PJ said:Ken Brunt said:what question?
ol' PJ must be a politician........he never did answer the question.........;)think global Pius
I believe someone asked what you meant by “think global”.
Ralph
I believe someone asked what you meant by “think global”.
Ralph
Ralph Berg said:PJ said:Ken Brunt said:what question?
ol' PJ must be a politician........he never did answer the question.........;)think global Pius
I believe someone asked what you meant by “think global”.
Ralph
hey Ralph,
think global not as of international, rather like attempting to see the big picture, see things the way they are. Be honest with my self, if you are not honest to your self you can’t be honest with others.
think global Pius
Steve Featherkile said:
PJ, I served over 20 years in the US Navy, on both coasts, afloat. To count the number of countries that I have lived in for a month of more, I would have to use the digits on both hands and both feet, and I still would not be able to count the total. These are in Europe, Africa, Asia and Central America. Sadly, I was only able to spend a week in Oman, though. I did not find any place that even came close to what the USA has to offer, with the possible exception of Canada.That HJ calls it home signifies that I might have missed something, though, so Canada deserves further investigation.
So, I guess that you are right, in my view, the USA is the best place to live. Appearantly, so do you.
One other thing, once, on leaving the Arabian Gulf, I did click my heels together three times and say, “There’s no place like Perth, there’s no place like Perth, there’s no place…” :lol:
You and I agree that illegal immigration is a serious problem.
edited because my keyboard stiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicks
Hey Steve,
as of today i visited about 34 countries, i never would claim that i know them good enough to make any judgment about quality of live. I belief that someone has to live long enough to talk the local language, to make any statements. people always ask me which country is better to live, i prefer to answer that they are not better or worse, but for sure different.
think global Pius
I can say I am happy where I am living now.
Ten years ago I was happy living on the coast. What was best for me then is not necessarily what is best for me now.
Steve,
The USA is the best place to live for you and I. It is our home. But it may not be the best place to live for everyone.
Warts and all, there is no place like home.
Ralph
PJ said:I just answered your question, PJ. I do not think that one has to become a native to make an assessment about the suitability of a certain local.
My question to you, in how many different countries have you lived to know, is your judgment based on real experience?
If I was to count all the countries that I have “visited,” I would have to use your hands and feet, too, to count them all. 
Reasons why the US might be considered “less democratic” than others?
Here’s one–the electoral college
You might remember an election in this decade in which one guy clearly won the popular vote for President, and may have also won the electoral college vote as well, except the recount was stopped by what the organizers called a “riot” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot) and then the unelected Supreme Court simply handed the presidency to the guy who lost the popular vote and may have lost the electoral vote?
Remember that? Like the result or not, it’s not very democratic.
The whole electoral college is un-democratic. It was set up to be.
There’s also the two party system–does anyone here feel that either party represents them very well? I thought not
Other countries, especially those with a parlimentary system, typically have far more political parties represented in govt. and are less likely to prevent voters with a choice of two candidates who barely differ on most issues
So right there are two things which make the US demonstrably less democratic than many other countries
PJ said:Ralph Berg said:PJ said:
what question?think global Pius
I believe someone asked what you meant by “think global”.
Ralph
hey Ralph,
think global not as of international, rather like attempting to see the big picture, see things the way they are. Be honest with my self, if you are not honest to your self you can’t be honest with others.think global Pius
PJ,
Thanks for the anwer. I was just curious. We have so many people that think Americans should learn to speak French or whatever and yet these same people don’t even understand the mind set of their own countrymen. I certainly don’t care whether I embarrass someone else by living the life I have and enjoy. The term “Kiss my ass” usually is a good universal answer and understood in most languages or at least understood by hand gestures. Someone on these list used to have a great signature line, that I can only paraphrase - “Some say, I live in my only little world. That’s okay, they know me there”.
And here my two cents:
I believe a good start with the “think global” slogan would be to follow the first part. Global as such is just as restrictive as “thinking inside the box”, just a different spatial configuration that leads you around in a circle from any given starting point.
Which leads directly to the following: Constructing a sentence is much like following a line, jigging and jagging makes it more interesting, but harder to read.
