Globalization is here, whether we like it or not. Has it had a positive impact overall? I would argue yes, but it's not like there haven't been some losers as well. The real issue is that there's no way to stop globalization.

"The U.S. government spends money that it doesn't have and gives away almost 50% of its tax revenue through foreign aid and welfare"

LOL...the foreign aid budget of the USA is something around $30-50 Billion/year (or around 1% of the U.S. federal budget), and welfare was "reformed" back in the 1990s. It's not a significant portion of the USA federal budget anymore.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/02/how-much-does-uncle-sam-spend-on-foreign-aid.html

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/ statements/2011/apr/13/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-foreign-aid-makes-1-percent-us-b

I personally think that the USA should spend less on foreign aid (see below), but one can't balance the budget just by slashing foreign aid alone.

"If taxes are raised, they should be raised on everyone. To balance the budget you would need a 88% tax on the highest earning bracket, and after the taxes, they would actually be making less than the lower class. Taxing one group more than another is unfair, biased and immoral"

...in your wild, Right-wing fantasy world that is...ugh... Progressive taxation is another completely non-controversial issue, except on the far Right-wing in the USA. Ending the GWB tax cuts (for mostly the rich ) & taxing millionaires at a slightly higher tax rate would yield another $3-4 Trillion in federal revenue over the next decade of so. Raising taxes on corporations, especially multi-national corporations, & hedge fund managers would yield another $100 Billion or so in federal revenue over the next decade or so. Eliminating unnecessary tax breaks for extraction (like Big Oil) & toxic chemical industries would yield another $70 Billion or so in federal revenue over the next decade or so. Limiting charitable giving and state & local tax deductions would yield another $1 Trillion or so in federal revenue over the next decade or so.

Keeping the estate tax at the estate level of $3.5+ Million (which will affect 0.5% of all estates) will fund around 27% of the projected, long-term Social Security (SS) shortfall. Bringing the SS payroll tax back to its historical level of taxation (around 90% of income) will fund around 40% (or around $550 Billion over the next decade or so alone) of the projected, long-term SS shortfall. Gradually raising the full SS retirement age over time to age 70 will fund around 35% (around $110 Billion over the next decade or so alone) of the projected, long-term SS shortfall. Extending SS coverage to more state & local govt. employees will fund around 10% of the projected, long-term SS shortfall.

Is there federal spending that can be cut as well? Sure, including around $110 Billion or so in unneeded "defense" spending, around $200 Billion in foreign aid, ending the failed No Child Left Behind nonsense (around $100 Billion) and reforming farm subsidies (around $10 Billion) all over the next decade or so.

Only through a balanced approach of spending cuts & increases in revenue can the federal budget be balanced over the long-term.

"Forced redistribution of wealth is extortion and theft"

LOL...again, spoken like a true member of the far Right-wing. The idea that taxation somehow equals "theft" is a wild assertion at best. Run along now...

You're talking about the exact same thing as what GWB did with taxes, period.

Paying taxes is a necessary responsibility of being a citizen, and we have unfortunately run up debts (which were things that were paid for with borrowed money...mostly under past GOP "leadership") which basically have to paid for with taxes at some point. There's no physical way to balance the U.S. federal budget & pay down at least some of the federal debt without raising some kind of tax on someone. Better taxes be raised on those that can better afford those higher taxes than on the middle or working classes IMHO.

The issue of govt. redistributing wealth via taxation literally goes back to the Roman Republic. It's only a "controversial" issue on the far Right-wing in the USA.

Iran may have made threats when it comes to the Strait of Hormuz, but they don't have the military power to do anything but be a minor nuisance in those area waters. Their navy is a joke.

LOL...and GWB didn't "buy" people with their own money by giving them tax breaks during his term?? Please...

Nope. I've known a lot of tomboys, and a lot of them are very normal, well-adjusted people.

No, there's no point to doing that...sticking to the facts of the matter speaks volumes.

