I Am An Individual
Keywords
I Am An Individual
Trending Content
| +96 | Are you “less ambitious” for having long term goals outside of NYC | 24 | 1d | |
| +45 | Interviews Are So Fake | 28 | 56m | |
| +33 | 2024 UK Election - Tories finished? | 21 | 4h | |
| +29 | Being Christian in investment banking | 14 | 1d | |
| +25 | Non-Competes Banned | 24 | 12m | |
| How do I become Sigma | 14 | 2h | ||
| +19 | Moelis has the cutest Analysts? | 4 | 1d | |
| +18 | ADHD ! | 4 | 3h | |
| +18 | Best NYC neighborhood for single 30M | 12 | 2d | |
| +16 | Underage intern, drinking? | 7 | 1d |
Career Resources
Jesus fcking Christ, will you Ron Paul people give it the fck up already? Yes, we know--Ron Paul is the messiah.
Oh.. another anti-Paul comment with ZERO substance.
I'm a RP fan but this video was not worth posting. That being said, go suck a dick VT.
Damn, I was sure the 4th guy was going to say ''I am not a ginger''.
Gingers have souls!!!
What substance is required? The video was outlining what the Republican Party has been preaching since Barry Goldwater--individualism, capitalism, and the rule of law. This is nothing unique to Ron Paul.
Don't you ever put the words ''Capitalism'' and ''Republican Party'' in the same sentence please.
Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 was capitalism?
Republican party is for the rule of law? This is news to me. The Patriot Act repeals the 4th Amendment. The republican party supported the NDAA wich says that any american citizen can be detained WITHOUT A TRIAL FOR EVER.
Republican party is for ''individualism''? Go on foxnews and read the titles ''GOP needs LATINO votes'' ''Romney leads in HISPANIC votes'' etc etc.
Your mother's syphilis must have made you retarded. There are no GOP candidates standing up for the rule of law except ron paul. We have had every candidate arguing that the executive should have unchecked war powers in direct violation of the constitution. We have them on record pimping for the bailout, which is direct robbery of the taxpayer and US dollar holders to settle the busted bets of BB and PD prop desks. Where's the rule of law? Where's the capitalism?
You have a job in finance? Someone with a double digit IQ like you?
lol individualism and capitalism? Give me a goddamn break. The GOP has not embraced individualism to any significant degree. How many of the candidates are against DADT and for actually banning gay marriage? Capitalism... how about corporatist bail-outs and funding the military industrial complex?
Blah, blah, blah. All I hear from you 2 is meaningless left-wing talking points. You 2 might as well be working for Howard Dean. "Military industrial complex" this, "corporatist" that. You sound like a f*cking informercial for the 9/11 conspiracy. You gonna tell me that Bush blew up the WTC? Gonna call Fox News "Faux News"?
F*cking losers.
Thanks for proving my point.
I bring up facts such as the bail out, the NDAA etc. and your counter argument is name calling. In short, I'm right and you are wrong.
If you were right, you could of braught up solid counter arguments and destroy my position in 2 lines; but you didn't. Why? Because your position is wrong.
Ok, point 1: support for NDAA has nothing to do with individualism, capitalism, or the rule of law. Just because you say it does doesn't make it so. NDAA is a lot more complex than what you're making it out. Typical for Ron Paul 19-year-old cult members.
Point 2: Fox News isn't the Republican Party. That's the dumbest comment I've ever heard. Because Fox News is covering how the candidates are doing among the different voting blocs that makes the GOP like Orson Welles characters? Moronic position. Absolutely moronic.
Point 3: the bailouts were a travesty, not because of the bailouts--which were necessary--but because we got to the point where we needed them. If you truly supported a capitalist candidate you'd vote for Romney, who is one of the most successful businessmen of our generation rather than Ron Paul, who is a career Washington politician.
Edit: on point 3, the GOP actually voted against this bill--the bailouts--pretty convincingly.
