Slashdot is currently occupied by moronic postmodern leftists and stinky Europeans. Too bad a more rational and intelligent geek forum is not available.
Actually we only owe about 41% of our GDP as debt (about 3 trillion dollars). That number you mention includes intergovernmental debt, which is debt the government owes to itself, which is a silly concept. Essentially, trust fund programs like Medicare and Social Security are counted as debt, as we are currently using trust fund surpluses as regular income.
If you doubt my 41% figure, check out what the IMF says.
Nonsense. The invasion by the Soviets was simply them trying to dictate their will to the people of Afghanistan. The Taliban were a faction of the mujahadeen, many of the Taliban's enemies also fought the Soviets (like that Lion of Afghanistan guy).
Gerrymandering has an overrated effect on US elections. Essentially, it really just gives a majority more votes than is representative by opinions, and that's just in houses where representation is by district and not by state.
Democrats heavily gerrymandered for 50 years, and if you look at opinion polls, they were indeed the majority party. Then Republicans took the house in 1994, which they shouldn't have been able to do if gerrymandering were all powerful.
The US is slowly having third party commissions draw up districts but it's a slow process and they have to do it state by state.
In my opinion, when you add it up the US simply has the most democratic government in the world, if you look at opinion polls and actual policies. Period.
surely there's a way for your president to call early elections in certain circumstances.
See now, to me that would seem like dangerous imbalance of power and one inherent in most parliamentary sytems. Divided governments are clearly superior, IMO. And to my knowledge election rules are determined by Congress as per the constitution. The president may have some influence with the FEC.
interference of electoral colleges or partisan state governments as our elections are runned by an independent third-party part which is public service
I've had this discussion with other Aussies and frankly it's depressing to hear you all say this. There is no such thing as an independent third-party. If you think there is, it's quite naive of you.
In the US elections are decentralized. This is preferable IMO to a central committee controlling everything. Essentially you are responsible for overseeing the electoral process in your own local community. In the end, it's all up to the people.
I predict a large transfer of wealth in the near future from industrialized nations to developing nations (it may have already started). As Asia has gained an absolute advantage with the US, as comparative advantage no longer applies, the factors of production are moving offshore. As such, revenue streams are diverted from the US. All nations must pay for their imports with their exports and as we have nothing to export our currency will collapse, as will our standard of living and our middle class.
Even if Canada wasn't closely allied to the US economically this would still affect you. Capitalism will seek out the countries/regions with the greatest absolute advantage when it can (and it most certain can today).
In the globalist free trade, having a high standard of living is a disadvantage. Therefor I can't think of many Western countries that are immune from this, unless their standard of living is low.
There are certian situations where trade is indeed a zero-sum game or at least close to it. You're right that it's not a perfect zero-sum game. Economists, however, know that regions can decline in standard of living because of normal economic forces. To assume that countries cannot decline is naive.
Ricardo said for comparative advantage to be applicable, the factors of production have to be immobile. If the factors of production are mobile (and service jobs are perfectly mobile) then the factors of production will move to the country with the greatest absolute advantage.
It's better than the unsubstantiated anecdotal evidence that you offer.
Did Australia lift it's uber-protectionist Australian-content laws? Hell, I ain't even against you protecting your own "culture", just don't try to paint the US as protectionist and Australia as being an enlightened free trader. Don't give me that shite, mate.
Yeah but you do get to keep your Canadian content laws (which are more protectionist than anything the US has done). Alanis Morrisette is a natural treasure up there apparently.:)
More accurately, the US is a limited democracy. Direct democracy is bad, kiddies.
No the president is not elected by the people. (read the constitution). Nor is the Supreme Court. Nor is the Senate supposed to be.
The founders were wary of the ability of the masses to make intelligent rational decisions. After reading Slashdot for any extended amount of time, any rational intelligent person could only agree.
Slashdot Mirror
So what you're saying is that 87% of Americans are rich? THat's pretty damn sweet! :)
Well then what is the answer to our "economic problems" in your opinion?
Slashdot is currently occupied by moronic postmodern leftists and stinky Europeans. Too bad a more rational and intelligent geek forum is not available.
Sucks but what can you do?
Actually we only owe about 41% of our GDP as debt (about 3 trillion dollars). That number you mention includes intergovernmental debt, which is debt the government owes to itself, which is a silly concept. Essentially, trust fund programs like Medicare and Social Security are counted as debt, as we are currently using trust fund surpluses as regular income.
If you doubt my 41% figure, check out what the IMF says.
