How long before the US collapses?

Jump to Last Post 1-35 of 35 discussions (149 posts)

60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
What we forget so quickly is our past. Our past leads us to the present and the present is not good.

This article isn't posted by me but gives a very good look back through the United States struggle with debt. I'd like you to notice the quotes given by many of our founding fathers:

http://hubpages.com/hub/The-United-Stat … the-making

We have entered a perpetual motion machine and the destination isn't good. Are we really going to be able to turn this country around? I'm loosing hope everyday, but I'd like to hear your sincere opinions. Thanks!
reply report
1. 55
  leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If Obama and the democrats are returned to power, that will be the end of the USA as we have known it. The poll in politico today tells the story, the Washington elites, those employed by the government and make much more than the average American don't see the problems we Average Americans have. They think the economy is fine, that their policies are working, they are out of touch with reality!
  reply report
  58
  katiem2posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Amen leeberttea, Amen indeed!
  reply report
2. 68
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Nobody knows for sure. But can happen any moment.
  reply report
3. 0
  Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  well you have to remember, NOTHING happens over night. It takes time, but we are seeing the signs of our country getting weaker everyday as a superpower if you look at a few of the facts. One, our military is getting gradually weaker, as even the us army is offering to train soldiers with less disciplinary authority, than they've been accustomed to doing things in the past. As one army drill seargent was quoted as saying on yahoo, "in a video game playing generation, we have to adapt our training methods." which to me translates to having a weaker military. Not that I would ever bad mouth our soldiers, as I have the utmost respect for all of them, but I'm just going over a few facts here.
  
  Plus, I never agreed with the media sticking their noses in military affairs, as all it does paint our troops in a bad light, and keeps them from doing their job accordingly. Add in the fact, that since the Vietnam era, politics continue to run the wars, instead of allowing generals and military officers to do their jobs, then it's safe to say that it'll be an awfully long time before you'll ever hear about us winning a war again. As many people forget, the reason why the US was undefeated before the Vietnam War was because politicians and the media KNEW when to keep their freaking traps shut and stay out of the way. Unfortunately, that's not the case today, and that's why we still can't seem to get iraq under control despite our OBVIOUS advantage technologically.
  
  Then we look at the dismantling of NASA, courtesy of Barrack O'Bama. Which now makes our country a lot more primitive technologically then we ever were before. Does he not realize that space exploration IS IMPORTANT as there are meteors like apophis coming our way in 2025 that could kill us. now before some of you get your panties up in a bunch saying how blah blah..our gravity will repel it anyway..blah blah and what not. Seriously, are you willing to take that chance? what if your wrong? what if our gravity DOESN'T repel that freaking thing? then what smart guy? i know one thing, ANYONE HERE THAT DARES TO DEFEND NASA'S DISMANTLING, THEN BE WARNED THAT I WILL BLAME YOU PERSONALLY IF I HAVE TO DIE BECAUSE OF THAT THING. IT'LL BE ALL YOUR FAULT!!!! Now, live with that on your conscience.
  
  Then we look at the economy, lets face it, it's not going to get any better anytime soon. anyone that thinks obama is going to fix it, is seriously smoking some good weed. as i don't even think he knows how he's going to fix it. in fact, with the amount of money we owe china and how they're converting to be a more capitalist country, then i think it's safe to say they might take our place as the world's number one super power.
  
  china or england, as england just unvieled the first unmanned jet that's capable of traveling faster than the speed of sound undetected by radar, that can be controlled by via remote. now that completely exceeds our tech as far as i know, so it's safe to say other countries are surpassing us technologically too.
  
  oh and look at our education system too. it seems year after year, our educational system continues to drop, as some of the world's brightest scholars are no longer from the united states anymore.
  reply report
  91
  Paragliderposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I hate to tell you, but gravity has never been known to repel anything. It's an attractive force, between masses. What you're relying on is that the thing will miss us
  reply report
  0
  Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  are you joking with me or insulting me? seriously, as i was so literally going to take what you just said as an insult, until i realized you must obviously be joking with me. thats the only logic i can deduce behind your statement.
  
  i guess someone should tell you that sarcasm doesn't come across in forums as well as it does in real life. trust me, i've tried to use it various times here. lol.
  reply report
  91
  Paragliderposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No offence intended. I just thought I'd put in a word for gravity
  reply report
  0
  Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  thats cool. im sure gravity appreciates you sticking up for her. :Lol: oh by the way, since we're all talking about the economy here for the united states. check out this video i found on youtube for captain america, symbolizing all the crap we value here in the usa. I hope you all find it as funny as i did. lol
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CbbtIoUceI
  reply report
4. 72
  maven101posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Now I know how the patriots at Bunker Hill felt. They saw the British Army coming up that hill, the most powerful army in the world. They were well equipped, well trained, and ruthless. The Americans standing at the top of the hill were a bunch of farmers and tradesmen, hardly a trained army. But they knew right from wrong, they were men of principle, and they were not about to back down from this fight, not when their honor and their freedom was at stake. Time to stand tall again, America. We can do it. All we have to do today is face the ballot box and not an oncoming army trying to destroy us (although some may disagree with that). If they did it for future generations, so can we. Never back down, never give up, and never, ever, give in. Let Todd Beamer's " Lets Roll !! " be the rallying call to roll back both houses of congress...Remember In Novemeber !!!
  reply report
62
Teresa McGurkposted 14 years ago
How long before the. . huh?

