TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- What would you do as president?
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

fyi marc, I didn't reply because others in this thread replied first, and dissected your logic much better than I could have done. I admit that.

And here is an article you may find interesting:

a little truth about "outsourcing".

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt a little truth about "outsourcing".

This was linked on the page. Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe and
The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War

quote:

In this blockbuster, Thomas DiLorenzo calls for a complete rethinking of a central icon of American historiography. He looks at the actions and legacy of Abe Lincoln from an economics point of view to show that Lincoln's main interest was not in opposing slavery but in advancing mercantilism, inflationism, and government spending: the "American system" of Henry Clay.

Nice one.

EDIT: I'm not steering away from the subject. I'm saying that I won't believe a web page that has shit linked on it.

hmm let's see

1. Greater enforcement of immigration policies and better border protection. Punish the corporations that hire illegals.

2. Improve education - altho I'm not quite sure how, lol. I dont trust teachers entirely so I wouldn't say "just increase teacher's wages"...

3. Make prostitution and marijuana legal, and as the OP already said, treat drug addiction/use as a health concern and not a criminal problem.

4. As metalgear said, instead of creating cities that are more spread out, start building more centralized cities.

5. Improve foreign relations with other countries.

6. Do something about the homeless situation in this country...force the lazy ones to work, and the mental cases (which constitute a large chunk of the homeless population) should be placed in mental institutions and treated.

7. Focus attention on newer sources of energy and protecting the environment.

8. Try to get third world countries to bring their population growth rates under control!!

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers Capitalizt, why don't you say something yourself, instead of letting someone do it for you. I've replied twice since you've posted and the only thing you can come up with is, "Pwned"? He didn't do shit. And "Rhuckus" (Ruckus), I never said I was in the public eye, I'm not. I work very closely with those in the public eye, and they review everything they are about to say, because if said wrong, it might ruin them.

Yet you won't bother to own up to your own rhetoric, you just shift targets then begin with the ad hominem?

quote:

And there are many corporations overseas because the WTO has made it unbelievably easy for them to exploit over in another country. And taxes are fairly lenient right now, and certainly not high enough for myself to be satisfied, but yet... there is still outsourcing? That kind of shits all over your idea that higher taxes lead to more outsourcing, because they will do it regardless.

1. Don't begin paragraphs with conjunctions.
2. The WTO making business profitable elsewhere in the world by allowing business to take advantage of lower taxes and labor costs has definately wooed corporations away from the US. Good point! lower taxes attract corporations and provide warrant to my claims.
3. Don't begin sentences in the middle of your paragraph with conjunctions either.
4. You advocate in this lengthy and intriguingly poorly written second sentence that outsourcing currently occurs under the prohibitive taxes within the US. That is quite a good call captain obvious. Do you have a point other than the one on top of your head?
5. Don't dangle participles
6. As taxes have increased, outsourcing has increased. The fact that there was outsourcing to begin with and it was then exascerbated by increased taxes proves, rather than "shits on" the basic principle that putting out a fire with gasoline is a fools errand.

quote:

The UAE has high taxes, is a very rich country, and has great social programs, I look up to them.

The UAE exports a huge surplus of oil at a great profit. If you're willing to allow drilling in ANWAR, and derricks off Martha's Vineyard and Puget Sound, then i think you should feel free to use the profits from that oil to fund social programs. However, as long as Sen. Kennedy is still shooting down the drilling off the East Coast, and the democrats are blocking ANWAR drilling, please stop spending MY money purchasing voters for YOUR cause.

quote:

I'm tired of arguing. You people aren't worth anything... no matter how much money you have.

