree. A good Congress can rein in the worst President, but the best President can't do much with a bad Congress.
@186 (phguti): "In the case of the US, however, one or perhaps both sides are so entrenched in ideology that I believe they are now incapable of ending bipartisan battles, even if it harms the country as a whole."
If you look back some 40-50 years or so, I think you will see that it really is both sides, and that the hardening / entrenching has gotten steadily worse over that time. I believe if you look closely, you will find that the disdain and hatred directed toward "those other unmentionables" has now become reflexive and unconscious, which means that eyes, minds, and hearts are now closed to any possibility of change. Considering how much God values every human being (including "those other unmentionables") our unconscious, reflexive disdain and hatred is not only evil in His eyes; it's a measure of just how little sanity, and how little real maturity, we have achieved. I'm certainly not complete in this area, and certainly not perfect, and I don't know anyone who is, but that doesn't excuse me from focusing attention on it and dealing with it by asking God to help me change.
Complain about this comment
193. arclightt:
"I believe if you look closely, you will find that the disdain and hatred directed toward "those other unmentionables" has now become reflexive and unconscious, which means that eyes, minds, and hearts are now closed to any possibility of change. "
********************
I respectfully disagree. Yes, many hearts, minds and eyes are closed; however, Obama's success can be attributed to a group of voters who wanted something more, something better than the same old politics. Obama understood they wanted bipartisanship. He's just not capable of delivering it. Maybe it's not possible to deliver it. Or maybe it just takes someone a lot tougher and more experienced than Obama.
Complain about this comment
I see it more as a deterioration in individual honor, rather than pessimism/optimism. Particularly in our individual 'corporate managers' and politicians, who show no honor or nobility. Not even the pirate's code.
Complain about this comment
174. At 01:41am on 09 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:
"There are not many Americans, I believe, who want the president (I mean the office, not some particular president) to be weak."
Good analysis. You could have pointed out that the US president is not the strongest of the world's presidents and can be frustrated by the congress and or the Supreme Court [President Obama is not the first to be stymied]. The French President is much more powerful.
I think that past presidents have usurped powers not originally intended or been given them by act of congress. Especially in the "War Powers Act." Wars are supposed to be declared by congress, the president's position as "Commander in Chief" has been used as if he has military carte blanche.
We now have a Roman situation where the president is almost a military dictator OUTSIDE the republic. God forbid that one of them should "cross the Rubicon!" This is what makes the US president "strong" compared to many other presidents and prime ministers.
The US president can not call an election and can neither dismiss nor prorogue the congress. I find that peculiar characteristic of Canadian [British? Australian?] parliamentary democracies disturbing.
I think that our constitutional lawyer president seems weak because he has tried to restore the constitutional balance by returning power to the congress, especially the senate. Too bad they are unworthy and disfunctional, so it has not worked out well. The road to perdition is paved with good intentions.
Complain about this comment
@106: "The defining characteristic of US-Americans is that, by comparison with citizens of all the rich nations, they are, on average, by far the STUPIDEST. By this I mean the least intelligent and the least knowledgeable. Google for hosts of surveys which will confirm this."
A few minor points:
1. Without defining how you measure "intelligent" or "knowledgeable", your statement conveys no usable information.
2. If your statement is to be taken as anything other than raw opinion, we should be able to expect a certain degree of intellectual rigor. If your source of information is the non-peer-reviewed Internet, it is by definition suspect. Do you have peer-reviewed sources you can cite?
@118 (jmm): "Our education system is failing us, particularly in teaching people to think for themselves especially, IMHO, in politics. Calling Obama a socialist or McCain a nazi is just plain ignorant. It is also destructive."
I definitely agree with this. It's been part of the culture war for too many years. Glad I got through it before the foolishness really started.
@ (rtcon): "I think that we need to bring our industrial infrastructure back home, re-regulate the corporate sector,..."
I'm puzzled by this statement a little bit. You want to re-regulate the corporate sector. Before I can agree or disagree, I have to ask: In what way, and to what end?
I ask because you apparently aren't considering the thousands of pages of statute and regulation that American businesses already cope with. You may also not be aware that our regulators find those statutes and regulations just as confusing as we do.
I once had the misfortune to have to ask the Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) folks a question about minimum clearances for personnel behind equipment racks. That should have been a no-brainer, straightforward question with an equally straightforward answer. All I could ever get from them was an "opinion" that carried no real weight. I wound up having to make a "best guess" which carried real financial implications.
That same inability to know what the law is is replicated every day in thousands of locations across the United States. It translates into extra costs for everyone, just like it did for me, because businesses can't operate on the basis of what the law IS--they have to operate on the basis of what it MIGHT BE, depending on WHO interprets it.
I am NOT arguing that we need no regulation...far from it. I AM arguing, however, that since all regulation costs something, we must establish regulation that is (a) precise, (b) understandable by the folks who have to apply it, and (c) directed specifically toward goals that are shared by the population and not just this or that interest group.
Arclight
Complain about this comment
@162 (gh): "Everybody thinks their own view, no matter how marginal, represents "progress." "
Good comment! This is parallel to the fact that everyone is certain that their political views represent the "mainstream", regardless of where in the actual stream (left bank, right bank, somewhere in between) they happen to be standing!
Arclight
Complain about this comment
179. At 03:06am on 09 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:
"The American people deserve more than lies from the right and the left."
On this we can absolutely agree. The Democrats are just as corrupt as the GOP. Where we part company is that I understand that BHO has been in the Whitehouse barely more than ONE year, and that the opposition among Democrat congress critters has been almost as bad as from the GOP.
The Dems wanted goodies, and the GOPpers wanted to undermine him to gain points in the next election. The result is, as you say, fine words but little action. So, can you really say it is all President Obama's fault? He isn't a dictator and can't ignore the corrupt and/or politically obstructionist congress.
Furthermore, the country is in a mess now because of what has been happening since Reagan's crazy, right-wing, trust the corporations not the government deregulation. It is amazing to me that blinkered right wingers can simultaneously attack Obama as a socialist, while calling him an enabler of the banks and big corporations. That they ignore the bailouts having been set up by GWB because the crisis had already started before Obama was elected.
So, yes, we deserve better than lies, deceits, and corruption from our government. We will not get that, however, unless a lot of people understand that THEIR party and THEIR congress person is just as venal as the other side. And we, the voters, need to pay attention to their actions, not their words, and punish any deviation from probity, whether or not we agree with the political statements.
Complain about this comment
GH1618 wrote: "It's not countries which are "fringe," it's Americans who think prop rep would be an improvement for the US who are "fringe," just based on numbers. I'll bet there isn't one American in a hundred who is in favor of that, and it's probably much less. I can only think of one person I've ever known after a lifetime of discussing politics who thinks pr would be a good idea for the US."
That would have more to do with that fact that most US citizens are not familiar at all with the concept of PR. But I think we both know that most in the US are not pleased with our two party system.
You say that those that do not capitulate to either the GOP or Democratic parties are "fringe". I think you may be missing the point. The GOP and the Democrats [i]are[/i] fringe groups. I know of few people who completely embrace either party. Truthfully most people on the street seem to chose their affiliation based more on what they dislike about the other party than what they like about their own. The Republicans and Democrats do not really represent anyone. However, they are deeply rooted, and most in the US don't really feel like any new group would be viable. And to be honest I'm not sure they would be either. Our two party system works hard to shut out others.
The only "outside" party to have really gained much steam is the Tea Party and its not really an outsider. Its the GOP with a different name. No Republican considers it a separate entity, even if Tea Party members sometimes like to pretend they are (so they seem more "edgy").
The two party system stifles subtleties in legislation. So when our representatives go to DC they pretty much have a party line to adhere too. We've done things this way for so long, that most in the US just accept it. So for many the idea of legislation that is strong in social justice but also pro-life, or fiscally conservative but pro-environmental seems impossible. To me that is tragic. It means that we've settled for accepting that unless policy follows one of two extreme views, it can not be viable. What a loss.
Complain about this comment
After the Bush/Cheney adminstration started two wars and sold the economy to ruthless unregulated bankers and then decided to tax the citizens so the wealthy would not be harmed by the bankers gambling that the Administration facilitied, it kind of dampens the spirit.
Of course the Republicans, in their usual avoidance of both responsibilities and the truth, wish to blame the current administration. The howeling monkies on this page that revise history to meet their political views would probably have better job opportunities in the old Soviet State. Presidents don't run the US bankers do.
Complain about this comment
re.#179. At 03:06am on 09 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:
"The American people deserve more than lies from the right and the left."
You mean we deserve lies from the center too?
After reading postings on HYS about Brtain's parliamentary system and multiple poltical parties it doesn't seem they're any happier with their system than we are with ours so why should we switch?
Complain about this comment
re. #107. At 11:00am on 08 Jul 2010, John wrote:
When I was a British kid 50 years ago, America was a nation renowned for hard work and generosity, that stood for democracy and rule of law and helped other nations out of the messes they had made (there were some stains but hey! nobody's perfect).
Bush's America by 2008 was a nation that despised democracy and law anywhere beyond its own borders (maybe even within), thought the world owed it a living and was spending itself into bankruptcy. Struggling with a self inflicted financial crisis, it had also insulted all its friends and got itself embroiled in 2 crazy wars. Don't know what Obama's done wrong to compare with all that.
Oh - and on the metric thing. The USA (5% of world population) is the only major (or minor) non metric country - if you want folks to buy your stuff (which you do to pay for the imports you NEED) it needs to be metric. Sorry.
----------------
Yes, we have become more like Britain in the last half century and it's a darned shame. We used to be self-reliant, independent people; now too many of us are content to sit back, pay high taxes and let government do everything for us.
I remember when government here tried to introduce the metric system back when I was in school; the average person saw no need to trade pounds for kilograms or miles for kilometers and simply ignored it. Our scientific and medical communities adopted it and many of our manufacturers also switched to metric. While it's a nuisance having two sets of wrenches in my toolbox I still see no reason to switch. If the rest of the world decided to adopt French as it's official language would Britons give up English for the sake of conformity?
Complain about this comment
Scott0962 (#203): "Our scientific and medical communities adopted it ..."
Scientific and medical communities already used the metric system, in the US as elsewhere.
Complain about this comment
rtcon (#200): "But I think we both know that most in the US are not pleased with our two party system."
We agree on that, except that I do not use the word "system" in that context. About a third of the electorate now describe themselves as "independent" or "unaffiliated."
Complain about this comment
Scott0962 (#202): "After reading postings on HYS about Brtain's parliamentary system and multiple poltical parties it doesn't seem they're any happier with their system than we are with ours so why should we switch?"
I wouldn't take HYS to be a stistically valid poll, but we may have one eventually from the UK. Lib-Dem party leader Clegg is an advocate for "reform" of the UK electoral system, and it seems he may get a plebiscite on the question from the Conservatives. It's pretty clear that Clegg favors changes because he believes they will give his party more votes, not because it will give the country better government. Except that any party believes that increasing its own representation will produce better government, of course. A plebiscite will show what the people think of the idea, which is where the real democracy lies.
Complain about this comment
"Ultimately, humanity is one and this small planet is our only home, If we are to protect this home of ours, each of us needs to experience a vivid sense of universal altruism. It is only this feeling that can remove the self-centered motives that cause people to deceive and misuse one another. I believe that at every level of society - familial, tribal, national and international - the key to a happier and more successful world is the growth of compassion. We do not need to become religious, nor do we need to believe in an ideology. All that is necessary is for each of us to develop our good human qualities."