I thought it already had?
reply report
1. 80
  Fluffymetalposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  lol
  reply report
  58
  katiem2posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That was my first thought as well, its been an ongoing process and I don't feel it's a political party issue just a political problem period aren't they all the same.. No really don't answer that
  reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
Well there is an obvious increase in tension between the citizens and their 'leaders'. I'm just curious what people believe will lead to the potential demise of the current USA. Trust me, I'm not advocating it, but it seems an impending event...
reply report
1. 60
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I wouldn't call them leaders.
  reply report
  81
  Rafiniposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  They may be poor leaders but they're still the leaders whether we like it or not.
  
  And they will remain the leaders until we do something about it.
  
  To answer the question: Isn't the US collapsing at this very moment?
  reply report
2. 69
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Here are a few negative factors:
  
  1. Increasing income disparity which is undermining faith in our democratic, free market system.
  
  2. Failure to conserve non-renewable resources and develop new sources of energy and other resources.
  
  3. Uncontrolled world population growth.
  
  4. Increasing gulf in income between the developed countries and third world countries.
  
  5. Increasing percentage in the elderly, retired segment of the population and a corresponding decrease in the percentage of the working population which supports the retired segment of the population.
  reply report
  93
  Dolores Monetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Ralph, your #5 won't be a problem. The older folks will no longer be able to retire as they will have no pensions and Social Security is in trouble. We'll all be selling apples on the street corner.
  reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
That was the meaning of the single quote marks haha.
reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
Yes, essentially.

But I suppose your guys' idea of a collapse is a bit different than mine. I still believe there are things that can be done (or should be done) in order to save this country from a complete and irreversible decent into non-existence.

We might be leading towards a collapse, but we're not there yet... We will be soon if we don't start making some radical changes.
reply report
71
Tusitala Tomposted 14 years ago
I've never been to the United States so what I say here is mere speculation.

Every nation seems to have it time of glory, its time of domination. Empires come and go. Quite recent was Great Britain's. When I was a boy at school, a good twenty percent of the world was coloured red in my atlas. That red represented the British Empire. That was sixty-five years ago. Look at the UK now. Not much of an empire.

The united states had a slightly different type of empire: world domination of business and, yes, entertainment. That has slipped away. China is the up and coming nation today, whether Americans like it or not.

My guess is that America's standard of wasteful living will be cut back drastically. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. But America won't collapse. It will just step back a little. Maybe it'll stop spending all of it resources on useless war materials, armaments etc.. Maybe it will start making its people 'clever' like some other much poorer resourced countries are doing. Who knows. But, to reiterate, I doubt very much if it will 'collapse.'
reply report
1. 64
  bgamallposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If the US collapses, as the US consumer is the buyer of last resort for the world's resources, then the world will collapse financially.
  
  I see a major slowdown. I don't know if it will be a full blown collapse. I hope not because we have leaders, neocons leaders in both parties, who are desperate for world domination. If pushed to the wall watch out for these.
  reply report
  68
  alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If the US collapses the world does not collapse - set free from the unfair trade restrictions and domination of the financial structures it will have a renaissance - and not likely to want the US back to play so easy.
  
  But if there was a financial collapse your rich would not care; much of their money is outside America anyway, you are ruled by people who do not care about you except as a commodity or working unit - much the same as most of the western world that has been forced along parallel paths with the US. In fact this would probably be the final trigger of a collapse as the ship tilts with all the fleeing money rats.
  reply report
0
Michael E. Hortonposted 14 years ago
It's doing it every day. The Great Depression 2010. Over one million people will lose there homes this year. Really sad.
reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
When you have an economy buying things with money that they don't have, you're going to get these kind of problems. I hope people start looking elsewhere, outside of the government, for the solutions!
reply report
70
earnestshubposted 14 years ago
I sincerely hope you are wrong. America's days of being the big consumer of world goods is gone for the most part though.

China can sell into it's own domestic markets now as never before though, and others are not as reliant on the consumption of America either.
How much would each American have to spend at home to rescue it's economy I wonder?
reply report
1. 55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "China can sell into it's own domestic markets now as never before though"
  
  Don't jump the gun on that one. China is a loooooong way from sustainability on domestic demand alone (if ever).
  reply report
0
pisgahnfposted 14 years ago
I believe the economy has collapsed. The current administration continues to inflate the dollar by printing more money. Our currency was once backed by silver and gold but now it is backed by absolutely nothing.
The continual practice of flooding the market with more paper gives the initial impression that the we are hanging on by a thread but thats going to snap quickly.
Congress is scrambling to cut deals to everyone in hopes that they get enough of the pie to ride out the impending recession comfortably. Its coming, make no mistake about that.
Once it does collapse who will take care of you and your family, most folks will have to submit to the government as they will have no other option. Others will refuse and try to ride it out but will eventually submit. Still others will form militias and protectionist society's and resist what some have called forced socialism.
China will call in the notes, some experts claim they already own 70 percent of the country and its wealth. I suppose we all get free medical, free food, free utility's....its going to be wonderful, right?
reply report
87
lovemychrisposted 14 years ago
"Polls: Wide Support for an Attack on Iran

Yonat Friling – Fox News.com July 16, 2010

Like most U.S. elections now, I suspect that the above polls were rigged: the questions were posed and the answers framed in such a way as to fit preordained results."

