I'm fed up....

Post Reply New Topic

Economics isn't a zero-sum game, by which I mean wealth isn't a fixed resource -- it can be created. Just because one country is rich doesn't mean they took anything from anyone else.

If the United States is wealthier than other countries and enjoys a higher quality of life, perhaps that should taken as a sign that they're doing something right.

I'm not trying to defend Bush or his policies, of course. The man and his handlers are vile opportunists.

Jeremy

Wow theres me told.

So excluding african states from even operating in markets most nations take for granted is to do with economic success? Bears any realation to this ideology of free trade that the united states preaches? Then bear in mind all that money we hand out to them because we see pictures of those poor black children starving to death etc undermines what economic success they have anyway. Its kind of ironic that aid money undermines african economies.

No it helps our economy greatly that we have people we can crush down on and disempower to do the crappy demeaneal jobs that the rest of us don't want to do. Its just fantatisc we have the chinese government to do that for us sometimes but there are other countries were weve got to play on unfair grounds. Can't have those

I don't really care about Bush people were told before he was elected that he was a dangerou right wing looney but instead they wanted to laugh at him, then he got elected. The president is only a figurehead of an administration, just like his daddy bush Jr has surrounded himself with a nice bunch of hell hounds.

Laz is right here. American foreign policy is not at all fair. It only seeks to belittle other countries in order to maintain American power.

Americain? Buddy last i checked we were the ones in charge don't give the game away to the yanks that there more British then we are they'l start demanding self determination and the last thing i want is the BNP bitching about americain immigrants flooding wales and various cities of the UK

I'm not defending U.S. foreign policy. While I think our economic policy is, in general, fairly sane, the way we act toward other countries is despicable.



I guess it is a little ironic, but it's still true in the big picture. Some aid is good. The kind that goes to help starving children is good, assuming it gets to those who actually need it. But it's a band aid over the real problem, which is the political instability. Stabilizing Africa should, in my opinion, be the primary goal of the foreign policy of all Western nations. Unfortunately, that means more than simply throwing money at the problem. Odds are good that it's going to require military action eventually, but it could potentially save hundreds of millions of lives.



You've got it backwards. China is taking advantage of us, not vice versa. They are artificially devaluing their currency in order to obtain a favorable trade position, and the U.S. government hates it but can't do much because the cheap imports are too popular. If it were up to me, we'd impose heavy tariffs on countries that have a poor human rights and labor record, or who engage in hostile trade practices. China falls into all three categories.

I sense from your tone that you're taking me for one of the stereotypical right-wing nutjobs. I'm not. I'm fiscally conservative, but that doesn't mean that I don't care about people suffering, and it certainly doesn't mean I like Republicans or the Bush administration. I think this is a much more complicated issue that you and RobertN seem to believe.

Jeremy

Its not us policy its everyone policy, we are all playing a role in it



Yes, but we have no interest in doing that, we like them to be poor we have no interest in saving lives. You have to look at the big picture here, china is becoming wealthier and its citizens demand more, Afica would do the same. If we paid the african farmers what their produce was worth and their labour costs to the same standards as our own laboureres....well goodbye cheap coffee



No chinese person has the same legal protection and social safeguards/welfare that you or I do. They are open to exploitation. And the chinese government has no quarms subjecting its people to harsh labour conditions to keep the money rolling in. As that wealth pours out into the individual citizens there will be a drive to have higher working standards and laws etc. The chinese and indian citizens will want the same things we take for granted, cars, their own houses etc



A conservative? Thats even worse

Oh you're definitely right about the majority of americans, but telling stupid people theyre stupid does not help the problem. Just makes em wanna kill you. Just as if someone were to tell you that you were being stupid and short minded it would probably piss you off way before you considered that they might be right. (I'm not saying you are, but think about how you felt when others here said some things which made you angry, but later you thought there was some truth in it.)

Insulting anyone is not a good idea.


Many countries do that. What country doesn't?
I think this is a matter of whatever country is superpower at the moment.

Its strange, nobody wants to hear from Robertn himself why he is feeling upset. (Mods?)
Robertn, is it the policies themselves that affects you or is it what people say about them?

The advice I give you is to try and prevent emotional reasoning on politics.

I was feeling upset about an incident that happened a few days ago - I am fine now, thanks!!

And no, I do not agree with your idea that "all countries do it". Many countries at least learn how to co-operate and engage in meaningful talks under organisations such as the UN and EU. The US is very negative about such international organisations and seeks only power for itself. For instance, it does not make sacrifices to curb global warming, as most other Developed countries have done.

Robert, I (and a fair passle of the moderators) no doubt agree with just about everything you say about the United States.

If you can believe it, I probably hate this place more than you do, just because I'm stuck here. I'd rather live in England, truly.

But we don't base our modertating actions on political bias. Please do believe that.

Its difficult to decide. Perhaps I wouldn't be so angry at America if Bush was not in power. Its Bush and his cronies that I hate, not the ordinary people. However I don't understand why the American people have let him back into power and let him get away with absolute murder. Maybe people can enlighten me into the answer to this question.

To your credit, in 2000, the people of America voted for Al Gore, not Bush. However, by deceit he managed to twist things to his favour (he had friends in important positions) so he got into power and not Al Gore.

A fair amount of it was the fact that we were at war (or whatever you call this mess). Americans tend to be reluctant to change leadership in the middle of something like that. Plus the incumbent usually has a natural advantage. Those things together usually translate to about a 15% boost, so Bush's "real" turnout would've probably been closer to the 35-40% range -- a fairly decisive trouncing.



Not quite. The people of America do not elect the president. They elect their congressmen and senators, but the president is elected by the electoral college, which, in turn, is appointed by the state governments. You may disagree with that system (a lot of people do), but it was the law, not deceit, that handed Bush the election. Even after all the recounts were finished, Bush still won the electoral vote.

Jeremy

You're not alone there.

I think a lot of it has to do with Cheney's statement shortly before the last election where he essentially said "if you don't vote for George W. Bush the terrorists will kill you and your family." I can't really blame people for being stupid, but it's hard to hold back when they're dumb enought to let fear tactics convince them to vote for that chimpanzee.

Bush's antics are going to end up being the reason for the next 9/11 style attacks and worse. Nothing that the U.S. has done in the past 40 years could arouse as much anger and hatred against the U.S. among decent people as the two big attacks on Iraq, and the last one was much worse because Saddam was giving his cooperation, reluctantly but he was. The invasion was on account of he wasn't giving in fast enough, and it was also done in spite of offers of total cooperation, total capitulation. Bush is a liar. We all know that. He's the kind of person who, if he gives you the count of two, means the count of three, and likes it when he gets a chance to pull out his little gun and shoot someone with it.

Even Manchester?

Many is different than all.
Even then, it is hard to say that there is at least something that every single country has done around the world to negatively impact another country.
Name one country that is a complete "saint"
Heck, not even that works because there are so many people in every country...