- 14th Dalai Lama
Complain about this comment
Liberalism vs. Conservatism
LIBERALS - believe in governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, and that it is the duty of the State to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Believe that people are basically good.
Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems
CONSERVATIVES - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.
Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.
Personally, I don't want some government beurocrat telling me what to do and when to do it and NO people are not basically good, especially if they have not been raised in an environment based on honesty and personal integrity.
Complain about this comment
"Obama's own actions ... has awakened a sleeping conservative base which makes up this center right country." (from lancelot83 at #192)
Wishful thinking. President Obama's Gallup approval rating of about 45% is almost identical to that of President Reagan at the same point in his first term.
Complain about this comment
re. 204. GH1618:
Scott0962 (#203): "Our scientific and medical communities adopted it ..."
Scientific and medical communities already used the metric system, in the US as elsewhere.
in the early 70s as an undergraduate archaeology student I discovered that measurements were always metric. I have calipers that show measurements in both inches and centimeters but in practice I always use the metric measurements.
In a global economy there are great advantages to having one system of measurement. If American manufacturers want to sell products overseas they should expect to conform to international standards. And by and large, they do.
Complain about this comment
I'm going to amend my post #205. There has actually been a recent poll on the subject:
The Wall Street Journal
According to this poll, 52% of American adults are satisfied with the so-called "two-party system," while 31% believe a third (significant) party would be good for the country.
Complain about this comment
209. GH1618:
"Obama's own actions ... has awakened a sleeping conservative base which makes up this center right country." (from lancelot83 at #192)
Wishful thinking. President Obama's Gallup approval rating of about 45% is almost identical to that of President Reagan at the same point in his first term.
***********************
And just like people were shocked that Bush could get re-elected, people are fooling themselves into believing that Obama cannot get re-elected. Of course he can and will.
Unfortunately, just like Bush, Obama's turning out to be a divisive force that leaves half the country seething. Too bad we will have to go through this ugliness again. Regardless of which you side you're on, as supporter or opposer of the problematic president, it's very unpleasant.
Complain about this comment
Money paid to warlords comes from a $2.1 billion contract called Host Nation Trucking. The fund is allocated to pay for the movement of food and supplies to nearly 200 American bases throughout the country. Given unpaved roads in often mountainous terrain with hostile population, not to mention the incessant danger of Taliban attacks who can suddenly emerge and as quickly disappear, some American commanders feel the money is well spent.
This, however, is undermining the very government and its institutions, especially the army and police, that Americans say are being trained to take over once American and Nato troops leave the country.
http://www.crescenticit.com/daily-news-analysis/2814-americas-own-warlords-in-afghanistan.html
americans dserve to be more pessimists...2-1 billion dollars just to have a passage, thats too much road tax to be paid by the americans to few war lords.....Taliban refused to pay such taxes and over powered these war lords...
Complain about this comment
Here is another example of their pessimism, some people in american government have already floating idea of paritioning afghanistan, as they have given up the idea that they can defeat the taliban..
Complain about this comment
208. At 5:24pm on 09 Jul 2010, Hopalongcasualty wrote:
"Liberalism vs. Conservatism"
"LIBERALS - believe ... that it is the duty of the State to alleviate social ills ... . Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need."
"Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems."
------------
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
This nonsense just drives me batty.
Liberals believe in markets. They believe that justification for government intervention in the economy can only be based upon addressing market failure and collective action problems.
In social policy, Liberals do not believe that the state has the right to legislate morality.
Liberals do care very strongly about civil rights, because both their economic and social policy choices are based on a premise of people of free will being able to make economic and political choices. This cannot be done without strong protection of civil rights and a reliable legal system. Liberals are big defenders of the Rule of Law.
Liberals are the strongest of all believers in fiscal responsiblity, for a whole bunch of reasons that ultimately boil down to requiring economic actors to be responsible for themselves.
They are also huge believers in science and education, because that is where social and economic advances originate. Liberals are, therefore, big proponents of school voucher systems, and big opponents of meddling by religious groups in public policy.
"Liberals" are on the right wing of the political spectrum in terms of financial and economic policy, and at the exact center of the spectrum in terms of social policy.]]
------------
CONSERVATIVES - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense.
"Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals."
[[Nonsense. That is actually a fairly good short definition of the aord "Liberal", except that it is not the government's duty to "provide" freedom, but rather to prevent encroachment upon the freedom to which a citizen is already entitled as a matter of basic human rights.
In any case, the premise is wrong: It is not true of "Social Conservatives" at all. They believe that the state has all sorts of reasons, none of them too petty, to intervene in the private lives of citizens, whether those citizens like it or not, and whether those citizens are doing harm to anyone else or not. When it comes to certain policy areas, Social Conservatives never met a repressive or restrictive policy the didn't like, and in those areas of policy no level of government is too big. Social Conservatism and NIMBYism have a huge zone of overlap.
Historically, Conservative economic policy has not been in favour of free markets - consider the "Corn Laws", and the policies in favour of high tariff walls to protect domestic monopolies or quasi-monopolies. Conservative policy generally favours producers over consumers, and land holders over tenants or city dwellers. Conservatives are the defenders of long-entrenched economic interests that are opposed to change. It is from "opposition to change" that the very word "Conservative" is derived.]]
"Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems."
[[Not in social policy they don't. Conservatives are highly interventionist. They do not support civil rights, and have opposed the expansion of the protection of civil rights at every opportunity from The Missouri Compromise onward (and, indeed, before then, too.)]]
_______________
The misuse of the term "Liberal" in America to make it mean pretty much the opposite of what it actually means reminds me very much of the misuse of the terms "verbal" and "fulsome"
Verbal means, be definition, "in words". The words may, for example, be in written form or in spoken form.
Americans, however, use the word "verbal" when they really mean "oral" or "spoken", and as meaning the opposite of "written". Just plain wrong.
Similarly, the word "fulsome" means excessive, insincere or fatuous.
"Fulsome praise" means praise that is not praise at all, but rather insincere frippery.
Yet Americans use the word "fulsome" as if it means "comprehensive" or "abundant".
Please stop abusing the English language. MK does well enough at it by himself without your help.
Yours,
Ill-tempered Foreigner.
Complain about this comment
Casting wide generalisations during times of novel social crisis is sheer folly.
Complain about this comment
Interestedforeigner - sorry for using "American English" since I am an American. The definitions posted were in American English about an American Perspective related to "American Pessimism".
I shall abuse the "English Language" since I am writing from the United States of America and it is the only vernacular of English I am fluent in you ethnocentric snob!
Complain about this comment
You know, I've been thinking about this whole pessimism thing.
I wonder if it's actually a manifestation of Cultural Anomie Gone Bad*?
For decades, I think we Americans have been feeling less and less involved in and represented by our government. Our national politics got most of our press time, while the decisions that directly affected our daily lives usually take place at the unseen state & local level. Apathy Happens.
-- in the 80-90's there was a PR push to encourage 'young people' to vote.
-- in the 90-00's there seems to have been a cultural back-lash among 'young people' that voting didn't do any good, so why bother trying?
-- and, since I was a wee lass in the 70's lawyer jokes have been brutal.
(After all 'Poli-Ticks' merely means 'Many Small Bloodsuckers', yes?)
So, we have a culture of frustrated cynicism regarding our Great Nation's Politics. Yuck.
But wait! There's MORE!
Media and information distribution has been in transition in recent years due to the shift of news broadcast from Local News (TV & Papers) to National Syndicate Media (Cable News & Talk TV) and Web-based Media
Now, before folks start chiming in that the Internet is Evil (Although, I wouldn't exactly expect this opinion to manifest itself on a delightful forum such as this.), we must all remember two important things about the interwebz:
-- The internet is merely a tool to be used as the user wishes. Whether you use it to obtain facts, to spout vitriol, or to cruise for mischief is the User's prerogative alone.
-- AND - people tend to go to sources they trust for information... which tends to exacerbate myopic information dystopia. It's sad, but it's true.
So, people who want to believe conspiracy theories and disproportionately erroneous factoids-of-falsehoods, can do so very well from the comfort of their own homes, without ever EVER having their paradigms challenged.
Therefore IMHO - I believe this American Pessimism of which you write is a result of longstanding political frustration exacerbated by chronic lack of useful information.
Happy Friday! Have a great weekend.
After all, we must strive to always look on the bright side of life.
________________
* BTW - 'Cultural Anomie Gone Bad' may not the title of a naughty film, but it would be rather funny if it were.
Complain about this comment
Ref. 215, Interestedforeigner:
'The misuse of the term "Liberal" in America to make it mean pretty much the opposite of what it actually means...'
In the U.S. the term liberal refers to social liberalism. It's used correctly in that sense.
Complain about this comment
Hopalong (#217), I, too, am American, and you do not appear to have mastered English to me, American or otherwise.
Abuse the language all you like, but using "conservative" and "liberal" to characterize political beliefs is simplistic (another word often misused).
Complain about this comment
Oh - and I should point out that I may be frustrated and irritable at times, but I'm actually rather Optimistic.
Perhaps I am the exception that proves the rule?
Or, Perhaps I am one voice among many many many people who are realizing that the only way to turn this Big Ungainly Nation in the direction I want it to go is to stand up and start working to change my Neighborhood, my City, my State and my Nation for the better. Whaddaconcept.
Complain about this comment
217. At 7:24pm on 09 Jul 2010, Hopalongcasualty
There are many countries in the World that use English. America is the only one, as far as I am aware, in which the word "Liberal" is used almost universally incorrectly. Thus the name of an historically great political movement is twisted through the deliberate ignorance of right-wing talk radio into some kind of smear or insult. It's ridiculous. It is particularly offensive when it is used in the context of political philosophy or policies that are in fact quite "illiberal".
The meanings that I have provided are the correct meanings in standard American English, too.
If you don't know what the word means, either find out, or don't use it.
In any case, stop smearing by inference the legacy of better men.
Complain about this comment
Has InterestedForeigner been reading George Grant lately:
"Americans who call themselves conservatives have the right to that title only in a particular sense. In fact they are old-fashioned liberals.... Their concentration on freedom from governmental interference has more to do with 19th century liberalism than with traditional conservatism, which asserts the right of the community to restrain freedom in the name of common good."
(source unkown, but possible Lament for a Nation)
Complain about this comment
It was, indeed, Lament for a Nation. Here is a link to an article, American Exceptionalism, by Seymour Martin Lipset which references Lament and discusses this subject under the heading "Liberalism, Conservatism, and Americanism."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/americanexceptionalism.htm
(Warning -- this article is recommended reading only for the true historio-socio-political science wonks among us, who are bored stiff waiting for a new Mardell topic, or at least for some new thoughts on the old topics.)
Complain about this comment
Here's another item about George Grant on the subject of pessimism:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/books/article984707.ece
"He (George Grant) concluded that speech with a dark admonition. Hope in the future has been and is the chief opiate of modern life. Its danger is that it prevents men from looking clearly at their situation. ... Moral fervour is too precious a commodity not to be put into the service of reality." (from above linked article)
Complain about this comment
Personally, I long for the days when my pessimism could be branded "American." Fifty years along though, I'm afraid my pessimism has become truly global and matured into honest, old fashion "misanthropy without borders."
