L, L, and the P of H: 2015 Edition (bringing the Founding Fathers into 2015)

Last week, I wrote about my history as a blogger and included a post I wrote for my blog on, the now defunct website GuerrillaNews.com.  I wrote that post over ten years ago and felt it was still pretty accurate. In fact, the sentiment behind it is probably more accurate in 2015 than it was in 2004. So, I thought I'd post an updated version.  Here goes:

L, L, and the P of H: 2015 Edition

Fri, 4 Sep 2015 13:00:00

We, in America, were always taught to revere the Founding Fathers.  They had the wisdom and strength to not only conceive of the Great Democratic Experiment, but to see it all the way through to fruition.  And they did so in the face of a mighty empire and its king who oppressed them all with unfair taxation.  What wise and brave men they were!

So, wise that for the past two-and-a-half centuries,  we have looked at the words they wrote and the system that put in place as almost sacrosanct.  On more than one occasion, regarding more than a few issues, our leaders, our news media, our idiot Television pundits have asked "what were the intentions of the founding fathers?"

As though, it's not fairly obvious when you consider the context of the Founding Fathers and the men themselves.

As though, culture hasn't changed dramatically since 1776.

As though, the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights were not written in English as a set of instructions to run a government.

As though, these documents were holy writ, words of deities written in another language and handed down to us, through millennia.

ARG! Why do folks on the left think they can lie and get away with it, too?

I've been a follower of politics for a loooong time.  While I call myself an independent, I do have left leanings.  However, those left leanings don't allow me to condone lies from the left just because I believe in their POV more than the right's.  Lies are still lies and the definition of a lie is something said in order to deceive or mislead.  So, now that the left is getting out there with their own voice, presenting their "side" of various arguments, you'd think I'd be happy, right?  Alas, not.

I posted what follows earlier today on Website666's Tumblr and it provides a great example of the left misleading anyone who reads their "info"graphic:

saboma:

American Censorship Day November [16th]

What the hell is the exact definition of an “infringing link”??  I hate these over-simplified “infographics” that fail to define basic terms. The fact that there is no definition of “infringing link” makes me want to ignore the whole thing.  I am so sick of people on either “side” of the political “aisle” failing miserably at properly informing the people they are trying to persuade.  This is a bad infographic because it does a great job of inspiring fear but a shitty job of, you know, actually providing information.

And it’s not just the lack of an “infringing link” definition.  Look at the “As a result” section.  It represents what website self-censorship is like now and will be like after SOPA passes.  Before SOPA, it’s a small circle.  After SOPA, the circle is MUCH LARGER!! OMG!!  THAT CIRCLE IS WAY BIGGER!!  How bigger?  Well, I can’t tell since there are NO NUMBERS describing the circles.  This is all beside the fact that there is no way to measure self-censorship in a future we haven’t lived in yet.  In short, this ven-ish diagram has zero basis in fact. In other words, it’s made up just to scare the shit out of you.

The same can be said for the line graph next to it.  Before SOPA, you see the number of new startups rises!  But after, it goes down. :( BUT THE DATA POINTS AREN’T NUMBERED, so we have NO WAY OF KNOWING WHAT THEY MEAN!!! This, also, is beside the point that this line graph does the same thing the ven-ish diagram does—it makes shit up about the future—there’s no proof that the number of new startups will go down after SOPA.

Under the “HOW DOES THIS AFFECT” section, it would be nice to see the part of the law that explains email providers would have to censor email with infringing links. It would also be nice to know how social networks could possibly censor the links of hundreds of thousands of users, especially when URL shorteners can be used to mask the links.

As I mentioned, this infographic fails to mention what an infringing link even is and that inspires even more fear than the even bigger circle of self-censorship or the non-specific datapoints in the “new startup” line graph.  What IS an infringing link?!?!  Is THIS an infringing link?  IsTHIS?  Would YOU be posting an infringing link by linking to this post?  OMG!!  WE LIVE IN SOVIET RUSSIA!!