Ok,
Point 1: I braught up the NDAA when I was talking about the GOP not respecting the rule of law. The problem with the NDAA are the Sections 1021 and 1022 wich allows Indefinite Detention WITHOUT a TRIAL and GOP SUPPORTED the bill.
Point 2: Fox News is the GOP media. However, you are right, officialy, it is not the GOP media. But that is not a problem because how many times did Romney and the GOP in general used the term ''LATINO votes''. When it comes to RP, he clearly says he doesn't like that term and he rather treat them as individuals.
Point 3: bailouts were necessary? You just lost any credibility. Let me guess, with no bailouts, it would of been a desaster? The expert concensus was that without bailout the world would of broke down?
So let me get this straight, the same experts that were clueless about what was going to happen, all of a sudden know what is going to happen? Give me a break. The clueless uncompetent people at banks made bad bets and they should of paid for it. That's the name of the game. If there was no bailout, medium sized companies could of baught up the ''good'' assets that the failing firms had.
And for the record, Ron Paul predicted the crisis. Did romney saw it coming? Let me answer it for you: NO :)
So when you hear Romney saying '' I understand the economy '' , don't believe him, because if he did, he would of predicted the crisis.
Now the question that arise is, we're in a crisis; Who do you want to put in power to solve it? The guy who predicted the crisis + consequences in precise details 10 years in advance? or you want the guy who didn't see it coming?
I clicked the video because I saw what might be a hot-looking blonde in the background but then an unemployed dude with a chinstrap beard is the first one to pop up. I feel cheated. Boo
Worst part is, the blond is not even hot.
Dude, first of all, are you even an American? If so, your high school did a f*cking horrible job in teaching you basic English. If you're not an American then you really have no say at all in what happens with this country.
The NDAA is a gigantic defense authorization bill. If those provisions violate the 4th Amendment then they will be overturned. You obviously don't have the slightest f*cking clue how legislation gets past in our republic. We have massive bills. You don't vote against a bill just because there is a line item you disagree with. You take the good with the bad and if something is illegal it gets overturned. Like I said, like a good cult member you have taken reality out of your position.
The bailouts were opposed by the GOP, so it sort of throws out your point. I didn't support the bailouts at the time because I was a 23-year-old moron. Here 4 years later I understand that you don't take a position SIMPLY out of spite or out of principle. They did the right thing in 2008--saved the western world from financial collapse. Live to fight another day so you then can uphold your principles and implement policies to ensure it never happens again (which they haven't, unfortunately).
Ron Paul isn't an oracle. He, like Gingrich, laughed at Ronald Reagan's position on the Soviet Union. Sometimes your predictions are right and sometimes they aren't. Whatever Romney believed or didn't believe he's as rich today as he ever was so obviously he did something right in the 2000s.
Go re-read what I wrote. I said : ''The PATRIOT ACT repeals the 4th Amendment''.
Economic Stimulus for the American People Act of 2008: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll042.xml Republicans: 165 YEAS - 28 NAYS (RP is part of the 28 of course)
What you fail to realize is that now, you have created a moral hazard and by doing so, you'll have a bigger collapse than the one you tried to avoid. Here is a life lesson: the whole point of having principales, is to stick to them during difficult times.
No he is not. He only understands economics while Romney does not.
What position? Show me a link or something.
Well, if your father is rich and is a governor (access to a huge network), who wouldn't become rich? lol
And why you bring that up as an argument? If you had a choice between 4 clueless guys, then ok, that argument can be braught up. But now, you have a choice between 3 clueless guys and 1 guy who can solve the problems.
Anyhow, my english might be very weak but I still managed to destroy you with arguments. And to try to use that as an argument against me, in itself, was very weak as well. Holla at me when you'll speak 5 different foreign languages.
I'm voting RP, but come on, a fucking SCRIPTED CROWD-source video about INDIVIDUALISM!? Do they just not see it?
We can do better.
The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 was NOT the bailouts. The bailouts occurred in fall 2008, not in February 2008. You, I, we were conflating the issue. Either way, the GOP voted against the fall 2008 bailouts. The act that you are showing is not what I was talking about.
