News Who Will Be the Next President of the USA?

[Loren Booda]

Which of the following categories do you qualify for?

 

[BoulderHead]

There you go.

 

[Adam]

I like the ieda of everyone voting for a third party and ending the two-party system (which is too easily controlled). However, since people won't do that, I recommend everyone vote for the option which has the best chance of removing Bush. It's only half a solution, but better than nothing.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I have a better solution. Australians don't recommend to Americans who to elect President of the United States, and Americans don't recommend to Australians who to elect Prime Minister.

 

[Gokul43201]

Adam is NOT an Australian. He is a Worldian.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Oh. So he can vote in our elections I assume?

 

[Adam]

How about "I'm allowed to have an opinion"?

 

[Dissident Dan]

I have a better solution. Australians don't recommend to Americans who to elect President of the United States, and Americans don't recommend to Australians who to elect Prime Minister.

Why do you have a problem with it? A person should be able to offer an opinion or advice regardless of national origin or location.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

I am an american and I am not voting for either person

the reason

i am not old ennough to vote

 

[wasteofo2]

Why do you have a problem with it? A person should be able to offer an opinion or advice regardless of national origin or location.

Because Republicans collectively have a strong case of xenophobia, along with an incapacity to handle dissent/disagreement, so if a foreigner wants something other than them, whoo boy, watch out na!


Of course Australians shouldn't (and don't) have any say in how Americans vote, but on a multi-national internet forum, I think they should at least be allowed to say "I am not an American but would vote for Kerry". I don't see what the big deal is Russ, have you ever heard of someone's vote being swayed by the opinions of people who don't live in their country? Hell, a poll recently came out showing that most every country in Europe besides Poland vastly preferred Kerry over Bush, some by margins of like 60 to 10, but did Kerry get any bounce in the polls because the vast majority of German and English people like him more than Bush?

Here's a link to a story about that study, with the numbers presented in the study: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3640754.stm

 

[BobG]

I have a better solution. Australians don't recommend to Americans who to elect President of the United States, and Americans don't recommend to Australians who to elect Prime Minister.

I suppose this solution also applies to Americans suggesting who should lead Palestinians?

 

[wasteofo2]

I suppose this solution also applies to Americans suggesting who should lead Palestinians?

Or Iraqi's for that matter

 

[Kerrie]

my opinion is, if you are over age 18 in america and complain about politics, you better be registered to vote...otherwise, you are a hypocrite.

 

[Smurf]

Either that or be doing something to overthrow democracy as a whole.

 

[fisipavia]

I cannot vote for any president american or any other. For us, puertorricans living in Puerto Rico, that right doesn't apply.

 

[fisipavia]

So, why should I care?

 

[wasteofo2]

I know next to nothing about Puerto Rico's legal status, but from what I think I know, it's like a territory of the USA, right? You do at least get to elect local governments, right? Obviously you don't have Senators, but do you have any members in congress? Do you pay federal taxes to the American government? If you pay taxes and don't have any representatives in the legislative branch and can't decide on America's leader, well that's just horrible, and you should try to do something about that. Hell, revolt if you have to, taxation without representation is one of the big reasons the American colonists revolted against the English.

Though if you plan on revolting, I'd advise you wait until Bush's out of office, he's got tons of the more radical guys from the Reagan administration on board, and you probabally know how the Reagan administration dealt with uprisings in Latin America.

 

[JohnDubYa]

If you pay taxes and don't have any representatives in the legislative branch and can't decide on America's leader, well that's just horrible, and you should try to do something about that.

Puerto Rico is perfectly free to vote themselves an independent country if they wish. But that would mean losing out on lots of benefits.

 

[wasteofo2]

Puerto Rico is perfectly free to vote themselves an independent country if they wish. But that would mean losing out on lots of benefits.

As I said, I have next to no knowledge about Puerto Rico. I'm going to take what you said on faith, that they can vote themselves independent if they want but won't because attachment to the USA is beneficial to them. However, don't you think that while Puerto Rico's current status may be better than they could do on your own, don't you think they should have some representatives in the legislative branch?


P.S. Kerry, landslide!
The poll shows that the entire amount of people in the world (on this sub-forum of a physics forum) who want to vote for Bush don't number as many as the people who are in America and will vote Kerry!

 

[Loren Booda]

Washington, DC's motto (on their license plate) is "Taxation without Representation." They pay taxes but do not have senators or a representative. The US Congress actually had tried to block this declaration of protest!