There's no reason for the USA to declare war on Iran. Iran has every right to develop nuclear energy as an alternative to petroleum, which is going to eventually run out anyways. Iran currently relies very heavily on others to refine the petroleum that they produce, and, while I don't support nuclear energy myself, Iran was given the go-ahead by the West under the Shah to develop nuclear energy. I personally think that a better solution for Iran's energy problems would better lie with wind, solar or geothermal energy, or other countries could provide Iran with enough nuclear fuel to power as many reactors as they want. In the very recent past, the USA has taken weapons-grade nuclear fuel from counties (like Mexico) that didn't want to have to safeguard it anymore...we could do the same thing with Iran if need be.

If I was Iranian & I saw what happened under the GWB Regime with the "Axis of Evil" countries (Iran, Iraq & North Korea), I'd want a nuclear weapon yesterday, not several years from now. Our potential adversaries unfortunately were shown under GWB that we'll leave you alone if you have even a crude nuclear weapon (North Korea) or we'll invade you & topple your regime (Iraq) if you don't have a nuclear weapon.

The USA doesn't need to strike Iran for Israel, since Israel is very capable of defending themselves (with nuclear weapons if need be). The mullahs that run Iran currently aren't going to attack Israel & risk their own destruction...they are cowards.

Blah, blah, blah...what's your next "argument" going to be Nazi-boy?? "And so's your mother!" Please, you've run out of mildly coherent things to say in this thread...therefore, I'm DONE responding to you here...so ramble on moron...

"You have no proof of that."

Of course I do...the falsehoods that you stated here again & again are right here in black & white for all to see.

BTW, don't like being laughed at eh?? Well, know that when others read your utter nonsense here that they'll be doing the same thing...lol...

"All media is opionated whether you like it or not"

...but that doesn't mean that all media is lying, moron.

"Great debating skills."

Same to you...you certainly have a knack for saying nothing again & again & again...

"I haven't done any homework in 10 years."

It's had to have been a LOT longer than that, because apparently you didn't learn a thing in school kiddo.

"Then verify them. Use another source SAYING THE SAME THING."

What a moron you really are...you just don't like being schooled with the FACTS of the matter, so you feebly try to claim "bias" in the actual factual reporting, where there is none...lol...what a joke...

"I don't live in America. Germany."

Then you disgrace Germany with your support of illegal torture, period. Run along now...

"Inhuman acts do not deserve human rights."

All humans have rights, period.

"They should be treated as POW's not regular prisoners"

...who both have rights as well.

"You had no response for this"

Of course I did, you just don't know how to read apparently, moron.

"Google it."

So, it MY job to do YOUR homework here?? I don't think so, moron.

LOL...thanks for admitting that you have nothing of actual value to contribute to this discussion, but what else is new eh??

"from now on, I'll refer to you as a Nazi."

Riiiight...because I spout all kinds of Nazi propaganda on this website...not...what an idiot & a liar you really are...sheesh...

"If someone does not wish to help the poor, it's his fuckin' right."

Not through taxes it isn't...and 'round & 'round we go.

"not that of a Fascist government."

We don't have a fascist govt., idiot.

"This isn't a discussion on how we should vote."

This is a discussion on how our system of govt. works...one that you don't want to participate in or acknowledge, which is YOUR problem, not mine.

"I provided evidence using reason and matching of Thomas Jefferson wanted."

No, you meshed your OPINION onto Jefferson and made believe that you were in agreement with him, period.

"As for your crime rate chart, you failed to mention that these crimes included VIOLENT crimes"

...which doesn't matter at all. You don't think that crimes for monetary value ever turn violent?? Well, you've never been in a liquor store holdup, like some of my friends were when we were all much younger.

"You failed to show any other decades"

...which doesn't matter, since I know when welfare reform was...it was in the mid-1990s.

