Republicans can't take it

[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']So then why are you still complaining?[/quote]

Not complaining, just pointing out your partisan lies (aka spin if you are in Washington).[/quote]

Sure sounds like complaining to me. The law called for a hand recount when an appeal is granted, and that's what Washington did. There is always going to be disgruntled voters when an erroneous election result is overturned. You're just going to have to live with it.[/quote]

Okay, let's just remind you of what you stated with certainty earlier in this thread to point out your inconsistencies:

[quote name='camoor']Dems aren't hypocrites. They want every vote counted and the third time, that's what finally happened.[/quote][/quote]

I though you said there were inconsistencies.

inconsistency: the relation between propositions that cannot both be true at the same time.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']So then why are you still complaining?[/quote]

Not complaining, just pointing out your partisan lies (aka spin if you are in Washington).[/quote]

Sure sounds like complaining to me. The law called for a hand recount when an appeal is granted, and that's what Washington did. There is always going to be disgruntled voters when an erroneous election result is overturned. You're just going to have to live with it.[/quote]

Okay, let's just remind you of what you stated with certainty earlier in this thread to point out your inconsistencies:

[quote name='camoor']Dems aren't hypocrites. They want every vote counted and the third time, that's what finally happened.[/quote][/quote]

I though you said there were inconsistencies.

inconsistency: the relation between propositions that cannot both be true at the same time.[/quote]

You said you wanted all votes counted, but you are not for further recounts to make sure all votes are counted. That is inconsistent, don't you think?
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='elprincipe']First of all, obviously for MBE and camoor the most accurate count is always the one where the Democrat wins because that is obviously the most accurate because, after all, it is only Republicans who would even think to commit electoral fraud and all Democrats are naive and innocent, besides they would always win if things were fair.

Secondly, they wouldn't be praising Jesus, let me assure you. :wink:[/quote]

So what do you think the most accurate means of counting the votes is?[/quote]

Perhaps not having political machinery which conjures up fraudulent votes? I mean that for both parties. And not to shock you too much, but there are plenty of people who feel machine-counted votes are less open to manipulation than human-counted votes. :!:
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='elprincipe']First of all, obviously for MBE and camoor the most accurate count is always the one where the Democrat wins because that is obviously the most accurate because, after all, it is only Republicans who would even think to commit electoral fraud and all Democrats are naive and innocent, besides they would always win if things were fair.

Secondly, they wouldn't be praising Jesus, let me assure you. :wink:[/quote]

So what do you think the most accurate means of counting the votes is?[/quote]

Perhaps not having political machinery which conjures up fraudulent votes? I mean that for both parties. And not to shock you too much, but there are plenty of people who feel machine-counted votes are less open to manipulation than human-counted votes. :!:[/quote]

You're arguing two different points here. Counting every vote means counting the fraudulent ones as well (the counters would have no way of knowing which votes were not legit). It's been stated previously that a republican and democrat were present at each counting desk so I'm not sure how much more fair that could be.

As for voter fraud, if their is enough evidence of it, it should be investigated and corrected if necessary. The counters can't do anything about voter fraud. They can only count the votes cast. And a hand count is the typically most accurate and that's why it's a last resort.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']So then why are you still complaining?[/quote]

Not complaining, just pointing out your partisan lies (aka spin if you are in Washington).[/quote]

Sure sounds like complaining to me. The law called for a hand recount when an appeal is granted, and that's what Washington did. There is always going to be disgruntled voters when an erroneous election result is overturned. You're just going to have to live with it.[/quote]

Okay, let's just remind you of what you stated with certainty earlier in this thread to point out your inconsistencies:

[quote name='camoor']Dems aren't hypocrites. They want every vote counted and the third time, that's what finally happened.[/quote][/quote]

I though you said there were inconsistencies.

inconsistency: the relation between propositions that cannot both be true at the same time.[/quote]

You said you wanted all votes counted, but you are not for further recounts to make sure all votes are counted. That is inconsistent, don't you think?[/quote]

Nope. I want all votes to be counted. This has to be weighed against the practical needs of having a Washington governor in place.

The state did the best job possible with the hand recount. If there are lessons to be learned, they should be written into the election laws for next time.