But then I remind myself of all the remarkably imaginative and creative people in the world who make life bearable, and I think: too bad the rest of us are going to kill all these imaginative and creative people off soon!
Is that too pessimistic?
Complain about this comment
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-black-panther-chief-malik-shabazz-on-king-samirs-kill-white-babies-comment/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/05/justice-attorney-set-testify-new-black-panther-case/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100704/ap_on_re_as/as_indonesia_war_on_christians_2
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4273869/nasas-final-frontier-the-muslim-world
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/08/mainstream-media-coverage-slim-nasa-black-panther-stories/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/09/new-black-panther-leader-defends-group-voter-intimidation-case/
Complain about this comment
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/05/justice-attorney-set-testify-new-black-panther-case/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100704/ap_on_re_as/as_indonesia_war_on_christians_2
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4273869/nasas-final-frontier-the-muslim-world
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/08/mainstream-media-coverage-slim-nasa-black-panther-stories/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/09/new-black-panther-leader-defends-group-voter-intimidation-case/
Complain about this comment
re. #210. At 5:38pm on 09 Jul 2010, timohio wrote:
re. 204. GH1618:
Scott0962 (#203): "Our scientific and medical communities adopted it ..."
Scientific and medical communities already used the metric system, in the US as elsewhere.
in the early 70s as an undergraduate archaeology student I discovered that measurements were always metric. I have calipers that show measurements in both inches and centimeters but in practice I always use the metric measurements.
In a global economy there are great advantages to having one system of measurement. If American manufacturers want to sell products overseas they should expect to conform to international standards. And by and large, they do.
---------------------
Exactly. And no one forced them to do it, they did it because it was in their own best interest to do so. However, supplying the global economy and the American economy are not the same thing. Sure, Americans could switch to the metric standard--but they don't want to and really, why should they?
There is no inherent advantage to me in measuring the outside temperature in degrees Centrigrade--if anything it is less precise because it offers only 100 measuring points from freezing to boiling instead of the 180 point span that the Fahrenheit system offers. And the same applies to miles versus kilometers or pounds and ounces versus grams and kilograms. About the only metric measurement we've gotten used to is in liquids and pharmaceuticals. We buy aspirin tablets sized in milligrams now instead of grains and we buy 2 liter soft bottles and 750 milliliter bottles of booze--yet we still buy 12 ounce cans and 64 ounce cups of soda. Go figure.
If we understand it and it meets our needs, why switch? Visitors to the U.S. can adapt to our quaint system of measures just like visitors to Britain adapt to driving on the left side of the road.
Complain about this comment
redwards36 wrote:
Ferrari... Lamborghini... Aston Martin.. Porsche... I could go on but its unfair !!! I think few would chose a Firebird over one of the European makes...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree those are all fantastic cars.
Still, if I could have any car in the world, it would be a 70's black Firebird like the one from Smokey and the Bandit!
Complain about this comment
re. #222. At 9:05pm on 09 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:
217. At 7:24pm on 09 Jul 2010, Hopalongcasualty
There are many countries in the World that use English. America is the only one, as far as I am aware, in which the word "Liberal" is used almost universally incorrectly. Thus the name of an historically great political movement is twisted through the deliberate ignorance of right-wing talk radio into some kind of smear or insult. It's ridiculous. It is particularly offensive when it is used in the context of political philosophy or policies that are in fact quite "illiberal".
The meanings that I have provided are the correct meanings in standard American English, too.
If you don't know what the word means, either find out, or don't use it.
In any case, stop smearing by inference the legacy of better men.
-------------
It is true that the word liberal once had a very different connotation in american speech. Teddy Rooseveldt was proud to call himself a liberal back in his day.
I think you'll find that today's American "liberals" largely brought it on themselves by switching to that term to describe their political philosphy because social liberalism sounded too much like socialist which had negative connotations for many Americans. Since the re-branding didn't change their views it was only natural that philosphical opponetnts came to use the word "liberal" in the negative sense. Now that "liberal" has come to be a pejorative American social-liberals are once again seeking to re-brand themselves by using the word "progressive" to describe themselves. Give it a few years and that word too will have a negative meaning in everyday use. (Hint to liberals: it's not the word on the label, it's what's inside the bottle that people find hard to swallow.)
Complain about this comment
re. 229. Scott0962:
Sure, Americans could switch to the metric standard--but they don't want to and really, why should they?
Because the rest of the world is producing goods in metric sizes. Think of how much of what we buy on a daily basis is made in other countries. Eventually manufacturers in other countries will get tired of packaging and sizing things for just the American market. It's an added cost for them. We'll be forced to adjust. Either that or bring the manufacturing of our consumer goods back to the US and give up the cheap prices from foreign labor.
And if we want to sell anything to consumers in other countries, we'll have to package and size the things we make using the metric system. And US manufacturers will get tired of having two measuring systems. It's an added cost for for them, too.
And unwillingness to change is not a good national characteristic.
Complain about this comment
215 IF,
You're defining "classical liberalism" in the first part of your narrative, not modern liberalism. In modern times the terms conservative and liberal are quite different. In the United States these terms began to reference ones fiscal philosophy on government spending and later included social issues like the separation of church and state, abortion, gay rights, gun rights; etc. Both groups today personify different portions of classical liberalism and even conservatism. It depends on the issue at hand and what one is willing to change and what ones is not. In short, using a dictionary to define modern political terms is overly simplistic and inaccurate.
Complain about this comment
# 215 Interestedforeigner wrote:
"Please stop abusing the English language. MK does well enough at it by himself without your help."
OK - I may not have rolled on the floor. But I certainly emitted a few audible chuckles
;-)
Complain about this comment
211. At 5:51pm on 09 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote that about a third of Americans think a third party would be good for the country.
I do too, a third or even a fourth, but fragmentation into numerous parties would not for the following reason:
I don't think it would be possible to reach consensus, for government to govern, if we were even more divided than we are already. Instead of being independent parties, the factions within each party are forced to try [often badly] to reach a consensus in order to be elected and then to govern.
Actually this is the same process that multiparty systems go through, but after a no-majority election. My civics class in high school discussed this, and we thought the US system might be superior because there was pressure at the begining to moderate and compromise.
New York has four parties [though the Liberals tend to go along with the Democrats and the Conservatives -formerly, tended to go along with the GOP]. If we transitioned to a European type system, the GOP might split into three, and the Democrats into at least three parties.
At one point in the early republic we had a congress of one party, a president of a different party, and a supreme court of a third party.
Just look at what Washington is like today and imagine what that would be like.
I think there are other reasons, but that is all for now.
Complain about this comment
# 231 Scott0962 wrote:
"I think you'll find that today's American "liberals" largely brought it on themselves by switching to that term to describe their political philosphy because social liberalism sounded too much like socialist which had negative connotations for many Americans. Since the re-branding didn't change their views it was only natural that philosphical opponetnts came to use the word "liberal" in the negative sense. Now that "liberal" has come to be a pejorative American social-liberals are once again seeking to re-brand themselves by using the word "progressive" to describe themselves. Give it a few years and that word too will have a negative meaning in everyday use. (Hint to liberals: it's not the word on the label, it's what's inside the bottle that people find hard to swallow.)"
As an outside observer, the impression I get is that US conservatives, despite their constant whining about the nasty old biased 'MSM', have done a splendid propaganda job on the word 'liberal' - which I would have thought literally means one who favours freedom. Essentially they claim that liberals are people who:
love foreigners and hate America
love criminals and hate the police
love taxation and government programmes and hate business, freedom, enterprise etc
love minorities and hate white people
love gays and hate straights
want to take away our guns and our tinfoil hats, and make abortion and homosexuality compulsory
It's hardly surprising that two phrases that are commonly used re liberals are 'tax and spend liberals' and 'bleeding heart liberals'.
Therefore, not surprisingly, those who believe in equality of opportunity may not choose to call themselves liberal - it's hard to blame them.
As to whether 'progressive' will gain a similar 'negative meaning in everyday use' - well, no doubt it will if Rush & Fox have their way. [And some people not 1m miles from this blog appear to view the latter as an objective source - which explains a lot.]
Put it this way - if the Dems managed by a clever propaganda campaign to convince most people that 'conservative' meant 'someone who hates minorities and people who aren't rich and loves wars', I suspect you'd find a lot of conservatives quickly finding a new label to describe themselves...
Complain about this comment
215. At 7:02pm on 09 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:
"The misuse of the term 'Liberal' in America to make it mean pretty much the opposite of what it actually means reminds me very much of the misuse of the terms 'verbal' and 'fulsome'"
I hate to disagree with you, as we agree on much else. But in this case you have blinders on. Why should Americans not spell colour as color? Why should Americans not have a different meaning of the word liberal? We also have different meanings for Whig, Tory, etc.
You are Canadian, and therefore lexically British, with which I have no problem. Our Tories became your Crown Loyalists so differentiation, at least in some cases, obviously, has resulted from post partum:) evolution.
American texts sometimes try to realign the vocabulary by referring to your "Liberals" as "Classical Liberals." I understand what you are saying, and understand a concern for mutual intelligibility, by we US Americans have been using this term in our own millieu for long enough to resist change.
There is a further problem, both the GOP and T-Party misuse the American term Liberal. This should come as no surprise, since they also misuse the terms socialism, socialist, communism, communist, nazi, etc., etc. So, to some extent, I share your irritation at obfuscation and lexical abuse.
Complain about this comment
208. At 5:24pm on 09 Jul 2010, Hopalongcasualty wrote:
Liberalism vs. Conservatism
LIBERALS - believe in governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, and that it is the duty of the State to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Believe that people are basically good.
In the UK and in this country (Australia) this ideology is known as Labour,as in "The Labour Party".
Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems
Whereas in the UK the Liberal Party is positioned somehwere in between Labour and the Conservative Party's. The Liberal party in Australia are the Conservatives.
CONSERVATIVES - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.
Complain about this comment
218. At 8:04pm on 09 Jul 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:
"You know, I've been thinking about this whole pessimism thing.
I wonder if it's actually a manifestation of Cultural Anomie Gone Bad*?"
What a great post! I just love that concept, "Cultural Anomie Gone Bad!!" Without a doubt, I will have trouble getting to sleep as I try to come up with corollaries.
Keep up the good work!
Complain about this comment
231. At 11:34pm on 09 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:
[Now that "liberal" has come to be a pejorative American social-liberals are once again seeking to re-brand themselves by using the word "progressive" to describe themselves. Give it a few years and that word too will have a negative meaning in everyday use. (Hint to liberals: it's not the word on the label, it's what's inside the bottle that people find hard to swallow.)]
I recollect that the “Communists” [who BTW are not really communist, but have twisted that word and many others for propaganda reasons—a Socialist People’s Republic is not socialist, is not run by, for or in the interest of the people, and is an oligarchy or monarchy masquerading as a republic] attempted to rebrand themselves as progressives at one time.
The “liberals” ought to rebrand themselves as Christian Democratic Socialists. At the very least it would leave a lot of GOPpers and T-Partites apoplectic!