"You failed to mention that they included sexual assault and rape in the statistic"

Never heard of those types of crimes where the perpetrator took things of value as well?? What a surprise...

"You failed to say that this is the amount of crimes REPORTED to police officers."

Riiiight, because all (or even most of) the crimes that are reported to the police are bogus...not...learn some logic you fool...

"I know you Nazi Communists like the term comrade"

LMAO! Fascists & communists are at the opposite end of the world political spectrum, moron. You just showed how much you know about politics & history...absolutely, positively NOTHING!

"But crime rates are DOWN."

Gee whiz, and your "evidence" (with no reports on the total amount of crime BTW) are for "Number of offenses reported" AND include "rape"...lol...what an idiot you really are.

"And, of course, before LBJ (king of welfare) crime was lower as well."

Baloney.

"correlation does not prove causation, of course, but if you want to make an argument about the comparison between crime rate and welfare... well, statistics will only show that more welfare equals more crime. Less welfare equals less crime."

Nice job at contradicting yourself all in the same phrase...LMAO! Take a course in logic kiddo, then come back another time...because we're DONE here.

"The possibility of a terrorist escaping is a non-issue."

Of course it is...there is nothing to fear from terrorists in this country that are safely locked up, since NONE of them have ever escaped!

"The issue is the political cowardice of some people who think we need to kowtow to our detractors. Personally I could give a damn what France or anyone thinks about America - and it gets tiresome listening to people who do."

Who the hell mentioned France?? America has enough laws of its own to live up to, and torturing prisoners, not allowing prisoners access to counsel & not following international treaties which are U.S. law under our system is illegal!

"Obama has closed Guantanamo and move terrorists into our country, for no good reason."

If you don't know by now why the Gitmo torture prison is a huge stain on the face of America, then there's simply no hope for you my friend.

"But you go left-wing. Tisk, use some right wing"

Facts are facts...learn the difference between biased opinion & real, verifiable facts.

"You insuate that I am right-wing"

...because you obviously are.

"Inhuman acts do not deserve human rights."

All humans have rights because they are human, period.

"They should be treated as POW's not regular prisoners"

POWs have rights too...ugh...

"You can't debate opinion"

Of course you can...with FACTS. Opinions that are not based on verifiable facts are worthless...just like yours are, moron.

Ignore the trolls, like "Kinda", as they have nothing useful to contribute, ever. :)

We already have games where the object is to kill as many people as possible. Why would a rape or sex game be out of the question??

Mmmmmm...trolls...so tasty to destroy at will...they have no useful concepts to say (just a lot of double-talk apparently), hence destruction is the only option for them.

Mmmmmm...trolls...so tasty to destroy at will...they have no useful concepts to say, hence destruction is the only option for them.

"There is no world hunger or serious lack of resources other than that created by man."

This is nonsensical double-talk. Humans need food...duh...no shit no one is going to be able to change that! The fact that many, many people in the world go without good nutrition is not a problem that can be simply wished away.

"Sure if you visit some city in Asia you will be taken aback by the number of people walking around - but again that is a man-made situation."

Again, more nonsensical double-talk. No shit people having more people is a part of the problem, but again, wishing this problem away with the back of your hand in not helpful at all.

"And no one there is starving either, other than that caused by man and politics"

Baloney...do some research on world hunger before you say something as silly as this.

1. Who ever originally proposed limiting the number of people that families could have either here or elsewhere in the world?? I don't remember reading that from anyone...that's a strawman argument.

2. The USA is not part of the population "problem" on the Earth...so basing solutions on what the USA "might" be able to do is just silly nonsense.

"colonizing the highlands" is a LOT harder than this guy makes it out to be. The extremes of weather at those altitudes is the real reason why people don't live up there currently. You're not going to be able to change that.

"providing energy for 100 billion people" is also no way near as simple as this guy tries to make it. Nuclear power is a dead end if for no other reason than the world will likely be running out of readily available uranium within the next century or less. Truly renewable energy, like the solar power that this guy only briefly mentions unfortunately, is really the only viable way to go in the long-term.