The GOP voted against it in both the House and Senate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_20…
You included the NDAA with your 4th Amendment argument. And you'd be right on the NDAA. The Patriot Act absoutely does NOT suspend the 4th Amendment given that the Patriot Act applies to non-U.S. citizens. Last time I checked Pakistanis are not privvy to the writ of habeus corpus.
Ron Paul LEFT the Republican Party and ran against Ronald Reagan/George H.W. Bush in 1988. That doesn't require a link. That requires basic knowledge of history.
Since you don't have valid arguments, I understand your need to insult people to try to make a point. However, I will respond to you with arguments and no insults, since my position is solid.
The bailout of fall 2008 was proposed by who again? oh, G. W. Bush wich was NOMINATED by the REPUBLICAN voters.
Did TARP was finally signed into law? Exactly :)
The NDAA rips the bill of rights. With the sections 1021 and 1022 in the bill, you (american citizen) do not have a right to a trial and can be put in jail forever.
The 4th amendment ''guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause''. Don't the Patriot Act allows the fed to go to your house with no warrants? :)
Well my genius friend, you were talking about RP's position on the soviet union being different to reagan's position. So I asked you for a link that showed that difference.
Virginia Troll 4ever, why do you hate liberty?
This video is terrible. I like Ron Paul a lot but his views on foreign policy are a little extreme. Get rid of foreign aid...ok maybe. Pull the U.S. out of useless areas and stop being the world police? Ok. Give our enemies access to nukes and fuck our allies? ....that's a bit difficult.
I find it hard to believe that anyone has the audacity to say that the bailouts were unnecessary. Let's get this straight. I hate the bailout. Everyone does. But the collapse of the financial system would have been a far worse outcome. Hopefully, if the time arises that we need another one (and it undoubtably will) we can institute some better plans due to all the research that has been invested in sustainable, moral-hazard minimizing plans since the bailout. That line about Romney not foreseeing the collapse is so ostentatious coming from someone who was probably in high school or college when this was happening I am amazed. If you are under the impression that the 99% of economists who thought that "this time was different" and that housing prices were increasing due to a secular, demand driven growth don't understand economics, I am dumbfounded. Hindsight is 20/20 man, if you are actually John Paulson you called it right. But if not, stfu. And the thing about anyone with a governor as a father being given success on a silver platter is, in my opinion, so obnoxious. To belittle the work that Romney did by saying that is amazing. I don't support Romney in the primaries, but I do respect him personally- you come off as very bitter in the way you talk about him. It's as if your parents worked for one of Newt Gincrich's mythical closed Bain Capital factories.
The reason that a ton of Americans don't support Ron Paul is because his core tenets do not resonate. People don't care about liberty over safety. People are more afraid of a terrorist killing them than the government arresting them without due process. I'm not saying that this is right, but maybe America isn't ready for the freedom he advocates. Freedom includes freedom to fail- and people like having a safety net. That safety could be entitlement programs or a more police-state type government.
Gross oversimplification of Paul's stance. First of all, Paul doesn't want to give our enemies access to nukes, so don't be dishonest. He does not want Iran to gain a nuclear weapon, and he would exert his influence to divert them away from one, but if they ultimately want to build one that is their right. Every other country in the region has a nuke and even a top Israeli leader points out it would be in their interest to obtain one. They would certainly gain more international respect.
Why fall time and time again for continued war propaganda? We survived the cold war with the Soviet's having tens of thousands of nukes, but we can't survive some country in the middle east with third world resources having a single weapon? Do you honestly feel threatened by Iran? I certainly don't.
He also doesn't want to fuck our allies. Since when did respecting the sovereignty of other nations become a radical idea? We give Israel about $3B in aid each year, and yet we give their enemies about $20B. Makes absolutely no fucking sense. Israel would benefit from us cutting all foreign aid.