Hey Folks,
Here a different thought, if our government keeps going like the past few years, what do you think where we end up. For example the exchange rate to the Euro today is $1= 1.57E. I remember just a few years ago the exchange rate was $0.95= 1euro. Do not take that to serious, but if we keep going like that, in a few years the US Dollar is worth the same like any money of a third world country. With our low exchange rate, it will be harder to buy that expensive oil. On top we pile up a huge deficit created by this war. I belief that the attitude that the USA is the best place on earth will not help, i think it is time to wake up and take action.
thik global Pius
Two small corrections
a) 1.00 EUR = 1.57 USD
b) oil uses the US$ as the base, the exchange rate doesn’t play into the US price. What does play into it are the speculators, it could possibly be worse if, as was suggested at one time the base would switch to Euro. The ramifications/reverberations would be something to behold!
Time to start drilling. I’ve got a front yard with the space for a oil well. I’ll just build the railroad around it. And PJ, I agree since 2006 things have certainly gone down hill. Old Chubby Algore’s desire of $5.00 per gallon gasoline is progressing pretty well, don’t you think? Now if the news media and the “greenys” can just continue their path of doom and gloom, I think all their goals have a chance of being achieved.
But I’ve got bigger concerns trying to create removable turnouts for a portable switch yard.
mike omalley said:
Reasons why the US might be considered "less democratic" than others?Here’s one–the electoral college
You might remember an election in this decade in which one guy clearly won the popular vote for President, and may have also won the electoral college vote as well, except the recount was stopped by what the organizers called a “riot” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot) and then the unelected Supreme Court simply handed the presidency to the guy who lost the popular vote and may have lost the electoral vote?
Remember that? Like the result or not, it’s not very democratic.
The whole electoral college is un-democratic. It was set up to be.
There’s also the two party system–does anyone here feel that either party represents them very well? I thought not
Other countries, especially those with a parlimentary system, typically have far more political parties represented in govt. and are less likely to prevent voters with a choice of two candidates who barely differ on most issues
So right there are two things which make the US demonstrably less democratic than many other countries
Mike,
While I must agree with you on our two party system limiting our options as voters there was a very solid reason why our forefathers set up a Republic with an electoral college.
It was feared that the big states would totally dominate American politics to the detriment of the smaller states. A strict popular vote, while certainly more democratic, would do that because the larger states simply had more people. This was a valid concern amongst the original 13 colonies as they were much more diverse economically and even culturally. Even then of course the larger states still had the greater influence.
The vast majority of the time the winner of the popular vote also wins the electoral college but on rare occasion this isn’t so. Maybe the electoral college is no longer needed in this electronic age, I don’t know. But at present those are the rules we play by and whether Left or Right or In Between we must adhere to those rules unless and until they are changed. There is nothing sinister in having an electoral college nor is it “stealing” the election to win only by winning the electoral votes.
I can’t argue that we still need the electoral college and perhaps it’s time to make a change on that front but having it doesn’t by any stretch of the imagination make us “undemocratic” or make our elections invalid. There is far more danger wrought upon us by the hanging chad crowd!
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
And here my two cents:I believe a good start with the “think global” slogan would be to follow the first part. Global as such is just as restrictive as “thinking inside the box”, just a different spatial configuration that leads you around in a circle from any given starting point.
Which leads directly to the following: Constructing a sentence is much like following a line, jigging and jagging makes it more interesting, but harder to read.
Hehe! HJ,
You’re a genius!!!
mikie,
Even the New York Times said that “W” won Florida, and the Times is hardly a bastion of conservative thought. And that with NBC declaring Florida for Algore an hour before the polls closed in the Florida panhandle. Ignore the truth at your own peril.
Our Constitution has worked well for 237 or so years. I would be loath to change it now.
There is nothing to stop you from starting your own party, or you can join the Libertarians or the Greens. It is up to you. Just because there is not much support for a third or forth party does not that is a reason to change. What works in other countries will not necessarily work here.
Steve,
You said: “I would be loath to change it now.”
Me too!
Opening the Constitution to change is what I fear most. Every right and freedom we have would be open to debate and revision. And worse yet the people making those changes would be the same nitwits we have in Congress.