Providing enough food for the world, even today, is a struggle at best. Trying to do simple, pie-in-the-sky hand-waving to wish this problem away is not really useful at all.

I do completely agree with this statement though:

"when women are educated and contraceptives are made available to them, the birth rate plummets."

That's the kind of reform that we need to get if one is really concerned about "over-population".

This guys rarely has anything factual or useful to add to any discussion. He's also shown himself to be extremely selfish, so his nonsensical post here is to be expected.

"since i am aware that they are on display, why would i lie about lying?"

Ummmm, because you've also been proven to be about as ignorant on issue after issue as one person could be...ugh... Truly stupid people don't act logically, as your words & actions (continual lying for one) have shown.

1. Try & run away from all the Right-wing nonsense that you've obviously spouted in this & many other threads. It's not going to work!

"I give to charity... so i can't be greedy and selfish."

LOL...your tax dollars do a lot of the same things that your charity dollars do yanno.

"What, just because they make something a certain way we should just accept it?"

Look, once again, you & many others on the Right-wing would love to change the way that our system works so that only the things that you personally believe in can get "your tax dollars". For the last time, that's NOT how systems of taxation have EVER worked. Tax dollars are pooled together to do the things that our elected representatives feel is in the public good. If you don't like their decisions, then vote them out. That's our fundamental system of govt., and it's NOT going to change to fit your wild imagination.

"Unless you can provide evidence that Jefferson would promote the welfare program"

LOL...it's up to ME to prove that Jefferson was opposed to a welfare system that post-dates him by many, many, many decades?? Look, moron, you trying to claim that one of the Founders is on your side without ANY evidence to support your claims is YOUR problem, not mine!!

"Hundreds of thousands of people in America are on welfare?"

There were 5.5 million people on welfare by the end of 2000.

http://blog.cleveland.com/wideopen/2007/10/welfare_rolls_still_plunging_a.html

There were 1.6 million people on welfare as of September 2008.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562449457235503.html#mod=rss_whats_news_us

"And what you're saying is that welfare deters crime?"

Since the so-called " welfare reform" of the mid-1990s, certain crime rates have been sliding upwards:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/ reportingtype.cfm

"The real issue is that there are people who will trash America no matter what we do - so it is best to do what is in our own interests. And it is not in our best interests to have terrorists in the country when there is a viable location elsewhere."

The Gitmo torture prison was NOT setup in the first place to be a "viable location" to house so-called "dangerous" individuals. It was setup to be a location where the USA could claim that the facility could indefinitely detain any non-U.S.-citizen who was believed to be involved in international terrorism (no judge, no jury, no nothing). The Bush Justice Department even tried to declare that Gitmo was outside U.S. legal jurisdiction & that the "illegal enemy combatants" at Gitmo were not entitled to any of the protections of the Geneva Conventions. Of course, the U.S. Supreme Court had other things to say about those completely bogus decisions.

The fact is that the USA has held many, many actual terrorists (not accused terrorists mind you) in custody for quite some time without ANY of them escaping. Who's afraid of the big, bad wolf? Not I, and neither should you.

"It's different from EVERYONE taking the law into their own hands and EXCEPTIONAL cases."

And who is to decide who are these "EXCEPTIONAL cases"?? The angry mob with pitchforks in their hands that's yelling "String 'em up!"?? I don't think so troll...run along now...

"You've constantly argued about how even the guilty can also be innocent."

Ummmm...riiiight, when did I say that again?? Oh yea, it was never.

Look, it's pretty obvious from a lot of your posts & "conversations" that I've seen on here so far that you're just some troll that's looking to stir the pot for no apparent reason. If you want to openly laugh at the basic concepts that America has stood for, then great...but do it on your own time, troll.

The only thing that an Internet Troll is good for is ignoring. Run along now Mr. fake "Hindu" guy from the "United Kingdom"...

