Is the US a shitty place to live?

They don't have armed clowns tho'

2e6ghae.jpg
 
Hey valcik. Didn't your country get destroyed by Ultron? Just kidding. Haha. What is it with Marvel and making up Eastern European countries?

Is the US a shitty place to live? Depends on your state, income, religious beliefs, marital status, and other factors. So...like anywhere else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say it depends on race, sex, gender, disability (mental and physical), and finance. The class war is strong in the UK and the US. Interesting how of those countries that fought against right-wing totalitarianism, both of the aforementioned countries are insanely neoliberal.
 
"Poll Shows Obama Millennials Want To Leave The America They Created"

I thought the problem was exactly that the changes Obama wanted to do always had been blocked by the other party.

/Edit: lel, is this some parody website or something?
 
The problem is that Obama is a POLITICIAN, not a job maker, not a healthcare giver, not a leader of soldiers, not ANY kind of leader deserving of the promises he made during his elections. He followed the model of famous presidents like Roosevelt and Lincoln, but those were instances of people taking action in THEIR times, not ours. He was one of the least evils of all the choices we had in both elections he participated in, but that didn't make him a worthy candidate to fulfill the promises he made. Which, by the way, are not to be confused with what he "wanted".

Obama got major promises that he pledged done. It wasn't blocked by "the other party". It was criticized to all Hell because they recognized he wasn't suited to be making those promises. But that happens with EVERY presidency. People are gradually forgetting more and more that these are POLITICIANS. They're career liars. Winning their seat matters more on being the least hated person on an episode of Maury because it's all about public opinion and swaying the populace than it ever matters on being right. The ones who are right have never been elected, because that's just not how the system works.

Government as a whole modernizes, but as I said elsewhere, they are inept at matching what industry or society could, because that's not their aim. They don't exist to be productive or successful. They exist to order and spend and usurp and drain and use. They'll never adjust and effectively represent their people like they'll ever claim to. It's simply physically impossible.
 
SnapSlav said:
The problem is that Obama is a POLITICIAN, not a job maker, not a healthcare giver, not a leader of soldiers, not ANY kind of leader deserving of the promises he made during his elections. He followed the model of famous presidents like Roosevelt and Lincoln, but those were instances of people taking action in THEIR times, not ours. He was one of the least evils of all the choices we had in both elections he participated in, but that didn't make him a worthy candidate to fulfill the promises he made. Which, by the way, are not to be confused with what he "wanted".

Obama got major promises that he pledged done. It wasn't blocked by "the other party". It was criticized to all Hell because they recognized he wasn't suited to be making those promises. But that happens with EVERY presidency. People are gradually forgetting more and more that these are POLITICIANS. They're career liars. Winning their seat matters more on being the least hated person on an episode of Maury because it's all about public opinion and swaying the populace than it ever matters on being right. The ones who are right have never been elected, because that's just not how the system works.

Government as a whole modernizes, but as I said elsewhere, they are inept at matching what industry or society could, because that's not their aim. They don't exist to be productive or successful. They exist to order and spend and usurp and drain and use. They'll never adjust and effectively represent their people like they'll ever claim to. It's simply physically impossible.
Click to expand...

While i share your despise for politicians (i think, if suddenly 50% of them disappeared, society would hardly notice any impact), i heard an interesting idea in one podcast. I wonder how much do they actually know about the post, when they are running for it the first time. Only the president and the people who inform him have a good view on the whole situation, so someone who is running for the president might have some good motives and ideas, but when he gets elected, he may be faced with some shit that he had no idea about. Add to that the super complicated puzzle that is the whole country as a living, constantly changing system, other systems around the world that interact with your system, the ties between parties and companies, the people who constantly give you two bad choices to choose from, and the shit keeps pilling on. So you get elected and suddenly you see this cunami of shit coming at you, washing over all your "cute" ideas.

Not saying that these people are innocent victims, but what if some of them were genuinely good folk, who didn't add into their equation all these variables, that they could not have known?
 
Depends on the politicans I guess. If those 50% which are simply shit would dissapear, no one would really cry for them. But not every politican is like Mc Cain or Obama. Infact there a quite a few which make a decent job, it's just that they never end up in leading positions and stay at the lower levels of the political food chain.
 
AskWazzup said:
SnapSlav said:
The problem is that Obama is a POLITICIAN, not a job maker, not a healthcare giver, not a leader of soldiers, not ANY kind of leader deserving of the promises he made during his elections. He followed the model of famous presidents like Roosevelt and Lincoln, but those were instances of people taking action in THEIR times, not ours. He was one of the least evils of all the choices we had in both elections he participated in, but that didn't make him a worthy candidate to fulfill the promises he made. Which, by the way, are not to be confused with what he "wanted".

Obama got major promises that he pledged done. It wasn't blocked by "the other party". It was criticized to all Hell because they recognized he wasn't suited to be making those promises. But that happens with EVERY presidency. People are gradually forgetting more and more that these are POLITICIANS. They're career liars. Winning their seat matters more on being the least hated person on an episode of Maury because it's all about public opinion and swaying the populace than it ever matters on being right. The ones who are right have never been elected, because that's just not how the system works.

Government as a whole modernizes, but as I said elsewhere, they are inept at matching what industry or society could, because that's not their aim. They don't exist to be productive or successful. They exist to order and spend and usurp and drain and use. They'll never adjust and effectively represent their people like they'll ever claim to. It's simply physically impossible.
Click to expand...

