The United States is not a Democracy? What an outrageous claim to make! Or so it would seem...
In fact, the United States of America is actually a Republic. The other terms bandied about amongst political scientists are "Representative Democracy" and "Constitutional Republic". And this isn't just a dictionary-zealot splitting hairs here; there are very important distinctions between a pure Democracy and what we have in the USA. And confusing the issue can actually lead to gross mistakes.
For instance, in the 2000 Presidential election, if you (hypothetically) didn't like George Bush but didn't trust Al Gore, you might have cast a vote for Ralph Nader on the belief that you were at least voting against the other two candidates. In fact, what you actually did was throw your vote away, because of the Electoral College system. Each state has a certain number of electoral votes, and the candidate who gets the most votes in a state gets all the electoral votes for that state, even if they only win by one vote.
Your electorate would have just counted the votes in your precinct until a clear winner emerged, then gone to the Electoral College and voted for the winner. That's what it boiled down to: one vote from each precinct. A vote for Ralph Nader did not cancel out a vote for George Bush.
In the more general scheme of things, the United States is a Republic because we have a representative government. Individual citizens do not get to directly vote on every detail, from whether we go to war to whether we have a seat-belt law. All we can do with a vote is appoint Congress members, Governors, Mayors, Senators, and yes, Presidents, too.
Once elected, those representatives can do whatever they please. They can say whatever they want when they campaign to get elected, but after you've voted them in, they aren't bound to represent you in the slightest. You can get them impeached for breaking a law or an oath of office, but there is no specific rule that says they have to keep every promise they made when they got elected.
Furthermore, in a direct democracy, the laws which are passed must be obeyed. In a Republic, the laws get interpreted by a third branch, which is the Judicial System. The court is free to throw out, rule against, or even just ignore a law if it finds the case is just and the law unfair. This is why everybody who commits adultery in California isn't in jail - there is a law against that, though, but it's ignored.
You're probably asking yourself, why is it that we don't have a direct democracy, then? Well, when the country was founded a mere 230 years ago, the device you're reading this on hadn't been invented yet. The same goes for cars, telephones, television, telegraphs, and radio. Where was communication technology when the Declaration of Independence was signed? The Gutenberg printing press. Ships on the ocean were sending signals by firing cannons and raising flags. On land, we had pen, paper, and the Pony Express.
Now imagine how long it would take to get anything done if we were to insist on collecting the informed opinion of every single citizen across the country in order to do every single thing, using only letters delivered by horse. You're right, it would be impossible!
You might now ask, "Well, now we can transmit information everywhere at the speed of electricity. Why can't we change to a direct democracy and throw out all of this red tape?" Not so fast! There are experimental ideas being tossed around about this already - one of them is the Unity08 party and another one is the National initiative to allow for ballot initiatives at the Federal level, being proposed by Congressman Mike Gravel, who is running for President in 2008.
However, even the boldest of these isn't proposing to implement a pure and full Direct Democracy right away. Do you, as a citizen, want to travel the world meeting with foreign leaders to decide if you want to do business with them or grant their request for aid? Would you have had the time to read every page of the hundreds of bills passed by Congress last year? And most of these on trivial matters such as how much funding to grant a program, what to name a bridge, whose face goes on the next commemorative coin, or who to appoint to the Spotted Owl Conservation Commission.
There's a lot to organizing ourselves as a group of 300 million people than you'd at first think. Simply put, we aren't built like ants or bees; nature didn't intend for us to act as a hive-mind. Humans are great in small groups, but even getting all of us together, such as in a Nationwide census or even in the Board of Directors at a corporation, is beyond us. Humans don't scale.
Humans don't scale. That's why we have the closest thing to a Direct Democracy - a Constitutional Republic!
The political scenery of United States has undergone a drastic change of color ever since the 19th Amendment to the Constitution bestowed the much deserved right to vote on women in the country. With merely days having passed from the time when Nancy Pelosi took on the reins of the US House of Representatives on 26th January of 2012, this article casts a few lumens of light on the worthy issue of how US political system has unfolded with regards to representation of women.