Incidentally, election reform laws are exactly what the Democrats are attempting to get passed in the Senate. That's the way you should handle election fraud - prevent it with good legislation.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe']You said you wanted all votes counted, but you are not for further recounts to make sure all votes are counted. That is inconsistent, don't you think?[/quote]

Nope. I want all votes to be counted. This has to be weighed against the practical needs of having a Washington governor in place.[/quote]

Wow, I wonder where this kind of statement was in December 2000. Weren't you one of the hangers-on promoting conspiracy theories about the Ohio vote totals? If not sorry to tar you with that brush.

[quote name='camoor']The state did the best job possible with the hand recount. If there are lessons to be learned, they should be written into the election laws for next time.[/quote]

I'm not sure about best job possible. Also I think your partisanship is showing...each party wants recounts until their candidate is declared the winner, that being the "best possible" count. I guess I'd leave it at that.

[quote name='camoor']Incidentally, election reform laws are exactly what the Democrats are attempting to get passed in the Senate. That's the way you should handle election fraud - prevent it with good legislation.[/quote]

Agreed. Clear and strong laws do make a difference.
 
To be honest, I think that graft is always going to be a part of a democracy (just like we'll always have homelessness, crime, etc). The trick is to minimize it.

I actually believe that we're doing alot better then the "JFK" days.

Doesn't mean we should stop striving of course.
 
[quote name='camoor']To be honest, I think that graft is always going to be a part of a democracy (just like we'll always have homelessness, crime, etc). The trick is to minimize it.

I actually believe that we're doing alot better then the "JFK" days.

Doesn't mean we should stop striving of course.[/quote]

I don't know, I like to think that, as the most creative and advanced civilization in the history of the world, we could come up with a way to eliminate any fraud or mistakes. If that means taking humans out of the equation except as a back-up plan, I'm all for that. Maybe these recent controversies will spur something in the right direction.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']To be honest, I think that graft is always going to be a part of a democracy (just like we'll always have homelessness, crime, etc). The trick is to minimize it.

I actually believe that we're doing alot better then the "JFK" days.

Doesn't mean we should stop striving of course.[/quote]

I don't know, I like to think that, as the most creative and advanced civilization in the history of the world, we could come up with a way to eliminate any fraud or mistakes. If that means taking humans out of the equation except as a back-up plan, I'm all for that. Maybe these recent controversies will spur something in the right direction.[/quote]

That's a pretty ethnocentric statement.

Are we advanced because we can't control our deficit and our waistlines? Or is our blundering preemptive strikes that draw the ire of the rest of the world?

We're so creative that we just voted a guy into the Whitehouse that reads the bible as if it states the literal truth. Twice.

Heck when I really think about it, it's actually a miracle that the Presidential election and Washington recounts went as well as they did.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']To be honest, I think that graft is always going to be a part of a democracy (just like we'll always have homelessness, crime, etc). The trick is to minimize it.

I actually believe that we're doing alot better then the "JFK" days.

Doesn't mean we should stop striving of course.[/quote]

I don't know, I like to think that, as the most creative and advanced civilization in the history of the world, we could come up with a way to eliminate any fraud or mistakes. If that means taking humans out of the equation except as a back-up plan, I'm all for that. Maybe these recent controversies will spur something in the right direction.[/quote]

That's a pretty ethnocentric statement.

Are we advanced because we can't control our deficit and our waistlines? Or is our blundering preemptive strikes that draw the ire of the rest of the world?

We're so creative that we just voted a guy into the Whitehouse that reads the bible as if it states the literal truth. Twice.

Heck when I really think about it, it's actually a miracle that the Presidential election and Washington recounts went as well as they did.[/quote]

I see, you're one of those left-wing pessimists. I think that the statement I made is justified looking at historical and present realities. In any case, with the statement I made I certainly wasn't referring to the government being those things, which of course you seem to think I was. You believe too much of what you read about everything going to hell and not enough through your own personal experience and the people you know and meet.
 
There are different ways of being advanced. We are the most advanced technologically, but not socially and culturally. How advanced our system of government is is more debatable.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']To be honest, I think that graft is always going to be a part of a democracy (just like we'll always have homelessness, crime, etc). The trick is to minimize it.

I actually believe that we're doing alot better then the "JFK" days.