Polls are another form of brain-washing.

You can pick and choose and find a poll to support or deny anything.

Think for yourself....who got us into this mess? Who is feeling no pain? It's more than "Washington elites" my friend.....so much more.
reply report
1. 55
  leebertteaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Washington elites are both democrats and republicans... although they are probably skewed more to the democrat side since Obama has expanded government by 25%, which would explain why so many of the elites support the current sitution and view the economy as positive and headed in the right direction.
  reply report
61
TMMasonposted 14 years ago
It is so funny to watch all the foriegners drool and quiver in excitement... thinking America might fall.

Don't you all worry about us... you better start worrying about what your gonna do when America wants nothing to do with you all anymore.

Who will feed and defend you all when America returns to isolationism.
reply report
1. 0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Us foreigners are not drooling and quvering - we are trying to warn you all that you are in deep doo doo and doing nothing about it except argue. Your view of how you feed and protect the world is not the same as outside your mirror world - you have been a net importer for over ten years now and your protection is just aggression for profit.
  
  No - what we are worried about is the scale of the final diversion when the cr@p hits the fan and you righteously attack someone else to divert attention, before you calm down and get on with rebuilding your economy and society on more realistic lines.
  reply report
  61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Umhum... yes china men your all just so helpful and full of good will toward us.
  
  Keep quivering and drooling in anticipation.
  
  We see you all for what you are...
  reply report
  68
  alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No - the problem is that you don't see anything except your own prejudices.
  
  Most of the world would benefit from US decline as it would stop the aggressive overseas actions that de-stabilise everything and directly cause terrorism.
  
  Much if the world would suffer to some degree from the changes in trade that would result, but others are more than ready to step in.
  
  It is time the US saw itself as it is not as it thinks it is.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "Most of the world would benefit "
  
  but
  
  "Much of the world would suffer "
  
  It seems that emotional anti-Americanism does not lend itself to reasonable consistency.
  reply report
  68
  alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah - two ideas at the same time are hard to figure for you. Things are not absolute and black and white , some people benefit and others suffer for different reasons and sometimes they acan be the same people - maybe you should sit in a quiet place and try to get your head around it.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, getting angry with me will make your contradiction go away
  reply report
  68
  alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Angry - no, I am never angry with kids. It was clearly advice for you, an attempt to help you with what you clearly find difficult concepts.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh great, more insults. How very productive.
  reply report
2. 70
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  America is not arrogant or stupid enough to try going it alone.
  reply report
68
Flightkeeperposted 14 years ago
I think we're in better shape than you think. Once the democrats are voted out of the house it will be a turning point.
reply report
1. 61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I hope so Flight...
  
  We must remove all Progressive influence from our politics, though. And there are many progressive republicans that must go also.
  reply report
  91
  Paragliderposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Even if I thought that was a good idea, I'd still think it's wholly impractical. When a party in opposition starts subdividing, which is what you are talking about, it always results in several terms in the wilderness. This has happened to both of the major UK parties and can happen to you guys too. Wouldn't you be better as a 'broad church' appealing to more of your people?
  reply report
61
TMMasonposted 14 years ago
Yes, that would be it.

And to think.

I thought it was your complete disdain for our country.
reply report
59
John T.posted 14 years ago
The United States will collapse when the dollar collapses. That, I don't think is not to far into the future. The CBO predicts that the US will run a debt to GDP ratio of 100% by 2015-2020. To give you some perspective that is the debt level that Greece was running (108%) when it collapsed this last summer. But if America collapses who is going to bail us out?
In addition, China could devastate us by calling in our debt to them, they own almost a trillion dollars in US debt. Just think of the inflation they could cause in the markets if the money was released into the markets.
We definitely need to exercise financial restraint, but that is not happening...
reply report
1. 68
  alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Absolutely - real figures about real things - well done.
  
  A UK economist, commenting on the US attempt to get China to revalue the Yuan, claimed that the over-inflated dollar was the longest running scam in the money markets. Over inflation leads to rapid collapse in the long run, it doesn't need China to call in its debt to collapse the US economy just for China to prefer imports from any other country, the rest of Asia would follow in turn out of necessity.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "Over inflation leads to rapid collapse in the long run"
  
  How do you have something "rapid" "in the long run"???
  
  "it doesn't need China to call in its debt to collapse the US economy just for China to prefer imports from any other country, the rest of Asia would follow in turn out of necessity."
  
  That really makes no sense. China's economy is dependent upon exports. Guess who imports a huge amount of that? China isn't "calling in" anything because they are not foolish enough to cut their own throat, and if they did nobody would rush to follow them.
  reply report
  68
  alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Go get yourself up to date, you not only spout out of date devalued doctrines you really don't seem to know what is happening in the world either.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm up to date, thanks.
  reply report
66
Arthur Fontesposted 14 years ago
The US will not collapse, will we stop funding other Countries? We are going to have to.