The US (like almost any nation I can think of) is perpetually in debt. One year in the 1830's we had no debt.
On the other hand we have much less debt that most other nations (41% of our GDP).
Nonsense. The invasion by the Soviets was simply them trying to dictate their will to the people of Afghanistan. The Taliban were a faction of the mujahadeen, many of the Taliban's enemies also fought the Soviets (like that Lion of Afghanistan guy).
Gerrymandering has an overrated effect on US elections. Essentially, it really just gives a majority more votes than is representative by opinions, and that's just in houses where representation is by district and not by state.
Democrats heavily gerrymandered for 50 years, and if you look at opinion polls, they were indeed the majority party. Then Republicans took the house in 1994, which they shouldn't have been able to do if gerrymandering were all powerful.
The US is slowly having third party commissions draw up districts but it's a slow process and they have to do it state by state.
In my opinion, when you add it up the US simply has the most democratic government in the world, if you look at opinion polls and actual policies. Period.
Eh? Was this a typo?
See now, to me that would seem like dangerous imbalance of power and one inherent in most parliamentary sytems. Divided governments are clearly superior, IMO. And to my knowledge election rules are determined by Congress as per the constitution. The president may have some influence with the FEC.
interference of electoral colleges or partisan state governments as our elections are runned by an independent third-party part which is public service
I've had this discussion with other Aussies and frankly it's depressing to hear you all say this. There is no such thing as an independent third-party. If you think there is, it's quite naive of you.
In the US elections are decentralized. This is preferable IMO to a central committee controlling everything. Essentially you are responsible for overseeing the electoral process in your own local community. In the end, it's all up to the people.
Nonsense, this has nothing to do with adaptability beyond the ability to adapt to a lowered standard of living.
I predict a large transfer of wealth in the near future from industrialized nations to developing nations (it may have already started). As Asia has gained an absolute advantage with the US, as comparative advantage no longer applies, the factors of production are moving offshore. As such, revenue streams are diverted from the US. All nations must pay for their imports with their exports and as we have nothing to export our currency will collapse, as will our standard of living and our middle class.
Even if Canada wasn't closely allied to the US economically this would still affect you. Capitalism will seek out the countries/regions with the greatest absolute advantage when it can (and it most certain can today).
In the globalist free trade, having a high standard of living is a disadvantage. Therefor I can't think of many Western countries that are immune from this, unless their standard of living is low.
There are certian situations where trade is indeed a zero-sum game or at least close to it. You're right that it's not a perfect zero-sum game. Economists, however, know that regions can decline in standard of living because of normal economic forces. To assume that countries cannot decline is naive.
Ricardo said for comparative advantage to be applicable, the factors of production have to be immobile. If the factors of production are mobile (and service jobs are perfectly mobile) then the factors of production will move to the country with the greatest absolute advantage.
Ummm, no. They do a household survey and if you haven't looked for work in 4 weeks, then you are counted as underemployed.
It's better than the unsubstantiated anecdotal evidence that you offer.
Did Australia lift it's uber-protectionist Australian-content laws? Hell, I ain't even against you protecting your own "culture", just don't try to paint the US as protectionist and Australia as being an enlightened free trader. Don't give me that shite, mate.
Didn't your PM dissolve the Parliament in the 1970's?
If so, haha, and as bad as the US may seem at times, the President has never tried to "dissolve" Congress.
Yeah but you do get to keep your Canadian content laws (which are more protectionist than anything the US has done). Alanis Morrisette is a natural treasure up there apparently. :)
Sorry, that's what I meant. Syntax Error. :(
Howard Dean has proven what? Besides screaming like a moron will make you the laughing stock of the entire nation, that is.
More accurately, the US is a limited democracy. Direct democracy is bad, kiddies.
No the president is not elected by the people. (read the constitution). Nor is the Supreme Court. Nor is the Senate supposed to be.
The founders were wary of the ability of the masses to make intelligent rational decisions. After reading Slashdot for any extended amount of time, any rational intelligent person could only agree.
Well... we have to apologize to intelligent, rational people for Slashdot. Might as well throw the rest of the world in there too.
Well you can only reply to stupidity a few times until you get tired unfortunately.
According to the NY Times the "United States pays 10 times as much as Australia does in tariffs in the joint trade between the two countries."
THe people don't vote for the president in the US.
Sorry. Wrong. Go learn some constitutional law will ya'?
This is the beauty of decentralized government, IMO. And the US needs to get more decentralized in it's government.