So you're not at all fatigued by flaming and spouting claims without warrant, but when you are required to support your vaccuous rhetoric, you first plead lack of stamina and then resume ad hominem attacks? If what you say is not important enough to you for you to back it up with logic and argument, why waste the bandwidth and subject the rest of us to your lack of grammatical prowess?

quote:

Originally posted by Rhuckus Yet you won't bother to own up to your own rhetoric, you just shift targets then begin with the ad hominem? 1. Don't begin paragraphs with conjunctions. 2. The WTO making business profitable elsewhere in the world by allowing business to take advantage of lower taxes and labor costs has definately wooed corporations away from the US. Good point! lower taxes attract corporations and provide warrant to my claims. 3. Don't begin sentences in the middle of your paragraph with conjunctions either. 4. You advocate in this lengthy and intriguingly poorly written second sentence that outsourcing currently occurs under the prohibitive taxes within the US. That is quite a good call captain obvious. Do you have a point other than the one on top of your head? 5. Don't dangle participles 6. As taxes have increased, outsourcing has increased. The fact that there was outsourcing to begin with and it was then exascerbated by increased taxes proves, rather than "shits on" the basic principle that putting out a fire with gasoline is a fools errand.

AND..."exascerbated"? haha, *exacerbated*, tool.

quote:

The UAE exports a huge surplus of oil at a great profit. If you're willing to allow drilling in ANWAR, and derricks off Martha's Vineyard and Puget Sound, then i think you should feel free to use the profits from that oil to fund social programs. However, as long as Sen. Kennedy is still shooting down the drilling off the East Coast, and the democrats are blocking ANWAR drilling, please stop spending MY money purchasing voters for YOUR cause.

I don't want drilling either. Oil is fool's gold anyway, you will find out soon enough.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt The sad fact is that there are many people in this world not willing to put in the extra effort required to succeed...to work beyond a typical 9-5, or to educate themselves in any new areas that may make them more valuable to an employer. They are perfectly content with mediocrity and this is why they don't prosper...NOT because "the system" didn't give them a fair shake at things.

But then would you consider someone who didn't care about prospering at their as not successful. Is sucess, for you, measured by someone's wealth or job rank. What if someone is perfectly content at their job by doing the minimum and have no desire to put in the extra work because they have no want to make their jobs their life.

Especially in the US, someone who "works to live" is looked down upon as unseccesful. People who "live to work," who basically surround their lives with their work are looked at as having a very successful life. In the US free-market system, you are only measured by your wealth, and the level of happiness is measured by how much you have, ie. things, money, big house. Quantity, not quality, is the language for Americans.

you're all a bunch of lazy ****s since you visit this forum so often!

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherWay83 4. As metalgear said, instead of creating cities that are more spread out, start building more centralized cities.

Presidents build cities now?

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail Presidents build cities now?

lol...what i meant was, try to focus on building such cities...lol

well if I were president i'd walk in Bill Clinton's shoes....nothing wrong with sucky sucky

quote:

Originally posted by christos well if I were president i'd walk in Bill Clinton's shoes....nothing wrong with sucky sucky

Don't forget the cigar and blue dress .

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid 3. Cut down the waste of land: Make suburbs illegal. Every one would need to live in a city of over 400,000. This would make people more open to different people and thus cut down racial crimes and the general ignorance of people. Would also leave many areas of open space. Making this country even more beautiful.

LOL, wow just wow.
I bet that plan would go over real well in Saudi Arabia or Egypt

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherWay83 4. As metalgear said, instead of creating cities that are more spread out, start building more centralized cities.

Dumbest thing ever. You can't outlaw such a basic choice that all people have had since the dawn of time.
Personally I love big cities, but not everyone feels this way. Some people like to live in rural small towns, or in a small town atmosphere, but still close to the amenities of big cities.

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles LOL, wow just wow. I bet that plan would go over real well in Saudi Arabia or Egypt

Well I wasn't referring to SA or Egypt fuckface.

The people will eventually get used to living in a city.

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles Dumbest thing ever. You can't outlaw such a basic choice that all people have had since the dawn of time. Personally I love big cities, but not everyone feels this way. Some people like to live in rural small towns, or in a small town atmosphere, but still close to the amenities of big cities.

Yep, I actually intend to move out to a very rural area one day...

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid Well I wasn't referring to SA or Egypt fuckface. The people will eventually get used to living in a city.