Should we pull all our forces out of Europe and let them defend themselves (from each other)? Absolutely.

Should we reward US manufacturing? There is no choice.

Should we stop buying cheap worthless foreign crap? Soon we will have no choice.
reply report
1. 61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly Arthur.
  
  it is all going to come down to kickin the tics iff the titties, closing our doors, and rebuilding our own house and the house of the few non-european allies we should help to sustain.
  reply report
0
jerrylposted 14 years ago
Collapse will definitely happen, unless we change from a monetary system that creates money as an evidence of debt to
the people, to a system that is an evidence of wealth to the people.

Instead of borrowing every dollar that goes into existence, we must start earning our dollars and then spending them into circulation.

Under the federal reserve fractional banking system. we do not
create any M1 money unless we borrow it from a private commercial bank first, then spend it in. All money is debt,
with no money created to pay the interest on the loans!

We are forced to borrow in order to have a medium of exchange, and have borrowed ourselves into an unmanageable debt hole.

If we continue on this same path, we go further into the crapper.

If we stop borrowing under this system, we begin an immediate
collapse.

We have to stop monetizing man's future productivity through indebtedness!

Currently we can only service the interest on our national and most state's indebtedness. How long before we will not be able
to service the interest on debt?

How long before people realize that it doesn't make any difference which political party is in power? The world bank, the IMF, the federal reserve, and wall street are in power, and wield that power through bought and paid for politicians throughout the world! They do not care which party is in office, as long as they follow orders.

If you don't wake up to those facts, you may as well be content with arguing amongst yourselves while everything you have worked to achieve in your lifetime is slowly being taken away from you and your children.
reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
Here is some more debt we might be adding onto the budget!

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/19/ … index.html

The politicians clearly don't know that we're suffocating on our own shit... How can government be so irresponsible? Oh yeah, it's been happening since the days of Andrew Jackson. I'm afraid there is no turning back unless we get some intelligent people into office, and it might even be too late for that.
reply report
71
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
How long before the US collapses?

Depends on many factors. Unfortunately, the one factor, for which, government refuses to address or change, is the manner in which it deals with the Economy, as a whole.

Therefore, the US will collapse and sink below any depression ERA ever seen. The growth of America will come to a screeching halt and it's currency will be forced back to the gold standard yet again.

When it falls? Shortly in the near future.
reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
Also, can we please not discredit the foreigners' advice? I'm sick of living in a country that produces such arrogant people. We're not the most amazing country in the world, get over it. We need to admit and address these problems before they're utterly impossible to fix (and that time is near).

We need whatever advice we can get.
reply report
1. 71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Your broad-based statement is untrue to some extent.
  
  It is not arrogance of the people. It's foolishness of politicians.
  reply report
  0
  jerrylposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Cagsil, We cannot go back to a gold standard that we were never on!!!
  
  When people swallowed the BS about being on a gold standard, we had a monetary system that was not entirely reliant upon debt.
  
  Gold was a small part of our money at one time, in the form of gold coins.
  
  When men panned gold or mined it, they could take that ore in to have it assayed, weighed, and melted down and stamped into coin free of charge. They could then spend that coin into circulation. This was monetizing man's productivity.
  
  Therefore, it was man's productivity that was backing our dollars, and gold
  and silver were just symbols of that productivity.
  
  Today, man's productivity is still what backs our dollars, however, it is his future productivity, because we have had to borrow every cent that is in circulation.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Interesting you say that. However, I'll simply leave you to what you think you know. Not a problem.
  
  It's unfortunate, that you find it necessary to make claims you cannot back up, considering history is not on your side.
  
  Besides, it doesn't dismiss my point to begin with. The politicians are foolish.
  
  It also doesn't help the fact that (a) government continues to be foolish and (b) citizens really do not understand the way of life in America.
  
  Both statements are fact. So, please.
  reply report
  0
  jerrylposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Cagsil, Explain to me, just one way that gold or silver in any form, ever came about, without man's productivity being involved.
  
  Whether man found a nugget lying on the ground, panned it, or mined it, man's productivity was involved.
  
  I was addressing your statement on a gold backed system, not the fact that politicians are foolish.
  
  As to citizens not understanding the way of life in America, I believe that they understand exactly what they have been brainwashed to understand.
  
  What is most important, is their not understanding the monetary system.
  
  The sinister nature of this system is not taught in our schools. i wonder who wrote the text books?
  
  I think you and I agree on the inevitable collapse.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Which is related to the topic at hand, and not the statement based on gold backed system. So, you admit to deflecting?
  I'll agree.
  You're missing a basic underlying issue, which is constantly dismissed. Before one can understand the monetary system, one first needs to learn about "money". Too many people simply do not understand.
  The sinister nature of all things is taught in school. It is no longer pointed out as being sinister, just mistakes of the past.
  Beyond any comprehension of the word. Collapse isn't really a word I would call it, but close enough.
  reply report
  0
  jerrylposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Cagsil, You seem to be misreading what I have written. No where did I agree with you, except when it comes to believing that this system will collapse.
  
  your statement about the people not understanding the American way of life covers a lot of areas in everyday life. I found that statement to be vague at best. It did not address the economy or the monetary system directly.
  