Jeannette Rankin was the first woman to be elected in the U.S. House of Representatives, and she achieved this position in 1917. Five years later, Rebecca Latimer gave further impetus to the representation of women in the Senate by becoming the first woman to do so. Though she served for just one day, the day still is still marked in golden ink on the political calendar of United States. More than a decade later, the position of the Secretary of Labor under the iconic Franklin D. Roosevelt was occupied by Frances Perkins, and thus she became the first woman to serve in the president's cabinet.
The 1960s are remembered for two events of prime importance as far their bearings on the future of women's representation on United States' political platforms was concerned. In 1964, Sen. George Aiken nominated Margaret Chase Smith for presidential status at the Republican national convention. Four years later, Shirley Chisholm overcame all social constraints and became the first black woman to be elected in Congress. 1976 is another important year in terms of the history of black women making it big on the political podiums as Barbara Jordan delivered a keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention, becoming the first black woman to do so.
I spoke to a friend and asked him what where his thoughts on the Mid Term US elections? I asked him how many voters had turned out the polls? He said, “I don’t follow US politics at all except for the Presidential Elections.”.
[extract1] I read the New York Times about Qantas Airways suspended flights. I read about the engine on one of the jumbo plane that exploded. I read about the small pieces of the plane that where scattered.
I tuned CNN on last week and saw US Military Jets. They where escorting Emirate Flight 201. I saw it land safely in New York City. I heard about sniffing dogs and EDS. I saw the anti-explosive team working in full gear.
I heard the experts speaking of packages flown here and there. I read about the routes and listened to Cargo analysis. I saw the images of “printers” on transoceanic routes. I saw the day report on Terrorism. I heard the news on the female suspect arrested. I heard about the difference between Cargo and Passenger planes. I saw the packages screened in the middle of the day. I saw NORAD tracking the A380 on live Television.
I heard about the gridlock concept and thought about timing. I asked a friend his thoughts on the Mid Term US elections? I asked him how many voters had turned out the polls? He said, “I do not follow politics except if they are Presidential Campaigns”.
I read about the Feds getting aggressive. I went online and ordered my new music. It used to come from Los Angeles. Today I got a visit from the mail man, perfect and on time. Distribution, platform and management. I feel safe from US to Buenos Aires.
With only 4 days for Midterm Elections US the countdown is on. United States politics is hard play, and now the guns come out. The West Virginia Democratic Senate candidate and current Governor, Joe Manchin took out a rifle to get his point across. His shot to cap and trade bill sounded off in the national television. But he was not the only one on the air.
[extract1] President Barack Obama appeared on “The Daily Show”. It was clear it was no time for jokes. According to The Washington Post, the US economy grew at a 2 percent annual rate in the third quarter as consumer spending climbed. President Barack Obama spoke about the spinning that the Health Care Bill had undergone. Once again he patiently explained it had been installed -and was working- in the interest of the American people. President Obama said that people that are suffering from a disease now do not have to sell their house to get healthcare.
This midterm elections is more than just about who gets the football. Fear campaigns and meet and greet times are over. President Barack Obama repeated the words, “Yes we can but it is not going to happen over night”.
As certain shoes go under certain demonstrators that rally and as the clock ticks the international media and the world watch the turning points. The words which made some laugh for others had a different meaning.
“Yes we can”. Barack Obama used those same words in his presidential campaign. Back then he running up against the Bush established system. “Yes we can but it is not going to happen overnight”, where the same words Barack Obama pronounced in the historical speech when he became the elected President of the United States.
Words like, “Yes we can.” which sound like repetition in reality show a direction forward and a continuation of policies. And that is what the midterm elections are all about. A continuation of the policies of the President’s Administration, or block and shoot down and restoration of the policies of the previous administration.