Doesn't mean we should stop striving of course.[/quote]

I don't know, I like to think that, as the most creative and advanced civilization in the history of the world, we could come up with a way to eliminate any fraud or mistakes. If that means taking humans out of the equation except as a back-up plan, I'm all for that. Maybe these recent controversies will spur something in the right direction.[/quote]

That's a pretty ethnocentric statement.

Are we advanced because we can't control our deficit and our waistlines? Or is our blundering preemptive strikes that draw the ire of the rest of the world?

We're so creative that we just voted a guy into the Whitehouse that reads the bible as if it states the literal truth. Twice.

Heck when I really think about it, it's actually a miracle that the Presidential election and Washington recounts went as well as they did.[/quote]

I see, you're one of those left-wing pessimists. I think that the statement I made is justified looking at historical and present realities. In any case, with the statement I made I certainly wasn't referring to the government being those things, which of course you seem to think I was. You believe too much of what you read about everything going to hell and not enough through your own personal experience and the people you know and meet.[/quote]

I just need to travel a few miles from where I am now to see the kind of people who are running the "most advanced civilization ever".

Trust me, they aren't your prototypical philospher kings.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='camoor']To be honest, I think that graft is always going to be a part of a democracy (just like we'll always have homelessness, crime, etc). The trick is to minimize it.

I actually believe that we're doing alot better then the "JFK" days.

Doesn't mean we should stop striving of course.[/quote]

I don't know, I like to think that, as the most creative and advanced civilization in the history of the world, we could come up with a way to eliminate any fraud or mistakes. If that means taking humans out of the equation except as a back-up plan, I'm all for that. Maybe these recent controversies will spur something in the right direction.[/quote]

That's a pretty ethnocentric statement.

Are we advanced because we can't control our deficit and our waistlines? Or is our blundering preemptive strikes that draw the ire of the rest of the world?

We're so creative that we just voted a guy into the Whitehouse that reads the bible as if it states the literal truth. Twice.

Heck when I really think about it, it's actually a miracle that the Presidential election and Washington recounts went as well as they did.[/quote]

I see, you're one of those left-wing pessimists. I think that the statement I made is justified looking at historical and present realities. In any case, with the statement I made I certainly wasn't referring to the government being those things, which of course you seem to think I was. You believe too much of what you read about everything going to hell and not enough through your own personal experience and the people you know and meet.[/quote]

I just need to travel a few miles from where I am now to see the kind of people who are running the "most advanced civilization ever".

Trust me, they aren't your prototypical philospher kings.[/quote]

Nobody ever said our smartest people were in charge. I doubt any civilization in history could say that.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']There are different ways of being advanced. We are the most advanced technologically, but not socially and culturally. How advanced our system of government is is more debatable.[/quote]

You may think we're not advanced socially and culturally, but I have to strongly disagree. American culture and society has created the best place to live in the history of the world, so I think it's pretty advanced. That is not to say we are better than everyone else in every area or anywhere near perfection, but overall.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']You may think we're not advanced socially and culturally, but I have to strongly disagree. American culture and society has created the best place to live in the history of the world, so I think it's pretty advanced. That is not to say we are better than everyone else in every area or anywhere near perfection, but overall.[/quote]

First, a caveat: I am not attacking America here. I just want to have the discussion - How are we "the best place to live in the history of the world"?

Here are some statistics that show we fall short of several other countries in important areas. I realize these stats are from 1991, but I don't think there has been a major shift since then to make them completely invalid.

Before the rabid say it, I'm not anti-American. I don't "blame America first." I love this country. If I didn't, I wouldn't care about which direction it's headed. I know there are very important freedoms we take for granted that most of the world envy. But we are not perfect and I think the attitude that "America is the best" often discourages us from trying to make things better.

The gap between the rich and poor is ever widening, our health care is top notch but only if you can afford it. I was surprised to see we lead in percentage of dual income families. It's simply not possible for most families to live on one paycheck. I wonder why conservatives (who often seem to want to return to the 1950s) don't push for higher wages so more families could have one wage earner and one stay-at-home parent. To me, that's family values.

I know some of these other countries pay higher taxes but they are also getting more benefits. Better public education, more affordable healthcare, a higher standard of living. Most Europeans get 4-8 weeks vacation a year. I've been at my job for 11 years and I get 3 weeks and that's the upper limit.