Complain about this comment
As Americans,we have every right to be pessimistic.Our economy is severely depressed and we're needlessly involved in two unnecessary wars.We have two political parties,both on the right and the Tea Party Movement is getting stronger by the day and if expected,their candidates will win big time in this fall's elections pushing this country further to the right leading to even more unnecessary military spending,cuts in health care and an even greater loss of jobs.Enough said.
Complain about this comment
Pessimism?
I can't recall the author's name or his every detail, but I'll do my best to paraphrase.
'After you've turned twenty five it's all over -- the joy, fun, the striving and dreams- they're done. I mean sure, you're not dead, technically speaking, I mean you still go out, get drunk, have sex, get married, have kids and all that, but really it's already finished, done, over. Nearly every waking moment of your life from that point on is consumed in thinking of ways to get the things people around you got and that's about it. Oh yeah, that, and every four years you walk into a booth and pull a lever for the presidential candidate that reminds you most of yourself.'
I hope your break offers some rejuvenation, a laugh or two, and the mental vigor for those subtle twists of phrase we enjoy in your blogs.
Complain about this comment
231. At 11:34pm on 09 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:
"It is true that the word liberal once had a very different connotation in american speech. Teddy Rooseveldt was proud to call himself a liberal back in his day."
[[Quite so.]]
"I think you'll find that today's American "liberals" largely brought it on themselves by switching to that term to describe their political philosphy ..."
[[Quite so.]]
"I think you'll find that today's American "liberals" largely brought it on themselves by switching to that term to describe their political philosophy ..."
____________
No, I don't think so. I have a different hypothesis.
It seems to me that the term "liberal" was used more or less correctly in America, much like everywhere else, in its various related meanings until perhaps 20 or 25 years ago, possibly even 30 years ago (where does the time go?)
And then somehow on the far right of the spectrum the term started to be used as an insult. I recall a columnist named "Lubor J. Zink". His columns tended to be a mix of anti-communist polemics with anti-Pierre Trudeau rants - which, for him, frequently amounted to the same thing.
I used to find his columns rather entertaining, though perhaps not in the manner intended. His writing style and content tended to be reminiscent of Horseradish up the nose. By his standards, Ronald Reagan was a wishy-washy left-winger. In some respects, such as the variety of his topics and their gently nuanced presentation, MK might be his literary heir.
I think it was in one of his columns that I first saw the word "liberal" used in a manner that in essence equated it with communist fellow travelers. I don't know if he had picked it up somewhere else.
Over time this became more frequent and more widespread.
At some point, I would guess in the mid 1990's, it spread from the hard right and began to be used much more often. If I had to guess, I would say that it got a big boost in the Gingrich era.
The spread of the term as some kind of epithet used by right wingers really took off with talk radio and on the blogosphere. Now it is commonplace. Given sufficient saturation through repetition, over a sufficient period of time, and now you see and hear it even from people who should know better.
-----------
This, to my mind, is all part of the polarization of politics, where one's opponents are labeled and demonized. This constant demonization is one of the factors that squeezes moderates and compromisers out of political office.
Under the US system, which in former times did not have anything like the whipped discipline of party politics in a Parliamentary system, government doesn't work unless moderates on both sides of the aisle can find common ground and compromise. It is the constant and shifting exercises in coalition building that permits the wheels of US government to turn, and for things to get done.
But if you drive out all the moderates, and you refuse to find common ground on any terms other than that your opponents accept your position and only your position as a basis for anything, then US government doesn't function properly. It jams. It's like what happens when one kid says he's going to take his ball and go home. This is not a sign of the political maturity of a great nation. Rather it is political immaturity at its worst.
Both parties are prone to this, but I would say it is more of a problem in the Republican Party. I find it appalling that someone like John McCain, a senior statesman in the party, a former candidate for the Presidency, is deemed by members of his own party to merit so little respect that he can be seriously challenged for the nomination in his own state. That he then has to pander to these people in response is degrading. "Unseemly" does not even begin to describe it adequately. Have these people no sense of propriety or perspective at all?
It is mind boggling to me that the people in senior leadership positions in both parties, but particularly the Republican party, have failed to see the danger in this, and have failed to understand the damage it is doing to America. These are the John C. Calhouns, the Millard Fillmores, the Franklin Pierces and the James Buchanans of our days.
How is it possible to rise to positions of power and authority in either party, and not understand that you have a greater duty to your country? That you need to be able to put aside this partisan crap? America is in serious trouble, and it needs better government than it is going to get from this mindless name calling.
------------
And when you consider "liberal" economic and political thought, its origins, the great liberating and democratizing ideology that it was, (and is), the correspondingly great political battles of the 19th and 20th centuries, the giants in both politics and economics who stood as its leaders... These were men. Real men. Men of principle. Men of intellect, of determination, of principle. Of vision.
For the term "liberal" now to be a term of scorn and derision in the mouths of the intellectual pygmies who assail that legacy, who have neither knowledge of, nor appreciation for, the history of the times in which their own nation grew to greatness ...
------------
There is going to be a long and heavy price to pay for this polarization foolishness. It is immature. It is irresponsible. It is self-indulgent. It is destructive to the body politic of the nation.
America can't afford this "culture war" political polarization foolishness anymore. It should have stopped long ago.
Complain about this comment
"No one wants to take time off from work every time something goes wrong with a car and no one wants a car that gives them trouble when they could buy a Japanese car that runs forever."
If you buy a Toyota/Lexus the car will run forever (even if you hit the brakes).
And you'll run to the shop forever to have one problem or another fixed.
Complain about this comment
I am shocked! An article written by a European about Americans being pessimistic, the sky must be falling or the pot has just called the kettle black or someone in a class house just lobbed a rock.
There is a huge difference between being pessimistic and being realistic.
Wouldn't concerned and worried (and rightly so) be a better discription of the American mood at the moment?
Let's save pessimism for those people who feel there is no hope for a better future because of what country they live in. This certainly doesn't apply, in general, to America or Americans.
Complain about this comment
President Obama's analysis highlights the reality that our policies, particularly the shift from industrial might to a service oriented economy, are the main reason for the calamities we are enduring today.
Our government and the private sector must increase spending in R&D and infrastructure, not only to create jobs but to be able to compete in fields such as alternative energy development where we could easily become world leaders if we tried.
Unfortunately for us, that requires considerable spending and a greater focus on education at a time when government spending is being demonized and large numbers of young Americans are dropping out of high school or not attending college.
President Obama must continue to emphasize the importance of investing and preparing for the challenges ahead and should offer a high level plan that contrasts with the political opportunism and lack of vision of his opponents.
Complain about this comment
Ref 243, InterestedForeigner
"Unseemly" does not even begin to describe it adequately. Have these people no sense of propriety or perspective at all?"
Greed and a thirst for power often make logic and national interests inconvenient obstacles.
I enjoyed reading your excellent and very accurate synopsis of American politics. I guess that is not surprising considering my "liberal" leanings and how much I enjoy my freedom...
Complain about this comment
243. At 05:26am on 10 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:
an analysis with which I have total agreement, just the quibble about expecting American and British vocabularies to be identical remains.
Complain about this comment
Freedom of speech means that Americans have the choice to be as conservative as they want, Americans have the choice to be as liberal as they want, Americans have the choice to be as independent as they want. We do not have to agree with each other, but we should try to compromise with each other when it is possible.
I have read some comments questioning why conservative-oriented people would be on the BBC- well, why not?
I thought the BBC was supposed to be open to all political parties?
It is as if some liberals think only liberals should be allowed a voice?
Freedom of speech means that as many Americans of all political persuasions can get on the BBC as much as they want.
When others attempt to use bullying and intimidation, this is a sign of their weakness.
Perhaps, they realize their cover has been blown as to who they truly are?
Complain about this comment
To me, liberals stand for tolerance.
Tolerance includes:
marriage between two men or two women
marriage between cousins/relatives
marriage between dogs/cats/animals and humans
marriage between adults and children
marriage with multiple partners
giving citizenship to all people who come here legally and illegally
open borders and amnesty
To me conservatives stand for limited tolerance.
Limited tolerance includes:
marriage between man and wife
giving citizenship only to people who come here legally, following our laws and being pro-American, swearing allegience to our country
closed borders and no amnesty
Complain about this comment
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
Well Mark I don't mean to be pessimisric. Where Democrats and Republicans view the glass as half empty, or half full. Most common everyday Americans alienated by both parties view the glass as cracked, dirty, and the water as cloudy and of poor quality, or is that the government? But the political elite and hacks have a different vision. Do I think Obama and the dems care? Hmm, where is the rest of the stimulus money, ohh, I see spend it before the election (Why is it sitting there, does it collect interest?).
While many Americans continue to lose jobs and are suffering, those in power use it for political advantage. So much for feeling the pain, hope and change of these suffering Americans. Unless it is spare change to buy a vote? Keep writing Mark I really do enjoy you work, even if I can't always agree.
Complain about this comment
251. At 3:48pm on 10 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
Nice Lucy I really liked this post. If being a straight male allowed to shower with females, I probably would have stayed until forced retirement (LOL), but a very good point.
There is also counseling involved, a male soldier has to leave the door open when counseling a female soldier, and have another female view from a distance when I was serving. So now who sits there, a gay, a straight, or now with modern technology will it be a video camera? Well written.
Complain about this comment
Green techno is a long way off. A plane built by a Swiss man flew all day and thru the night powered with solar power. Small problem is it is the size of an Airbus and seats one. Plus the cost of making the solar cells takes considerable amounts of fossil fuels to produce. So it is a long way off. Does anyone here know where the US can buy some 238 plutonium for reactors, seems we ran out. Oh, well back to drilling.
Complain about this comment
249. At 3:25pm on 10 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
"Freedom of speech means that Americans have the choice to be as conservative as they want, Americans have the choice to be as liberal as they want, Americans have the choice to be as independent as they want."
[[ It's actually Freedom of Conscience, but your point is well taken nonetheless.]]
"We do not have to agree with each other, but we should try to compromise with each other when it is possible."
[[This is the assumption upon which American government was founded.
In my opinion, more than any other single person, Benjamin Franklin, by the strength of his intellect and open-minded personality, was the guiding and driving force behind it, from the 1740's onward. It is the story of his life: reasonable men working together, through rational discussion and compromise, can achieve great things. A remarkable man, in so many ways.]]
Complain about this comment
Skin color and sexual orientation are not the same thing.
A man and a woman of different skin colors sleeping together can physically have a baby.
Two men sleeping together or two women sleeping together cannot physically have a baby, unless they use scientific methods.
This is why people of different colors should and are being allowed in the military to sleep in the same rooms and take showers in the same rooms. Because skin color is not sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation, on the other hand, for gay people is being attracted to someone of the same sex. Such as a man liking a man or a woman liking a woman. Sexual orientation is not skin color.
Skin color and sexual orientation are two very different things.
Although I would like to add that people of different races do have some different genetics, although we all bleed red. Like one race may be more predisposed to a disease and so on, scientifically speaking.
Complain about this comment
244. powermeerkat:
"No one wants to take time off from work every time something goes wrong with a car and no one wants a car that gives them trouble when they could buy a Japanese car that runs forever."
If you buy a Toyota/Lexus the car will run forever (even if you hit the brakes).
**************************
A joke worthy of late night comedy.
Complain about this comment
Re: 223, 224, 225 - Gary:
Pardon me, for some reason I didn't notice those postings yesterday.