Few things are as controversial and sensible issues as drugs and birth control methods. What do you get when you mix both of them? You get Mrs Harris and her Project Prevention. Project Prevention is a Charity project and it is offering drug addicts £200 to be sterilised.
[extract1] This project has been working in the US for some time. Now it crosses over the ocean. Taking her project to Europe Ms Harris goes into UK. The project is offering incentive in the form of cash for addicts to be sterilized.
In the UK, and in Europe the project has been met by hard comments. An article in the BBC says, that a charity which helps drug addicts in south Wales is in talks with a controversial US campaigner who offers addicts cash to be sterilised.
[extract2] Mrs Harris´ project has angered many people, and caused controversy. The right to inform implies the responsibility to inform and provide all the choices.
An addict is a person who can not control the intake of substances that alter his state of mind. Is offering an active addict cash a good idea? Addiction is a disease that has no known cure. Addiction is not a choice of life. However, an addict can recover and he is responsible for his own recovery. Millions of people around the world recover from addiction. There are several free working programs world wide. They have proven to be successful. Addicts have the same human rights as any other person. The right to inform implies the responsibility to inform and provide all the choices. To provide all the information and options available is the only way an individual can make an informed decision. Addiction recovery is possible. Addiction recovery is life.
From the Common Wealth Games in Delhi, to Football Incidents in Italy. A confusing message reaches the masses through the games. Is politics streaking into sports?
[extract1] For Athens´ Agora it was the Olympic Games. For Rome it was the bloody Coliseum. For the Inca Culture it was a game to the Death. Politics, power and sports have always been connected.
For politicians in all cities, it is a golden opportunity. "Bring out the sports, entertain the masses, bring out the games, distract the agenda, change the dialogue and… get your image on the papers." Why not get your name chanted in a popular spontaneous hymn and while you are at it add a election campaign to the equation. When a conflict breaks in sports viewers go off the charts. But, is security becoming too hard to handle?
Games are a perfect to stand out of the crowd. One message can reach a millions. Politicians love the games, and any games will do. It is estimated that more than 1 billion people saw the World Cup. In the US 9.3 million people watch the Super Bowl. A 30 second ad in the Super Bowl can be worth $2.4 million. But who is counting? Politicians, football players, fans, agents, and even streakers.
Recent games have been controversial. Delhi Common Wealth games saw all type of problems. From accommodations, pools, late run sweeping tracks to even bridge class collapsing. But, nothing stopped the political figures from attending the closing ceremony.
In Italy sports took on a another International dimension. In the Italy's Euro 2012 Group C qualifier a group of Serbian fans disrupted the match. Some where arrested and some where questioned. Italian Special forces contained those riots. Have things gone too far in the world of sports?
Streaking by definition is the act of running nude through a public place. Recently streakers started wearing ads when they "invaded" the games. Considering these events, it may be time to change the definition of streaking. Is politics streaking into sports?
Image Creative Commons Some Rights Reserved by PaDumBumPsh
In past recent days the world witnessed the most insane bombarding of news coming from all parts of the world. From the constant bombs going off in the middle east conflict, to the burning of a Mosque in Israel, from the Red-plague-looking-like river pollution in Hungry, to the terrorist threats in Europe and the US and while on course more rains, polluted rivers and talk of nuclear treaties.
[extract1] Politicians are known for their long speeches but this week silence has prevailed. In the midst of all this breaking news few politicians spoke on these issues. Where are the politicians when one needs them? Barack Obama is too busy with mid term elections and dealing with emails leaking from Alaska. David Cameron and the Lib Dems are too busy holding meetings and Labour party is busy compiling a new list for their Shadow Cabinet. Politicians in France are too busy doing... well we have not heard from them but we are sure they have their hands full. We do know where Geert Wilders is. Geert the Dutch anti-Islam politician is too busy at a trial facing hate speech charges for stirring religious hatred. He is too busy spinning Freedom of Speech. And finally Spain politics may be too busy trying making sense of the Venezuela-Spain-Terror Defamation campaign. In the 9th years, of the US war on Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai established a High Peace Council to talk to leaders of the opposition. And that is where some politicians are.