It’s a shame propagandists get hired to make “info”graphics like this, instead of good human beings who want to properly inform people.  Especially since the truth about this bill is probably very terrifying.

THANKS FOR THE FEAR MONGERING, AMERICANCENSORSHIP.ORG!

I remember when Air America first went live.  I tried listening to some of their shows, but they were just as obnoxious as the shows from the right (especially the "noxious" in "obnoxious").  Who does it serve to be loud and whiney on either "side" of an issue?  Likewise, it serves no one to cheat the facts, or blatantly lie, as I feel the above infographic does.

I'm an atheist in all things.  I try my best to believe/trust nothing without some semblance of proof (or at least evidence).  When an infographic does not provide any, but still gets reblogged all over the place, I get really frustrated and a little worried because that means that many people are basing their decisions on propaganda, not on facts.  Regardless of whether you're basing your decisions on the will of a god you imagine to be real or a graph that has no basis in actual fact, your decisions are likely to be just as faulty.

So, activists on the left and the right, why not just tell the truth instead of doing what ever it takes to influence us?  If your argument is so strong, why fudge things?  Unless, your argument isn't so strong, in which case you should ask yourself why you think that your view is the right one.

saboma:

American Censorship Day November [16th]

What the hell is the exact definition of an “infringing link”??  I hate these over-simplified “infographics” that fail to define basic terms. The fact that there is no definition of “infringing link” makes me want to ignore the whole thing.  I am so sick of people on either “side” of the political “aisle” failing miserably at properly informing the people they are trying to persuade.  This is a bad infographic because it does a great job of inspiring fear but a shitty job of, you know, actually providing information.

And it’s not just the lack of an “infringing link” definition.  Look at the “As a result” section.  It represents what website self-censorship is like now and will be like after SOPA passes.  Before SOPA, it’s a small circle.  After SOPA, the circle is MUCH LARGER!! OMG!!  THAT CIRCLE IS WAY BIGGER!!  How bigger?  Well, I can’t tell since there are NO NUMBERS describing the circles.  This is all beside the fact that there is no way to measure self-censorship in a future we haven’t lived in yet.  In short, this ven-ish diagram has zero basis in fact. In other words, it’s made up just to scare the shit out of you.

The same can be said for the line graph next to it.  Before SOPA, you see the number of new startups rises!  But after, it goes down. :( BUT THE DATA POINTS AREN’T NUMBERED, so we have NO WAY OF KNOWING WHAT THEY MEAN!!! This, also, is beside the point that this line graph does the same thing the ven-ish diagram does—it makes shit up about the future—there’s no proof that the number of new startups will go down after SOPA.

Under the “HOW DOES THIS AFFECT” section, it would be nice to see the part of the law that explains email providers would have to censor email with infringing links. It would also be nice to know how social networks could possibly censor the links of hundreds of thousands of users, especially when URL shorteners can be used to mask the links.

As I mentioned, this infographic fails to mention what an infringing link even is and that inspires even more fear than the even bigger circle of self-censorship or the non-specific datapoints in the “new startup” line graph.  What IS an infringing link?!?!  Is THIS an infringing link?  Is THIS?  Would YOU be posting an infringing link by linking to this post?  OMG!!  WE LIVE IN SOVIET RUSSIA!!

It’s a shame propagandists get hired to make “info”graphics like this, instead of good human beings who want to properly inform people.  Especially since the truth about this bill is probably very terrifying.  

THANKS FOR THE FEAR MONGERING, AMERICANCENSORSHIP.ORG!

Chinese Rep Says Wellfare States Brought on EU's Economic Woes

In a recent interview with Al Jazeera, Jin Liqun, chairman of China's sovereign wealth fund, said the following about a possible bailout for the EU:

"If you look at the troubles which happened in European countries, this is purely because of the accumulated troubles of the worn out welfare society. I think the labour laws are outdated. The labour laws induce sloth, indolence, rather than hardworking. The incentive system, is totally out of whack.