  It has been my experience through debates with economics professors, that they, for the most part, are just as ignorant on the sinister nature of this monetary system, as their students. This also goes for most of the politicians that we have confronted in our attempts to pass legislation.
  Most haven't a clue, but will not make a decision without completely trusting the word of a banker or his lobby.
  
  I have not deflected on anything, nor do I feel I have to. I am not in a pissing contest with you, but just trying to shed some light on a lot of fallacies. The gold backed dollar being one of them.
  reply report
2. 61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  We are also not the dumbest.
  
  But many a foriegner on here seems to feel free to sling that around and infer it repeatedly. So too bad for them when they are told they are no better, and in some cases not even as good as, us.
  
  We have the solution for the problems, capitolism and the constitution.
  
  And what?... You think America is the only one in trouble. have you looked at Europe? Asia?...
  
  No.
  
  The rest of the world doesn't hold the answers, man.
  reply report
3. 55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "We're not the most amazing country in the world"
  
  Yes we are.
  reply report
  60
  maplethorpejposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  We may have the most amazing citizens in the world (and honestly that's just an unverifiable opinion) but we have so much to fix before our country is up to the "amazing" standard.
  
  Yes people, I love the American PEOPLE. I'm frightened by the government and it's ability to manipulate its citizens by whatever means necessary... 9/11 ? Yeah, I'm not going there.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Who do you think comprises "the government"?
  reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
Yes, but most Americans don't know anything about foreign countries. Most people are just look at what the media is showing them. This isn't my opinion:

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/011387.html

There are too many people saying too much crap without actually solving the BIG problems at hand. I'm just going to sit back and watch the world slowly some to a halt (maybe I'll write a few good hubs to try and help). Now, I'm not much of a 2012 theorist, but I think it might be an instigator to something 'new'. We'll see....
reply report
1. 55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "most Americans don't know anything about foreign countries."
  
  Have you asked "most Americans"?
  reply report
2. 61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I do not base my opinion of the world on the media.
  
  And that is wrong to just assume most Americans do.
  
  We are not a stupid people man.
  
  America has advanced this world exponientailly in the life of our country.
  
  I think we can handle contemplating a real world view of other countries and things going on in the world.
  reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
I desperately hope you don't think it's 'we the people'. I'd be embarrassed for you...
reply report
1. 71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  In previous conversations in the forums, it has been proven "we the people" is no longer and has not been for a great many years.
  
  However, the appearance is still seen because of untruth/lies from politicians/political officials in power continue to insinuate it's existence.
  
  The "majority" and "minority" are both misconceptions brought on by those in power. It's a separation tactic constantly used.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No such thing has been "proven." Just because some people find it easier to gripe on the internet than to actually get involved does not change the fact.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And, just be you don't seem to be looking at the facts of the situation is your downfall.
  
  And, yes it was proven. Beyond argument, that "we the people" does not exist, because "we the people" have no power in voting the elected officials.
  
  If you are unable to understand that, then I would suggest you look deeper into politics.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "And, just be you don't seem to be looking at the facts of the situation is your downfall."
  
  What "downfall" would you be referring to?
  
  "And, yes it was proven. Beyond argument, that "we the people" does not exist, because "we the people" have no power in voting the elected officials."
  
  Nonsense. Hyperbole and apathy only enable this kind of "oh well, nothing to do but gripe on the internet" mentality.
  
  "If you are unable to understand that, then I would suggest you look deeper into politics."
  
  I'm guessing that I'm more equipped to "look deeper into politics" than yourself, but in any case I reject your transparent attempt to cut off the topic.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, Ignorance is truly blissful for those who lack too much. Glad you are blind to the truth and your actions point directly to it. Thank you so much for showing others.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There it is again. "You're blind" = "you must agree with me!!!" = "I've run out of things to say but still demand you agree!!!"
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
2. 55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "Desperately" and "embarrassed" - how dramatic!
  reply report
87
rebekahELLEposted 14 years ago
I guess it depends on your definition of collapse. we've already suffered through a recession and are still recovering. recovery doesn't happen overnight when it took many years to reach the danger zone.

can we turn this country around? again, turn around to what? we can learn from history in many ways, also by not trying to compare it to current times. conditions are not the same regardless if they look similar. progress is made with decisive plans and implementation. will it look the same as before? not likely.

why do you say 'most Americans don't know anything about foreign countries'? I would say that many Americans don't know a lot about their own country. to say 'most' is a broad assumption. many Americans I know stay informed about the world. everything is affected. a country can't isolate itself and succeed.
to sit back and watch? why would that be an option? we are responsible for our lives.
reply report
1. 55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "progress is made with decisive plans and implementation. "
  
  Disaster all too often follows that attitude when it gets into the hands of an overly active government.
  reply report
69
MikeNVposted 14 years ago
$13 Trillion Debt + $26 Trillion Personal Debt + Interest = Collapse.

When?

Whenever the public finally wakes up and realizes their monopoly money has no real value.

And the more unemployed the faster this occurs.
reply report
78
DzyMsLizzyposted 14 years ago
It's called 'living beyond your means' using what amounts to credit cards, essentially, to supplement actual income.