What a load of crap! I see that you live in Chicago. Great city, but most people live in the Chicagoland area, not the city.
While the population has finally started to move back up in the right direction (currently at almost 3 million, but nowhere near its peak of 3.5 million in the 1950s) the population of the greater Chicago area is 9.5 million.
Or take Atlanta - 470,000 people live in the city, but over 5 million live in the metro area.

Besides, there's a loophole as to what the definition of a city is.
Jacksonville, FL for example is a city merged with its county, so the city's population of 800,000 is pretty spread out. Same deal for Louisville.
The size of Anchorage or Oklahoma City are other fine examples of cities that are far bigger in size than Chicago yet have a much smaller population.

There's a lot of reasons as to why people choose to move out of the city - safer neighborhoods, lower taxes, lower housing costs (or conversely more expensive ones), the bias that their kids will be safer in a smaller environment, the longing at an older age for a slower pace of life, etc.

Even in China and India, the world's most populated countries, most of the population doesn't live in the big cities.

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles I see that you live in Chicago. Great city,

I know Chicago is very beautiful.

quote:

Besides, there's a loophole as to what the definition of a city is.

That is why I would be defining what a city is. And I wouldn't be president, I would claim myself king.

quote:

There's a lot of reasons as to why people choose to move out of the city - safer neighborhoods, lower taxes, lower housing costs (or conversely more expensive ones), the bias that their kids will be safer in a smaller environment, the longing at an older age for a slower pace of life, etc.

That is a bunch of BS created by some elite class that wanted to make more money. Some neighborhoods in the chicago area are more dangerous than the city itself! And taxes where I live are expensive as hell. And the taxes my brother pays in the city are less. And he lives in a really good area of Chicago(boys town or close to it).

quote:

Even in China and India, the world's most populated countries, most of the population doesn't live in the big cities.

Yes, but there is a movement towards the cities. And every week in China, a city the size of Philedelphia(mostly pop) is created. And Beijing has a population of over 30million in its area.

Key words: in its area.
There's also over 30 million people living in the Tokyo area. They don't all live in Tokyo or Yokahoma though, now do they?

Yes, there are suburbs that are more dangerous than the big city. Just look at Compton in L.A. as an example.
For the most part though, suburbs are perceived, and often are, less dangerous.

Let's also take into account cities that deteriorate. Detroit is a perfect example, and it wasn't just white flight - middle class blacks, and Arabs all moved out when they got the chance. Why do you think there's such a large Arab community in the suburb of Dearborn?
Detroit at its peak had over 1.8 million people living in it, whereas today less than 900,000 call it home (less than half!).
Political corruption, police corruption, high profile gang and drug wars, and a city that had bad riots and rising racism sealed the deal.

So as you can see, there's a lot of reasons people vie not to live in a big city. It's not just white people who sometimes make the move elsewhere - it's oftentimes anyone and everyone that can afford to do so.

And yes, I understand you were joking about becoming a king.
I also think you might sadly be right about most Americans not being able to handle "soft" drugs responsibly if they were legal.

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles Besides, there's a loophole as to what the definition of a city is. Jacksonville, FL for example is a city merged with its county, so the city's population of 800,000 is pretty spread out. Same deal for Louisville.

I lived in Louisville when they had their merger. It brought the city into the top 20 largest cities in the country.

Detroit also never had a diversified economy. It was all revolved around the american auto industry, which took a southern turn, and left detroit out in the cold. Any city that bases most of its economy on one industry is destined for failure.

Very true Krypton.
It's sad how in the early part of the 20th Century Detroit was considered a city of the future, only to see its foundations crumble later in the century.