He also said:

The welfare system is good for any society to reduce the gap, to help those who happen to have disadvantages, to enjoy a good life, but a welfare society should not induce people not to work hard.

This from a guy representing a country with some of the lowest paid workers in the industrialized world. Planet Capitalism is really starting to worry me. If China will be the one determining how workers are treated I think I'm going to start looking on Craigslist for good deals on spaceships.

I just LOVE how these rich assholes can just blatantly lie about the causes for the economic woes around the world. I don't know the specifics of the EU's problems but should a system that doesn't treat humans well be supported? Should hard work be forced on every last citizen? This system is really getting out of control. Now where would "used spaceships" be on Craigslist?

And I Should Know

And I Should Know

This is an amazing account Roseanne Barr gives of what she went through on here sitcom—couldn’t stop reading it. Here’s a cutting:

It didn’t take long for me to get a taste of the staggering sexism and class bigotry that would make the first season of Roseanne god-awful. It was at the premiere party when I learned that my stories and ideas—and the ideas of my sister and my first husband, Bill—had been stolen. The pilot was screened, and I saw the opening credits for the first time, which included this: CREATED BY MATT WILLIAMS. I was devastated and felt so betrayed that I stood up and left the party. Not one person noticed.

I confronted Marcy under the bleachers on the sound stage when we were shooting the next episode. I asked her how I could continue working for a woman who had let a man take credit for my work—who wouldn’t even share credit with me—after talking to me about sisterhood and all that bullshit. She started crying and said, “I guess I’m going to have to tell Brandon [Stoddard, then president of ABC Entertainment] that I can’t deliver this show.” I said, “Cry all you want to, but you figure out a way to put my name on the show I created, or kiss my ass good-bye.”

I think her comments put an interesting coating over the thought that we’ve made progress.  She says her show is still ahead of its time and that:

Hollywood hates labor, and hates shows about labor worse than any other thing. And that’s why you won’t be seeing another Roseanne anytime soon. Instead, all over the tube, you will find enterprising, overmedicated, painted-up, capitalist whores claiming to be housewives.

This explains a lot to me after giving Hollywood a go, myself.  Seems like I just wasn’t a big enough asshole.

It also suggests to me that for all the progress Hollywood has made culturally, it’s still about fear and money.  Sad stuff.

The world might not really end this Saturday, but it might as well. We sure don’t seem to be going in any good direction.

Down the Memory Hole? Maybe, but we're watching it happen.

whitneymcn:

rafer:

jeffrock:

[much snipped here]

Like the Ministry of Truth, it appears that Apple is deliberately attempting to usurp the meaning of the word Flash in the computing industry and redefine it. They’re tired of the word standing for an inefficient browser plugin. They’ve begun leaving Flash out of stock Mac OS X installs. They’re dodging its implied meaning in calls and pushing what they want it to refer to. Fast, efficient storage.

Down the memory hole, indeed.

Rafer sez:
Jobs is doing some sketchy stuff, vis-a-vis redefining “open,” et al. However, Flash is the longstanding private trademark of a pretty darn big company. If they can’t defend themselves by learning how to either ship a great version of this product or market decently, they deserve to be redefined and forgotten.

I started thinking about a related phenomenon the other night. My main takeaway at this point is that right now Apple understands the power of shaping and controlling language better than any other company out there.

For me the issue then becomes whether we, as consumers, should put up with it.  I’m switching to Android with my next phone for myriad reasons, one of which is I do think Apple has really started to exploit customer ignorance by enhancing it.

Glenn Beck rewrites civil rights history (and regular history, too--but it's his effect that is the most scary)

Does this freak anyone else out as much as it does me?

