Topic: Is the American dream alive?

[-<WillyP>-]

Roger L. Simon » Thanksgiving 2010: Is the American Dream Dying?

We have lots to be thankful for in the US, while Obama is fighting to take what little we have left of the American Dream and flush it down, the American public has risen to the occasion and said NO, and unless the liberals get the message soon (they won't, it's what makes them liberals), we will say it again and even louder in 2012.

[Crash]

I don't deny that Obama's tenure has been a disappointment, but which aspects of the American Dream do you feel have been taken away from you?

Don't you feel that President Bush and the Republicans' American Dream is simply unsustainable in cold, hard reality?

I wonder whether Obama has taken this away or simply revealed that it was already gone.

[TechPro]

Don't you feel that President Bush and the Republicans' American Dream is simply unsustainable in cold, hard reality?

I have to agree that in the path it was headed, yes it is simply unsustainable.  However I'm appalled at the idiocy of spending and more spending then combined with even more spending while calling it "the way to recover" (referring to the economy).  Utter nonsense.

GETTING BACK ON TOPIC. (thanks for the rousing political content, guys)

My point of this Soupe is ... No matter what our status and condition, it is imperative to the human psychi/soul to be thankful for all that's good and if there is a lot of bad around you there is always something to be thankful for and we should always cling to it (whatever it may be).

[-<WillyP>-]

Crash, I guess it depends on your vision of the American dream.  For me, it is much more than having two cars, a wife and a house in the burbs.  It is about American Exceptionalism.   The idea that we are free.  We have so much to be thankful for in this country, something the young idealist liberal can't accept.  And because of that, we have lost our focus on excellence and superiority in the world.  We have gone from being the most powerful nation in the world to one were our President bows to foreign leaders, calls the citizenry 'confused' when they soundly reject his socialistic ambitions, and even refuses to acknowledge students living under an oppressive regime who protest in favor of democracy.

Yes, we need to give thanks for all that we have, but it is also a time to fight for what is right, to champion the cause of freedom like no other.  We are at a turning point in the history of the United States of America.  To use President Obama's analogy of a car, Bush drove us on a rough road, at breakneck speeds, we took a beating, but, no, we did not end up in the ditch.  Obama wants to drive us off a cliff. 

No, I am not under any delusion that the Repubs are going to turn us 180 degrees away from the cliff, and bring us back to a constitutional govt.  No, I think it would be asking more than is human to expect those in power to give that power back to the states.  It's too big, the elephant in the room has outgrown the room and become the room itself.  But I do think we can take a better path.

[Crash]

I think Liberalism must have a totally different meaning in the United States.
Here in the UK, a liberal is one who recognises and respects the rights of others.

I feel sorry for your current President. He has to bow to foreign leaders, as does our Prime Minister with the Chinese but that is an expedient action that reflects the reality of the times.
Perhaps if we'd scrutinised our former leaders as strictly, life would be better for us both and also for those US and UK servicemen fighting Bush's wars abroad rather than 'enjoying' ... Amazon's Black Friday consumerism.

[Scyphi]

*gets a headache from all this politics talk*

See, this is why I hate politics. It's nothing but a bash-fest for angry people. Don't like their problems, but aren't willing to take even some of the blame, and instead pin it on the government (who they elected) or worse still, on the president himself, as if he's responsible for ALL of the nation's problems, and he's supposed to fix ALL of them within his term of office. Which is ridiculous, because that is NOT how the American government is supposed to work. The President is literally supposed to serve as more of a figurehead than anything else, as well as someone to enact and enforce the laws Congress makes. Which usually just makes me pity the poor president as he's quite often taking undue blame for something he probably had little involvement or control over. Personally, while I don't approve of some of Obama's methods, he at least has a few ideas worth trying that I think are better than nothing. But no one will let him.