Politicians are known for their long speeches but this week silence has prevailed. When elections come politicians rush out to make speeches and take actions. When actions comes politicians become silent? They either seem to have vanish from public life or maybe they are just meditating...on their next move. Meanwhile the week progresses events continues taking full speed.
As the Danube becomes polluted and the World is constantly terrorised and as China sees more rain than ever since 1961, we ask ourselves, where on Earth are the Politicians when one needs them? Do you know where your politician is? Are you keeping track of your elected representative? We are all looking for answers, so we may wonder where are politicians now, they always seem to have the right words.
The departure of Rahm Emanuel and the announcement that Peter Rouse is taking over, is the news that everybody is trying to understand. Making sense of politics is sometimes hard work. Making sense of politics inside the White House can be even more difficult. Or, is it? As John Locke once wrote, “What worries you, masters you.”
[extract1] Today, the inner circles where renewed. The greetings, farewells, and official introductions where made. Now what is left is analysis. Who is Peter Rouse? And why is Rahm Emanuel leaving?
Here are some facts. The New York Times calls Peter Rouse the "new gate keeper". Peter Rouse does not give interviews to anyone. President Barack Obama, said at the press conference, "Pete has never seen a microphone or a TV camera that he likes". However, Peter Rouse is not an outsider nor a stranger. Mr Rouse is considered to have a “low profile”. He knows his way around Washington and has been in Town for more than 30 years.
Rahm Emanuel is leaving the White House but is expected to run for Mayor in Chicago. Chicago is, as we all know, a city close to the President´s politics. So, is Rahm Emanuel really going that far from the Presidential circle?
Here is a little background on Rahm Emmanuel. Rahm Emanuel served previously as a senior adviser to President Clinton. According to the media Rahm Emanuel did not push the Health Care Reform hard enough. This was frowned upon by the left, and smiled down by the private sector. But, like a cat, that always falls on his legs, Rahm Emanuel leaves the White House and now heads to City of Winds. Rahm Emanuel’s eloquence was replaced by Peter Rouse silence. Get the drift? On the other hand, Peter Rouse is known as the "fixer working in shadows". One of Peter Rouse specialities is the smoothing of relationships between The White House and Congress.
With strength and power mid elections heat up. The international media report on the President’s Rally and Make Overs. Around the world and within the states, the White House´s momentum breaks to be deciphered. However, some words came across loud and clear. The words where, Guantanamo, Health Care, and Private or Public.
All these words come through to us since the Bush-era. Still today these issues are drafted on. Still today these issues are voted on, worked on and sometimes progressed on. One thing is sure, all these issues today, are still being campaigned for.
Does European Politics have mixed emotions for immigrants? Whether you are a Romanian immigrant just forced out of France, a worker in Greece, a skilled professional in UK, or a union protestor in Spain, immigration and unemployment is a controversial issue.
The European Union declares freedom of movement within the European Community for all its citizens. Europe is a land where cultures and people of different backgrounds live. So, why is European politics not in tune?
European light still shines bright as an opportunity and ideal for millions of people who are looking into a better quality of life. This causes both legal and illegal immigration. Does European currency lose power every time a European country breaks news with a new crisis? Do Europeans themselves have mixed emotions on the European Union?
Mixed signals started coming out of Europe this year first from Greece. The world watched its televised economic crisis and the social unrest that followed. Today, a massive crowd of protestors took the streets of Spain demanding change. Some encountered a kick off as they clashed with police forces. However, Spain has recently granted under the Spanish Law of Historic Memory European passports to those generations that directly descend from Spain, widening therefore immigration.