(1) The Martin Lipset article you cited was quite interesting. Thanks for posting the link.
Here it is again, for anyone else who is interested:
American Exceptionalism, by Seymour Martin Lipset which references Lament and discusses this subject under the heading "Liberalism, Conservatism, and Americanism."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/americanexceptionalism.htm
(Gary's warning at 223 is apposite, by the way.)
(2) No, I have not been reading George Grant lately - probably not in close to 30 years - and I never did read more than parts of "Lament for a Nation".
You have, however, struck the target dead-center: at least half a dozen times in the last 25 years colleagues have asked if I had practically written "Lament for a Nation".
(3) I am always impressed by your ability to find things on the net.
It is not common, at all, for Americans ever to have heard of George Grant - not very common for Canadians, either, unless they have an undergraduate degree in Canadian history or political science (I have neither, as it happens).
"Lament for a Nation", is sometimes considered the work that most nearly defines "Red Toryism".
"Red Toryism" and Red Tories themselves, are anaethma to Social Conservatives, and, particularly, to our present Prime Minister who has nothing but contempt for them.*
The contrast between Red Toryism and the Progressivism can be understood by comparing Lament for a Nation with a top notch work "The Progressive Party in Canada" by W.L. Morton, U of T Press. Great book, long out of print.
In any case, thanks for those postings.
------------
* Digression:
The Prime Minister appears to believe that by hood-winking Peter McKay into allowing the Progressive-Conservative Party to be taken over and throttled by an American-style right-of-center "we-like-our-steak-raw-and-still-mooing" party, he has at least neutered, if not exterminated, the Red Tory breed. But he is mistaken, and they still won't vote for him.
If the Liberals were smart they would stop playing footsie with Jack Layton's Socialists, and instead (a) move to the right to give a home to dis-affected PC's; and (b) try to convince the Greens (who tend to be richer than average, better educated than average, and often not particularly impressed by the virtues of Socialism), that a necessary first step is to get Stephen (Global warming?-Great-Let's-burn-more-coal) Harper out of power; and a second step, to keep him out, is to bring in voting based on ballots where you rank the candidates according to preference, as in Australia.
Can't say I expect much from Michael Ignatieff on this score, though.
Complain about this comment
45. At 00:59am on 08 Jul 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
"40 years ago America sent men to the moon and returned them safely...three times."
Three times eh? If your ability to count is a reflection of your general education I'm not surprised at the level of ignorance you show. Moon landings by Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 (that's six) plus lunar orbital flights by Apollo 8, 10 and 13 (three) makes a total of nine missions, although I will agree they were all made safely.
Complain about this comment
254 - California Happy.
I'd say 'pessimistic' is exactly how many Americans (including myself) feel. What I find more interesting is that you seem to think that the fact that Mark Mardell is a European somehow lessens the value of his observations.
Why is it that you think this?
Complain about this comment
250. At 3:42pm on 10 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
To me, liberals stand for tolerance.
Tolerance includes:
marriage between two men or two women
marriage between cousins/relatives
marriage between dogs/cats/animals and humans
marriage between adults and children
marriage with multiple partners
giving citizenship to all people who come here legally and illegally
open borders and amnesty
-----------------
The straw man argument is a ridiculously predictable tactic of the rationally challenged...
Complain about this comment
# 250 LucyJ wrote:
"To me, liberals stand for tolerance.
Tolerance includes:
marriage between two men or two women
marriage between cousins/relatives
marriage between dogs/cats/animals and humans
marriage between adults and children
marriage with multiple partners
giving citizenship to all people who come here legally and illegally
open borders and amnesty
To me conservatives stand for limited tolerance.
Limited tolerance includes:
marriage between man and wife
giving citizenship only to people who come here legally, following our laws and being pro-American, swearing allegience to our country
closed borders and no amnesty"
Well - I could say that 'to me the moon is made of green cheese'. That doesn't make it so.
So, do you actually have any evidence that these mysterious 'liberals', who support gay marriage, or civil partnerships, also support bestiality, incest and paedophilia? Besides your hearing some opponent of gay marriage on Fox saying that gay marriage is the same as these, or must ultimately lead to them? Could you perhaps name some of them and link to where they have expressed these views?
For example, there are a number of countries that have allowed gay marriage/civil partnerships. I believe the UK is one - and indeed that the current Conservative-led government supports this, and gay rights in general. Do you have any evidence that any country, or indeed US State, that has allowed gay marriage and/or civil partnerships, has faced serious call to legalise bestiality, incest and paedophilia, or has seriously considered doing so?
And if, as I suspect, you have no evidence whatsoever, why do you continue to come out with this stuff?
You seem to have an obsession with freedom of expression. You have a right to express your views, within whatever rules the BBC sets down here. What you apparently fail to grasp is that freedom to express your views grants you no right to have these views respected. It also grants you no right to stop others questioning your views or requesting evidence for what you assert as fact. That is the other side of freedom of speech.
Complain about this comment
# 251 LucyJ wrote:
"So if openly gay people are allowed to serve in our military, Congress is going to have to spend billions for extra housing." Etc etc etc
I would refer you to this link on the BBC website - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/us_and_canada/10582584.stm.
In particular to the following - "President Barack Obama and Adm Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, have called for an end to the ban, which was enacted in 1993."
So apparently the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff does not share your concerns.
But hey - what would he know?
Another 2 interesting facts in the article, the last of which in particular is conveniently overlooked by supporters of the ban on gays in the US military - "Since 1994, more than 13,500 US servicemen and women have been discharged under the policy.
Britain, Israel, Canada, Australia, France and at least 20 other nations allow gays to serve openly"
Two obvious questions
1 Do you have any evidence that the military in these countries, which include several US allies, have been unable to function effectively, or have had to spend billions on extra housing?
2 Does it not occur to you that there is a cost in expelling or refusing to accept those who want to serve - no doubt in some cases after they have had years of experience and training - at a time when, AFAIK, the US military has had to lower recruiting standards due to difficulties in getting enough recruits?
Complain about this comment
re. 254. AmericanGrizzly:
Green techno is a long way off. ...Does anyone here know where the US can buy some 238 plutonium for reactors, seems we ran out. Oh, well back to drilling.
Nuclear reactors use uranium-235 or plutonium-239. Plutonium 238 is not used in reactors since it emits alpha radiation, not gamma. It is used in radioisotope thermoelectric generators and radioisotope heater units. The US has purchased plutonium 238 from Russia for space probe power units since 1993.
Green tech is supplying power today in the US and many other countries. Hydroelectric power is green, so are wind turbines and ground-based photovoltaic systems. The building where I work has about 10 percent of its electricity supplied by a solar array on its roof, and that is only using about a third of the available roof area. And I live in NW Ohio, not exactly the sun capital of the US. The little Ohio city of Bowling Green has a wind turbine farm that generates 7.2 megawatts of power — enough to supply electricity for some 3,000 residents. And everybody is eyeing the Lake Erie shoreline, which has abundant wind throughout the year. The state government is putting grant money into supporting research and development of green power technology. There is a factory outside of Toledo that is producing solar panels using a thin-film technology that produces more electricity under a wider variety of conditions than conventional panels. The technology was invented in NW Ohio and the company is now the largest manufacturer of thin-film solar-electric panels in the world. Ohio intends to be a green power center in the coming decades. We need the jobs, so I hope they're right.
Power for aircraft is particularly difficult because of the power/weight trade-off. The particular problem for the aircraft you mention was the desire to generate enough electricity to not only power the aircraft in flight, but to charge batteries to power it during the night. That's why it had such a large size. It needed space for batteries (which are heavy) and a large enough wingspan to carry a solar array big enough to charge those batteries. It's a proof-of-concept vehicle. The first solar-powered man-carrying aircraft actually flew in 1974 (in the US), and in 1990 the solar powered airplane Sunseeker successfully flew across the US.
So don't sneer. Green power is a lot closer than you think. People think about green initiatives the wrong way, too. We don't have to completely replace fossil fuels to make a big impact. If we could decrease the demand for power plant-generated electricity in the US by 10 percent with relatively modest investments in solar power like my employer did, wouldn't that be a good thing? I drive a car that gets 41 mpg highway with a conventional gas engine. If one of the cars in every two-car American family got that kind of mileage, think about how much less oil we would have to import. If we simply did the easy and cheap stuff first, we would benefit enormously as a country.
Complain about this comment
229. At 11:20pm on 09 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:
---------------------
"Exactly. And no one forced them to do it, they did it because it was in their own best interest to do so."
"About the only metric measurement we've gotten used to is in liquids and pharmaceuticals."
____________
Having had to learn both systems, and having various conversion factors and physical constants permanently hard-wired into memory, almost any kind of calculation in the physical sciences is easier in Metric.
I love quaint old British Imperial units
(a "ton" of refrigeration = 24,000 BTU/hr;
1 BTU = 778.16 ft-lb(f);
1 hp = 2545 BTU/h = 33,000 ft-lb(f)/min;
1 psi = 27.7 inches of water;
1 lb of water = 7000 grains of humidity)
as much as the next guy, and I will never calculate fuel efficiency in anything other than miles per imperial gallon, but when it comes to kinematics, dynamics, fluid flow, thermodynamics and heat transfer, metric is way "miles" easier.
Complain about this comment
263, 264. J-i-D.
Thank you.
Complain about this comment
# 266 IF
De nada
Complain about this comment
264 timohio,
"People think about green initiatives the wrong way, too. We don't have to completely replace fossil fuels to make a big impact"
Bingo! The fact is we can not replace fossil fuels at this time and maintain reliability and current consumption levels with green technology alone.
Wind is erratic and does not always occur during peak demand. Twenty five years ago I was more optimistic about wind generated technology. Today? I'm not liking it at all. Yes the power generation is green, but the production and maintenance of the towers, blades, and back-up systems are not. There are also environmental concerns beyond noise and esthetics. You also need a lot of towers and transmission lines to carry the energy to larger cities.
I'm in favor of tidal and hydro electric power generation. However, there are some folks who see damming up rivers as adverse to the environment and marine life. Plus dams require a lot of steel, concrete and heavy equipment to build. Like wind farms, you also need a lot of towers and transmission lines to carry the energy to larger cities.
Solar power is the best alternative so far. And as you say, that technology has come a long way. It also has reliability problems as an energy source though. Night time and winter (depending on your location)means no energy, unless you have storage devices or are still connected to the grid, hopefully via a net meter. There are also site specific issues such as being in shadow at certain times of the day. Solar power makes a lot of sense for homes and small buildings and you could probably see 50% reduction in fossil fuel use in these applications.
Another idea making a come back is passive solar heating and cooling design. Incorporating passive solar design in our homes and buildings will lower the demand, and consequently the size, of forced air units needed for heating and cooling. While you can find all types of applications and strategies for passive solar design, I included a link below of a current application for a commercial building in Seattle.
http://www.weberthompson.com/pressreleases/prterrythomaswmig090429.html
Obviously, Seattle's climate is pretty moderate year round.
The point though, is that better passive design techniques can lower our energy consumption.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Re alleged shortage of uranium. [not true, btw.]
Commercial power reactors can be easily fueled with abundant thorium, which, on top of everything else, cannot be used in nuclear weapons.
[which takes care of a nuclear proliferation threat]
Complain about this comment
Soon after I moved to the US an American friend gave me a book of essays by Martin Amis (I hope my memory is correct). He coined a term that I think is brilliant: 'obscene optimism'.