We will be the fastest rise and fall of a superpower in history.
reply report
1. 55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Some people seem positively giddy to declare the end of the world (or of whatever the topic may be). It's so darn exciting to run around shouting "It's all over!" instead of doing the day-to-day required to improve things.
  reply report
  59
  Mr. Blobbyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I agree. Why are people so blind. You are so smart.
  reply report
  85
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And I'm sure you know exactly what we should be doing.
  
  No great power has been able to survive entanglement in foreign wars. We also suffer from a wide difference in culture - civil war is always possible. We are terribly stressed by pollution, over population and unfortunate natural disasters. We COULD go down.
  
  But I'd like to think we can disentangle ourselves and find a way to compromise enough to avoid tearing ourselves apart. I'd like to think we can clean up our mess and survive whatever chance deals us.
  
  So I'll agree with you, at least in principle.
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I know that just moaning "Game over man!" on the internet sure as heck isn't going to help.
  reply report
  85
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Again, I have to agree with you on that.
  
  I'm sure we are at complete odds as to what would help and what would make this worse, but hey, you never know - maybe we could find one thing we would agree on.
  
  Wouldn't THAT just knock the stuffing right out of the turkey?
  reply report
  55
  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Wouldn't surprise me at all.
  reply report
  60
  maplethorpejposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If you've read any of my articles, you'll realize that I'm very concentrated on getting people to think of real, plausible solutions to the imminent problems that we're faced with. The real problem is getting people to use their brains and stop praying that the government is going to solve anything for us.
  
  I started this topic so that more and more people are exposed to the situation that could cripple this once prosperous, proud nation. We are an innovative society, but we're being chocked by government intervention and a dependency to global corporations. We need to revitalize our society.
  
  This is my attempt: http://progressthroughthought.tumblr.com/
  
  What is yours?
  reply report
  91
  Paragliderposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It's good. I had a quick look but will come back.
  
  Ours is here http://dropoutnation.blogspot.com/
  reply report
  60
  maplethorpejposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, I'll check it out tonight when I get back from work!
  reply report
2. 78
  DzyMsLizzyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I have no quarrel with what either of you have said: in fact, I agree completely. My statement was merely an observation about the current status-quo, and the fact that the MAJORITY of people seem disinclined to get involved or work for change.
  
  The minority can start a grass-roots movement, but unless they can 'convert' or convince enough members of the majority, they end up getting squashed like so many bugs and nothing changes.
  
  I do what I can, phone calls, letters, etc., but don't get around well anymore, so can't participate in marches and other headline-grabbing events.
  reply report
60
PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years ago
Not long. GW put us in a hole and we have to dig our way out. Give it 2 years.
reply report
1. 71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  GW?
  
  Did you have your eyes open before GW was President or were they close?
  reply report
  59
  John T.posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  True Bush did put us into debt, but BO put us into a huge amount of debt You need to read this from the CBO itself
  
  CBO projects, that if current laws and policies remained unchanged, the federal budget would show a deficit of $1.3 trillion for fiscal year 2010. At 9.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), that deficit would be slightly smaller than the shortfall of 9.9 percent of GDP ($1.4 trillion) posted in 2009. Last year’s deficit was the largest as a share of GDP since the end of World War II, and the deficit expected for 2010 would be the second largest. Moreover, if legislation is enacted in the next several months that either boosts spending or reduces revenues, the 2010 deficit could equal or exceed last year’s shortfall.
  
  The large 2009 and 2010 deficits reflect a combination of factors that are discussed in CBO’s Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal years 2010-2020. Those factors include: an imbalance between revenues and spending that predates the recession and turmoil in financial markets, sharply lower revenues and elevated spending associated with those economic conditions, and the costs of various federal policies implemented in response to those conditions.
  
  CBO projects, that if current laws and policies remained unchanged, the federal budget would show a deficit of $1.3 trillion for fiscal year 2010. At 9.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), that deficit would be slightly smaller than the shortfall of 9.9 percent of GDP ($1.4 trillion) posted in 2009. Last year’s deficit was the largest as a share of GDP since the end of World War II, and the deficit expected for 2010 would be the second largest. Moreover, if legislation is enacted in the next several months that either boosts spending or reduces revenues, the 2010 deficit could equal or exceed last year’s shortfall.
  
  The large 2009 and 2010 deficits reflect a combination of factors that are discussed in CBO’s Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal years 2010-2020. Those factors include: an imbalance between revenues and spending that predates the recession and turmoil in financial markets, sharply lower revenues and elevated spending associated with those economic conditions, and the costs of various federal policies implemented in response to those conditions.
  
  BO has tripled our yearly deficit in just one year and looks to spend even more next year. What good has all this money done for us? The US just posted it's biggest debt to GDP ratio of 62% How are we gonna pull out of this in two years if we keep spending like drunken sailors?
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  All that wasted space, simply because you are placing blame on ONE President for the entire history of debt.
  
  And, in that aspect you would be wrong. What part did you not understand about having EYES open before GW was President.
  