Then there's Congress itself, which has spent nearly all of it's time since the last presidental election just bickering with itself, because the Democrats are bound and determined that the Republicans can't win, and vice versa, even IF whatever issue they're presented with might actually HELP the nation, even IF it's just until something better can be come up with. Because political parties have decided the only reason they exist is so they can oppose the other side REGARDLESS of what they stand for, which is just about meaningless now, because they are CONSTANTLY flip-flopping on that issue. Just less than a decade earlier, both Repub. and Democ. stood for the exact OPPOSITE of each other, when those sides ran the best chance of giving them all the glory and benefits! And since the very beginning, one side has ALWAYS stood in opposition of the exact OPPOSITE of the other. At least back then they had the decency to come up with an explanation why, but these days, they almost don't even bother anymore! As a result, our country is simply too divided over the stupidist of all issues, politics itself!

I am CONVINCED that is the REAL reason why this nation is currently in the pits. It seems everyone has decided that the world will come to an end if they try to work together, so instead, they opt for the free-for-all, everyman for himself tactics, as if THAT will fix everything.

And maybe I've just fanned the flames with all of this, and just made a further mess of things, but...dang it...you were asking for it, particularly by derailing a Thanksgiving thread of all things to bash politics for crying out loud! I mean, you should be ashamed of yourselves for doing that! And quite honestly, I'm bit peeved about that, AND all the stupid disillusionment and bashing about all the WRONG issues in politics.

Sorry for the rant, but, geez, I've been holding back this for a LONG time, and these ill-timed comments finally broke the dam, so as far as I'm concerned, you brought it down upon yourselves.

[Crash]

I should be ashamed of myself?

Just who the hell do you think you are?

What you've just written is a rant and while I agree with the lion's share of it, I wholeheartedly object to your closing sentiment.

It may interest you to know that not the whole world does celebrate thanksgiving and I certainly don't remember ever voting for Blair or a Labour government.
If you think this is a little harsh, I'm sorry but your diatribe has tripped my breaker. Your assertion is complete presumption.

I'm sorry I've touched a sore nerve but you can't expect people to apologise for your own pent-up frustrations.

I did mean to say I totally agree with TechPro that you gotta be grateful for all you've got but that seems a bit redundant now. Well done for that.

[-<WillyP>-]

Scy, you are a very smart guy and I have a very high regard for you opinion, but I must respectfully disagree with you.  I haven't seen any bashing in this thread... A carefully worded criticism is not the same as a bashing.

I would be interested in learning more of what you think are Obama's good ideas that are better than nothing.  If you prefer, I can split this topic into a new one, leaving TechPro's post here.

Crash, in this country a liberal is someone who in theory promotes tolerance, equality, and inclusiveness.  Unfortunately, in practice, this has come to mean a severe intolerance for anyone not of a liberal mindset, wealth redistribution through taxes and welfare, political correctness, and a scarlet letter placed on anyone not a member of the minorities chosen by the liberals to be the recipient of the inclusiveness... mainly, white, Anglo-Saxon males of the lower middle class and up.  The economic policies of the left are mainly to take wealth earned, by those who would use it to build economy, and redistribute it to those who are through unfortunate circumstance, poor choices or pure laziness, do not earn money, but somehow have become thought of as 'deserving'.

[Crash]

Here we have the circumstance of not having had our liberal party in power for over 70 years, (I think I'm right in saying), so we are ill-suited to know their practical evils but what you describe seems quite pleasant to me (broadly, with the obvious caveats).

Some degree of social engineering ie. Welfare State, as it was once called here, is a logical reaction to the cruelty of 2 world wars in Europe.
The problem is that you actually alleviate all responsibility for social support and cohesion from society itself and put it in the hands of the state, social workers and the Police, NHS etc.
Now why would any society need professional social workers to such a great extent?
The system doesn't do you any harm provided that you don't allow society to abuse it. On BBC Radio 4 last night, a woman was living in central London, having a £1,400/month (and this is pounds again, not dollars) rent payed for her by the taxpayer and had no twinge of conscience about that at all. We have some amazing stories of where our public money goes because our system of benefits/welfare is massively overgrown. So I agree with you on many a point there. Too much social engineering and economic redistribution leads to criminal examples as we have seen but a low level is simply a moral responsibility by a government.
Any legal system that awards damages works in the same way - of spreading and dividing the cost of things that people don't really have any control over between us.