They see studying U.S. history as a powerful reconnection with their youth. Waiting for Beck’s “American Revival” show in Orlando, Florida, in March, 70-year-old fan Joseph Cerniglia told me he was way too busy for civics lessons when he was raising kids and working as a stockbroker and then cider-maker. “I have learned more from Glenn Beck — learned more about American history and government, from Glenn Beck — than in the previous 40 years of my life,” the retiree told me.

via cnn.com

That last bit is NOTHING TO BRAG ABOUT, SIR.   Don’t get your information from a single person: ESPECIALLY GLENN BACK. The moron doesn’t know how to spell “oligarchy” for crying out loud!!

The “they” mentioned in the above quote from the Will Bunch opinion piece at CNN.com refers to followers of Glenn Beck—mostly retired, mostly with loads of time on their hands to “re-learn history”. Of course, as Bunch points out, they’re getting it entirely wrong.

And that’s what is more scary than everyone listening to this wind-bag (and the very first EFFYOU recipient from my site effyou.org). See, they’re not only listening to his every word but learning from them, too—it’s amazing what you can do with the power of fear. And it’s the incorrect information that they are learning that is the scariest part of all of this.

When you’re inaccurate, the sky is the limit for how bad you can screw things up. And these fools think Beck is 100% trustworthy.

Let me tell you—history books aren’t 100% trustworthy.

I hope, at Beck’s little MLK rip-off event this weekend, Beck comes out of the closet and admits he’s just been playing everyone all this time.

I would breathe a sigh of relief if that happened…

And don’t forget, when Beck quotes Thomas Paine, he’s quoting a guy who thinks all religions are a crock.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
— Thomas Paine, (1737-1809), The Age of Reason

Good stuff…

Read more Thomas Paine quotes and see how much Beck ignores so that Paine can fit Beck’s narrative.

#WTFObama: #DontBelieveTheHype: US Mil "withdrawal" from Iraq just a rebranding--56k will stay.

US Withdraws Last Combat Brigade from Iraq, But 56,000 Troops Remain

The US has officially withdrawn its last designated combat brigade from Iraq, two weeks ahead of a deadline for the withdrawal of some 14,000 troops. In a surprise announcement, the Pentagon said the last combat brigade crossed over into Kuwait earlier today. Although the withdrawal has been hailed as a major milestone in the Iraq war and an end to combat operations, most of the remaining 56,000 US troops are still trained in combat and will continue to carry out armed attacks. The Obama administration also plans to double its private military force in Iraq to an estimated 7,000 contractors. According to the New York Times, the bulk of the private military force will be deployed at five compounds across Iraq, where they’ll perform duties including operating drones, deploying reaction forces and operating radars to detect militant attacks. In an interview on Democracy Now! earlier this month, independent journalist Jeremy Scahill said the Obama administration’s withdrawal plan amounts to a rebranded occupation.

Jeremy Scahill: “What is essentially unfolding here is a downsized and rebranded occupation, Obama-style, that is going to necessitate a surge in private forces. The State Department is asking for MRAP vehicles, armored vehicles, for Black Hawk helicopters and for these paramilitary forces. So, yes, you can say that officially combat has ended, but in reality you’re continuing it through the back door by bringing in these paramilitary forces and classifying them as diplomatic security, which was Bush’s game from the very beginning.”

via democracynow.org

Sadly, this is what I was expecting.  I’m sure anyone paying attention isn’t surprised by the fact that we’re leaving a huge stack of troops behind.  What’s next from the O-man? A giant “Mission Accomplished” banner and an aircraft-carrier-based photo-op?

Are the Lies the Lying Government Officials tell actually lies? Or...?

newsweek:

“What does it mean to tell the truth about a war? Is it a lie, technically speaking, for the Administration to say that it has faith in Hamid Karzai’s government and regards him as a legitimate leader—or is it just absurd? Is it a lie to say that we have a plan for Afghanistan that makes any sense at all? If you put it that way, each of the WikiLeaks documents—from an account of an armed showdown between the Afghan police and the Afghan Army, to a few lines about a local interdiction official taking seventy-five-dollar bribes, to a sad exchange about an aid scam involving orphans—is a pixel in a picture that does, indeed, contradict official accounts of the war, and rather drastically so.”