  Previous Presidents have been just irresponsible. That's the point.
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No, I my eyes were wide open. They were wide open to my much more filled purse.
  reply report
60
PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years ago
We have to invest in the economy in order for it to grow.
reply report
1. 71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Do you even know what that means? And, I do not mean the garbage spun by Washington.
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Let me ask my economics degree. "Economics degree, do you know what that mean?"
  "It means that if you don't spend any money on the economy the banks will go bankcrupt, healthcare will increase the deficit, and jobs will not be created."
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There was no reason to be a smart A$$ about it. I simply asked if you knew what it meant.
  
  And, even with your reply, it is clear that you do not. But, thank you.
  reply report
  61
  luvpassionposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  We have to invest?
  
  I'd like to hear the answer myself PP cagsil asked.
  
  How exactly?
  
  Where should the money come from?
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It should come from some place if people want to have jobs. If there's no job creations, there's no jobs.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You do realize that government can only create government job and cannot actually force businesses to hire people?
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I realize that the government can invest money in businesses so that they can hire people.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And, it would be foolish to invest in the BANKS because it's already an established business. It operates on it's own profits.
  
  Invest...sure, in small business expansion or up start, that creates jobs.
  
  That is my point. Your first statement said invest in banks. It makes no sense to give money to a bank, when it already makes a decent profit from the people(customers).
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If the bank fails, the economy collapses. Do I want money to funnel into the banks, absolutely not. After the government bailout, however, they're not lending at all. I believe the government should give banks conditions so that they'll be force to lend to small businesses.
  reply report
  66
  Arthur Fontesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  I would agree that banks should be freeing up credit for stable small business, but for the Government to force this upon them would probably end up with the same problem we had with home mortgages.
  
  Business owners would end up owing the banks much more then the value of the business itself. Then they would walk away from their debts and drive us deeper into the hole.
  
  Credit should be available to those who have proven to be fiscally responsible.
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Then will the economy be back on track?
  reply report
  61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  They did that already... it was called fannie mea and freddy mac, and accomplished the complete collapse of our economic system. It was thier guidlines and forced loan policies that made the banks give loans to people who could never pay it back, but were minorities so automatically qualified, that set us up and crushed the housing market
  
  So lets let them do it again... right.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Which just happened because of government failure to properly do it's job of regulating the banks. The idiots in government was the morons who told the banks to take on more risk.
  I would hope not.
  Of course they are not lending, because there is NO money in lending with the interest rate where it is.
  Sound or Stable Small Businesses, Yes! Start Up companies should have more leeway to get started, but with the interest rate where it is, not even government wants to loan money, because it's not good at that either.
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Just like magic!
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Actually I blame the oil and insurance companies. If people didn't have to pay so much for gasoline or health care, they would have been able to afford their mortgages.
  reply report
  61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That is just so lost...
  
  A good majority of people who the banks were forced to give mortgages could not afford them to begin with. And it wasn't just because of thier gas and health-care.
  
  That is the leftists answer I have ever heard... it is all the oil Cos and health-cares fault... that is so flat a logic, it is sad, not funny.
  report
  67
  Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Not exactly. The banks were predatory in their lending practices. Have you read the headlines about Goldman Sachs creating bogus mortgage products destined to fail? This is what happened in reality. The American consumer was led to believe that these products would give them a way to afford a home, not fall into the foreclosure pit. Otherwise they wouldn't have fallen for it would they?
  report
  61
  TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I am sure that some lenders took advantage of the policies put in place by fanny mea and freddy mac and the dems, to hand out billions to people who couldn't pay it back.
  
  Do you read anything other than the headlines?
  
  You do know that the mass media lies. Don't you?
  report
  67
  Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The mistake was that they saved the banks. We are the ones who keep banks in business, not the government. And after such predatorial practices, it would have been devastating to let them collapse, but if the government bailed out Americans so they could keep their homes and create new, smaller banks, the problems with the super money machines would eventually die. Now, however, the government has perpetuated it.
  
  No matter what, there would be rough times for a while, but if you enable the American public to recapture some of their wealth, they WILL spend it, and new business, eager to please and become profitable, eager to serve, will show up.
  
  Bailing out banks and business is a huge mistake. They have all the money, and the public qualifies for none of it. So then we will top over a million foreclosures this year.
  reply report
  66
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The word "mistake" implies it was an accident. Nobody makes accidents that big. It was a HEIST. And not the first. Banks and other corporations have been heisting the governments of the world for untold years, and the only way to do that is with the complicity of (many of) those within that government.
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh great, my response was deleted! Well, ok, you win. Right? Forget that I said that an economy could collapse if the banks go under.
  reply report
2. 78
  DzyMsLizzyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  We, the people, cannot 'invest' in the economy with money we do not have. The domino effect is BS. Wealth flows sideways, not down to the masses.
  
  It is the RICH who must 'invest.' If they stop spending, as a news article today indicated:
  
  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wealthy-R … 0&.v=1
  
  We are still in trouble.
  reply report
83
Tom Cornettposted 14 years ago
Sadly....I believe that our extremely incompetent leaderships will lead us into global war within the next few years. Look at the world just before WWI and WWII. War creates massive employment and opportunity for many in power.....along with certain positions to become extremely wealthy. I do hope I am wrong.
reply report
65
Joy56posted 14 years ago
you mean it has not happened already....
reply report
0
kimberlyslyricsposted 14 years ago
All sounds so scary from up here
reply report
73
Kangaroo_Jaseposted 14 years ago
Just to ask a question so as I can get a grasp on the focus of this thread. The OP's title is How Long Before The US Collapses.