I love this country and I want it to be the best in every category again.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='elprincipe']You may think we're not advanced socially and culturally, but I have to strongly disagree. American culture and society has created the best place to live in the history of the world, so I think it's pretty advanced. That is not to say we are better than everyone else in every area or anywhere near perfection, but overall.[/quote]

First, a caveat: I am not attacking America here. I just want to have the discussion - How are we "the best place to live in the history of the world"?

Here are some statistics that show we fall short of several other countries in important areas. I realize these stats are from 1991, but I don't think there has been a major shift since then to make them completely invalid.

Before the rabid say it, I'm not anti-American. I don't "blame America first." I love this country. If I didn't, I wouldn't care about which direction it's headed. I know there are very important freedoms we take for granted that most of the world envy. But we are not perfect and I think the attitude that "America is the best" often discourages us from trying to make things better.

The gap between the rich and poor is ever widening, our health care is top notch but only if you can afford it. I was surprised to see we lead in percentage of dual income families. It's simply not possible for most families to live on one paycheck. I wonder why conservatives (who often seem to want to return to the 1950s) don't push for higher wages so more families could have one wage earner and one stay-at-home parent. To me, that's family values.

I know some of these other countries pay higher taxes but they are also getting more benefits. Better public education, more affordable healthcare, a higher standard of living. Most Europeans get 4-8 weeks vacation a year. I've been at my job for 11 years and I get 3 weeks and that's the upper limit.

I love this country and I want it to be the best in every category again.[/quote]

I didn't accuse you of "attacking America", just of being a pessimist. I'm not one of those that takes every criticism as being unpatriotic and think that's an unfortunate attitude.

Those are some very interesting numbers in that report. I don't doubt most of them are still fairly accurate, although the homeownership one is clearly much different today as the US rate has increased by quite a bit from 1991. I disagree Europeans have a higher standard of living because I've been to Europe and seen for myself they don't. Coincidentally, as societies I think they have a ways to go to get to our level, frankly. I think you need look no further than charity giving and volunteerism in the United States compared to Europe to illustrate this point.

As for higher taxes=higher benefits, only if you're including only government benefits. Personally I feel the private sector is much better equipped to improve standards of living than government, and therefore generally the less money government has the better. I'm kind of surprised to hear praise for European economies that are overall flat and much less dynamic than the U.S. economy. Look at the unemployment rates in Europe compared to the U.S. Perhaps you'd trade low unemployment for more government and a couple weeks more vacation.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I didn't accuse you of "attacking America", just of being a pessimist. I'm not one of those that takes every criticism as being unpatriotic and think that's an unfortunate attitude.[/quote]

I wasn't referring to you. I was just trying to head off the few who think any negative remark about the US is an attack.

[quote name='elprincipe']Those are some very interesting numbers in that report. I don't doubt most of them are still fairly accurate, although the homeownership one is clearly much different today as the US rate has increased by quite a bit from 1991. I disagree Europeans have a higher standard of living because I've been to Europe and seen for myself they don't. Coincidentally, as societies I think they have a ways to go to get to our level, frankly. I think you need look no further than charity giving and volunteerism in the United States compared to Europe to illustrate this point.[/quote]

And I could give you a tour of my county where we have lost tons of textile, tobacco and furniture jobs. Some could say the reason we have higher charity giving here is because we have higher need.

[quote name='elprincipe']As for higher taxes=higher benefits, only if you're including only government benefits. Personally I feel the private sector is much better equipped to improve standards of living than government, and therefore generally the less money government has the better. I'm kind of surprised to hear praise for European economies that are overall flat and much less dynamic than the U.S. economy. Look at the unemployment rates in Europe compared to the U.S. Perhaps you'd trade low unemployment for more government and a couple weeks more vacation.[/quote]

I certainly don't want higher unemployment here. I wish we weren't hemorrhaging jobs overseas right now. Manufacturing jobs are pretty much a lost cause now, but the loss of more high tech jobs will really hurt.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='elprincipe']As for higher taxes=higher benefits, only if you're including only government benefits. Personally I feel the private sector is much better equipped to improve standards of living than government, and therefore generally the less money government has the better. I'm kind of surprised to hear praise for European economies that are overall flat and much less dynamic than the U.S. economy. Look at the unemployment rates in Europe compared to the U.S. Perhaps you'd trade low unemployment for more government and a couple weeks more vacation.[/quote]