—

The New Yorker: Wikileaks and the War

  (via southpol)

So, they are lying?

Like it even matters.

Who freaked out in 2000 when it was obvious to anyone paying attention that there was no clear winner in the election?  Or that it’s Congress’ job to settle ties, not the Supreme Court’s?

What public rose up to demand impeachment when it became obvious the Bush Administration’s USG had violated international law several times over, least of all by invading countries unprovoked?

Every single one of us wander the streets of our cities and towns knowing full well that the cash in our pockets isn’t worth anything tangible, yet we just keep pretending that’s not true.

We, The People, are used to dealing with lies—all the time.  Whether it’s God, Santa, our money, our government or the fact that Diet Coke is really no better for you than regular Coke.  We lie to each other and ourselves all the time and this shock that the USG is lying to us about war is, you guessed it: a lie.  This one, like many of them is to make us feel better.

No one in the USG should worry.  Both endless wars can continue. We have no ability to stop them from doing so and even if we did we wouldn’t use that ability.

And that is no lie.

Oh the Hypocritical Lies: Death Panels have been around for years...

Oh the Hypocritical Lies: Death Panels have been around for years..., originally uploaded by thepetecom.

UNBELIEVABLE.

This is what I'm calling the voices against health care reform.

These people are either the biggest idiots or the biggest liars (with Sarah Palin, it's very hard to tell).

So, Palin and others are "scared" there will be these government death panels deciding who lives and who dies based on how sick you are. What a crock. Companies have had this power for years now. Salon.com recently did a piece called "The 'death panels' are already here." The Salon piece mentions the case of Nataline Sarkisyan, who died in 2007 after insurance company Cigna dragged their feet because they decided a liver transplant wouldn't save her life (she later died without the transplant).

Sounds pretty death-panelrific to me, but I remembered a case from further back--after about 30 seconds of Googling I found an excerpt on Michael Moore's YouTube page from his old series The Awful Truth where he explored the case of Christopher Donahue, a man who's insurance company, Humana, was refusing to pay for the pancreas transplant he needed to survive. Michael Moore held a funeral for Donahue outside of Humana's headquarters, which Donahue, himself, attended. Before long, Humana caved and paid for the transplant, but as we saw years later with Nataline Sarkisyan, not all companies are as "generous" as Humana.

So, the next time you hear someone praise the free market for all things, think about this kind of situation.

If we truly believe all humans have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, doesn't the "right to life" mean we have to make sure everyone can get health care? And if companies are going to put their "right" to make as much money above our right to life, doesn't that mean that these corporations are anti-American and, really, anti-human? Pretty bizarre that they're in the "business" of providing health care insurance when they look to ways to avoid doing just that.

So, UNBELIEVABLE, once again, that these idiots or assholes honestly think the government would institute death panels when they've existed for over a decade. That's right--the Michael Moore show, The Awful Truth episode I described above was aired in 1999.

We've had death panels since last century--thanks, Sarah Palin (and others), for finally getting around to noticing just now.

1948 Cartoon Predicts Current Socio-Economic Problems (sort of)

The really funny thing is that everything in this cartoon is both right and/or wrong and everything it warns about has come to pass in the America of 2009--sixty-one years after the cartoon was made--the only problem is that it claims our current situation will occur thanks to communism.

Ah, fresh, sweet irony!

Check out the original here: http://www.archive.org/details/MakeMine1948

Siskita first pointed out "Make Mine Freedom" to me after she saw it in the Vintage ToonCast (which doesn't seem to have been updated since late last year). As I watched this fun little propaganda cartoon for the first time, I couldn't help but wonder if the slick, slightly darker complexioned man, with the thin mustache, in the almost-zoot suit, peddling the "imported double-talk" was actually peddling capitalism.

