Yep. He was very much the lesser of two evils. Most didn't want him there and if another candidate was picked then I'm sure Trump would have lost by a landslide. But as the decision was between orange turd and senile old man, they had to settle for senility.
Hes hated mate. 94% disapproval rating from democrats aged 18 to 34
Biden is not totally responsible for it and some things are outside of American control but we are clearly moving into a bipolar world between Western and Eurasian blocs, a very unstable economic period with a significant degree of de-dollarisation and debt and economic decline of Western allies (ie. EU and Japan), a weakening of US diplomatic influence, a loss of US international prestige etc... that is not meant to say that the US is finished... they will remain a great power, a great economy, but primacy they have enjoyed globally since the end of the Cold War is waning
I doubt Biden will hold that much blame considering that the Pandemic happened while Trump was in power and the reckless spending and money printing has been happening since Bush.
Biden's presidency will come to symbolise the end of the American Century but yes, a lot of the problems have been present since Bush 43 and even Clinton
In other words, America fucked it up by being America.
Absolutely..what a freaking opportunity, not just for the US..but the world to embrace each other.. But alas its always about America..that Capitalist greed is so entrenched in them.. Not saying that I’m a Socialist..just this me me attitude is their creed.
I believe that there is two Americas at war with each other --> their ideals (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness etc.) vs their interests (America First so to speak)... and what drives me up the f*+#ing wall is when the American interests are being pursued, especially internationally, but it is cloaked in their ideals (democracy, freedom)
You know no wonder there are so many shootings are in the US..it’s citizens reflect their foreign policies.. They shoot whoever they want who don’t agree with their way.. Not a good example.. *
an interesting argument I have listened to as to why the US is not an empire is because traditionally empires have used, plundered their colonies to enrich the centre, the imperial heart... imagine Athens or Rome for example in ancient times or Britain, Russia, Spain etc. in modern times
I was chatting with an American economist a while back about America's Capitalism, the Nordic model and stuff like that. He basically said that everyone praises the Nordic model as it is basically as Socialist as you can become without becoming Socialist. He called it a great model, but he pointed out that if countries like the US didn't exist, then the model would collapse as it relies on other Capitalistic countries to drive development and trade.
Now that is progress!an interesting argument I have listened to as to why the US is not an empire is because traditionally empires have used, plundered their colonies to enrich the centre, the imperial heart... imagine Athens or Rome for example in ancient times or Britain, Russia, Spain etc. in modern times
but for all of America's cynical opportunism internationally, at least in modern times (ie. not the Louisiana Purchase or Mexican War), it has not actually - per the argument - enriched America in general but rather just classes within the US --> corporate America, the military industrial complex, the political elites etc.
now, if that is the case, it begs the question whether the US really is the greatest country in the world for the majority of their citizens? and if it isn't, if the wealth of the US is actually not meant for ordinary Americans through healthcare and social welfare and infrastructure and education and economic opportunity and standard of living etc., and there are plenty of social and political and racial and class divisions in the country, maybe things like mass shootings and crime and demonstrations etc. are more understandable
just consider the following picture
Australia used to the perfect mixed economy..with essential services, like water, electricity, telecommunications, run by the government to ensure all citizens would have the most needed basic services at an affordable price..same with healthcare…funding the loses by subsidising with profits..this has obviously eroded to a point... Look I understand the need for competition to ensure innovation, progress, etc..but these services should be guaranteed.. Leave competition for retail.. Thus, it gives everyone an even chance..to a point..
The history of public funding/subsidies used in new technological advancement and private corporate advancement, is well documented, hence that notion is ridiculous
In part. Subsidies usually help in tech advancement and recovery, but they always lag behind Capitalism because they lack competition. What you end up with is advancements that lack refinement. The exception for this is government backed military tech advancements because the competition does exist there to drive it forward.
You mean the one who mixed up 9/11 and 7-Eleven?
.
