Princeton Concludes What Kind of Government America Really Has, and It's Not a Democracy

[Developereo]

If using illegal immigration or oil drilling or fracking as issues to discuss whether any subversion has occurred or not, common to all of them is a vigorous debate at all levels of the system to determine the best way forward in keeping with the wishes of the people. For example, Arizona has toughened up its law for immigrants, and New York has a moratorium on fracking.

As regards illegal immigration, this song and dance about amnesty and reforms has been going on for decades. For people who have followed this dance, there is nothing new under the sun. The "vigorous debates" that you mentioned provide entertainment, but little else. I can guarantee you that America will be having the exact same debate thirty years from now, after tens of millions of additional illegal immigrants have crossed over, and nothing substantive will have changed.

I am not taking sides in that debate; I am simply pointing out that the current debate is déjà vu all over again.

 

[UKBengali]

@Developereo : why are you wasting time with people that have neither the intelligence or the intention to be educated?

 

[Developereo]

@Developereo : why are you wasting time with people that have neither the intelligence or the intention to be educated?

I am interested in sociology and mass-psychology. Politics combines both subjects and the study of political dynamics is fascinating to me. I don't care whether this debate relates to America per se, but America provides a good context because of the sheer impact that America has on the world.

 

[UKBengali]

I am interested in sociology and mass-psychology. Politics combines both subjects and the study of political dynamics is fascinating to me. I don't care whether this debate relates to America per se, but America provides a good context because of the sheer impact that America has on the world.

It is funny to see immigrants here being butt-hurt when you point out obvious flaws in the US system of democracy.

Sometimes people don't want to acept the truth as it is depressing to acknowledge.

 

[Developereo]

It is funny to see immigrants here being butt-hurt when you point out obvious flaws in the US system of democracy.

Sometimes people don't want to acept the truth as it is depressing to acknowledge.

My interest is to debate the vulnerabilities in large scale democracies. America just happens to be the context here, but the same problems exist in other democracies.

Neither I nor the Princeton study are criticizing "America" (whatever one perceives it to be) but some people are determined to take offence where none exists or is intended.

 

[UKBengali]

My interest is to debate the vulnerabilities in large scale democracies. America just happens to be the context here, but the same problems exist in other democracies.

Neither I nor the Princeton study are criticizing "America" (whatever one perceives it to be) but some people are determined to take offence where none exists or is intended.

These brain dead fools cannot accept that the US is flawed like other countries.

Jews, as a great example, have far more influence( in proportion to population) in US foreign policy since they have great influence in areas like finance and media.

Due to undue Jewish influence the US has done things in the Middle - East which goes against its core long-term interests.

 

[gambit]

Ah yes.
Everyone "hates your freedoms".

PS. Oops. Today I ordered "french fries" instead of "freedom fries". Uh oh!

At work, we have weekly meetings to review current and potential issues and see how we can solve them, or at least put in place steps to minimize consequences. I met plenty of your type before and have recommended termination on many of them. Your type love to produce reports after analyses after studies after inspections and so on and on and on. Rarely do they ever offer solutions, even compromised ones, especially when we have to deal with factors beyond our controls that even compromised solutions are better than none because they would help us in the short term while we search for better solutions in the long term.

It is supposedly said...

Blackstone's formulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer

I have no problem agreeing to that despite knowing the crime issues that often conflict with public safety and justice. The one solution is to relax the rules for the state to enforce laws to ensure public safety. But the moral offense of punishing an innocent person is gross enough that I, and many people, have no problems rejecting that solution and opting to live with the knowledge that we will have to spend more resources to prosecute the correct people and increased risks of suffering a crime against us.

Regarding this debate, you cower behind the shield of 'analysis', dragging the problem on and on without offering any solutions, even compromised ones. In theory, limiting contribution is a curtailment of a person's right and freedom of speech because financially supporting one's favorite is a form of speech. But since there are many other ways of expressing one's speech, whether in trying to sway a political figure into one's side or to help a candidate into political office, should we be going after those other ways to try to minimize the corruption in the political system ?

It is a fair question in the interest of debate but you refuse to answer it. All you want is to endlessly debate on the flaws of democracy, as if you can convince us that you will lead us into some new revelations.

Criticism: 'The rich' have a disproportionate access to political figures and influence.

Fine...That is a fair criticism and no American here have even tried to deny that, especially in our practice of democracy. We knew about it a couple hundred yrs ago.

But equally fair is the demand for solutions and the pressure for OPERATIONAL details is when people like you beat their fucking feet, either in running away or in a song and dance routine more on how evil is 'the rich'.

If limiting non-financial versions of the right and freedom of speech for 'the rich' is on a steep slippery slope and that offends you as much as relaxing the rules on the law so much that an innocent person would be punished, then have the courage to say so. But such an admittance would pretty much cut short the discussion and that would deny you the chance to blather on and on and on about 'the rich' and their evil ways.

This is why no American on this forum should take yours and others' criticisms about US seriously. Not because we believe our system and way of life are flawless, but because as you amply demonstrated -- no solutions proposed.

No solutions proposed because you do not know as much about US as you claimed to be.

 

[Developereo]

At work, we have weekly meetings

You entire blabbering speech to salvage some dignity when you have been exposed as an ignoramus is entertaining, but serves no other purpose.

In your deluded fantasies, YOU may see yourself as a superhero, out to defend America's honor on the internet, but America doesn't need your help because, contrary to your delusional childish fantasies, this is not an attack on America. As I mentioned, these problems exist in all large scale democracies.

You were denying that there was a problem in the first place, then you dithered back and forth on a couple of desperate avenues, spouting nonsense about campaign contributions and freedom of speech. When all of that fell flat, you went back on your usual tactic of personal and racial attacks on posters., focusing on the poster's ethnic background rather than addressing the Princeton study.

I have wasted eight pages indulging your flights of desperation back and forth when you have failed to demonstrate any understanding of how political influence peddling works. You are not worth any more of my time.

 

[gambit]

As I mentioned, these problems exist in all large scale democracies.

Fine...Then what are your solutions ?

Never mind...It is more debates and analyses.

 

[Juice]

I read the study....it concludes the rich and powerful have more influence than others. I hope they got a huge government grant to discern this hidden jewel of previously unknown wisdom.

 

[KingMamba]

It doesn't say anything we already did not know though, anyway rich will always have the most power in most governments but US gives you the opportunity to work yourself into a role of power. Most never make it but Obama came up from nothing and did so it can be done.

 

[VCheng]

As regards illegal immigration, this song and dance about amnesty and reforms has been going on for decades. For people who have followed this dance, there is nothing new under the sun. The "vigorous debates" that you mentioned provide entertainment, but little else. I can guarantee you that America will be having the exact same debate thirty years from now, after tens of millions of additional illegal immigrants have crossed over, and nothing substantive will have changed.

I am not taking sides in that debate; I am simply pointing out that the current debate is déjà vu all over again.

You are correct in saying that. Immigration reform will likely drag on by fits and starts over decades.