I literally laughed out loud at that last sentence. Reminded me of one of my favorite quotes by Hayek: "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." The government cannot run the economy, it has never worked and will never work. The government has learned nothing from the 2008 crisis, they still blame the free market and it sounds like you do too.
The bailouts were fraudulent, unneeded, and have ultimately set us up for a much worse crisis down the road. Do you really think the US economy would have collapsed completely if Goldman Sachs went bankrupt? Do you actually think that? Wall Street has become a parasite on the economy and the role of banking has far exceeded it's appropriate role in society. Instead of banks serving their customers, everyone now serves the banks. And it's because of government and the permanent bailout mechanism aka the Fed that have allowed banks to overshadow the whole economy. Capitalism is about profit and loss. Losses are just as important as profits. A system that enables private gains while socializing the losses is a fundamentally flawed and unsustainable system. In capitalism if you make the wrong decisions, you lose. A system based on survival of the unfittest cannot survive.
Do you really think that investment banking activity in the US would cease to exist if a few TBTF banks went under? What a joke. There is plenty of capital in this country and additional banks would have been started overnight. Sound, healthy banks would have stepped up and taken the marketshare left by the zombie banks. Do we really need Wall Street slicing up toxic CDOs to keep mainstreet working? Stop falling for this shit man.
The thing is, there are no free lunches. All of Wall Street's debt didn't just magically go away, it's now dumped on the taxpayer. We have shifted massive private risk to the sovereign level which puts us all at risk. The next time there is a crisis, which is now guaranteed because of government's response to the crisis (TBTF banks have gotten even bigger without learning any lessons), we won't be able to bail them out again. And no one is going to bail the USA out.
It's unfortunate that people have fallen for the shit their government has shoveled in front of them ("Don't worry, let the state take care of you"). We have formed a state so antithetical to what the founders' envisioned it's almost unidentifiable. Ron Paul and his supporters feel that vision is worth fighting for, even if the establishment tries their best to discredit the message as best they can. The reality is eventually everyone will see that the optical backstops provided by the state to protect them from all danger are illusory. Governments that overextend themselves and perpetuate a warfare and welfare state inevitably fail, we are no different.
So because it’s “in Iran’s interest,” and because “even a top Israeli advisor” agrees that it is, for Iran to obtain a nuke, that somehow makes it ok for Iran to obtain a nuke? It was in Germany’s interest to take over the world during WW2…would it have been ok for Germany to do so? Should we have just let them do that? No. And YES, I realize Germany and Iran are two EXTREMELY different animals in this analogy, but hopefully you get the point – an enemy’s interests are not necessarily aligned with world safety. No, I don’t think Iran is a threat at this point, and yes a ground war would be utterly absurd, yes let’s stop nation building – I get all that, so please don’t rehash it. Point is, Iran developing nukes is a bad thing, something that needs to be prevented and can be by talking with them, and telling them that they simply haven’t behaved in a way that a nuke-possessing nation should behave, and that they need to halt nuclear developments as long as they do shit like threaten the strait of hormuz. No, the US is by no means innocent here, and beware the military industrial complex, don’t forget the endless wars, blah blah blah – please don’t fucking rehash that shit, I agree with most all of that, honestly. But I’m not an isolationist, and I'm only with Ron Paul about 85% of the way on foreign policy - because I realize Iran is bad news.
And why do you assume they’d only make one single nuke then stop making weapons? Once they develop the means to create one, what’s to stop them from developing many more?
And what’s to stop them from selling the nukes to radical organizations? It could be profitable, and Iran already supports radical organizations…but wait, the Iranians are trustworthy – of course we should just TRUST them not to do anything like that! It’s all about trusting people! All world agents are to be treated perfectly equal no matter how they behave! Absurd behavior like Iran's should go unnoticed, it's no big deal!
You raised some fair questions in your 1st paragraph. However, the rest of your statement is incorrect. So, let me give you some counter-arguments to defend my case.
