I'm an American, I'm an Army ROTC cadet and personally love my country. But I can recognize all the flaws. The high prison population, poor economic situation (more imports than exports), support for either the impoverished OR corporations never for the middle class and small businesses, the disproportionally high crime rates and the antiquated racial biases. Of course I also recognize that the United States is by far the strongest nation on earth in classic terms (economy, resources, and military) and unlike empires of the past (England, Spain, Rome) is having significant positive effects on the earth. For example the spread of both capitalism and democracy has resulted in a time of general peace in comparison to 1900-1970; in other words wars fought between nations have decreased sharply while wars fought within countries has grown. I think that the United States is the last empire before we see a globalized government; the foundation of which has already been layed: UN, ICC, Democracy as a fundamental concept and the concept of freedom; these are inherent of the American empire and will be the base of global governing.

I'd like to see Glen Ross talk to this guy ;)
http://youtu.be/MnPGuD_5fTg?t=7m5s

That occupy "leader" pretty much embodies the entitled 'special snowflake' type.

Coffee is for closers. People don't close, and they still expect the Cadillac. Or at least the steak knives.

The article was so beautifully Machiavellian. So realistic while people hate thinking about it. Thanks for the read, I found its truth quite entertaining.
ILN: I had mixed views on the video. Though I agree with Hannity (a miracle in itself) that the kid needs to provide for society with something more substantial than being on the internet all day and he should actually get a job, I agree with the concept that basic necessities should be provided (though that doesn't extend quite as far as he might like since houses and cars aren't necessities, even certain foods are more like commodities). Though that doesn't make them free, as Hannity started to hint toward. They would have to be provided through tax money, part of which should come from the person receiving the necessity (though it is far cheaper this way).

The OWS guys didn't say cars and houses, he said transportation to work and housing. Public Transportation and basic shelter should absolutely be provided.

The USA accounts for 40% of the world's defense programs and gave over twice as much foreign aid as any other country in each of the last 5 years. We are home to 6 of the top 10 universities in the world. But for some reason America is shit... let's delve deeper into this.

We are 7th in literacy 27th in math 22nd in science 49th in life expectancy 178th in infant mortality 3rd in median household income 3rd in labor force 4th in exports
-so we're not number 1 in any of those and I keep see them reoccurring but here is why those stats are all flawed:
++Literacy for 7th place? well we also have approximately 45 million recent immigrants, only 50% of which can speak English 'to an acceptable degree'
++Math and Science? what we are behind?!?! Not Quite. this is based off of both children's test scores and college grads, but if you look at the most recent breakthroughs, the Americans are way up there, alongside the Swiss, Japanese, Germans and French. England contributes too but we are definitely in the top 10 as far as expanding of these fields.
++ 49th in life expectancy and 178th in infant mortality, this is much more simple, healthcare is shit, and abortion is legal. These stats aren't the most unbiased as you can see. The debate over abortion continues although I'm personally fine with it being legal to a degree.
++3rd in median household income, 4th in exports and 3rd in labor force
Median household income? what about qatar and monaco, liechtenstein and bermuda, I'm amazed the US is in third when you look at the richies over there. And although we are only 4th in exports, we are 1st in imports and stimulate the economy much more healthily than any other country.

So we are not #1 and that is sad, but why aren't we? the answer is simple: politics.
-the US government provides security and foreign aid for countrie across the world. Although we have had conflict in the middle east, that is due to greed and corruption. Political parties have enveloped the American people and in all truth they are horrible. We help the world and stop the bad guys, but only when we can make some money or get good PR. Another reason why we suck? Sarah Palin. Somehow, I believe that if I were to run for an office I would never get really far, i can not imagine myself getting into politics and succeeding. But somehow, this little dumb prick Sarah Palin made a run for the vice presidency, and came within a few votes of making it. I mean really? REALLY?

What a leftist, lying piece of shit Yanik is. Funny...in another post he is claiming to be against political parties....not he is blaming all the problems of the US on an UNELECTED citizen....and not the Democrat leadership of the last 6 years.

Fucking hypocrite piece of shit.

I say we elect him.

@Yanik: child mortality does not include aborted children. It usually consists of the rate of children between birth and 5 that don't reach their 6th year of life. (in some statistics they count children up to 7 or 12 years old). Otherwise, being in the upper half of the OECD is generally fairly good, it doesn't need to be the first. So, among your statements really bad are indeed only the health-poverty-related issues. In both cases the general American public seems to abhor changes to the actual system. Or rather abhors the idea of spending public money on it. Unfortunately, there is no free lunch and improving things needs money (and some sensible regulation). I am too lazy search for the links to the relevant numbers, but the efficiency of the American health care system is one of the worst, not just among the developed but of the whole world. Efficiency understood as health per dollar spent. Either way, it was one of the reasons why my wife and I declined an otherwise promising opportunity to move to the States. Below an way above median income, we get better child care, better education and better health care in Japan, which compensates for the 5% less earnings we have now.

sorry, just noticed that you wrote about infant mortality. The only change to my original argument here is, that infant mortality usually ends between 6 and 12 month but still starts with birth, not counting abortions.

@mendax: Your point may be true, but the tone of that OWS guy, really makes me want to give him a good slap.