As unemployment rises it defines immigration. Migrants then decide. Stuck between the wall and the sword most take up the opportunity. They prefer living in a country like Spain, even with its 20% rate of unemployment.
Another mixed signal comes from France. The European Commission is now taking action against France for the deportations of Rumanian Europeans. Disserting views, confronting politics, and controversy reigns over immigration, immigrations laws and unemployment.
Previously this year, in the UK elections, immigration fired up heated debates. The opinions given by politicians revealed where political parties stood on the issue.
Some of the brightest signals of the European Community are its freedom of movement and freedom to work within the community. They are constantly sided with news columns on new economic crisis, demands, demonstrations and rising or falling politicians.
International Business and millions of people, in Europe and around the world, are influenced by European Politics and by the direction they take on immigration and unemployment.
As unemployment and cultural perceptions form once again inside Europe, the land of politics shakes things up. What will it take for politicians to get on board? Who would benefit from a strong European Community?
Do you live in Europe? Do you have a view on European migration and unemployment? Are you affected by European news? Do you think European Politics is sending out mixed signals on Immigration and Unemployment?
The hullabaloo that has been created in America over the proposed erection of a mosque and Islamic community center in close proximity to Ground Zero is reflective of the ideological change that is taking place in America.
Inevitably, this debate has seen a battle of words with the conservative and rightist Americans predominantly expressing their strident opposition to this venture. It also cannot be denied that the liberal and broadminded segment of the American social order has passionately endorsed the mosque, saying that stopping the erection of the mosque would be seen as a triumph for the Islamic fundamentalists, who would then utilize it to recruit innocent Muslims to further their unjust causes. The approvers of the mosque have endorsed the view that it would assist America in its battle against terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq. The supporters have argued that the erection of the mosque is necessary to express solidarity with the peaceful Muslims in America.
[extract1] President Barack Obama has stated that the mosque and the Crescentic community center must be allowed in principle, since the American constitution promotes liberty. The creation of the mosque near Ground Zero, adhering to all the local rules, would be an ideal response to the philosophical poisoning by the Mohammedan terrorists such as those of Al-Qaeda and Taliban. The American constitutional fabric is just and confers equitable treatment to all the peaceable Americans, irrespective of their ethnicities or racial ancestry. To be honest, there is a copious amount of validity in this presidential argument. Prima facie, one can only agree with it and laud its appropriateness and evenhandedness.
Nevertheless, the argument of the opponents of the mosque deserves more attention. The formation of the mosque cannot be justified by quoting the constitution. The mosque, one of the most potent symbols of Islam, is, after all, going to be erected near Ground Zero, which is a site that is associated with one of the most mournful chapters in American history.
Ground Zero is the destination which was obliterated on 9/11 by the Al-Qaeda terrorists. The builders of the mosque and community center, notwithstanding their law-abiding intentions, could have portrayed more sensitivity toward the sentiments of the American populace. Whether one likes it or not, this is an emotional issue. The sight of a mosque in the vicinity of Ground Zero has the potential to inflame the American citizen, and justifiably so.
Barack Obama released a new children book. Tony Blair released a new book. Thousands of books are fresh out from the press. They all have the name of world leaders on their cover.
Evidently there is a new formula of success when it comes to writing a best-seller. Today books released by world leaders rank high in the list of best sellers. But, do the people need to read books about political figures? We hear them talk every day. Do we really need a copy of their book in our coffee table? There is freedom of speech, so anyone does have the right to write. But what about the writers who struggle day in and day out with the perfection of words? Writing can be an underpaid job. Yet, most decent writers dedicate to writing with passion.
[extract1] As Cervantes wrote, (probably in prison after collecting money for the Spanish Kingdom), "Delay always breeds danger; and to protract a great design is often to ruin it." So yes, the field of writing is unique.
While writers budget and guidelines is set by editorial boards in closed rooms inside tall Corporations buildings, the public is left with political-leaders new best-sellers to read.
