Big Gulp, Meet Big Brother

[peggy]

Is it possible to find such a country that did not achieve their high level of satisfaction due, at least in part, to subsidies from the US? Northern Europe can breathe easy knowing the US firepower stands solidly behind NATO and the US dollars support it up front. I wonder if they would feel so content if that situation were to change? It is, afterall, quite a luxury to not have to worry about threats from their neighbors thanks to a security system that is virtually free.

Why yes, I'm sure that has something to do with it, but it still points up the fact that people are more happy when they have the protections and tools of the government behind them. Whatever the analysis is, these are not every man for himself countries.
You are mistaken about European security systems, a common mistake. These people aren't just lying on the couch eating bon bons and watching Oprah! NATO protects everyone, more politically now days than anything, and really it's in place more for us than anyone else. These folks don't fear their neighbors because largely their neighbors aren't interested in conquering them. And as we've seen in the recent past, the enemy more often than not comes from within, and we don't stand armies to protect these folks from themselves. Having bases in these countries was/is mutually beneficial to both countries, although the benefits to us have changed with modern warfare equipment and theatre. And we are working to close those bases, but these are our friends and we can no more simply close a base than we can in a community in the states. We must ease our way out without harm to us, them or our relationship, and I do believe that has started. (see bae's very realistic post above about the speed and difficulty in doing something even in a very small town. Now put that on a global scale)
And don't forget, after WW2 WE put restrictions on these countries as to standing armies and such and in return said we won't let you get attacked. You see, foreign policy is so much more complicated and so much more nuanced than most people can even imagine, which is why I run at the speed of light away from any politician who 'makes it simple for the simple man'.

But. back to the original idea, yes, these countries are successful and these people would laugh if you tried to convince them that they in fact are being controlled by their governments because they have universal health care. It's such a convoluted idea that it just blows me away that anyone actually swallows it. Because we use our government to bring the opportunity of peace, prosperity and affordable health care to all, that is somehow evil and controlling and we should all be miserable?
Yeah, and I got some swamp land in Holland to sell you!

[peggy]

To be fair peggy I need to clarify. The concentration of wealth, political and otherwise, IS in the hands of the middle class here. The vast majority of land in my state is in the hands of farmers and ranchers. Oh sure, a few are rich just like in any other type of business you care to name, but their political clout comes from the group of them, not just from a few high powered individuals. The cattleman's association here, for example, is very influential and has thousands of members. Almost all of those members are solidly middle class, hard working people who tend to elect their representatives based on how much common sense they have. Maybe we're just the land that time forgot, but that's how it works around here and most of us would like to keep it that way.

I guess i should clarify as well. I was just trying to make an analogy with the concentrations of wealth/political/voting power/population. You know, this is to this as that is to that. But I was never very good at analogy, and failed miserably in that portion of the test every time.

so, never mind. I've lost it now.

[Gregg]

...but it still points up the fact that people are more happy when they have the protections and tools of the government behind them.

I think people are happier when they are free from oppression of any kind. Is that possible with a strong government in place? I think it is, I'm just not sure that is the direction we're heading.

NATO protects everyone, more politically now days than anything, and really it's in place more for us than anyone else.

NATO is a military organization. Membership is a net loser for the US. IMO getting out of it would be one of the most sensible things the US could do.

These folks don't fear their neighbors because largely their neighbors aren't interested in conquering them.

Those folks don't fear their neighbors because we are standing behind them with a great big stick. The neighbor's interest has a long history of changing if no one is looking.

And we are working to close those bases, but these are our friends and we can no more simply close a base than we can in a community in the states.

Friends, yea, sure. If the choice ever comes down to closing a base in Denmark or a base in Mississippi I say we take a vote right here in the good ole' USA. Bet I know how it would end up.

I don't know peggy, sometimes its like we live on different planets. The conclusions you reach with basically the same input are 180* from mine. It would be fun someday to sit on the dock with that margarita and try to really figure out why that is. I'm sure its not because I watch FOX, because I don't. And I'm pretty sure you read more than just People Magazine and the huff & puff report. Under ordinary circumstances it would be kind of funny, but I'm worried that our country won't be able to stand the pressure of this divide forever.

[peggy]

I think people are happier when they are free from oppression of any kind. Is that possible with a strong government in place? I think it is, I'm just not sure that is the direction we're heading.



NATO is a military organization. Membership is a net loser for the US. IMO getting out of it would be one of the most sensible things the US could do.



