Tweet
The reason the US is a monopole and wil remain so for a while is that most other states simply are fine with the current situation: as I said, power porjection by the US is a function not only of the equipment, but even more of the fact that dozens of sates around the world let us use their territory. If none of Afghanistan's neighbors had allowed the US through, all the carriers and cargo planes would have meant diddly, since we could not get at the enemy (and if we treid to anyway, you would have a much bigger and dangarous operation). The same is true with Iraq: we wanted a nothern front, we have the capability to set up a northern front, Turkey said no, there was no northern front. Had Kuwait said no to basing our troops, there would have been no southern front either. The thing is, the second the other states with the ability to challange the US start to think that leaving the U as the sole monopole is not that acceptable a policy to continue. US power relative to the tohers will decline, if only becuase the others will inevitably beguin to build theirs up. In that respect, Bush accelerates the situation because 1) he creates situations in which US unipolirity is no longer viewed solely as benevolent, and 2), by draining the budget he lowers the abiity of the government to shift speinding upwards when and if others start to build up. The thing is, Bush will be long out of power by the time this is a serious challange, so the question is whether whomever is rpesident in 2004 and beyond keep the Bush tax cuts or end them.
-
If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw -
I don't understand how us being the monopole and having the ability to crush whoever we want helps improve the quality of life for the average American."The first man who, having fenced off a plot of land, thought of saying, 'This is mine' and found people simple enough to believe him was the real founder of civil society. How many crimes, wars, murders, how many miseries and horrors might the human race had been spared by the one who, upon pulling up the stakes or filling in the ditch, had shouted to his fellow men: 'Beware of listening to this imposter; you are lost if you forget the fruits of the earth belong to all and that the earth belongs to no one." - Jean-Jacques RousseauComment
-
Benefits of being the monopole
US as monopole is one of the biggest reasons the US is attractive to foreign investors. Investors are a conservative bunch and prize stability possibly most of all. Foreign investment is one of the bigger reasons the US can support the trade deficit it has, and this has a direct impact on pumping up the standard of living in the US.“It is no use trying to 'see through' first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To 'see through' all things is the same as not to see.”
― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of ManComment
-
If the rest of the world gangs up on the US we are dead meat. Here is why:
Europe, Japan: Technology
China: Lots of soldiers
Middle east: good "special ops"
Israel: Mossad
Comment
-
Napolean -What social programs have been cut? If anything, the social welfare system is growing enormously under Bush - drugs for seniors...The Bush administration has solidified two trends in US politics:
Domestically, appeal to the affluent and affluent sympathisers at the expense of social programsComment
-
Re: Benefits of being the monopole
Originally posted by pchang
US as monopole is one of the biggest reasons the US is attractive to foreign investors. Investors are a conservative bunch and prize stability possibly most of all. Foreign investment is one of the bigger reasons the US can support the trade deficit it has, and this has a direct impact on pumping up the standard of living in the US.
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)Comment
-
Berzerker
Education is taking a hit already, but the greatest impact will be felt down the road. I said that he cuts taxes at the expense of social programs - where else would the money come from? Is it not clear that he is more devoted to serving the affluent than maintaining the social programs. What gives?What social programs have been cut? If anything, the social welfare system is growing enormously under Bush - drugs for seniors...Napoleon IComment
-
GePap: I would agree with your reason #1. However, most countries have never viewed American power as benevolent. If this is so, why are we involved in most countries of the world, with the full permission and cooperation of the native governments?
It is better to look at this as whether or not others view the US as a credible force, with the positives outweighing the negatives. In this light, Bush has been highly successful. He is very credible on the world stage, even if US prestige might take a hit. The number of countries with which we are involved militarily has skyrocketed under Bush. And he was able to do this extremely cheaply. Just look at your example of Central Asia.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Silly US bashers always have wet dreams like this. They don't realize that US only needs marginal effort to turn those guys on each other if it wants.Originally posted by Odin
If the rest of the world gangs up on the US we are dead meat. Here is why:
Europe, Japan: Technology
China: Lots of soldiers
Middle east: good "special ops"
Israel: Mossad
Just imagine how easy it would be to have Chinese and Japanese tearing each other to shreds.
Comment
-
"He is very credible on the world stage"
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)Comment
-
Of course, this could change a lot. The rest of the industrialized world could reverse course. I doubt the US will change much, though. Everybody will work for a new addition on to their house. But that's just a hunch of mine.If you use GDP per head as your guide then that will take a very long time to happen, as we european work 10% to 15% fewer hours than the average american and the number of hours worked here is falling whereas in the US the number of hours worked has been stable since the early 1970's (which makes the US the odd one out as hours are also falling in most of the rest of the developed world and have historically done so).Last edited by DanS; August 31, 2003, 17:58.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Well, who else has said that two governments should disappear in 2 years and then made it so? Iran and North Korea certainly believe in his credibility."He is very credible on the world stage"I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
If there is one thing that needs to be cut, it's the social programs. However, Bush admin is not cutting them since doing so would piss off millions of voters. Especially cuts in Medicare/Medicaid are a big no-no. GOP had suffered enough during its last confrontation on that issue with Dems when it only wanted to cut the NET INCREASE in Medicare expenses.Originally posted by Napoleon I
Berzerker
Education is taking a hit already, but the greatest impact will be felt down the road. I said that he cuts taxes at the expense of social programs - where else would the money come from? Is it not clear that he is more devoted to serving the affluent than maintaining the social programs. What gives?Comment
-
Credibility is something you said you would do and then do it.Originally posted by HershOstropoler
"He is very credible on the world stage"
So far Bush has been true to his words. (not that I necessarily agree with him.)Comment
-
Well the trend I referred to (that stopped in the US since the early 1970's) has been going on since the 1850'sOriginally posted by DanS
Of course, this could change a lot. The rest of the industrialized world could reverse course. I doubt the US will change much, though. Everybody will work for a new addition on to their house. But that's just a hunch of mine.
Do you really think it will stop completely?
And if it does don't you think that maybe the US will 'catch up' with the increased leisure time at some point?19th Century Liberal, 21st Century EuropeanComment
Comment