Thousands of excellent books are written every year by outstanding writers. They are passed down and forgotten. These writers work through poverty, work on the fields, report and sweat on every page. Some even write behind bars, like the thousands of political prisoners around the world. Others live by their word.
Publishing Houses continue to release books from within the "Silver Establishment", under bright suns, while they break to discuss the state of the stock exchange market.
If you are a writer and feel at times as if you are fighting giant windmills, have no doubt about it, political leaders and their books are in it for the long run. What journalists are left with is to either review the copy or to decline writing about it. Let’s just hope that our brains do not dry out before we finish the book. Let’s just hope we do come to our senses.
Is everything in this world turned into a political maneuver? Why are we obsessed with figures that speak for us? Today, good writers not only compete with romantic novels, they compete with books released by world leaders. Do they have a chance of surviving?
Books is the way children read into the past and understand it. Books are the carriers of information that strive through generations. Are books today an independent and unbiased source of history and knowledge?
Is documenting history and novelising the imagination no longer the role of writers, journalists, historians and critics? Politicians have always written books, but now thanks to globalisation they are super-sized and trendy. Is political publishing the new niche of Publishing Houses? Should politicians write books?
No one ever believed Yodar Hoopelhoffer, the Mount Perry town idiot, would win the election to the highest seat in the Mount Perry political structure, on his agenda of, "COMPLETE AND TOTAL CHANGE", but win he did, now we are stuck with him for the next four years. Among his more controversial issues is his obsession with providing, Health Care For Everyone.
As if just the cost of this plan were not enough to make him "rather" unpopular, Yodar has proposed the creation of a 10,000-man Health Care Army to work in conjunction with our Army, Navy, Marine Corps. And Air Force. Although no one knew this item was in the bill, Yodar had shoved it quickly through our house of representatives, and he immediately signed it into law without the consent of the Tax Paying Public.
People around these parts are just a tad upset about this and have vowed to eliminate the problem with the next election. Unfortunately, being elected President of Mount Perry, Yodar Hoopelhoffer has the authority to form his Health Care Army and not only form the Health Care Army, but to put his new army in the field in the face of any he sees as a health care emergency.
Clarity in the bill has become a problem as much of what President Hoopelhoffer wants to do is written in Legalese. However, one thing has been made crystal clear, Doctors will be drafted into the Health Care Army and trained in the use of our complete arsenal of modern weapons of warfare. They will function along with, but not under the control of our regular army.
In the event there are not enough doctors in Mount Perry to fill the ranks of the Health Care Army, out of work citizens will be drafted into the Health Care Army and trained as doctors during their indoctrination. Previous experience or education is not considered a factor on just who is drafted. This part of the plan will help shrink the Jobless Rate. If a citizen needs health care, he or she is going to get it irrespective of quality.
Naturally, no one will be forced into this service, they may always accept the other option and be trained as Gladiators to fight in The Mount Perry Sports Center and Gladiatorial Arena. There is always a big demand for new gladiatorial combatants to participate in the Sunday Afternoon Festivities.
[extract1]Should a Health Care Emergency arise, the Health Care Army will be able to call in Air Strikes, Navel Bombardment and Army Artillery Missions from their cell phones. For instance, if a group of citizens were found at a picnic eating unhealthy foods, armed doctors could descend on the group and demand they desist from eating any unhealthy foods. Should there be any resistance to this order, a navel or army bombardment could be called in on the location.
Should a citizen be found, outside their home, smoking a cigarette, an Armed Doctor might approach, show his authority as a member of the Health Care Army and demand the cigarette be extinguished at once. If the order was not followed immediately, the act could be viewed an insurrection, by the Armed Doctor and dealt with with lethal force. After all, second hand smoke has also been deemed unhealthy.
The Doctors, so drafted into the Health Care Army, would be instructed in the use of all weapons in the arsenal of the Army, Navy and Air Force. The training of each Doctor would take about six months, as certain parts of the Hippocratic Oath would have to be overcome so the doctor can carry out his/her orders from President Hoopelhoffer.