"you have presented ONE case of false execution."

Wrong again, there have been many, many, many more cases that that:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0921-08.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/12/national/12DEAT.html

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/additional-innocence-information#Released

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/causes-wrongful-convictions

"Even if there has only been 1,196 people executed (which I find very unlikely)"

My numbers are correct GOPer...quit denying them!

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/prefurman/all.htm

http://www.txexecutions.org/history.asp

You don't even appear to know the real reasons why TX has had so many executions:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/ shows/execution/readings/texas.html

LOL...why am I not surprised that you are undaunted by actual facts?? You've already stated above that the real facts of the matter will never change your mind on this issue. Give it up wing-nut...I'm DONE wasting my time with the ignorant likes of you.

"This is a notoriously sketchy study to begin with"

...in your own, completely biased opinion that is.

"I don't care where you got your information, there is no sure way to know."

Thanks for letting us know that the real facts of the issue at hand will ultimately mean nothing to you...so we're done here!

"It just shows that you can't believe the truth that contradicts you."

LMAO! Kettle, meet pot...pot, kettle...LOL...too funny...that irnony will, of course, go right over your head...

"You would have to have no heart and no brain to not torture someone to save your family"

...in your own warped mind that is.

"if you care about your family, why would you let them die?"

My family is not about to "die", moron. Try, just for once, to not make your political decisions from a position of fear, and you'll understand what I am talking about. The entire "ticking bomb scenario" that's going to kill you, your family, and millions of others is based on a LIE from a novel from the 1960s...wake the hell up...

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/ 02/19/070219fa_fact_mayer

"obviously its not a good long-term strategy, but the government hasn't been torturing people for that long of a period of time"

...as far as you know. I'm not at all naive enough to think that torture hasn't been done by members of the U.S. govt. (or our govt. hasn't spirited people away to countries that allow torture to take place) just in recent memory. Those incidents don't make torture any less illegal, and, as you've already said, it's not an effective long-term strategy, period end of story. Thanks for proving my point, moron.

"you are the one thats defending the terrorists! Im defending the people who torture the terrorists."

LOL...once again, thanks for proving my point. You are defending completely ILLEGAL acts. I am defending the human rights of everyone, period.

"If the government tortures a very select amount of people with ties to a terrorist organization, it doesnt mean that everybody is not safe."

And who, praytell, gets to decide who has "ties to a terrorist organization" or who doesn't?? The government that is doing the torturing in the first place, which is in blatant violation of it's OWN laws, that's who. The entire concept of the rule of law is not something to be tossed away just because a select few people, like you apparently, are afraid of the "boogeyman".

"it was banned because its inhumane, not because its not effective."

LOL...once again, thanks for proving my point, torture IS inhumane, as it goes against the very core of the meaning of human rights. Also, as I've shown you & others in this very thread, it's NOT an effective means of interrogation, hence the reason why the U.S. Army has banned its use long ago.

"obviously it does work"

...despite, of course, all the direct evidence that's been presented to the contrary, win-nut. Ramble on moron...your words truly have no meaning.

"i just finished saying that using torture dozens upon dozens of times works?"

LOL...no, you just finished saying over & over (including above!) that "obviously torture works"...don't try running away from the FACT, liar!

"it was a mistake. They weren't lying."

Sure, sure, and the fact that they were many, many people saying at the time that Iraq had no WMDs & that they had no ties at all with Al-Qaeda or 9/11 was just a coincidence...MORON!

"you never quoted a report filed by the Bush Administration relating to this."

Of course I did, and I even quoted Bush Regime officials that have said the same thing. The fact that you can't bring yourself to admit that you're wrong on this issue means nothing to me.

"when did you prove that i lied?"

LOL...run away liar...run away...it's not working...

"When can i expect the actual end of the story?"