Ron Paul is following the constitution. So when you say that he is a little extreme, your saying that the constitution is a little extreme. And what is a constitution? Well, it is the social contract that allows people with different opinions to live together under certain rules. If you think that the social contract of the country you're in is extreme, go live in another country.
Now, RP doesn't want Iran to have a nuke. His point is, they're surrended with unfriendly countries who have nukes. So it is a natural reflex to want to have one. Imagine if you're in a neighborhood filled with people who want to break into your house. And you know that by having a gun, you would prevent that from happening. Wouldn't you want to get one?
Just so you know, Iran never invaded a country. And the US governement overthrowed their elected president in 1953 to put in a dictator that killed innocent people.
Since I don't have much time, here's a short video that explain the Iran/US situation rather well
Again, if you did not see it coming (wich means, you do not understand the fundamentals & dynamics of an economy), you don't know what is going to happen.
If there would of been no bail out, those incompetent firms would of gone bankrupt, medium sized companies would of baught the worthy assets and it would of been a painfull process of a year or two. Now, it has been almost 5 years and it is still getting worse.
Ok, so you want the governement to pick & choose the winners and losers. So much for capitalism. You guys stopped following most of Capitalism principales and when you have crises as a result of it, instead of embracing those principales again, you abandon them even more wich brings even bigger crises. This circus been going on for decades and you guys don't even realize it. Amazing.
When Romney was crying on tv for a bailout while the other ''experts'' were saying that gold was a bubble, I was buying gold for $800 and silver for $16.
The bottom line is: Ron Paul = predicted the crisis + consequences in precise details years in advance So called experts = did not see a thing coming
I mean, this is the biggest crisis since the great depression and they couldn't see it coming. Need I say more? Herman Cain was saying the economy had never been in better shape one week before the collapse. Bernanke a year before the collapse was saying the economic's fundamentals were strong. haha
I can imagine you in your office having to decide wich of your employees will have a promotion:
Employee A: predicted most of the firm's problems and warned about the consequences years in advance Employee B: got every prediction wrong and was clueless about the firms & markets problems
You: I promote employee B !
I reminded VT about Romney coming from a rich family with a huge network because it was VT's last refuge (argument) to defend Romney. That he was a successful guy. VT was being over enthusiastic with it as if Romney was self made.
Success is always good. I define success as coming from nothing (broke family and zero connect) and still make it and become wealthy.
Having already the money & the connects on your side is just a continuation. Not a 'real' success per say.
Everyone is an individual, blahblahblah, which is why they're all toeing the same line. If there were more individuals, there'd be a dozen or more alternatives. Instead there's one, and only two parties.
Why does this fucking Canadian think he can tell us how to run our shit? Seriously the vast majority of you guys think the world is fucking black and white. Reality is there are all shades of grey as well as red blue and green.
To your point that Bush "supported" the bail outs is total joke. The president has no real power when it comes to legislation. Congress has that power, sure he can veto it, but there was no time to veto it and send it back to make it better. Shit was melting down faster then a run away nuke power plant. Before all of you guys start talking down to people from your high horse you need to do serious research. People from all major areas of economic though agree to some extent that TARP was necessary. I agree with them, do I wish it was more regulated and only used for its original intentions. TARP was actually not as unpopular as it is today in the moment. It was only after the proceeds were taken away from debt paydown and used to fund all sorts of other stuff such as the stimulus plan, the auto bail outs that everyone knows were nothing more then a payback for a voting block. DC has done a great job of getting America to hate the finance industry despite the fact that the non government owned bail out recepients have paid back over 95% of the loaned out money.
Well, it just happen that the USD is currently the world reserve currency. This means that if your country runs deficits, chances are, you'll print money wich will make my food and gas more expansive.
In other words, since your policies affect me, I have a right to tell you how to run your country :)
You mean those experts who couldn't see the biggest crisis since the great depression coming when it was staring right at their face?
Art Laffer: '' United States economy have never been in better shape'' , ''monetary is spectacular'' , haha
Actually that gives you no right to tell me how to do anything. You canadians have been riding our coat tail for years, if you are going to ride our wave you keep your mout shut and deal with it.