 

[kat]

P.S. Kerry, landslide!
The poll shows that the entire amount of people in the world (on this sub-forum of a physics forum) who want to vote for Bush don't number as many as the people who are in America and will vote Kerry!

Lol, further confirmation that the democrats really have lost touch with reality.

 

[wasteofo2]

Washington, DC's motto (on their license plate) is "Taxation without Representation." They pay taxes but do not have senators or a representative. The US Congress actually had tried to block this declaration of protest!

Now that's hilarious.

Lol, further confirmation that the democrats really have lost touch with reality.

'Twas a joke chica, hence the "(on this sub-forum of a physics forum)"

And honestly, the first president since the great depression to loose jobs, and he's going around saying it's the best economy in decades, and the guys who want someone else in office are out of touch?

 

[JohnDubYa]

http://ri.essortment.com/puertoricansta_rdla.htm (Puerto Rico and statehood)

 

[JohnDubYa]

The District of Columbia has no voting power for a very distinct reason -- since all three branches of government reside within the District of Columbia, some felt it would give the District too much power. The idea was to de-centralize government.

The residents of DC have no complaint. The lack of voting power was there before they arrived. If they don't like it, they should move somewhere else.

 

[fisipavia]

http://ri.essortment.com/puertoricansta_rdla.htm (Puerto Rico and statehood)

Wow...that page is … hmmmm, let's say "unbalanced". The analysis for statehood is way longer that for commonwealth and independence.

 

[Smurf]

The residents of DC have no complaint. The lack of voting power was there before they arrived. If they don't like it, they should move somewhere else.

I am getting really sick of hearing "If you don't like it, Get out!"

What If I don't want to move? My whole familly is here! What If I'm not like you, and I don't want to give up! No, I'm going to make this place better, instead of running away.

 

[JohnDubYa]

What If I don't want to move? My whole familly is here! What If I'm not like you, and I don't want to give up! No, I'm going to make this place better, instead of running away.

Why did you move into the area in the first place? And if living there is so bad, why do you want to stay?

This reminds me of families that move next door to race tracks, then try to shut down the tracks because of the noise.

If DC wants votes, let the district apply for statehood. Just be willing to allow all three branchs of government to move out of the area. I bet that would cook their geese.

fisipavia, I was only looking for confirmation that the people of Puerto Rico have voted on statehood in the past.

 

[physicsuser]

why this thread is name "President of the World"?

 

[fisipavia]

why this thread is name "President of the World"?

When I entered the thread for the first time I was also wondering the same thing... But then I realized it was probably started by someone from the US and remembered that many of them keep forgetting that US is not a synonym for world nor for America. So I just ignored that its tittle was “president of the world” and assumed he meant “president of the US”

 

[Loren Booda]

I named the topic "President of the World" for a number of reasons. The U. S. has, as far as I know, an electorate most representational of the world's nationalities. Also, our president - like him or not - has more influence over the people and policies of the world than any other leader. Perhaps ironically, America and its presidents, since securing our own liberty, have insured the freedom and independence for much of the world.

 

[aeroegnr]

my opinion is, if you are over age 18 in america and complain about politics, you better be registered to vote...otherwise, you are a hypocrite.

Even if you disprove of both parties?
Sure we can all say "vote third party" but if a third party had a chance in hell of being elected, it would show some presence.

Aside from that, Nader tends to pull more votes than the other third parties (at least from what I remember) and I don't support Nader. So why bother?

 

[wasteofo2]

Even if you disprove of both parties?
Sure we can all say "vote third party" but if a third party had a chance in hell of being elected, it would show some presence.

Aside from that, Nader tends to pull more votes than the other third parties (at least from what I remember) and I don't support Nader. So why bother?

It's called a protest vote. Even if some random guy who has no chance of winning gets some votes, like 3% or whatever, people start taking notice of him. He may not get elected, but he'll get press and get his message out there. Hell, if you can convince enough people that are going to reluctantly vote for either Bush or Kerry to vote for some third party candidate, you could doom that person's candidacy, who was just going to get a lot of people who think he's the lesser of 2 evils to vote for him. Look at Flordia, Gore lost by like 600 votes in 2000, Nader got like 22,000. Out of the millions of people in Florida, 22,000 doesn't seem like alot, but if it weren't for Nader, more than enough of those votes would have gone to Gore for him to win the State (if you assume nothing illegal was done to hide Gore's votes). Nader, while not winning the State, was the reason Gore didn't win the state, and effectively made it so that Bush would be our President, that's a hell of a lot of power that 600 voters had.