After all, Wal*Mart has tried to crush unions, the Bush Administration loved to repeat that everything was fine over and over and over (as do most politicians and the mainstream media even still, though they may not use that exact language), banks and businesses are being bought up by government now in the form of those bailouts, it sure seems like there's less private property since we can't afford to buy any, and government has been subsidizing farmers for decades.

Even earlier on in the cartoon, we are told that certain things are guaranteed to us under the freedom of the capitalist system.

1) "Freedom to work at the job you like." Unless they're not hiring.

2) "Freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble." Just so long as you do it in the "Free speech zone" set up several hundred yards from the event you're protesting.

3) "Freedom to own property." ...and to pay property taxes, mortgage payments and to desperately cling to any job you can get (whether you like it or not--so much for point #1) in order to keep paying said mortgage.

4) "Security from Unlawful Search or Seizure." this one is completely out the window in our "Post-911 World".

5) "The right to a speedy and public trial." ...unless you're labeled an enemy combatant in which case you can be held without charges, indefinitely, without a lawyer and without the right to challenge your detention (habeas whatsis?).

6) "Protection against cruel punishments and excessive fines." Unless you're labeled an enemy combatant or copyright infringer. For the former see #5 and for the latter you could be fined thousands for downloading one song. Oh and the imagery used in the cartoon at this point is a fat and satisfied prisoner sitting at a table with a roasted chicken while being waited on by a prison guard. Yeah, I don't think that's how it works these days, either (did it ever work this way?).

7) "The right to vote." ...but apparently not the right to proof that your vote counted. Sure, we got Obama in, but we will never know for sure if Bush was supposed to have been in the White House for those horrible eight years.

8) "And to worship God in your own way." But Atheists can go suck it.

The cartoon explains that the above freedoms are what has made America strong. Since we really don't have those freedoms any more, does that mean America is weak now?

The funny thing is, the cartoon is right--all those things do make any country strong. However it's not "capitalism" or the "free market" that guarantees those things. It's good leaders.

It's good leaders who make sure that only proper, just laws are passed.

I won't even go into the overt racism of the cartoon, with any non-white ethnicity being all but left out completely (two shots depicting dark skinned Americans doesn't count). And what's with the "ism" peddler, anyway? He's not as white as everyone else. He's also selling "Ism" using the exact language that the USG has been using over the past few years to sell us on everything from privatizing Social Security to invading Iraq. High profits, maximum security, etc. And what the hell? The peddler's company is called "Ism Incorporated!!" Doesn't that make HIM a capitalist, too?

And that "scrap of paper" seems to be describing the exact effects of the various bailout bills businesses and banks have been begging for. Our money is worth MUCH less now and therefore allows us to do less with our freedom, too. And since our kids will be paying higher taxes (as will their kids), doesn't that rob freedom in just the same way as Dr. Utopia's Ism Elixir?

There is one last thing I can think of that "Make Mine Freedom" gets kinda right. That last bit where the John Q. Public character says the following:

"When anybody preaches disunity, tries to pit one of us against the other through class warfare or race hatred or religious intolerance, you know that person seeks to rob us of our freedom and destroy our very lives and we know what to do about it."

Of course, John Q. seems to endorse violence, or at the very least the threat of violence, against those doing the exact things he describes. The thing is our government has been doing this for the past eight years and has pretty much always done these things to control us. Whether it's the military which aims recruiting efforts at the poor, or the Bush campaign, back in 2000, spreading rumors about John McCain's "black baby."

Religious hatred is also used by Christians against Muslims and gays on a regular basis (not to mention the generally sucky attitude toward us Atheists).

The ultimate point here is that everything in this cartoon is both right and/or wrong and everything it warns about has come to pass in the America of 2009--sixty-one years after the cartoon was made.

Boy, I sure am glad we didn't drink that ethnic man's "imported" (commun)Ism Elixir back in 1948! Who knows how much WORSE things would be right now!?!?