Suburban Detroit on the other hand, especially Oakland County, includes some of the wealthiest zip codes in the world. A good example is Troy

quote:

World first: In 2008, most people will live in cities By Brad Knickerbocker | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor For the first time in human history, the world's population is about to become mostly urban. Citing population growth rates and migration patterns, United Nations researchers and other experts predict that some time in 2008 more people will live in cities than in rural areas. This demographic shift is mostly taking place in Africa and Asia, largely in low-income settlements in developing countries - much of it in the 22 "megacities" whose populations will exceed 10 million and in some cases grow to more than 20 million by 2015. The environmental, economic, and social ramifications of such trends are enormous, according to the Worldwatch Institute's annual "State of the World" report released Tuesday. Among the major challenges are the mundane features of daily living: clean water and air, sanitary waste facilities, the cost of food, and the availability of shelter and transportation. "Unplanned and chaotic urbanization is taking a huge toll on human health and the quality of the environment, contributing to social, ecological, and economic instability in many countries," warns the report, which is written by demographers, international program officials, and other experts from the United States and other countries. But the news is not all bad. Researchers find examples of cities from Karachi, Pakistan to Freetown, Sierra Leone to Bogot�, Colombia with projects aimed at improving the lives of urban dwellers while reducing the environmental impact of concentrated populations. These include urban farming plots, solar water heaters, economic cooperatives, improved sewer facilities, and upgraded transportation systems. "The task of saving the world's modern cities might seem hopeless - except that it is already happening," says Worldwatch president Christopher Flavin. "Necessities from food to energy are increasingly being produced by urban pioneers inside city limits." Still, the challenges and the probable costs of addressing them remain daunting. Eight of the 10 most populous cities are on or near earthquake faults. Some two-thirds of the cities projected to exceed 8 million residents by 2015 are in coastal areas where sea levels may rise as a result of climate change. But the human need is more immediate. Of the 3 billion people who live in cities today, about 1 billion are in slums without clean water, adequate toilet facilities, or durable housing. Some 1.6 million urban dwellers - many if not most of them children - die each year due to causes associated with the lack of clean water and sanitation. "For a child living in a slum, disease and violence are daily threats, while education and healthcare are often a distant hope," says Molly O'Meara Sheehan, project director of Worldwatch's 2007 report, a collection of articles and graphics produced annually since 1984. This argues for a reassessment of global development priorities, advocates say, particularly the allocation of national and international aid. According to the Commission for Africa, launched by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in 2004, problems associated with urbanization are second only to HIV/AIDS on the world's most rapidly urbanizing continent. Yet from 1970 to 2000, aid designated for cities in developing areas was just 4 percent of total development assistance worldwide. This was the period when many countries in Africa were transitioning politically and economically from European colonialism to independence. "Too many of us were ill prepared for our urban future," notes Anna Tibaijuka, executive director of UN-HABITAT, the United Nations agency that promotes socially and environmentally sustainable towns and cities with the goal of providing universal adequate shelter. "The promise of independence has given way to the harsh realities of urban living," writes Dr. Tibaijuka, an agricultural economist and native of Tanzania, in the report's foreword. By 2015, there are likely to be 59 African cities with populations between 1 million and 5 million, 65 such cities in Latin America and the Caribbean, and 253 in Asia. "Urban centers are hubs simultaneously of breathtaking artistic innovation and some of the world's most abject and disgraceful poverty," writes Mr. Flavin. "They are the dynamos of the world economy but also the breeding grounds for alienation, religious extremism, and other sources of local and global insecurity." Cities also exemplify the challenges and promises of sustainability. China, for example, has 16 of the world's most polluted cities. But on an island in the Yangtze River near Shanghai, China this year plans to break ground on the Dongtan ecocity project designed to be nearly self-sufficient in food, water, energy, and waste disposal for its projected 500,000 residents.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0112/p25s02-wogi.html

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail Presidents build cities now?

Well, I do live in a city built by a president

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0112/p25s02-wogi.html

When did Tokyo get that big!? That can't be right...

There's no denying the fact that the world is becoming more urban, but that also includes cities of 20,000 people, not just ones with half a million and up. It also includes urban areas where there's a central city yet most of the population resides in nearby smaller cities and unincorporated communities.

There's also another problem you're overlooking: What if everyone in the world that wanted to move to NYC or London would do so? Let's say, for arguments sake, that 1 percent of the world's population moved to NYC - That's 60 million people! Way more than it could ever handle.
Furthermore, what would states like Maine or Montana do if everyone fled their states to live in a big city?

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles Furthermore, what would states like Maine or Montana do if everyone fled their states to live in a big city?

They'd become national parks than.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.