@ ILN: I just watched your clip. Sean Hannity (whoever the fuck he is) is such an asshole in that clip. The title "Sean Hannity debates Occupy Leader" is a fraud. He doesn't seek to engage him in debate - he just shouts at him for the entire video. The Occupy guy repeatedly attempts to explain his position, and this Hannity cunt doesn't let him - he just barks at him, cutting him off mid-sentence every time.

Coffee is not for Sean Assity. What an asshole.

I love Glengarry Glen Ross, by the way, what a brilliant film.

@ ILN: By the way, you show your ignorance by saying you'd like to see "Glen Ross" talk to anyone.

In the film, Glen Ross Farms is a real estate development. There isn't a person in the film called Glen Ross...

whoa shit i stopped checking this thread. I'm not blaming Sarah Palin for anything Krellin! I'm just saying I'm amazed she got so far, which is sad, but thank god she didnt get elected. Also, im not left if anything im republican but even them i dont agree with them. I also don't blame the political parties for everything, I just don't agree with their existence as what is best for this country.

Krellin just stahp ok. you twist my words and youre own opinion has a stubborn undertone.

Sean Hannity is repeatedly named the worst news anchor on television. There's a reason for that.

I'm surprised Mr. Hannity even had time to bark at the Occupy guy. Glenn Beck must have got tired of having his cock sucked.

Vashta: saaaaaaame.
mendax: I did concede the basic necessities point.
Jamiet: Yeah, Hannity's job is pretty much just to be a dick to people he disagrees with.

@JY By just reading I couldn't say whether you or krellin is the older one. I guess that's just how he is. You won't convince him and if he runs of arguments he invents himself you haven't written and attacks you on that.

I disagree with you concerning political parties, though. Let me explain shortly, where you go wrong. In a society, parties will always emerge. A party is just a way to shortcut the formulation of preference sets and method to reduce competition to a manageable level. As an illustration:

consider a society of 7 people. assume they will always interact with each other in order to find a solution to a problem. now assume they have a cost to pay for every interaction. (you can think of that in terms of not having enough time to work for a living, to have sex, to eat, to actually implement a decision, just be a little imaginative here). So it is best for the society (and actually crucial to its survival) to find a mode to reduce the amount of interactions concerning decision making (starting with the formulation of preference sets).

Here is some math: if everybody would always interact with everybody, you'd have 7*(7-1)/2 = 21 interaction channels. suppose a reorganisation of the system, where only members of subsets interact with each other (ie. formulate preference sets) and then these subsets interact with each other (eg. via a representative). It can be shown that this leads to a minimal number interactions of about 8 (three subsets {1,2,3},{4,5},{6,7}) with (interactions {A,B,C} : 3*(3-1)/2 = 3) + (interactions {1,2,3} = 3) + (interactions {4,5} = 1) + (interactions {6,7} = 1).

Now let us call these subsets "parties", there specific preference sets "party stances" or "ideologies" and the subset level interaction intraparty politics and the wholeset interactions "party politics." the economies of 21 - 8 = 13 represent the benefit for the society of such a system. Therefore, you will always see parties evolve in the mid run.

Ofc, this is but a rough sketch so you'll get the idea. I'll leave the rest up to your imagination and reflection. Get back to me via PM if you would like to have some recommendations on further reading on the subject.

x3n0n I am 16 and Krellin has hinted that he is much older than me.

also, i understand that political parties will form, but I believe that they shouldn't be the immediate vote choice for some. While many people are opened minded, there are also many people who stand by their party Gung Ho and don't even consider other options. And many of the leaders of political parties today, such as the Republican Tea Party, who in general hate the Democrats unconditionally. And with 7 people society it is easy to keep manipulation minimal, unlike 310 million people...

The United States is far and away the #1 destination for emigrants from other countries, including developed western nations.

What does that tell you?

@Jeff: That we have one hell of a PR team.

@JY it might be your impression, but trust me, this is not the case. many people have a lot to do. so think about peoples support decisions in a way that they side for an OS and by extension PC/smartphone/tablet environment. Ofc there are a lot of options out there, but for reasons of time people tend to side with what they feel the least distant. This is the whole idea of spatial choice theory. It applies to political parties as well. I have a Linux and a Mac, using the Mac most of the time. I used to have a Windows PC, but I wouldn't go back unless I'd have too.

Switching from OS to another is just very cumbersome. Most people though are highly opportunistic. This is one of the reasons why there is political change in party dominance. As for your lamentation about certain factions dominating the parties or locking them in, well this is just a consequence of the American voting system. Starting with the possibility for gerrymandering (it's result is very close to old feudal systems), which is ruled out in most civilised democracies (and fortunately in some states in the US as well). The presidential election caucus which is in its functionality was also a purely aristocratic element from its very inception. (please refer to the literature, I won't discuss involved topics about the American constitution on this forum) and has a strong potential to block majorities out of office (and it did quite often so, not just in the case of Bush and Gore). Read about the mathematics behind it in the general election circus documentation or in a more abstract way including proofs refer eg. to The Logic of Political Survival by BdM2S2 2002. And last is the fact that you have a single first pass the post system for choosing your elects which themselves will be nominated as candidates in the very same way. This enhances first radicalization within the party and then prevents non majority party candidates from being elected at all. (non majority is everything EXCEPT both Republicans and Democrats). It is a sequence of Duverger processes. So unless you don't tinker with machine, your car won't be up and running.

ah, and don't believe krellin about his age. he is just 15. even if his birth certificate states otherwise.

the leads are weak

The leads are weak? YOU'RE WEAK.