I certainly don't want higher unemployment here. I wish we weren't hemorrhaging jobs overseas right now. Manufacturing jobs are pretty much a lost cause now, but the loss of more high tech jobs will really hurt.[/quote]

Well, if you don't want higher unemployment and a flat economy, looking to Europe as a model seems like a strange choice.

http://europe.tiscali.co.uk/index.jsp?section=Business&level=preview&content=224724

What about France, a country that has taken "progressive" steps like requiring a 36-hour work week and a heck of a lot of vacation?

http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/blsin/inu0022fr0

I feel our situation and way is better.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Well, if you don't want higher unemployment and a flat economy, looking to Europe as a model seems like a strange choice.

http://europe.tiscali.co.uk/index.jsp?section=Business&level=preview&content=224724

What about France, a country that has taken "progressive" steps like requiring a 36-hour work week and a heck of a lot of vacation?

http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/blsin/inu0022fr0

I feel our situation and way is better.[/quote]

I wasn't suggesting Europe as a "model" for us. I was just pointing out in some ways, they have a higher standard of living. I'm not saying we have to use the same methods other countries do. I am saying we still have room to improve and should try to.

And on a country by country basis, there were quite a few that had lower unemployment rates than the US, such as the UK. Higher standards of living doesn't mean you have to have higher unemployment.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='elprincipe']Well, if you don't want higher unemployment and a flat economy, looking to Europe as a model seems like a strange choice.

http://europe.tiscali.co.uk/index.jsp?section=Business&level=preview&content=224724

What about France, a country that has taken "progressive" steps like requiring a 36-hour work week and a heck of a lot of vacation?

http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/blsin/inu0022fr0

I feel our situation and way is better.[/quote]

I wasn't suggesting Europe as a "model" for us. I was just pointing out in some ways, they have a higher standard of living. I'm not saying we have to use the same methods other countries do. I am saying we still have room to improve and should try to.

And on a country by country basis, there were quite a few that had lower unemployment rates than the US, such as the UK. Higher standards of living doesn't mean you have to have higher unemployment.[/quote]

Who said the UK had higher standards of living? And most countries in an area where you think they supposedly have higher standards of living do have higher unemployment than the U.S. You say we need to improve, but you point out an area that is in an economic quagmire as an example of what we should aspire to. No thanks.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Who said the UK had higher standards of living? And most countries in an area where you think they supposedly have higher standards of living do have higher unemployment than the U.S. You say we need to improve, but you point out an area that is in an economic quagmire as an example of what we should aspire to. No thanks.[/quote]

The UK was only one example on that chart that did better than the US in most of the statistics. I'm not saying there is one single country we should emulate but there are a lot we could learn from.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='elprincipe']Who said the UK had higher standards of living? And most countries in an area where you think they supposedly have higher standards of living do have higher unemployment than the U.S. You say we need to improve, but you point out an area that is in an economic quagmire as an example of what we should aspire to. No thanks.[/quote]

The UK was only one example on that chart that did better than the US in most of the statistics. I'm not saying there is one single country we should emulate but there are a lot we could learn from.[/quote]

Fair enough.
 
no we just have to respond to idiots like you OP. Also when you or any liberal state false facts, and twist and put stuff out of context it is my duty to defend my President.
 
[quote name='MrFriday18']no we just have to respond to idiots like you OP. Also when you or any liberal state false facts, and twist and put stuff out of context it is my duty to defend my President.[/quote]

And who do you run to when Dubya lies, spins and takes quotes out of context? 'Cause that happens more frequently.
 
[quote name='MrFriday18']no we just have to respond to idiots like you OP. Also when you or any liberal state false facts, and twist and put stuff out of context it is my duty to defend my President.[/quote]

Why do you use words like "duty" and "defend". You have the right to criticize the President too, it's guaranteed in the Constitution. Any responsible member of a democracy will analyze the facts for him/herself. Bush is not King George (although people are certainly starting to act like it...)
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']You can knock Christians all you want, you can call Republicans every name in the book, you can say they're Nazis, fascists, they pimp Jesus, hate gays, want to hang night traps and it's okay. You can say Republicans believe in war for profit, they want to make war on the environment, want to starve children, make old people chose between food and medicine. You can say that all they care about is big business. You are allowed to say Republicans are ignorant rednecks that shaq-fu their sisters, have no education, live in trailer parks and have gun racks on their pickup.