 

[physicsuser]

I named the topic "President of the World" for a number of reasons. The U. S. has, as far as I know, an electorate most representational of the world's nationalities. Also, our president - like him or not - has more influence over the people and policies of the world than any other leader. Perhaps ironically, America and its presidents, since securing our own liberty, have insured the freedom and independence for much of the world.

laugh! secured your liberty... are you sure? Name just one country that USA secured their freedom and independence? I don't see how by demolishing a country to rubble gives it liberty and freedom. Sure USA helped Afganistan to defeat USSR and then what? Well you what happend. Same goes for every other country USA "liberated".

 

[wasteofo2]

laugh! secured your liberty... are you sure? Name just one country that USA secured their freedom and independence? I don't see how by demolishing a country to rubble gives it liberty and freedom. Sure USA helped Afganistan to defeat USSR and then what? Well you what happend. Same goes for every other country USA "liberated".

Well, there were those things, what're they called, something like "World War I and World War II".

 

[Loren Booda]

physicsuser,

I can only see that your argument might be valid in conflicts with which the majority of American citizens themselves strongly disagree.

 

[wasteofo2]

physicsuser,

I can only see that your argument might be valid in conflicts with which the majority of American citizens themselves strongly disagree.

What, besides WWI, WWII and Gulf War I did the American public strongly approve that resulted in liberated nations?

 

[Loren Booda]

South Korea, Balkans, Nicaragua, Grenada...feel free to add to the list, those more informed.

 

[wasteofo2]

South Korea, Balkans, Nicaragua, Grenada...feel free to add to the list, those more informed.

Umm...
I kinda meant "liberated" in a sense where we did more than just kill people, I should have said "liberated and made a good place". I don't know too much about the Balkans, but I'm fairly sure they're still doing pretty crappy, and don't get me started on Nicaragua, Fascist terrorists were given handbooks on how to perpetrate terrorist acts against the Sandinistas/general populace, funded/trained/armed with illegal money we got from selling weapons to Iranian terrorists, caused mass chaos and violence, took power back, and now Nicaragua's like the second or third poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.

And besides, Nicaragua was covert and a huge scandal when it broke, people didn't actually support it did they?

 

[Loren Booda]

wasteofo2,

I think you're basically right concerning Nicaragua; how about El Salvador instead?

 

[wasteofo2]

wasteofo2,

I think you're basically right concerning Nicaragua; how about El Salvador instead?

I don't know

When I asked "What, besides WWI, WWII and Gulf War I did the American public strongly approve that resulted in liberated nations?", it was a genuine question, not me trying to say that nothing besides those 3 incidents had resulted in liberated nations. I'm only 16 and the NY state ciriculum is so tight that I learn a lot of useless crap about History (I could go on and on about the Visigoths), but there's no real time for anything modern to be taught, since modern stuff isn't on the state exams.

Though I was under the vague impression that bassically everything we've ever done in South/Central America (as far as military action) has resulted in horribly crappy outcomes where dictators take over and do the typical dictator type stuff or you get mafia style Democracy like they had in Russia until just a while ago when Putin decided Democracy wasn't such a hot idea.

 

[fisipavia]

I named the topic "President of the World" for a number of reasons. The U. S. has, as far as I know, an electorate most representational of the world's nationalities. Also, our president - like him or not - has more influence over the people and policies of the world than any other leader. Perhaps ironically, America and its presidents, since securing our own liberty, have insured the freedom and independence for much of the world.

I was actually hopping for a better answer...I mean...it was better for you to say that you forgot that the US is not the WORLD!
Sure US have a lot of power, principally military power. But you really think that the president of US deserve to be named "president of the world"? You really think that the US have to intervene in the way other countries act? In EVERY discussion between two countries? (not to mention that when US is on the side of one of those countries, and that is ALWAYS, the US president assume to always know (like he was god) what is the fair thing to do and who has the reason)
You see the US as a world savior, but that perception doesn't imply that you are assuming that other countries are incapable of taking the right decisions or resolving their own problems?...doesn't that perception imply that you see the US ( and in consequence, people from US) as superior?...that is racism
You know, if you analyze what you have said:
" Also, our president - like him or not - has more influence over the people and policies of the world than any other leader"
you would conclude that the correct name for the thread should be
" DICTATOR of the world"
you are right...he has a lot of power over a lot of people that didn't vote for him... As you said ...like him or not, and that's really sad-LIKE IT OR NOT.

 

[Outcast]

Oh. So he can vote in our elections I assume?

Why shouldn't Adam vote in our election? Everyone else in the world is.