It is easy to pay back essentially 0 interest money when there is so much QE going on. Give me a fucking break.
Your telling me that on ~ 300 billion in loans to banks that lasted on average of 4 to 6 months that returned close to 25 billion in interest that is 0% interest....
Did this video remind anyone else of:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/LQqq3e03EBQ
Disclaimer: I'm a Ron Paul supporter, but thought this thread needed some levity.
It's not just what Canada thinks, but the entire world. Nobody likes the US and the entire world is turning against you. At least the election of Ron Paul would be a step closer to rectifying your meddling in the world. Nobody wants you to ''help''... cos all you do, you do for profit. After WW2 you came to Greece for example, and put the Greek army in power creating a dictatorship. This became a huge problem, democracy was gone. And you did it so that it wouldn't become influenced by communists.
You don't help anything, you just exploit. Plus this whole shit storm in Europe is because of the US.
So yes, you should care what Canada thinks. You should care what the world thinks, because every empire crumbles, and your time has come too. In the future, Europe, the world and I kindly ask you to fuck off and mind your own damn business.
I disagree. If a country is stupid enough not to educate it's people so they can prevent any invasion, then they deserve it.
My only problem with the US is the USD being the world reserve currency. These fuckers are making my food and gas more expansive by the minute.
And don't tell me that you saved us from the Germans in WW2 either. There was a motive for you, and for jumping in when you saw that the end of the war was close, because you could benefit from the restructuring of Europe.
You didn't save Europe, you took an opportunity.
Disclaimer: I'm not talking about the US soldiers in WW2, props to them for fighting for morals. Screw the politicians for sending them in the first place.
Yeah...all that money and weapons and lives we gave Europe was just for fun.
We were next on Germany's 'to do' list, and they had active programs in other regions that were important to us (N Africa). To give you an extent of how closely our interests were aligned with England, they actully thought the first waves of troops were to be under the command of British generals (which is nuts, and of course did not happen).
America didn't enter the war initially because the public support wasn't there before Pearl Harbor. That's the long and short of it. There's even a conspiracy surrounding the hours before the attacks, that suggest that Washinton allowed the attacks to happen (not realizing how severe it would be) so there would finally be a reason to enter the war...but no one has proof.
This thread is getting disgusting. We essentially are Europe's army. The reason those French fuckers can sit on their high horse and gripe about us protecting ourselves is because our army is keeping Europe safe. The European debt crisis our fault? WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SMOKING? Almost all of Greece's debt (and Italy's and Spain's) was put into place during good economic times by the socialist parties. It is obnoxious that you want to blame America for problems that were caused by other factors. This is why I hate the Ron Paul crowd sometimes. He has good ideas but then you get the apologists like you who want us to bow our heads because we did something that was in OUR BEST INTEREST at the time. Fuck you. If we stepped out of the world state shit would go down almost immediately and the fact is when Europe comes crying about how it needs money for a bailout, how oil prices have skyrocketed, etc. I would LOVE to be the one to tell them "told you so".
Safe from what? Do you think we feel threatened? Over here we don't have this ''terrorist craze''. Your army is keeping the world safe by attacking other countries. That doesn't make sense. Just keep your army in your country, and protect yourself.
How does it have to do with being educated about anything? Did the US go into Iraq to save them from a dictator? Or for oil and other business?
Did they manage to do this because the Iraqi people were not aware of the reason behind the invasion? No, it wouldn't have mattered if they knew the reason. Did they manage to do this because the US people were not educated and were tricked into thinking in terms of ''kids are being bullied, we'll go help them out''? Yes.
Who is the US to think they're the world police anyway?
Because we are.
See, this is the type of arrogance you people have, despite being the most retarded developed nation, and having among the least advanced social systems.
Nobody respects the US. Sweden or Norway is what modern day society should look like.
