China has all the money and USA doesn't have any.

Just read The end of influence : what happens when other countries have the money by Stephen S. Cohen, J. Bradf.

It says that America will not be able to wield as much power and influence on the world stage because it no longer has the money. It's mostly in debt to China.

"We Americans spent more than we earned; we consumed more than we produced. We borrowed the money to buy the stuff from the people who produced it abroad and sold it to us. We paid them in dollars; they took the dollars and lent them back to us, so we could do it again. It worked well all around. They sold more, banked the money, and felt richer; we bought more and felt prosperous." p91.

Since a huge percentage of China's riches come from USA debt, China can't let the USA fail. They're in a sort of sick, co-dependent relationship.

The difference between the Democrats and Republicans.

I'm fascinated by American politics. I don't know why. I guess I enjoy the silliness of a fake two party system, that really is only one party.

Yes, I think that the democrats and the republicans are basically the same party. All their leaders basically do the same thing. Obama is no different. He's authorized massive war, believes in bailouts for corporations and wants to keep the health care system about the same as it is now (he backed off on the public option).

Any republican president would have done the same thing. None of this is very insightful. What I find fascinating is that the republicans and democrats pretend they're different. They have silly arguments about abortion and gay rights etc. They want and need us to talk about these differences because on all the big issues they're the same.

Example: government spending. Both parties say they want and believe in fiscal responsibility. The US debt is now $12.4 trillion. So if both parties are for fiscal responsibility why does the USA owe so much money.

Example: war. Every president starts or gets involved in a major war.

Example: economy. Both parties believe in bailing out wall street. George W. Bush did it and then Obama continued it. Senator McCain said he would have done it as well (although now he changed his mind).

Example: health care. Both parties want to fix it, but not enough to make it a "free" single payer system. Obama said he did, and even had a super majority to do it, but got cold feet and backed down in the end.

The last example brings up a good point: Each party says they want certain things, but when they get the chance - they fail to deliver. That's because they don't really want it. The republicans will always be one vote shy of overturning Roe v. Wade and the dems will always be stopped just short of passing whatever fancy social service they brag about for years.

Each party will blame each other and try to get more votes. That's the way it is. Politicians are elected to preserve the system, not change it.

I want to be an old white man.

My friend always used to tell me he couldn't wait to become an old white man with grey hair. He said it would help his career and he'd look "distinguished".

I used to scoff at him.

Today I realized he was right. At work we were looking up Canada's richest people to ask them for donations.

Right away I noticed the top 10 were old white men. Then the top 20. Then the top 30. All old white men.

I became determined to find a female or a minority. I got to 41 before my eyes glazed over in a puddle of wrinkly white skin and silvery hair.

I gave up. The good news is that I'm white. The bad news is I will never make it on that list.

Why do people hate Sarah Palin?

It amazes me how many people hate Sarah Palin. She seems like a nice person to me.

She's obviously smart, having been a governor of Alaska. She seems to be a good mom, and she has a loving family.

Yet people badmouth her constantly. She's ridiculed in the media, bashed on blogs and ripped apart in everyday conversations.

I wonder why she's hated?

Maybe it's because she's a powerful woman? Well, that can't be true. Hillary Clinton is a woman and she wasn't hated.

Maybe it's because she's attractive? But there are plenty of attractive women in the world, and they don't seem to be hated like Sarah Palin.

Maybe it's because of her political views? Yet people are not their political views. Just like people are not their sickenesses or weaknesses or talents. Anyway, her political views aren't that extreme. She's simply a conservative, and hundreds of thousands of Americans share the exact same views.

I don't really know why so many people dislike her. It doesn't seem fair, and I feel a little sorry for her. If she happened to stop by my neighborhood, I'd say a few friendly words to her.

Is it ethical to lie even though your lie is for a greater, ultimate truth?

Here's another philosophical post. I've been mildly interested in the health-care debate in the United States. Mostly because the United States is the only industrialized country that does not have universal health care.

American conservatives seem to resist a single-payer health care system. And President Obama promised that they would get one, but as it turns out the new health-care bill right now is a bailout for insurance companies. How did this happen?

Lies. American conservatives have been lying about the proposed health-care bill. For example, Sarah Palin made up the lie about how "death squads" would be in charge of deciding whether Americans live or die. The lie is outrageous, outlandish.

Yet people believe it. I have no doubt that Sarah Palin knows it's a lie - but I'm interested in a deeper topic. Does she justify the lie to herself because she knows that she is lying for a greater good, and that "lies" can be excused in this case?

Certainly she thinks a single-payer health care system would be a terrible thing for America. In her book she said that Canada should dismantle its own system and adopt American for-profit health-care.

So should we be allowed to lie in a debate if we know that we are right, and the lie helps convince someone that we are right?

I say no.

No matter how sure we are, there's always a chance we are wrong. When you lie to persuade people, you're not offering them a fair way to make up their minds. If you do manage to convince them, their knowledge is incomplete - so, in fact, you have not convinced them of anything.