Armed S. W. A. T. teams of Doctors, in armored vehicles, would roam the streets of Mount Perry, stopping and searching any citizen suspected of carrying unhealthy food items, such as greasy potato chips, greasy hamburgers or the like at any time of the day or night.
[extract2]President Hoopelhoffer would have direct and complete authorization to use his army to put down any revolutionary uprising such as, Bar B Ques, Fish Fries and any other type of outdoor gatherings in the back yards of a citizens home where unhealthy food might be served. Church Dinners will receive the very same scrutiny as the private citizen.
Although there is a gathering uproar over the rights of people who want greasy foods, President Hoopelhoffer is quick to remind us about how he knows better than we do and in the end the whole effort, is to promote good health. How can we fault the man when his intentions are so clearly in our best interests?
Although our citizens will be allowed to roam the streets and carry out their daily duties, it would be best if you left your home without any tobacco related items, sugar or salt. Under the new Health Codes, these items are considered dangerous because they form unhealthy habits.
Anyone found in possession of any of these items will be immediately sent to a Health Farm where they will be "Re-Educated" into a healthy life style. Graduates will re-enter normal society with no marks on their records, second offenders will be dealt with in a sterner fashion.
Public scales will be set up in the Center of Mount Perry and all citizens will be weighed as they pass. Anyone found to be overweight will have their weight stitched into the right hand arm of their clothing with three inch tall yellow thread and they will be expected to weigh less the next time they pass the check point.
Doctors have been telling us to lose or gain weight for years, now they can enforce it. As these doctors WILL be armed, there will be little or no resistance to their orders now.
Premature death will no longer be allowed. Anyone dying too early will be revived and sent to a Health Care Camp where they will be re-educated and taught to live a healthy life style, thus preventing any further premature deaths.
Remember, dying too early is now forbidden by law and there are stiff penalties if you do.
Naturally, President Hoopelhoffer is aware of the cost of his Universal Healthcare Program and is prepared to deal with any disgruntled tax payer by having them also re-educated into the healthy mandate now in force.
There will be special camps set up around Mount Perry in strategic locations to house those disgruntled Tax Payers until such time as re-education is deemed hopeless. Those Tax Payers, deemed hopelessly disgruntled will become part of a humane solution.
Now that his Health Care Program is a law, President Hoopelhoffer has turned his attention to Universal Dentistry Care.
The financial crisis might be over for the most part but financial difficulties still exist. In view of this knowledge - what's a soldier worth?
Keeping the wars going, giving the soldiers uniforms, guns, bullets, transportation from and to war zones, feeding them - it all costs money. Yet, this all is unimportant for the sake of this short post.
Recent article in Washington Post says "Defense Department spent about $10,000 on advertising, marketing, recruiters and other budget items per recruit, with the Army spending more than double that, at $22,000."
Am I missing something or is United States really putting on average of $16 000 into brainwashing Americans? Young Americans still in age they are not allowed to drink, yet are allowed to be killed?
If a business venture had to pay $16 000 just to find each of their 200 000 employees they need, they'd go bankrupt. But obviously, United States can afford it.
You can afford it or not but...isn't it just plain stupid?
The US military has managed to meet its recruiting goals for the first time in more than 35 years. Hundreds of thousands of young men have enlisted.
The way we see it, it could be due to two potential factors.
1. The financial crisis. Considering the financial climate the US military is a good place to be in to avoid total personal bankruptcy.
2. It's all about Obama. Everyone wants to show they are good for their country and they are ready to make a difference in the world. And with Obama becoming a president, it is believed there's a good chance that showing the good will is going to be good enough. The actual hope is that there's no need to go to war just because you have enlisted. So it could be sort of shallow reasoning for the most part.
Are we going to see a mass desertion should Obama start sending more and more troops to Middle-East?