This just means you are a tolerant, visionary, caring, sensitive individual. It means you have the correct vision of the world and you just want everyone to live in harmony under the warmth and glow of a warm summer sun. You can't be a bigot when you use the words and phrases above, you just can't be.

Get it?[/quote]

Let's look seven posts down to this post...

"I mean I guess that's what it takess to qualify as a hockey helmeted, short bus riding, chronically masturbating wonder tard. "

Good job stereotyping and making fun of the mentally challanged. Do you really have to sink that low to make yourself look better?
 
Its funny, although there were two people at each table, they divided the votes in half and then each person counted their votes. Then the other person would go back and count to make sure the number of ballots matched what the person reported. They didn't actually go back and double check the other person's work. Plus they went back and marked over pencil lines that were hard to read or had faded in pen, ignoring state law. I'd probably be considered a Democrat here in Washington, but seriously, King county is screwed up more then any other county. This state, esp King county, needs election reforms badly.

I think the Republicans (or the "Dinosores")are nit picking, in every election there are voting discrepancies, whether its dead people voting or canidates picking up votes in a recount...

I know some Republicans who were betting that the election results were going to change because the Dems run King County since the recount began... I honestly can't think of a witty remark or comeback, I just seem to repeat whatever our governor's campaign manger says...
 
Perhaps you should look at Canada for a model of success in terms of standard of living.

This is not to say things are perfect here; we have many flaws.

However, I believe our example of progress (Death Penalty, Same-sex marriage, marijuina legalization) is a perfect way of adapting to the times and demonstrating that perhaps allowing these modifications doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse.
 
[quote name='Mike23']Perhaps you should look at Canada for a model of success in terms of standard of living.

This is not to say things are perfect here; we have many flaws.

However, I believe our example of progress (Death Penalty, Same-sex marriage, marijuina legalization) is a perfect way of adapting to the times and demonstrating that perhaps allowing these modifications doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse.[/quote]

I agree. It may not be as good for the rich, but middle class and down I would say canada has the edge, and most rankings agree. Though it has dropped a few spaces recently, most likely due to the increase in poverty. Though, for the highest living standards, you really have to look a countries such as sweden and norway. The big problem in the u.s. is poverty and health care. It's funny, all the supposedly disasterous things, such as free health cares, are the very things the nations with the highest livings standards tend to do.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23'][quote name='Mike23']Perhaps you should look at Canada for a model of success in terms of standard of living.

This is not to say things are perfect here; we have many flaws.

However, I believe our example of progress (Death Penalty, Same-sex marriage, marijuina legalization) is a perfect way of adapting to the times and demonstrating that perhaps allowing these modifications doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse.[/quote]

I agree. It may not be as good for the rich, but middle class and down I would say canada has the edge, and most rankings agree. Though it has dropped a few spaces recently, most likely due to the increase in poverty. Though, for the highest living standards, you really have to look a countries such as sweden and norway. The big problem in the u.s. is poverty and health care. It's funny, all the supposedly disasterous things, such as free health cares, are the very things the nations with the highest livings standards tend to do.[/quote]

Wow, this Norway, it sounds great. Or maybe there some things that you haven't taken into account, like this.

Or maybe Sweden, that must be a better place to live than the U.S.! They have it easy on the eyes there with all the blondes! Or not.

I'm really not trying to say these countries don't have high standards, just that you all have a grass is greener kind of mentality instead of appreciating what we have in the U.S.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='alonzomourning23'][quote name='Mike23']Perhaps you should look at Canada for a model of success in terms of standard of living.

This is not to say things are perfect here; we have many flaws.

However, I believe our example of progress (Death Penalty, Same-sex marriage, marijuina legalization) is a perfect way of adapting to the times and demonstrating that perhaps allowing these modifications doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse.[/quote]

I agree. It may not be as good for the rich, but middle class and down I would say canada has the edge, and most rankings agree. Though it has dropped a few spaces recently, most likely due to the increase in poverty. Though, for the highest living standards, you really have to look a countries such as sweden and norway. The big problem in the u.s. is poverty and health care. It's funny, all the supposedly disasterous things, such as free health cares, are the very things the nations with the highest livings standards tend to do.[/quote]

Wow, this Norway, it sounds great. Or maybe there some things that you haven't taken into account, like this.