Those folks don't fear their neighbors because we are standing behind them with a great big stick. The neighbor's interest has a long history of changing if no one is looking.



Friends, yea, sure. If the choice ever comes down to closing a base in Denmark or a base in Mississippi I say we take a vote right here in the good ole' USA. Bet I know how it would end up.

I don't know peggy, sometimes its like we live on different planets. The conclusions you reach with basically the same input are 180* from mine. It would be fun someday to sit on the dock with that margarita and try to really figure out why that is. I'm sure its not because I watch FOX, because I don't. And I'm pretty sure you read more than just People Magazine and the huff & puff report. Under ordinary circumstances it would be kind of funny, but I'm worried that our country won't be able to stand the pressure of this divide forever.

Gregg, if you and i could sit on the dock with a margarita and discuss the politics of the nation, even if we disagree, then that is the kind of 'divide' our country can in fact stand. And to be truthful, it's the kind of 'divide' that keeps our country strong, and the kind I would welcome. I love a good political discussion, one of real substance, where the end goals are pretty much the same, but it's just in the works that we disagree. That is the kind of discussion our country was born on (most don't seem to realize the founding fathers had deep divides and very heated discussions, but compromised to form the constitution). And I think we need that sort of 'divide' to keep our country strong and honest.
But if we just stand on either side of the pond and yell at each other, that doesn't do anyone any good, least of all the country. That is the wrong kind of divide, and it started I think with Newt and his lot. He took the discussion out of the policy and made it personal, and we didn't call him on it. That's our fault. It was a tactic of diversion to play on peoples emotions and it worked for him so it grew to the point where the political ads don't point out policy differences, but say the opponent hates America and wants to destroy our way of life and really he isn't one of us and on and on. People listen to and cheer on Rush Limbaugh and Glen beck, which spawned Kieth Olbermann and a few others on the left, but really the left will never learn to take it to the fine brainwashing heights the right has. That is destructive to the nation and the conversation.
Then you get the tea party types who vow to never ever compromise, ever, and these, I fear, are the last nails in the coffin of our country as we know it.
I'd like to sugar coat it and say we are all equally guilty, yada yada yada...but the truth is, we aren't . Studies have shown that democrats/liberals have not moved significantly from where they have been for the last 30 years, but the right has moved so far to the right that even moderates in their own party are starting to question the monster they have created. They used the rabid tea party types and peasants with pitch forks to strong arm their way forward, but now find themselves tossed aside by this no compromise take no prisoners group. This is what Our country will not stand, and what will ultimately destroy the good that we have.
I fear people like you and I, who would enjoy sitting on the dock and discussing these mutual problems facing our country, are the exception rather than the rule. I don't know how bad it has to get before people wake up and demand that the first consideration in a good politician is one who will gladly work with the other side to find a compromise, but i think it's going to get a whole lot uglier before it gets better, if it gets better. My husband firmly believes we are headed for civil war, but i certainly hope he is wrong.
But, Gregg, there is always a cold margarita waiting for you on the dock, and a fishing pole too cause we simply must get rid of some of these catfish!
I do think we agree more than we disagree.

[iris lily]

Then you get the tea party types who vow to never ever compromise, ever,...

Compromising of fiscal solvancy is stupid. Look where that has got us over the past 30 years.

The hard line of: less government spending, let's balance that mthfkn budget NOW! is a reasonable response to an unreasonable Congress.

[peggy]

Compromising of fiscal solvancy is stupid. Look where that has got us over the past 30 years.

The hard line of: less government spending, let's balance that mthfkn budget NOW! is a reasonable response to an unreasonable Congress.

And when President Obama offered them a deal of 10 to 1, 10 cuts to one increase, and they still refused? Is that how to get things done in this country? Is that a reasonable group of people, or petulant 5 year olds who stomp their feet and refuse to get in the car? Who is being unreasonable here?

[LDAHL]

Having just lived through the past year and a half here in Wisconsin, we have seen one party’s Senate contingent flee the state to avoid a vote they knew they would lose. We saw teachers call in sick to attend protests. We have seen doctors write bogus sick notes on a mass production basis. We have seen death threats made against opposing legislators. One politician had beer poured on his head, another had obscenities shrieked at him in the presence of his children. We have seen millions wasted on a recall election. And when it finally ended and the loser conceded, an angry activist slapped him in the face.

I can’t imagine what kind of closed system of contempt and self-regard a viewpoint would need to be trapped in to view this as the behavior of the more reasonable party.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I don't think that term: "reasonable", means what you think it means.