As with everything American there is also the extreme of negativity, cynicism and skepticism (with both the left and right having their forms of this which are very similar in some ways).
Complain about this comment
Yes Thorium has been under development for 40 years.The high cost of fuel fabrication, due partly to the high radioactivity of U-233 chemically separated from the irradiated thorium fuel.
Separated U-233 is always contaminated with traces of U-232 (69 year half-life but whose daughter products such as thallium-208 are strong gamma emitters with very short half-lives). Although this confers proliferation resistance to the fuel cycle by making U-233 hard to handle and easy to detect, it results in increased costs.
Recycling thorium is a problem due to highly radioactive Th-228 (an alpha emitter with two-year half life) present.
There is some concern of the weapons proliferation risk of U-233 (if it could be separated on its own) along with the technical problems (not yet satisfactorily solved) in reprocessing solid fuels. So it is not a given and I don't know how far off it will be until the bugs are worked out so to speak. So perhaps it could happen. But I don't know how much the US has produced so far? From what I have read, India is currently leading in this research and design. But others are also involoved.
However, with some designs, in particular the molten salt reactor (MSR), these problems are likely to largely disappear.
Much development work is still required before the thorium fuel cycle can be commercialised, and the effort required seems unlikely while (or where) abundant uranium is available. In this respect, recent international moves to bring India into the ambit of international trade might result in the country ceasing to persist with the thorium cycle, as it now has ready access to traded uranium and conventional reactor designs.
Nevertheless, the thorium fuel cycle, with its potential for breeding fuel without the need for fast neutron reactors, holds considerable potential in the long-term. It is a significant factor in the long-term sustainability of nuclear energy.
Complain about this comment
Well if we can fund ACORN (now renamed into a front org). But we gave $0 dollars for 238 plutonium development for space or other. What makes you think there is money for thorium? Right now both parties governors of numerous states our putting their hands out to Washington $$$$$$$. What a mess. Well Japan just voted? Hmm..
"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine principles of it's constitution; I mean an additional article, taking from the federal government the power of borrowing. Thomas Jefferson, but what did he know?
Personal note: two weeks ago my company laid off another 22 workers, no work in sight. The saga continues.......
Complain about this comment
Ref# 250 LucyJ
To me, liberals stand for tolerance.
Tolerance includes:
marriage between two men or two women
marriage between cousins/relatives
marriage between dogs/cats/animals and humans
marriage between adults and children
marriage with multiple partners
giving citizenship to all people who come here legally and illegally
open borders and amnesty
____________________
At what point did it get into your head that liberalism promotes the override of consent?
Anything involving children, incest or animals cannot involve informed consent and this makes them wrong in a way that has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism.
Your citizenship line appears to be in line with the basic idea behind why the US came into being in the first place. You seem to have it right in terms of this being a liberal idea. It just seems to me that the alternative view is by definition, Un-american.
As for open borders, that's not true just because Fox says so.
Your associating the promotion of acts with an ideology you do not subscribe to shows an ignorance that betrays the merits in the conservative viewpoint you promote. It shows your views are not based on informed facts.
Complain about this comment
Re#269 I'm sorry, but I can't rewrite a picture of Anna Chapman.
She looks the way she look and my American pessimism does not allow me to consider her a beauty queen, even if she is a British citizen.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/sexy_russian_spy_anna_chapman_2Zmmc1rSqu2H71x3v7BibM?photo_num=12
Complain about this comment
274. At 2:57pm on 11 Jul 2010, PartTimeDon wrote:
"It shows your views are not based on informed facts."
____________
I don't believe they are intended to be.
------------
Consider the nature of the postings.
Consider the fixation with hot-button right-wing topics that get dredged up, over, and over, and over.
Topics that generate a lot of heat, but not much light.
Topics that really have very little to do with the really serious public policy issues facing America.
Comments that mis-construe (i.e., spin) the words and meaning of others.
Lots of straw men and non-sequiturs.
Lots of right-wing pot stirring.
------------
Consider the frequent inability, or perhaps unwillingness, of the postings to respond in a manner that engages others in rational argument, that frequently responds to logic only with bald (and often outrageous assertions lacking in any substantive support.
Now consider that the postings purport to be those of a person with a remarkable lack of general knowledge, and a level of naked parochialism that is almost self-caricature at times.
------------
Think, for example, about the apparently stunningly naive and banal questions posed to our local representative of the ISI/Taliban in the last week.
------------
Now think why most of us came here in the first place: when it come to real news, and in particular to international news, the BBC World Service is the finest broadcast medium that exists. This is the place where real, hard-news junkies come to get their fix. (My guess is that's why, for example, Marcus is here, even though he professes dislike of the UK, and contempt for all-things-EU.) But her, the postings present a persona that in terms of general knowledge and level of education is at the opposite end of the universe from a political hard-news junkie.
So what gives?
For someone with the persona presented in those postings:
How did she end up tripping in this gopher hole in the first place?
And, having tripped in the gopher hole, what explains the apparently anomalous continuing presence?
No, I'm not convinced they are intended to be postings based on informed facts or rational discussion thereof.
Complain about this comment
Sorry to hear about the current situation with your job, Grizzly.
I wish you luck in the future and hope very much that things will improve.
John, there's lots and lots and lots I could say, but it would likely be censored, so what's the point? I get on American blogs and it always gets posted there, so at least I can express my full views to other Americans in its totality.
Well, you know what they say- Ignorance is bliss. Would I rather be blissful and ignorant then know a lot and be miserable? You betcha!
Anyway, ignorance is in the eyes of the beholder. What may be ignorant to one person is not necessarily ignorant to another person. Everybody is different. People's cultures are also different across the USA and across the globe. What is normal for one person may not be normal for another.
If we were all the same, life would be very boring, indeed...
SO we should all be grateful that we are not all the same...
Complain about this comment
276 Interestedforeigner:
I wondered when you were going to get a clue about LucyJ. The thing to think about with LucyJ is 5 or 10 or 15 million LucyJ's going to the polls in November. That's truly scary. She's clever, but not smart. She doesn't even begin to understand what she asking for.
Such unbelieveable comments: "Well, you know what they say- Ignorance is bliss. Would I rather be blissful and ignorant then know a lot and be miserable? You betcha!
Anyway, ignorance is in the eyes of the beholder."
Oh yeah!
Complain about this comment
278. At 7:08pm on 11 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:
"I wondered when you were going to get a clue about LucyJ. "
*****************
Have you considered that your writing a comment like this here is not exactly a sign of superior thought capacity?
Ignorance may very well come in many forms.
Complain about this comment
LucyJ is an obvious phony. "Her" supposed naivete is wildly inconsistent, and "she" cuts and pastes without acknowledging it. "She" got a job, did she? One suspects "she" was in reality moved to a different shift.
Complain about this comment
279 AndreaNY:
Do I think LucyJ smart? No. Do I think she is clever? Yes. Do I think she is disingenous? Yes. Do I think she is a ringer? Yes.
Are you like LucyJ? Would you rather be "blissful and ignorant"? Do you really believe, "ignorance is in the eyes of the beholder."?
Complain about this comment
281. d_m:
I think she is, like you and everyone else here, entitled to her views and not worthy of ridicule.
I do not believe ignorance is bliss, but there is certainly something to her comment that ignorance is in the eyes of the beholder. Some otherwise intelligent people can behave quite ignorantly. With that, I'll stop discussing her as though she's not present.
Complain about this comment
Her "views" are entirely worthy of ridicule, if they're worthy of anything.
Complain about this comment
282 AndreaNY:
Not to worry, she's lurking here somewhere. Views like LucyJ's should always be ridiculed. Her views are nothing more than demagoguery. We all know what demagoguery can lead to.
Complain about this comment
Americans like what they can do for themselves, whilst Europe/UK Citizens like what the government can do for them. We don't want to lose the right to better ourselves from generation to generation, as it has made many poor (legal)immigrants have a much better life than where they came from. Losing that is concerning in America. They aren't pessimistic as they know a new president is just around the corner who can undo the mess Obama made. Americans fight (protest & vote) for their rights, Europeans accept the governments right to dismiss them. I lived in the UK for 8 years. I saw more angry people than I have ever seen growing up in America.
Complain about this comment
Barack Obama's notion of economics fails because it relies on deficit spending and mounting a national debt possibly reaching $20 trillion if he serves two terms. Debtors suffer from the basic inflation spiral of red ink spending. Obama will not see a savior from tax revenues based on a robust GDP. He thwarts a strong business surge with welfare bills, lack of attention to threats in the Southwest of the United States, and his misconceived wars in the Middle East.
Complain about this comment
"As with everything American there is also the extreme of negativity, cynicism and skepticism (with both the left and right having their forms of this which are very similar in some ways." - AAPrescott
I'm thinking you're correct in this assessment. I will say however that pessimism is not the best word to describe what many Americans are feeling right now which is more properly described as agitation, frustration, and disappointment; this will almost certainly influence the November Congressional elections if nothing good happens between now and then. Let's face it though; we haven’t had much to celebrate about lately other than our independence from the late British Empire.
Regardless, I prefer to enjoy the little things in life and smile when I can; we all owe ourselves that much.
Complain about this comment
286 sean56z:
Neither of the wars in the middle east are President's Obama's wars. They were both started by President Bush. As for the debt, that isn't really President Obama's debt either. The debt comes from the trillions of dollars we have spent fighting the wars begun during President Bush's adminstration and the financial collapse that also began during President bush's administration. Both the wars and the debt predated President Obama. It's not yet clear what health care reform is going to cost us or do to us.
Complain about this comment
There's a world of difference bewteen ignorance and willful ignorance.
We're all guilty of ignorance to some degree wheather we like it or not. Many times in these very threads I've read perspectives from both the left and right that I don't share, yet, I've often become informed of an aspect or fact to an issue that I hadn't been aware of and I'm glad to have been relieved of some aspect of my own ignorance in the process.
Willful ignorance on the other hand is a ploy. It is not an expression of views to arrive at truth or understanding, but in political dialogue is used to run the clock or poison the well.
On C-SPAN for example, I often see attempts by the willfully ignorant to run the clock. If an expert in a given field is present for one hour of calls, he will be forced to answer the same question repeatedly from every call of that side of the issue, each 'failing to understand' what has already been said, all in an effort to prevent the dialogue from moving forward.
In a thread such as this, the method is more to poison the well- to create an atmosphere that will dissuade people from even wanting to participate, and at the same to time see if you can push enough 'emotional buttons' to attract others to help you achieve this purpose.
Complain about this comment
Neither of the wars in the middle east are President's Obama's wars. They were both started by President Bush.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correction. They are america's war. Obama inherited, whitehouse, which he likes to live in, and he inherited the wars, which he likes to give impression that were not his wars...If he didnt want them, he could have ended them, and not sent the surge..not set the date for withdrawal and then orders his military to fight the war to win....If I was a american soldier in afghanistan, i would never fight a war which would end in one year...Mccrystal was I guess as clever as me, he found no reason to fight a war which would end in one year..