Or maybe Sweden, that must be a better place to live than the U.S.! They have it easy on the eyes there with all the blondes! Or not.

I'm really not trying to say these countries don't have high standards, just that you all have a grass is greener kind of mentality instead of appreciating what we have in the U.S.[/quote]

I was expecting something horrible to replace the fact that 17% of americans have no health insurance. I've seen those before and it's true it's not things we have to deal with, but it's a trade off, and a good one as far as I'm concerned. Though I am living in canada now, and I have seen how others and the poor live here and in the u.s.. But for all the problems it has, including high poverty (but lower than in the u.s.), the system in place, as far as I'm concerned, works better. I also never said to copy them exactly, the goal is, if possible, to try to take the best of different countries. It feels nice to think we have everything, but pretty much any way that you could rank standard of living among all the people of a country (and not just a section of it) the u.s. does not come out on top. Also, with the size of our economy and a cut back on the military, we could probably run similar programs more effectively, cutting down on things such as waiting times.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']To the point of voiding the election and throwing out the governor?[/quote]

Yes, if there is fraud there should be a revote. The same is true of Ohio where there was verified fraud. There should have been a revote. You can't pick and choose which cases of election fraud should be revoted.
 
[quote name='Mike23']Perhaps you should look at Canada for a model of success in terms of standard of living.

This is not to say things are perfect here; we have many flaws.

However, I believe our example of progress (Death Penalty, Same-sex marriage, marijuina legalization) is a perfect way of adapting to the times and demonstrating that perhaps allowing these modifications doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse.[/quote]

Great point. I think there are alot of Americans who would prefer to keep up the farce of jingoism and christianity that was so popular in politics during the cold war. Yet in the cold war, the US differentiated itself from Russia by placing a great importance on religion. These days the US is trying to fight radical muslim fundamentalists by placing an even more radical christian fundamentalist in charge. The smart move would have been to place a moderate in charge of the US government, and prove to the world that we are not only a moral but also rational people. Unfortunately with the constant hysteria still continuing over 911, I think the US has lost a great deal of it's reasoning powers.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='alonzomourning23'][quote name='Mike23']Perhaps you should look at Canada for a model of success in terms of standard of living.

This is not to say things are perfect here; we have many flaws.

However, I believe our example of progress (Death Penalty, Same-sex marriage, marijuina legalization) is a perfect way of adapting to the times and demonstrating that perhaps allowing these modifications doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse.[/quote]

I agree. It may not be as good for the rich, but middle class and down I would say canada has the edge, and most rankings agree. Though it has dropped a few spaces recently, most likely due to the increase in poverty. Though, for the highest living standards, you really have to look a countries such as sweden and norway. The big problem in the u.s. is poverty and health care. It's funny, all the supposedly disasterous things, such as free health cares, are the very things the nations with the highest livings standards tend to do.[/quote]

Wow, this Norway, it sounds great. Or maybe there some things that you haven't taken into account, like this.

Or maybe Sweden, that must be a better place to live than the U.S.! They have it easy on the eyes there with all the blondes! Or not.

I'm really not trying to say these countries don't have high standards, just that you all have a grass is greener kind of mentality instead of appreciating what we have in the U.S.[/quote]

I was expecting something horrible to replace the fact that 17% of americans have no health insurance. I've seen those before and it's true it's not things we have to deal with, but it's a trade off, and a good one as far as I'm concerned. Though I am living in canada now, and I have seen how others and the poor live here and in the u.s.. But for all the problems it has, including high poverty (but lower than in the u.s.), the system in place, as far as I'm concerned, works better. I also never said to copy them exactly, the goal is, if possible, to try to take the best of different countries. It feels nice to think we have everything, but pretty much any way that you could rank standard of living among all the people of a country (and not just a section of it) the u.s. does not come out on top. Also, with the size of our economy and a cut back on the military, we could probably run similar programs more effectively, cutting down on things such as waiting times.[/quote]

Well, I'll definitely agree with you on two things. First, no, we're not the best at everything. I've already said that. Second, I'm all for cutting back the military (as well as every other facet of government [over]spending).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top