Richard Smith said:
Steve,You said: “I would be loath to change it now.”
Me too!Opening the Constitution to change is what I fear most. Every right and freedom we have would be open to debate and revision. And worse yet the people making those changes would be the same nitwits we have in Congress.
Hey Richard,
you are so right on with your statement, and in the same moment you presented us the path and sequence how to change things, things like that buddy politics in the senate. by the way, i mentioned that before, we have to get read of any earmarks and any sponsoring. i belief that we also should level the playing field for any elections, so that it is possible for other parties to play along, to bring in a new wind.
by the way, all this changes could be made with out changing our constitution, and maybe we would get away with out changing it. here again, i belief that the constitution is a great thing, just what we make out of it sucks.
think global Pius
Hi again,
just a quick question, did anyone of you see the movie “the man of the year” with Robin Williams. It is so amazing to me to see that someone is producing movies pointing out all the trouble we have.
In that movie the last sentence was, " we should change politicians like diapers, that for the same reason.
Think global Pius
The biggest change I could see that would help a lot is term limits for Congressmen. 2 terms, that’s it! Works for a president, why not a congressmen! Get rid of a lot of deadwood that’s there now…
Seems like a good time to insert this into the conversation…
Not long ago I read a joke ... it said all the politicians running
for president are promising change to the American people. We send them
billions and billions of tax dollars and they send us the change. Funny? Not
really; there is too much truth in it to be funny.
That got me to thinking ... they all promise change. How about if they run on a promise of restoration rather than
change?
A restoration that would take us back in time to a place where
things ran better, smoother and life was more enjoyable.
Change? That, in truth, is what they have been giving us all
along.
We used to have a strong dollar ... politicians changed that. Life used to be sacred ... politicians changed that. Marriage used to be sacred ... politicians are changing that. We used to be respected around the world ... politicians changed
that.
We used to have a strong manufacturing economy ... politicians
changed that.
We used to have lower tax structures ... politicians changed that. We used to enjoy more freedoms ... politicians changed that. We used to be a large exporter of American made goods ...
politicians changed that.
We used to be an openly Christian nation ... politicians changed
that.
We used to teach patriotism in schools ... politicians changed
that.
We used to educate children in schools ... politicians changed
that.
We used to enjoy freedom of speech ... politicians changed that.
We used to enforce LEGAL citizenship ... politicians changed that. We used to have affordable food & gas prices ... politicians
changed that, too.
And one could go on and on with this list. What hasn’t been
changed, politicians are promising to change that as well if you will elect
them.
When, oh when, is America going to sit back with open eyes and
look at what we once were and where we have come and say, enough is enough?
The trouble is, America’s youthful voters today don’t know of the
great America that existed forty and fifty years ago.
They see the world as if it has always existed, as it is now.
When will we wake up? Tomorrow may be too late. When will America
realize Politicians are what is wrong with America?
I think every politician should serve two terms, one in office, and another term of equal length in jail.
Lets’ assume “democracy” means a system in which each person’s vote counts equally in the management of the nation’s affairs.
I didn’t make an argument against the electoral college, I just pointed out that it’s not exactly a democratic institution. It was created specifically to thwart popular democracy. And as we saw in 2000, the electoral college prevented the candidate who won the most popular votes (Gore) from being elected. (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0876793.html)
The Senate itself is an oddly un-democratic institution. It allows a state like N Dakota, which has, what, 800,000 people? to have the same political power as a state like Texas, with 25 million people. That’s a very undemocratic system. If you wanted to be more democratic, abolish the Senate.
I could start any number of political parties, but they would be forever shut out of power. How may congressmen can you name from any party other than the Democrats or the Republicans? See? The last ones I can name belonged to the Populist Party in 1892. The system is stacked against the formation of 3d parties and thus against the inclusion of diverse point sof view. Parlimentary govts. typically have a range of parties from Monarchist to Royalist to Communist to Fascist, and they all get a muh bigger peice of the action than any 3d part in the history of the US.
I’m not making an argument against the present systems–I’m not the one bemoaning the state of things or calling for revolution. IMHO the US functions pretty well. I’m just pointing out that there are objective reasons to rate the US as less democratic than a lot of other countries.