Complain about this comment
In a thread such as this, the method is more to poison the well- to create an atmosphere that will dissuade people from even wanting to participate, and at the same to time see if you can push enough 'emotional buttons' to attract others to help you achieve this purpose
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its an american way...they sideline their opponents by ridiculing them,when they are met with opinions which dont fit their narratives and or point of view...and then after siliencing their opponents, they very generously talk about what they believe their oponents believe, taking it to be the final word of G-d, in case if they believe in G-d, or final word of consititution if they are not religious, living as a nation which is united under one G-d.
Complain about this comment
Not to worry, she's lurking here somewhere. Views like LucyJ's should always be ridiculed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before you ridicule someone's view, you should atleast give alternative views which have some substance...
Complain about this comment
Its an american way...they sideline their opponents by ridiculing them, when they are met with opinions which dont fit their narratives and or point of view... - colonelartist
It is also the American way to speak your mind and express your opinion; LucyJ has every right to do so, and she is welcome to continue doing so.
Complain about this comment
#290
Well, we're both right. President Bush started the wars and Obama inherited them. And yes, sad to say, they are America's wars.
#292
As for presenting alternative views to LucyJ's comments: she's not interested. Others on here have tried it. She ignored the offer constructive dialog, so engaging in it with her is not possible. What can one say to comments like I'd rather be blissful and ignorant than know anything. Or comments like: "Skin color and sexual orientation are not the same thing." Your alternative response to that would be? So, by all means engage with LucyJ.
Complain about this comment
# 285 self00 wrote:
"Americans like what they can do for themselves, whilst Europe/UK Citizens like what the government can do for them. We don't want to lose the right to better ourselves from generation to generation, as it has made many poor (legal)immigrants have a much better life than where they came from. Losing that is concerning in America. They aren't pessimistic as they know a new president is just around the corner who can undo the mess Obama made. Americans fight (protest & vote) for their rights, Europeans accept the governments right to dismiss them. I lived in the UK for 8 years. I saw more angry people than I have ever seen growing up in America."
Where to start?
As I have pointed out before, I am strongly of the view that all postings can be discounted if they come from people who arrogate to themselves the right to speak for the hundreds of millions of Americans, or to make sweeping generalisations about the even more hundreds of millions of Europeans. Guilty on both counts.
"We don't want to lose the right to better ourselves from generation to generation, as it has made many poor (legal)immigrants have a much better life than where they came from. Losing that is concerning in America."
Again, appointing himself as the spokesman for all Americans. Because of course they are totally homogenous in their views. So how exactly is Obama preventing Americans from bettering themselves? Which rights that they enjoyed in the Golden Years of Bush/Cheney has he removed? And how exactly do European governments prevent people from bettering themselves?
This relates of course to a great American cliche - 'Other societies may be hidebound by class but in America you can go from a log cabin to the White House. Just look at how GW Bush pulled himself up by his bootstraps...etc etc'. The problem is that any actual research I have seen on social mobility - on how much a person's wealth and socioeconomic group is influenced by their family's - suggests that the US is at best no better than other major democracies, at worst considerably worse.
"They aren't pessimistic as they know a new president is just around the corner who can undo the mess Obama made."
Anyone who claims to be able to predict the result of an election some 2.5 years away is clearly a liar or a fool.
"Americans fight (protest & vote) for their rights, Europeans accept the governments right to dismiss them."
So no doubt you have evidence showing that voting rates are higher in the US than in other democracies? I'd love to hear it. News to me.
Whatever the rights and wrongs, the Greeks don't exactly seem to be rolling over and accepting whatever their government dishes out. Not that many years ago widespread protests and indeed rioting in the UK were considered to have contributed to the downfall of Thatcher, the most electorally successful PM in over a century. But let not the facts interfere with the generalisation.
Complain about this comment
293 BienvenueEnLouisiana:
"It is also the American way to speak your mind and express your opinion; LucyJ has every right to do so, and she is welcome to continue doing so."
I agree. People have the right to their opinions (at least to the exctent te moderators allow) and people are permitted to disagree with those opinions.
Complain about this comment
# 277 LucyJ wrote:
"John, there's lots and lots and lots I could say, but it would likely be censored, so what's the point? I get on American blogs and it always gets posted there, so at least I can express my full views to other Americans in its totality."
While I don't always agree with the BBC Mods, and certainly don't always find their rulings consistent, as I recall you have had dozens of 'unmoderated' postings, and as a general rule the % of all postings deleted is small.
So I shall draw the logical conclusion that you do not defend your claims because you realise that they are indefensible.
"Well, you know what they say- Ignorance is bliss. Would I rather be blissful and ignorant then know a lot and be miserable? You betcha!"
Much speculation as to who LucyJ is. But surely that "You betcha!" is a dead give away. As I recall she used the expression in the VP debate.
Clearly, LucyJ is actually SarahP.
"Ladies and Gentlemen, the next President of the United States...."
Complain about this comment
297. John_From_Dublin:
"Clearly, LucyJ is actually SarahP."
*****************
Is George Bush here, too?
Complain about this comment
297 John_From_Dublin:
Say it isn't so...
Complain about this comment
#277 LucyJ:
What are these blogs LucyJ. Name a couple.
Complain about this comment
297 John_From_Dublin:
Clearly, LucyJ is actually SarahP.
"Ladies and Gentlemen, the next President of the United States...."
________________________
SarahP wishes she could talk as much 'sense' as LucyJ.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
278. At 7:08pm on 11 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:
276 Interestedforeigner:
"I wondered when you were going to get a clue about LucyJ." [[Go back to my very first, or very early (?), lengthy reply to "Lucy". I've been trying to piece together "Lucy" is for quite some time.]]
"The thing to think about with LucyJ is 5 or 10 or 15 million LucyJ's going to the polls in November." [[No, there aren't. There are relatively few Lucies. But the Lucy persona is, I suspect, a polling composite, and of them, yes, there are probably plenty.]] That's truly scary. [[Yes.]] She's clever, [[Yes, in some ways.]] but not smart. She doesn't even begin to understand what she's asking for. [[There I am pretty sure you're wrong.]]
____________
280. At 7:48pm on 11 Jul 2010, GlencoraP wrote:
LucyJ is an obvious phony. "Her" [[In my old posting I guessed it was the writing of a 25 year old male]] supposed naivete is wildly inconsistent, [[Yes, very much so.]] and "she" cuts and pastes without acknowledging it. [[The pastings raise inconsistency issues, too.]]
"She" got a job, did she? One suspects "she" was in reality moved to a different shift. [[Don't know where reality ends and truth begins on that. I didn't see any reason why that would not be true. What would have been the point of lying about that? Did I miss something?]]
__________
281. At 7:51pm on 11 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:
279 AndreaNY:
Do I think LucyJ smart? No. Do I think she is clever? Yes. [[Ditto, but not clever enough to avoid being inconsistent.]] Do I think she is disingenous? Yes. [[Ditto.]] Do I think she is a ringer? Yes. [[Ditto, might have used the word "plant".]]
Are you like LucyJ? [[No, Andrea does not make those mistakes. Andrea's specialty is counter-punching. Leave it at that, for now.]]
------------
282. At 8:50pm on 11 Jul 2010, AndreaNY wrote:
281. d_m:
"I think she is, like you and everyone else here, entitled to her views [[Yes, of course]] and not worthy of ridicule." [[Two minds on this: With exceptions for trailer parks in New Jersey, etc., usually personal ridicule is out-of-bounds. But what if the postings involve deception or false pretenses? Hmm.
I do appreciate J-i-D's mockery, though. He has been on a roll the last while ...]]
------------
283. At 8:57pm on 11 Jul 2010, Tinkersdamn wrote:
Her "views" are entirely worthy of ridicule, if they're worthy of anything. [[Yes, but it depends. When a slow pitch is served up right over the plate, why not take it at face value and send it over the wall?]]
284. At 9:25pm on 11 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:
"282 AndreaNY:
Not to worry, she's lurking here somewhere. Views like LucyJ's should always be ridiculed. Her views are nothing more than demagoguery. [[The Lucy "persona" views are demagoguery, true. As far as I can tell, they are intended to be.]] We all know what demagoguery can lead to. [[Yes.]]"
------------
All:
You may recall that last Summer there was a long bash with some people who appeared to be working for, or on behalf of, the Government of Iran or one of its surrogates. A very similar problem arose.
It is the same problem raised by a number of other posters on this site. There are clearly people who are employed to monitor the site on certain topics. They appear every time we touch on, e.g., the eastern Med, Iran, Gun Control, Health Care, and so on. I suspect that the good ones are paid consultants; the not-so-good ones include volunteers working from defined lists of talking points prepared by the party or lobbying interest on whose behalf they are posting.
Somehow it seems like cheating to me, and distinctly lacking in good sportsmanship. Sort of like football (i.e., soccer) players who dive, or fail immediately to admit that they have handed the ball into the net, in a world cup game - ought to be banned for life.
What do you do about them?
Some days it is tempting to wish that one of the BBC rules required explicit disclosure by those being paid to monitor the site, or engaged by governments, political parties, or interest groups. Deliberate and repeated lying or deception, or fakery, raises the Josef Goebbels issue, too.
But the BBC probably doesn't have the ability to police it, and even if it did, to what end? Genuine posters could make the same points, and the response in a system of free speech is to rebut the posting.
Annoying, nonetheless.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
John_From_Dublin wrote:
"As I have pointed out before, I am strongly of the view that all postings can be discounted if they come from people who arrogate to themselves the right to speak for the hundreds of millions of Americans,"
It isn't a question of speaking for the rest of Americans but it is certainly reasonable for an American to know much more about his fellow citizens than someone thousands of miles away from another country just as I am sure you can reasonably judge much better the feelings and inclinations of your fellow citizens over someone not from your country.
I know it's hard for some of you people over there in Europe to comprehend but just because you watch our movies, TV shows and listen to our music doesn't somehow get you in tune with American life and culture to anywhere near the extent that a native American is.
"This relates of course to a great American cliche - 'Other societies may be hidebound by class but in America you can go from a log cabin to the White House. Just look at how GW Bush pulled himself up by his bootstraps...etc etc'. The problem is that any actual research I have seen on social mobility - on how much a person's wealth and socioeconomic group is influenced by their family's - suggests that the US is at best no better than other major democracies, at worst considerably worse."
Right, that explains why you see so many minorities in positions of power throughout Europe, huh?
"Anyone who claims to be able to predict the result of an election some 2.5 years away is clearly a liar or a fool."
And anyone who denies Obama's unpopularity is equally "a liar or a fool." Regardless, just like Bush he can go no more than two terms and his nightmare is over.
Complain about this comment
Regarding my post #302:
Hilarious. Apparently your are not allowed to question Obama's intelligence in this forum or his bizarre primary goal of having NASA, as a priority, reach out to the Muslim community. Wow!
:)
Complain about this comment
Regarding my post #302:
Oh, I forgot, apparently you are also not allowed to question the opinion of the people of what I and many others believe to be one of the most pessimistic countries in the world, the UK.
Complain about this comment
re. LucyJ or not LucyJ
None of us here knows if any of us is what we appear to be, and there is no value in judging if a persona is true or not. The only truth is what appears on the screen, and that is what we all have to deal with or respond to. If Lucy is her true self, then she should play with the grownups as a grownup. I've had my doltish moments and been called on them. So have others. Rules of the game. If Lucy is a plant or a pseudonym, he or she has to deal with the rest of us nonetheless.