Our Conservative Party is presently trying cut away at state services and the 'job creation' through our previous government's massively excessive spending. It seems like the opposite of Obama's efforts. I think it will be vastly painful for people and make for a very miserable decade but I don't really think it unwarranted either. The shame is that everyone except those responsible for the bubble's collapse gets to suffer for it.

They are also trying to tackle the nanny state problem through a policy of "Big Society" although I have doubts about how effective it will be.

I think you talk a lot of sense. Maybe a compromise route half-way between these paths; US and UK, would be in peoples' best interests.

I think a split would be an excellent idea and I apologise to Scyphi for the temper of my previous post. I had quite a tricky day and didn't really feel like being accused of anything afterward.

[-<WillyP>-]

There is an old saying, goes something like 'absolute power corrupts... absolutely!'.  The states conceded absolute power to the US Gov when they allowed Lincoln to invade the Confederate States.   The confederate states had seceded (as was there constitutional right) but the US Gov maintained a fort in Confederate territory.  When it became clear Lincoln would not with draw, the Confederate States sent militia to remove the soldiers, and the war between the North and South began.  So, if the states could not secede, then that meant the Fed Gov held power over the states and could then dictate laws, collect taxes, etc, previously these powers were rights of the states, as stated in the constitution.  This opened the door to all the abuse that has piled up since.

Welfare State is the most evil of all of the evils that has been unleashed upon mankind since the dawn of time.  If there is a satan, it is truly his heart and soul.  There is no power greater than to hold the power of life and death over a broad segment of the population, and to create a rift of animosity between those that have, and those that don't.  Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think there is anything wrong with giving someone a hand up in a tight situation.  But the problem with that is... where do you draw the line? And how do you prevent those in power from redrawing the line?  Well the answer is you can't.  All you can do is try to push back as much as you can.  It is most certainly not a moral responsibility of the US Fed Gov to lead people down this path of Welfare Dependency.  In fact, it is expressly forbidden by the US Constitution.  Try telling that to a US rep or congressman, from either side of the aisle, (other than Ron Paul) and see how far that gets you!

Now as far as Job creation... There is a saying, 'give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach him to fish, feed him for a lifetime'.  The current situation is govt created jobs are more like giving someone a fishing pole, but no water to fish in.  Any job creation effort by the FedGov is doomed to failure because it does not address the root cause of the problem.  Govt jobs creation programs will always take more out of the economy then they put in.  It really is simple math.

Here, take this little quiz: Advocates for Self Government

[d3jake]

On the note of being thankful,  it's typically when a person leaves your life before you realize how much they mean.

(I'm kind of saddened that this thread took a political tilt at the first reply. In the interest of keeping this thread about... the Soupe, any chance we could have this political garbage split off and thrown into the correct subforum?)

[-<WillyP>-]

Ok.

[karx-elf-erx]

WillyP,

you have posted a lot of blatantly polemic and ideological stuff. Your opinion of a "liberal" is pure prejudice in my eyes. I will not reply the same way, but try a practical approach.

Germany (more or less) has a welfare state. The U.S. of A. don't. Now look at how much poverty and gross social injustice there is in the U.S.A., and compare to Germany. There is nowhere near as much poverty and violence here as it is in the U.S.A.

Germany has done very well during the recent economical crysis, and part of that is owed to a solidarity between employers and employees. We have a culture of taking a certain responsibility for others.

It should be pretty clear who's the winner here, and how completely and utterly unjustified your stance is.

Being looked at from Europe, your country looks like a mess, and you're getting yourselves deeper and deeper in it. No, I am not welcoming it. I don't want a Chinese century. But you are really begging for it.

The American dream is just what it says: A dream. Or better: An illusion. What did Obama take away from you? You seem so blindfolded by the labels politicians give themselves, and by the buttons they push when talking to their supporters. I am not at all an Obama fan, but why do you so violently split your nation into Republicans (good) and Democrats (bad) instead of taking a closer look?