So I conclude that lying is not justified even if you're sure you are correct.

What's wrong with liberals.

A couple days ago I wrote about what was wrong with conservatives. Now I'll return the favour for liberals. So what's wrong with them?

- They push their own "morality" on society. (Political correctness, forced green initiatives, etc.)

- They meddle too much with the economy.

- They pursue a political strategy of appeasement with enemies and aggressive nations.

- They have a sense of entitlement (I should be provided free medical care, welfare, employment insurance, benefits)

In short, they're typically young and naive. They don't understand the world very well and they think that the government can solve all their problems. Most annoyingly, they think the government can "pay" for everything.

Guess where the government gets its money from? You and me. One more question: is the government good at doing things? Are government bureucrats successful in their various efforts? No, of course not.

Oh you liberals!

What's wrong with conservatives.

I'm reading Liberty and tyranny : a conservative manifesto by Mark R. Levin. He basically outlines conservatism as the perfect political outlook, and his descriptions of conservatism sound fantastic. If you didn't know better, you'd say, "Yeah I'm a conservative!"

He starts to go wrong when he begins describing liberals (or "stateists"). He exaggerates their position, and talks about all their bad ideas. He says that liberalism is basically a soft form of tyranny because liberals want the power to control your life with laws and regulations.

In other words, they're busy-body do-gooders that want to mother you and protect you like a nanny. Partly true, of course. But he doesn't mention the problems with conservatives. I'd thought I'd share a few in my opinion:

- They're close-minded and stubborn.
- They don't like "change", and are often against progressive or new ideas.
- They're pro-military and aggressive
- They're socially dogmatic and often push religious views on people.

Why "surveys" on websites and radio stations are useless.

I've seen so many surveys in local newspaper, websites or radio shows that ask questions like, "Do you think the government should build another sky train line?"

Or "Do you think we should have cameras on the HOV lane to catch cheaters?"

Duh. Of course everyone's going to say yes to these kinds of questions. Who wouldn't want better transit and punishment for cheating drivers?

The problem is that the questions never mention the consequence. Namely, money. It costs money to do the above things and that means you pay through your taxes.

I think the questions should have the following added to the end: "...if you had to send a cheque for $200 right now to cover the cost?"

In fact, I think any person (usually left, wing liberal) who says something like, "I think we should have more [blank] so that [the world will be a better place]" should be asked if they're willing to write a cheque then and there.

I'm going to try that from now on. Except I'm thinking it might come off as obnoxious. Ah, so what!

I want to write a "manifesto".

Why do crazy people always write manifestos? What is a manifesto anyway? I think it's a political statement - often written by insane people with extreme views.

Here are some sections of random manifestos I've found on the internet.

• "Unnameable parts of no whole short circuit the code recognition programs flipping surveillance agents into hyperdrive which spew out millions of bits of corrupt data as they seize in fits of schizophrenic panic and trip on terror."

• "We propose a reversal of priorities in favor of more useful, lasting and democratic forms of communication - a mindshift away from product marketing and toward the exploration and production of a new kind of meaning."

• "Sons of the sun, mother of living creatures. Fiercely met and loved, with all the hypocrisy of longing: importation, exchange, and tourists. In the country of the big snake.
  It’s because we never had grammatical structures or collections of old vegetables."

• "we will reek our garlic breaths into the onion-skinned mouths of our lovers!we will pepper our thoughts with salty kisses!we will lose ourselves in the Garden of Eden!!!"

• "We believe that this racist government has robbed us and now we are demanding the overdue debt of forty acres and two mules."

• "absolute submission can be a form of freedom. abstraction is a type of decadence. abuse of power comes as no surprise"
  

I want to write a manifesto one day, but I really need to grow my hair longer and stockpile weapons and live in a secluded, wooded area. Also, I need some scary opinions and some gibberish, stream-of-conciouss language to put this all on paper.

Then I need to kill some people and end my own life.

Will Obama be assassinated?

Two months ago a Pennsylvania newspaper published a classified ad calling for the assassination of Barrack Obama. Later, the newspaper apologized for running the ad - but I'm worried.


Not because a few degenerates are calling for his assassination, I'm worried because Obama scares people. He scares the right-wing wacko element of the United States - those people who stockpile grenade launchers, live in bullet-proof compounds and publish Nazi newsletters.


These are the kind of people who wouldn't think twice about taking a potshot at Obama. The president is young, progressive, black and has an aggressive agenda of change. What happens to progressive presidents who want change?


Already they're calling him a Nazi because he wants to change medicare. There are pictures of him patting Hitler on the back. There are pictures of him wearing Joker makeup from Batman. And "angry mobs" are showing up at Town Hall meetings waving signs that call him evil. All because he wants to improve his country's medical system.



He's only been President for half a year. He's got three and half to go. I hope he's not assassinated.