A very homoginized society is easy to manage, Norway and Sweeden have very little difference in their populations. If you are hyping social systems you do not have the American mindset and should shut your mouth. Europeans love to sit up on their hill and tell everyone else how much better they are while they dare not get their hands dirty or even try to. You stand behind the back of America and shout insults at everyone while relying on the US to protect you if someone pokes you.
Maui is also a great place to live, but they're irrelevant in most aspects of global power politics. The Swedes have a great way of life and maybe someday I'll move there. It's a great place to live: the women tell the men what to do and.they.love.it, unemployment is low, the markets are up, golf scores are rising, and they have some of the best theme parks. However, they have the luxury of (1) not having the responsibility we do and (2) being very small countries that are relatively isolated from larger geopolitical struggles. They can AFFORD to have their views. We can't.
They benefit from the security WE provide, and as soon as America pulls the plug on the firepower I think you'll see the Norweigans putting away their Nokias, and putting their viking helmets back on.
Nokia is Finnish. I don't understand why you have the impression that we need your protection. Or as if we somehow expect it.
60% of the US budget is for social programs.
Your posts are so wrong on so many levels. I'll destroy your whole belief system later today. For now I have go.
Also, your presidential candidates are retarded and often unqualified. At least Ron Paul is better than the norm, but as I recall it, he doesn't believe in evolution, which is also quite retarded.
Btw, of course not everyone in the US is dumb, but stereotypes are created for a reason. And there are a lot of things that I DO like and respect about America. I just don't like their insane foreign policy. I mean recently they made a law that they can arrest anyone in the world whilst removing their rights. So I could be taken in now, and never be seen again. Like kidnapping, but ''legally''. IN MY COUNTRY! How can they make a law that encompasses everyone in the world??
I really do try to stay away from these shit-shows but these comments were so utterly devoid of critical thinking and bereft of intelligent thought that I simply had to respond.
In what way is this profitable for us? No. Just no. Of course we didn't La Résistance française and a besieged Britain had things under control. In case you forgot Germany declared war on America not vice versa. I would hardly call a dearth of cradle to grave and treasury pillaging social programs a weak point for the U.S. right now. (If you think really hard about it I bet you'll be able to understand the relationship between this and the fiscal troubles facing Europe) Yes if you fancy a static but comfortable life with no transcendent purpose then Sweden is for you. You do realize that much of our overseas presence was at the bequest of local governments unable or unwilling to provide for their own defense? But we agree here, I would love for us to leave the EU to fend for itself.Oh and btw OP this video is far more effective at championing individualism:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/Nkgv3LoQY2o
Because this is not the cold war. Just because a nation builds a nuclear missile, doesn't mean we need to shake in our boots.
[quote=Boreed]Because this is not the cold war. Just because a nation builds a nuclear missile, doesn't mean we need to shake in our boots.
]
Probably the eact opposite of what is true. MAD isn't what we need to look for. Iran with a nuke isn't gonna blow up NYC, but they will gain immense power in their region and the instability. Furthermore the fanaticism that goes throughout the MENA isn't exactly conducive to rationality. I am just as fearful of a random nuke getting out of the former USSR/Pakistan as I am of Iran. That doesn't make the fears any less real.
Also, I would never want to live in your fabled Nordic countries. They have destroyed the true basis of capitalism- the ability to really succeed. If you want to make a living only, Sweden is great. You have a far less chance of being rich. It is hilarious that you are fangirling over Ron Paul, but your "ideal" country is one where capitalism has been subjugated in favor of socialism. Where a prisoner gets a better life in jail than a hardworking person.
This BS about America being the stupidest country is always hilarious. We can tack on the most successful and strongest country too. Just because American have NO NEED to know about the BS going on in your countries doesn't mean that everyone is dumb. I consider much of European politics extremely "dumb" and oftentimes overtly racist. The fact that politicians in office can call ethnic groups a malaise and degenerates and this be passed off as normal is astounding. The xenophobic attitude of Europe is amazing.