What did Clinton do for the U.S.A.? He left  behind him balanced state finances and a U.S.A. with a good reputation in the world. What ruined him wasn't what he did, but that American hypocrisy couldn't bear it.

What did Bush do for the U.S.A.? He tried to implement a rightist think tank's idea of American dominance in the 21st century. He managed to damage constitutional rights of the American citizens. He ruined the American finances. He decreased taxes for the rich and made the poor pay for it. Heck, he even reduced health care and pensions for American veteran soldiers. He deliberately lied to the American people (and the world, but that's secondary here) about Iraqui WMD. That's your George Bush, defender of American virtues. That's the man so many American conservatives embraced.

Obama had to take over the utter mess the Bush administration had created while feeding the American public greed for being "a great and powerful nation". War has always been a means to distract from domestic problems. It is simply ridiculous how you are trying to twist this the way you did above. It was Bush who gave America the momentum of it's current movement, and it's really hard to stop such a big train in full motion in time.

I have to say though that I believe that Obama might be a Wolf in a sheep's disguise. Bush tolerated whistleblowers. Obama wants a law against them. That's ugly. As if the whistleblowers were the problem. They wouldn't exist if there weren't ugly things governments and companies are trying to cover up. It would certainly be better for the reputation and integrity of the U.S.A. if soldiers shooting civilians for fun would be punished real hard instead of trying to cover such things up. The problem for American security doesn't lie in such things happening, it lies in how the U.S.A. deal with them (they way they do it it's a slap in the face for the countries where Americans do such things).

Your Tea Party Movement isn't any better. They are just trying to exploit the fear and insecurity that is plaguing many Americans because of their rather grim prospect of their future for their own purposes. From outside the U.S.A. these people look like narrow minded fanatics.

Now the only thing I am asking for is that you people look at what is really going on and judge it with intelligence and a sober mind - not filter it through your ideological preconceptions that do not let things pass to your conscious mind that do not fit into your nicely setup picture of the world and the U.S.A. Use your brains, not your belly.

I could rant on a lot now, but I have learned that it is pointless anyway and that any good and reasonable argument will probably fail at the incredible stubborness the average American middle class citizen seems to defend his beliefs with to avoid having to question his brave little world. It just took me this far to decelerate.


Crash,

the problem is that the media love to report stories of abuse of welfare. Those who abuse the system are a small minority though, and only serve as a welcome excuse for those who'd rather direct the money into their own, or the industries (overly full) pockets. The longer I live and look at it the more I have come to the conclusion that politicians usually are more or less corrupt.


Scyphi,

simple and true. Although a president didn't get that far by asking nicely. Usually he is a man or woman who leads an agenda many people agree with and hence support him. That's quite a base of power. It was WillyP however who derailed this thread with his very first, very political post.

[Pumo]

Hey, just what happened here?
I thought 'Ethics & Commetary' was a section exclusive to the DBB.

I went away from the DBB precisely because of that repulsive section,
just to find the very same stuff I hate here, on this friendly and overall great Descent community I think PD is.  

Please guys don't make PD fall that deeply down, where the DBB is.

Let's mantain this community healthy (no politically or religuously polemical topics here, please   )

Peace among all, be grateful and give thanks even for the small things of life (as TechPro said). Cheers!  

[-<WillyP>-]

karx11erx: Not at all. You have attributed many things to me which I never said or thought.  For example I never said Bush was a good president, or Clinton was bad.  No one, to my knowledge, has ever said things were rosey when Obama took office.  I never said Democrats were bad.  And I did in fact split this topic of, and moved it out of the Soup board, in case you hadn't noticed.

I am not familiar with the idea of Germany being a welfare state, could you elaborate?  Perhaps we have different ideas of what that means.  Could you explain how it differs from the welfare system here in the US?

Pumo, just a friendly discourse,  I assure you it will stay civil.  I have been debating politics for some time on another board, which has fallen into name calling and personal attacks by a few, unfortunately it is true a few rotten apples spoil the barrel, to paraphrase an old expression.