Right now, since you've been completely & thoroughly schooled on this issue, once again, moron. We're DONE talking about it now. You can ramble on & on, but you'll be wasting your time, not mine.

"why would we detain people who we know are innocent?"

That question was answered by me days & days ago, but you'll never admit to that, liar.

"1. Not a right-winger"

Oh yea, you're an "Independent"...with a Nazi icon over a gay pride flag...please...

"I believe they shouldn't."

Of course you don't, since you're simply greedy & selfish, period.

"why do you attack my view points by saying 'you don't get to choose'."

Because that's the REAL issue here, moron! In our system of govt., like it or not, we do NOT get to directly choose how ANY of our tax dollars is used, period!

"The fact that welfare is implemented by the government would upset Jefferson"

...in your own, wild imagination that is.

"Since welfare is a government enacted program that benefits few, it is not seen as a Civil NECESSITY"

...again, in your own biased opinion. The reality is that if some form of welfare didn't exist, then there would be hundreds of thousands of people with absolutely no way to readily support themselves without having to resort to dangerous things, like turn to crime, which effects everyone...either directly or indirectly. That's why some form of welfare is in the public's best interest.

Now, you'll never agree to any of the above, but that won't change the reality of the way things really are. So ramble on wing-nut...I'm DONE wasting my time educating your sorry ass...

"i was definitely telling the truth there"

...in your wildest dreams that is. Your blatant lies are on full display there for all to see, liar.

"I dont see a beat down going on"

...because you are blind to it, which makes it that much more funny...lol...

"If the president is violating 'the Constitution of the United States' then he is a domestic enemy."

Really?? Then why didn't the military take up arms against your buddy GWB?? Illegal torture...wars for no good reason...I could go on & on. The reason? Because that's not the way our system works. The military exists to take orders, not to give them.

As for being dense, you take the cake there Joe...sheesh...

This is one of the most moronic things that you've uttered on here so far, and that's quite an accomplishment for you! I really can't believe that you actually believe some of the things that you type here sometimes. Really, no one is that dumb.

"I hear statements not reasons."

Because you're simply not listening, period. If everyone could take the law into their own hands, then America would become a free-for-all. One could be executed for the most minor thing, like being a moron, like you!

"Isn't that what I JUST SAID?"

No, in fact, you said the exact opposite. All you know about the Old West is from movies...your words, not mine.

"According to you you can never actually know if anybody is ever guilty."

Really?? When did I ever say that? Oh yea, it was never.

"In your book every criminal is potentially an innocent."

LOL...no, moron, in our system of justice, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. When you rant against that concept, you rant against a very basic concept that is at the core of what makes America a great nation.

This is just more silly nonsense from you. Do you EVER take anything seriously?? There isn't going to be a shooting war in this country...now stop spreading more fear.

"Keep in mind that during the last days, Bush Jr. was considering having soldiers protecting the white house."

It's not surprising the GWB was really a coward in the end. His public statements & reactions to that crisis were pitifull. He looked like a scared lil bunny to me.

"Obama has talked about a civil army.... why?"

It's not an "army" at all...just a bunch of volunteers to help out their communities.

"How old are you?"

Probably older than you kiddo.

"The media is to keep people informed and the government in check?"

Yes, the press is what's called the Fourth Estate.

"While all that are enlisted in any armed service, they are sworn to uphold and obey the Constitution of the United States"

...and to follow the lawful orders of their civilian leadership, period.

Agree & well-stated. This group of Right-wing wackos really poses no threat to anyone. They are waaay too small a group to do anything. Most of them will probably just end up in a militia group, like McVeigh & we all know how THAT turned out!

...which are provided for in the U.S. Constitution, period.

This is a ridiculous "argument". These wackos look extremist because they are a very small, Right-wing, extreme group, period.

"The military should specifically spell out what constitutes a lawful order and what does not in order to keep the government in check."

That's already been done in many military manuals. "Illegal" orders should not be followed at all. All soldiers should know that by now.