/ sarcasm

Reuters: Everything Good is Bad Again

Spotted this article on Reuters.com this morning called "October consumer prices and home starts plummet" and found it really fascinating.  If you read it, it talks about things like housing prices dropping and deflation as bad things.  Think about that for a moment.

Houses dropping in price means more people can afford houses and fewer new loans will be defaulted on.

Isn't that good for the economy?

It's certainly good for people who want to buy homes.

But the Reuters article insists that the economy is weakening even further than it has.

The article also mentions deflation as another example of an ever-sinking economy.  The thing is, what do we mostly bitch about when it comes to money? 

Inflation.

So, shouldn't deflation be a good thing to us?

I say yes.

While the article also reports on consumer prices dropping and a few other things that generally the economy is weakening, I say prices dropping are part of the system working.  Yep, that's right--this is ThePete saying capitalism and free market economics both work just fine when not abused.  Leaving them be, letting losses and crashes occur means that things were getting to big for the system to support.  Now we can rebuild on more stable footing. 

Prices dropping is a natural function of the law of supply and demand.  We American consumers have stopped spending as much as we used to--THIS IS A GOOD THING.

This fills my heart with hope for humanity that we're not just a bunch of dumb sheep doing what we're told.  This is proof we can react to what is really happening and do the right, logical thing.

So, we stop spending, prices drop to entice us to buy, to a certain degree we do, and slowly but surely, the economy builds back up again.

Color me malfunctioning, but my memory circuits tell me this is how things are supposed to work.

Bailouts now would just delay our economy's recovery.

Tell me I'm wrong--please--and tell me how so I can learn.  Thanks.

One last thing about this article.  Since it puts everything in terms of its level of badness for the economy, despite those things being good for consumers and really the stability of the whole system, doesn't this article end up coming off like an advertisement for the corporate greed mindset?  That we all need to be buying and borrowing at all times to keep the economy moving and growing and dominating (despite it's complete crashing and bleeding out recently)?  It reminds me of how the media isn't liberally biased, it's biased toward money--and the furthering of the belief that "greed is good."

Gordon Gecco is dead.  Let's leave him buried, shall we?

Posted by email from thepete's posterous

America the 22nd Most Stable and Prosperous

I meant to post about this a while back--thank you session manager add-on for Firefox! Remembering tab contents is the coolest!

But I digress.

The above screencap comes from a March 25, 2008 article at TimesOnline.co.uk which you can read for yourself here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3613926.ece

The gist of it, however, is that Britain ranked 7th in a prosperity and stability study done by Jane’s Information Group. Turns out America came in 22nd, but scored a 93%.

Of course, the question begs to be asked, doesn't this mean that America is no longer "the greatest country on Earth"?

That's what I always hear from other Americans--that the US is "the greatest" and "the best" nation around--but often it seems like these comments come from people who have never spent any real time in another country.

I don't mean just for vacation, either. I spent two weeks in Edinburgh, Scotland back in 2005, and while I may be a bit biased, I'm pretty sure I fairly judged that city to be a much more efficient, cleaner, safer, and more fun city to live in compared with Los Angeles. Of course, I have no idea what the job situation in Scotland is like, but I do recall seeing an ad for bus drivers wanted. The pay was £35,000 per year. That's like $70,000. Granted, everything costs more there, but just think of the vacation you could have visiting America. ^_^

I think I'm digressing again.

I'm thinking that the US is NOT the best country in the world and I suspect it's becoming less stable and less prosperous--with the emphasis on the last syllable, there. Our dollar gets ever weaker (it's kinda designed that way) and it seems like gas prices will never make it back below $2 (or even $3) ever again.

Yet, we're "free" to say what we want and stuff, which is true. But if it weren't for the Internet, what other way would we have to express ourselves?

Given that we're 21 countries away from being "the best," shouldn't we be spending more time worry about problems at home? Like our economy or the evaporating middle class?

Happy Monday everyone! ;)

(If you think this post is depressing wait until you read the next one for today!)