Illegal aliens have been registered too, since under Motor Voter, any recipient of government benefits can sign up to vote -- no questions asked. Did that wide-open door to fraud cost former GOP Congressman Robert Dornan his seat in Congress? An investigation by the Immigration and Naturalization Service following Dornan's 1996 defeat by Democrat Loretta Sanchez found that 4,023 noncitizens may have cast ballots in that election. Dornan lost by 984 votes.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jeffjacoby/jj20040920.shtml

Thank you President Clinton for the Motor Voter Act.

 

[marlon]

I am not an American but i have a question for all USA-people here. Beeing a European myself I don't really know a lot about the intern US-policy, i mean sugjects like social security and so on...In Belgium for example if you got no job you receive about 600 to 700 euro's social security. Do you guys in the US have an analogue system and how much do you get when you fall out of work ?

Another thing i want to know, here if you gain a certain amount of money you pay about 50 percent taxes...how much do you pay in the US?


regards
marlon

 

[Loren Booda]

fisipavia,

Most of all, the title "President of the World" is poetic and does not reflect my belief that the U. S. should rule the world. It would indeed be against the democratic process, dictatorial, to assume that 3% of the world's population should decide policy for the other 97%.

 

[Outcast]

I am not an American but i have a question for all USA-people here. Beeing a European myself I don't really know a lot about the intern US-policy, i mean sugjects like social security and so on...In Belgium for example if you got no job you receive about 600 to 700 euro's social security. Do you guys in the US have an analogue system and how much do you get when you fall out of work ?

Another thing i want to know, here if you gain a certain amount of money you pay about 50 percent taxes...how much do you pay in the US?


regards
marlon

We have an unemployment insurance program here in the States.
# In general, benefits are based on a percentage of an individual's earnings over a recent 52-week period - up to a State maximum amount.
# Benefits can be paid for a maximum of 26 weeks in most States.

Our highest federal tax rate is 35%, but we also have to pay state taxes. The state tax rate varies from state to state. And there is city and county taxes in someplaces.

 

[marlon]

Still one question...

Suppose you have a college degree in applied science and you want to work in high-tech-industry. How much would you make a month in the US? I heard from a Belgium-professor at MIT (Pattie Maes) that you make a lot more in the US then in Europe, especially when you are highly educated. Is this a general truth in industry also ?

What are the incomes for a engineer working in chemical-industry for example or an electronical engineer developping high-tech machinery...

Thanks,
marlon

 

[humanino]

Let us all europeans move to the kingdom of liberalism !
I think it is true. But it is more dangerous, as you might have noticed.

 

[Outcast]

Still one question...

Suppose you have a college degree in applied science and you want to work in high-tech-industry. How much would you make a month in the US? I heard from a Belgium-professor at MIT (Pattie Maes) that you make a lot more in the US then in Europe, especially when you are highly educated. Is this a general truth in industry also ?

What are the incomes for a engineer working in chemical-industry for example or an electronical engineer developping high-tech machinery...

Thanks,
marlon

That is one on America's biggest problems, we are the largest brain drain in the world. We do pay the best. I am an electronic technician, no degree, and I make $45,000 a year. My wife is a Civil Designer, 2 year degree, and she makes $40,000 a year. I have a friend in Hungary who is a system administer for a large corporation and he makes about $20,000 a year. If he was in the States, he would be making at least $60,000 with his experience and training, of course the cost of living is higher here.

I would suggest that you start your job search online with
Monster Have you ever visited the States?

 

[humanino]

I am engineer in physics, I am getting my PhD right now in physics in the US. I am strongly considering stealing one of your positions

Why do you say brain drain is a problem for you !? I guess you could stop it.

 

[marlon]

Outcast,...

Thanks very much for your reply...very interesting.

I have a master degree in theoretical fysics and i will be studying for two more years in order to become an engineer. My dream is to help developing machinery that is used in hospitals or radiology for example. So you can say i am mainly interested in nuclear physics and nanotechnology and stuff like that.

My worry is that if you have studied at a university in Belgium (Ghent) will they accept my degrees in the US ? Generally it is very well known that math education is of a very high standard in Belgium even already in high-school. Also lagnuages are quite ok in here because every student will speak Dutch, French, English and a little bit of German at least...

Are these properties a big advantage or not in the US. I mean (don't get me wrong here) are educated foreigners regarded as an solid economic source in your country and are they given the chance to develop themselves ?

Basically what i am asking is the following : is the USA really the land of opportunities ?
If so, i'll be there in 2006 or 2007 (i think California is the best right? I mean for high-tech-industries and nice girls )

regards
marlon