Living in the Midwest, I have no reason to doubt that Lucy is herself as she says she is. There is an internal consistency to what she says that sounds real to me. Yes, she is naive, but there is a kind of engaging quality to that, even as I sometimes cringe at her postings. I was young once, too, but I listened, learned, and grew as I got older. I hope I still can. And sometimes a naive comment can contain a certain wisdom. So I listen to Lucy even if I disagree.
It's not a club, folks, it's a blog. No one should be driven from here because of their opinions.
Complain about this comment
re. LucyJ
And I might add that we give ourselves way too much credit if we think that we are worthy of attention from political parties or governments. I don't know what the hit numbers are on this blog, but I doubt that they are anywhere close to Lindsay Lohan's. Sad to say.
Complain about this comment
To Interested Foreigner, John from Dublin and Tim Ohio
At first I thought LucyJ was a naive young person, then I began to suspect s/he was a cutout, agent provocateur or poseur of some kind.
A few attempted conversations were frustrating, so I just watched for a while.
This person is inconsistent and sometimes contradictory, has wild mood swings, appears to believe s/he is making sense or even offering profound truths when it is really regurgitated talking points and nonsense. There is more than a hint of paranoia and bigotry as well. Then there are the non sequiturs and bizarre segues on offer.
Everyone, myself included, makes an occasional such departure, but they are departures. With this LucyJ it is a constant barrage.
It has finally donned on me that this is more or less exactly what my brother was like before he found Jesus and gave up weed. This being the case it is possible, as Tim Ohio has said, that this is a real but messed up person.
I have never used the complain button because I believe in freedom of speech and don’t like censorship. So yes s/he has a right to have and even to publish bizarre, addled or disagreeable opinions, even if a poseur or a pothead. However, nobody is obliged to read or respond to it.
As for driving her/him away, it was attempted on me by Jacksforge and I did not like it and wouldn't do that to anyone else.
Complain about this comment
"So yes s/he has a right to have and even to publish bizarre, addled or disagreeable opinions, ..."
___________
Heaven only knows, if those were grounds for banning postings, there'd be some very short threads.
Complain about this comment
309. At 02:30am on 12 Jul 2010, timohio wrote:
"And I might add that we give ourselves way too much credit if we think that we are worthy of attention from political parties or governments...."
____________
Well, you might think so.
However, only last week the governing party admitted in the press it does precisely that. And everything they do, they first learned from the Republicans.
But even they aren't the most obsessive. Just wait until there is a string on the Dalai Lama, or Tibet, for example. It will seem like every other post echoes the Chinese government position.
Not this particular blog you say?
Well it won a prize for Justin Webb, so they're here - like cockroaches and bed-bugs.
Complain about this comment
Re: #9 Marcus,
Nice post. Your position is well presented.
Complain about this comment
Like it or not, we in the US are going to have to cut defense spending as well as reduce our overall budget spending.
Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas and Democratic Congressman Barney Frank are co authoring a bill that would bring home all US troops from Europe, Japan and South Korea as well as Iraq and Afghanistan. By changing our posture to strictly the defense of the American Homeland, the estimated savings over a decade would be $1 trillion dollars every decade or perhaps even greater savings.
A strong defense? Yes. Playing the worlds guardian protector and first responder? No
We are witnessing bipartisan cooperation that will hopefully usher in an era of Isolationist Congressional oversight of the Executive Branch.
Complain about this comment
" when it come to real news, and in particular to international news, the BBC World Service is the finest broadcast medium that exists."
So perhaps Interested Foreigner, you could kindly explain to us why BBC staff's pensions have been cut?
[curious meerkats want to know.]
Complain about this comment
303. Interestedforeigner:
"There are clearly people who are employed to monitor the site on certain topics. They appear every time we touch on, e.g., the eastern Med, Iran, Gun Control, Health Care, and so on. I suspect that the good ones are paid consultants; the not-so-good ones include volunteers working from defined lists of talking points prepared by the party or lobbying interest on whose behalf they are posting."
***************
You do realize that you are reading way too much into this? There are many, many people with viewpoints like hers. That you don't realize this makes you the one with the limited knowledge.
You need to broaden your exposure.
Complain about this comment
309. timohio:
re. LucyJ
And I might add that we give ourselves way too much credit if we think that we are worthy of attention from political parties or governments.
*******************
Amen.
Complain about this comment
My # 304 was 'moderated', apparently because the Mods thought my quotation from HL Mencken might prove 'provocative' or 'offensive'.
It may be found on his Wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Mencken
It is the last quotation under the heading 'Democracy'
If the Mods allow you to click on the link, be prepared to be offended and provoked.
Whether you consider the quotation applicable to the last presidency, or indeed to the Divine Sarah, is of course entirely a matter for you...
Complain about this comment
Ref# 315 PMK
"So perhaps Interested Foreigner, you could kindly explain to us why BBC staff's pensions have been cut?
[curious meerkats want to know.]"
_________
Non-sequitur alert...
Most BBC staff do a great job.
The BBCs reputation is hard won and well deserved. If you don't like the service you get here, you know where the door is.
Complain about this comment
Ref# 309 timohio
And I might add that we give ourselves way too much credit if we think that we are worthy of attention from political parties or governments.
___________
That's probably true, but this type of blog is an indicator of what people who follow american politics are thinking. While it is unlikely that this blog is actively monitored, it is feasible that a few of the contributors are actively engaged in politics or in its reporting.
Also as an indicator of attitides to politics, it would be wise, periodically at least, to make sure that their reading of the political attitides of us plebs is roughly in line with what we have to say. True to form we are indeed a decent indicator of American politics. Left and right can't have a civil conversation without cheap point scoring and most of the rest of the world thinks the American right have views that verge on the extreme.
Any belief that we can go beyond this and actually influence is not really feasible. Fox and MSN work because they are big enough straw men that to pretend they are reflections rather than creations of a political viewpoint has a decent rate of return in terms of influencing others. With the best will in the world, this blog neither big enough to be worth the time or investment nor relevant enough. Why persuade foreigners who can't vote in the US.
Complain about this comment
307. At 02:21am on 12 Jul 2010, AllenT2 wrote:
Regarding my post #302:
Oh, I forgot, apparently you are also not allowed to question the opinion of the people of what I and many others believe to be one of the most pessimistic countries in the world, the UK.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ouch,If you would have said the most cynical nation on this earth,that
would be nearer the mark,& we would have worn that badge with pride,aka
the old contemptables.The cynical contemptables has a roundness to it,
but just pessimistic is just so tame.We really are a peculiar sort,what!.
Complain about this comment
As long our current election process requires candidates to have hundreds of millions of dollars, we voters will have little or no input into the process. The candidates of both parties must have fully sold out to their investors, er, donors. This sets their agenda to benefit those donors and not the nation as a whole.
This is the reason that the bail-out primarily funded Wall St and big banks and did nothing for small and midsize businesses (where 80+% of all new US jobs are created.) This is why UAW workers effectively became government employees. This is the reason the health care plan is really about massive profits for big pharma. This is the reason that the current Administration (who had no plans to do much of anything about the BP spill) finally recognized the PR issues and came out and addressed the nation 57 days after the incident and then really said nothing. The push by this Administration to implement a Carbon Tax or Credit trading isn't about AGW or the future. Its about major profits to few well placed donors.
This administration (and its predecessors) are fully in the thrall of their 'owners'. Elections are an expensive, multi-year process. Presidential candidates have to have the millions of dollars to win and hold office (this is true for US Senators and to a lesser extent Congressmen as well.) Until the election process is cleaned up and managed, the candidates will remain 'owned' by their donors.
Complain about this comment
Off topic rant
Roland Polanski a convicted sex offender will not be extradited to the U.S for jumping bail.
The Swiss seemed more concerned about protecting a celeberty than obeying treaties and prosecuting sex offenders.
Europeans now will you please stop lecturing the U.S about out system we prosecute celberties.
Shame on the Swiss!
Complain about this comment
It is also the American way to speak your mind and express your opinion; LucyJ has every right to do so, and she is welcome to continue doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, its not americans way to speak your mind, you can speak your mind and express your ideas as long as they confirm to the narrative that is presented to you....You and lucyj and o riley and the likes can speak and express anything against islam and muslims, provided they add a footnote that whatever hatred they speak against islam and muslims is only limited to the islamist terrorism, on the other hand people who have challanged your narratives have been ridiculed and silenced, the latest example is that of that old lady journalist at the white house press corps, helene thomas, who at one time was presented as the one who asked tough questions. A few wrong sentences against israel, and she was forced to apologize, resigned and sidelined..while the rileys and the likes can keep on saying rubbish against muslims, their countries, their laws, their ethnicity and on and on on..
Complain about this comment
In my humble but correct opinion, you are all different variations of lucyj...Some are more lucyj and others are less, but you are all fruit of the same tree...
Complain about this comment
re. 310. JMM:
This person is inconsistent and sometimes contradictory, has wild mood swings, appears to believe s/he is making sense or even offering profound truths when it is really regurgitated talking points and nonsense. There is more than a hint of paranoia and bigotry as well. Then there are the non sequiturs and bizarre segues on offer.
To be honest, she reminds me of a former neighbor. If you get out into the small towns and rural areas of Ohio, there are a lot of Lucys. They're sitting ducks for demagogic talking heads. Even if she doesn't watch or listen to people like Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh (which is what she says), she's certainly in a milieu where their opinions are repeated. And if the people around you regularly express those kinds of opinions and are never challenged, eventually they seem like the truth to you and anything you hear to the contrary is labeled as extreme. But I do recall leftist college students in the 60s who were about as bad on the other extreme. Everyone who disagreed with them was a fascist.
As you say, no one is forced to read her posts. If anyone wants to reply, they should think of it as an exercise in writing clearly about their own opinions and firmly but politely refuting hers. I never reply to posts I disagree with thinking that I'm going to convince the writer, but I think it's important to present a different point of view for others who might be reading this blog.
Complain about this comment
Many of you seem to be wondering about why haters hate. There are many with vile postings and attacks on others. The right-wing bloggers have blamed everything on Obama since his first day in office and seem to forget everything that happened in the previous eight years or what the Republicans in congress do to facilitate the bankers and big business at the expense of the taxpayers. These are folks with no integrity and feel the ends justify the means. You will never change them as the ignorant find power in their very ignorance. Most of these posters have their ears pressed to some radio talk show host who is making millions off of them and repeating what is said as if it is the truth...snake oil salesmen with their followers....Madoffs of the radio world.
Complain about this comment
Magic Kirin
A rant indeed. Europe is of course, composed of over 30 different countries with a total population of about 600 million, all countries with different histories, cultures, legal procedures and points of view.
Therefore to assume that Switzerland (a country of around 6m) represents the views of the entire of Europe is a little bit stupid.
In any case, the extradition was refused because the US law enforcement agencies failed to issue the correct paperwork - again. The Swiss take these things seriously - it is a shame that the US obviously did not.
Complain about this comment
John_from_Dublin (#318), Mencken was a professional cynic and a satirist, among other things. His insights into American politics of the early twentieth century, however amusing, don't have much applicability to the present day.
Complain about this comment
I humbly request to Mr Mark Mardell to come to the rescue of posters by opening a new thread...When people move from the actuall subject matter and start discussing a person, then its time to admit that their pessimissim towards the topic has taken control of them...So, give them a new topic..