While i share your despise for politicians (i think, if suddenly 50% of them disappeared, society would hardly notice any impact), i heard an interesting idea in one podcast. I wonder how much do they actually know about the post, when they are running for it the first time. Only the president and the people who inform him have a good view on the whole situation, so someone who is running for the president might have some good motives and ideas, but when he gets elected, he may be faced with some shit that he had no idea about. Add to that the super complicated puzzle that is the whole country as a living, constantly changing system, other systems around the world that interact with your system, the ties between parties and companies, the people who constantly give you two bad choices to choose from, and the shit keeps pilling on. So you get elected and suddenly you see this cunami of shit coming at you, washing over all your "cute" ideas.

Not saying that these people are innocent victims, but what if some of them were genuinely good folk, who didn't add into their equation all these variables, that they could not have known?
Click to expand...
No, I'm not talking about not realizing how tough the post really is until they acquire it. I'm LITERALLY talking about their promises, and how a political position has NOTHING to do with those promises. Obama promised "to create more jobs". As his election took place at the onset of a MAJOR recessions, and the country's average rate of unemployment began to skyrocket, this sounded like a no-brainer campaign promise to make, right? Well, it's NOT the president's job to make jobs. Presidents don't do that. Business owners create jobs. That's it. Obama promised changes in the healthcare system, and that his changes would do such and such, and no, this potential problem won't happen because he won't allow it to happen. Well, that's ALSO not the President's job. If you have privatized healthcare (which I'd KILL for this country to truly have) then politicians have absolutely 100% no say on the matter. But, if you were to socialize healthcare, then the political process has SOME level of control over the matter. But NOT the President.

The President has ONE role related to lawmaking: he signs them. That's it. The President doesn't issue the laws, frame the laws, amend the laws, rescind the laws, or do ANYTHING to them besides sign them. The Obamacare debacle was a direct result of the fact that Obama COULD NOT make good on his promises, because it wasn't his job. He has zero say in how the law should be created nor carried out, because that's not what the President does. Just 2 examples, but extrapolate that lesson to EVERYTHING, and you might see what I was getting at. Simply put, the President has NOTHING to do with these things he often states will seek to change. None whatsoever. It's bad that the public doesn't immediately realize this, but that doesn't take any of the blame away from the politician in the first place for making these promises and prolonging these public misconceptions of the capabilities of their office.

It's not that I hate politicians because I think they're snakes and how dare they and I distrust them because this or that. It's because I recognize that they have NOTHING to do with carrying on with daily living. Have a disagreement on a moral level that money can't solve? Well, neither can politics, cause you CAN'T legislate morality. Have a problem with a problem or grievance of the practical sort that can be reasoned rationally? Well politics has no say in this, either, and no laws will change that. Need a road to get to your place of work more quickly? Well then, THAT is something politicians can influence...... EXCEPT that so can private industry, and many people get to their places of work far more efficiently and cheaply by paying a toll to use these privatized stretches of road.

So, really, it's nothing more than that I recognition that politicians serve NO purpose at all if your society is of a reasoned, informed, intelligent standard. But in a day and age where people will HAPPILY give up their rights and liberties because they can't rationalize their way out of a paper bag when a single momentary scare takes place, naturally we can't expect everyone to BE reasoned, informed, and intelligent. So thus the mantle of leadership is created and supported. ~_~
 
SnapSlav said:
The President has ONE role related to lawmaking: he signs them. That's it. The President doesn't issue the laws, frame the laws, amend the laws, rescind the laws, or do ANYTHING to them besides sign them. The Obamacare debacle was a direct result of the fact that Obama COULD NOT make good on his promises, because it wasn't his job. He has zero say in how the law should be created nor carried out, because that's not what the President does. Just 2 examples, but extrapolate that lesson to EVERYTHING, and you might see what I was getting at. Simply put, the President has NOTHING to do with these things he often states will seek to change. None whatsoever. It's bad that the public doesn't immediately realize this, but that doesn't take any of the blame away from the politician in the first place for making these promises and prolonging these public misconceptions of the capabilities of their office.
Click to expand...

Oh, ok. Pretty much the same situation here, although now we have a pretty competent president for a change, but otherwise it was the same thing here and pretty much (i would think) everywhere else. It's like that poisoned apple for the politicians, they can't resist it, when they know that a good majority of the population are gullible enough, to eat up all those promises.

SnapSlav said:
So, really, it's nothing more than that I recognition that politicians serve NO purpose at all if your society is of a reasoned, informed, intelligent standard. But in a day and age where people will HAPPILY give up their rights and liberties because they can't rationalize their way out of a paper bag when a single momentary scare takes place, naturally we can't expect everyone to BE reasoned, informed, and intelligent. So thus the mantle of leadership is created and supported. ~_~
Click to expand...

Well i can't see that happening in any near future. For there not to be any governing body (although it could easily be shrank down by a good amount), the current level of culture is just not even close to what it should be. I'm not even sure we will reach that time. Some asshole will undoubtedly pull the plug on the nuclear arsenal before that.
 
Everyone hates the one in charge, no matter who it is.
 
I imagine that's especially the case with the US, considering their history with other nations (and their own).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top