America gets shit for intevening in ethnic cleansing incidents, and we also get shit for the ones we don't try to stop. It's really nothing more than politically throwing America under the bus for doing shit they don't want to do. Honestly, Europe is so irrelevant anyway that nothing they say changes anything and when they take a more proactive role then yeah, we can call home some troops and relax a bit.
What exactly do Europe's youth actually DO? They have almost the same population but almost no military. What has Europe been doing with the last fifty years?
Boreed, I agree that we need to worry abotu ourselves and not be the world police. 100% agree!
Now, what is one of the main reasons Europe is in shambles? Social programs that you describe as so great...
Also, you can't compare the US to Norway or Sweden. Hell, the state I live in, Texas, has 3 times as many people as Sweden and 6 times the people in Norway.
Fair enough, but I'm sure that if the US focused more on itself it would be able to improve its society immensely.
Get yo' gun and we'll be done.
And probably, despite its size, become as ''good'' (in these terms) as Scandinavia.
They will gain immense power over who? Pakistan? India? Israel? Iraq? The first 3 countries already have functional nuclear weapons and Iraq is essentially run by the US military complex.
Why? Because that's what dictatorships do. External enemies are the only real justification for keeping people in that state of mind. The US does this in times of war and honestly, the state of perpetual alert is damaging to us. But we're not just going home because we KNOW it will boil over. You don't like it, then pitch in, THEN we'll back out.
So why don't we take out Pakistan or Israel? Those countries are hardly much better and already hold nuclear weapons. No point in problematizing 1 country holding the same power many of its neighbors already do.
Man, this topic is getting beat to death lately, I'm backing off
Israel is the worlds biggest warmongerer and Iran, whilst being led by a couple of nutjobs, has not invaded a country for nearly 200 years. In fact, it was a thriving democracy before the 50s when the US removed the democratically elected government and installed the current dictatorship.
Tehran is not a stone and sand pit like a lot of people imagine it to be. Go Google it, it's an incredible place.
All those years spent as a BO clerk in a shithole regional bank must have given you much insight into geopolitics.
LOL at people thinking we need bailouts and war with Iran. So fucking delusional.
All I see is idealistic jargon being spat out by Boreed, and it being refuted by a more pragmatic UFOInsider. Keep it up I'm enjoying the show
Error illo aliquam id ut rerum assumenda. Ex nam impedit suscipit vitae est atque.
Maxime distinctio quia voluptatem officia ut voluptatem quia. Tempora dolor suscipit cum doloremque non quia rem. Officia occaecati qui possimus dolorem et. Aperiam et quis enim ut tenetur.
Voluptatem aspernatur quae et explicabo aut qui dolor. Perspiciatis deleniti distinctio expedita.
Facilis non est aliquam sed molestiae earum expedita. Unde quis sit et voluptatum. Excepturi incidunt esse sit. Officiis distinctio ab eveniet ipsa dolorem aut. Voluptatem eveniet nobis non vitae.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Voluptatibus libero nam molestiae praesentium. Assumenda culpa repudiandae modi. Beatae quasi corporis maxime. Praesentium nobis dolore aut suscipit. Amet fugiat debitis dolorum architecto minima quia.
Magnam fugiat id sunt deserunt. Ipsa qui officiis occaecati est quia.
Quibusdam corrupti accusantium placeat ut occaecati ut. Amet rerum et recusandae. Sed nihil assumenda id odit aut corrupti. Aut saepe eius enim vitae nostrum.
Quia repudiandae id repudiandae deleniti. Veritatis aut ipsum enim culpa. Suscipit ducimus dolore error voluptatum inventore et cum dolorem. Itaque laborum soluta aut maxime occaecati maiores.
Ex velit ut rerum vel totam ullam et. Quas expedita nulla ut iusto vel fugit ut. Voluptas nobis optio reprehenderit et voluptatem et. Dolorum quia odio illum officiis illo. Iste necessitatibus assumenda aut suscipit molestiae exercitationem magnam. Commodi alias libero aut voluptatem consequatur.