So I ask, what is the measuring stick for this? Are you asking a single question, or several? Such as;

How long before the US collapses
- financially into another Great Depression
- politically, therefore potential for mass civil disobedience
- politically, thence a massive backlash world wide against all US police actions (war in Iraq & Afghanistan for instance)

or The Democrats have done nothing, therefore lets vote the Republicans in or vice versa ( I'm Australian, so I am not up on US politics)

Or there may be other related question/s used as the measure stick
reply report
1. 60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It may collapse, or it may not. I suspect Obama has a firm grip on the economy. However, if he doesn't and it collapses, take comfort that you'll have your family and friends even more.
  reply report
2. 60
  maplethorpejposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  When I used the word "collapse" I could have been more specific, but I wanted to hear what other people deemed as a collapse and how they believed it would happen.
  
  Voting the republicans into office isn't going to do any good. We need to stop affiliating ourselves with political parties. They are schemes used by the wealthy businesses to fund the candidates' campaigns in order to get their (the businesses) issues addressed. It's sick, but that's how it works.
  
  Will we ever have an honest, uncorrupted president? BAHAHAHAHAHA
  reply report
  69
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Historically, the U.S. political system dominated by two moderate parties has served the country well. It has produced superior results to those achieved in multi-party countries like Italy and countries with two polarized parties as in the case of UK's conservative and labor parties which, until recently, tended to cause the country's political economy to lurch back and forth from left to right, from socialism to liberalism in the European sense.
  
  Unfortunately, our current polarized parties plus the Tea Party as a wild card may result in a combination of the worst features of a multi-party system and a polarized two-party system.
  reply report
  0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  This is about right - the old system that may or may not have worked ok has a new problem. Whoever is 'in' is a puppet of corporations and their few owners, and the puppet master is the media that the same people own and use to divide and confuse the public.
  reply report
  60
  maplethorpejposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Very nice way to sum it up.
  reply report
  69
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm reminded that I failed to mention that the U.S. system is superior to one party systems like those in the USSR, China, Cuba, Mexico (previously).
  reply report
  60
  maplethorpejposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Everything so far has been debatable... What isn't debatable is what the job of a politician is: to represent a portion of the country's citizens. Who do politicians represent now? Special interest groups and corporations.
  
  Until we develop the technology to ensure that every American's representation is completely their own, we won't be able to get away from corruption in government. I wrote an article about how we should be working on a system where we could use the internet to vote on government issues. There are obvious problems, but they shouldn't be stopping us from making progress towards individual representation.
  reply report
  69
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Election campaign reform is badly needed. Government financed election campaigns at the federal, state and local levels would be the best solution, in my opinion.
  reply report
  0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That is a subjective view with no proof that the system itself is 'better'. I am hugely in favour of a democratic process but the ridiculous two horse races that pass for it in the US and the UK are not it. The jockeys may wear different coulours but both horses have the same owner. Here - in this oneparty government - I see the local party ELECTING officials upward, villages and town areas ELECTING their leaders, 'mayor' and council, and in among the processes I see about the same amount of corruption and politicking as in our supposedly democratic system - just different. We bleat on about 'our' freedom and their totalitarian dictatorships - from where I sit we don't look free and 'they' don't look oppressed; the freedoms are different and the oppressions applied in different ways is all.
  
  When 'we' have any semblance of a working democracy I will be the first to cheer - when we get it.
  reply report
  66
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The UK is hardly a good example (of a two-horse race) given the events of earlier this year there in any case.
  reply report
  0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I beg to differ completely, if you can tell me any real differences between Blair and Co - and Cameron and Co I would be interested to hear them. Changing government in the UK is about as effective as changing the tea boy in the office.
  reply report
  66
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I am not saying that the British have true representative democracy any more than the Americans do. In fact, I am pretty pessimistic that those who want power will ever have it wrenched from their grips. Having said that, when a country only has two parties, and both parties evidently ultimately represent more-or-less the same power bases (I mean, I didn't notice Obama grab back any of that bailout money after he was elected...), you basically have a one-party state with two bickering factions; and a population lined up behind either one or the other faction. At least in Canada, Britain, etc., there is more wrangling going on at the top - either way, I concede your basic point. The systems of democracy that we have in the West leave a lot to be desired (though, personally, for me a country's universal healthcare, or its absence, is my general yardstick of how good a system is...)
  reply report
  73
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hey maple, thanks for the clarification. It has been interesting the views expressed here so far, obviously the commentary would have been much different if you had narrowed down your choices in what would be deemed a collapse.
  
  We have what is known as 'tall poppy syndrome' in Australia. If our politicians become deemed by the public for being 'too big for their shoes' and start doing or allowing other things than their initial election promises, they get voted out of office quick smart.
  
  Our former Prime Minister is a recent example, started to try and do stuff the public had no interest in or was considered not good for the country, hence as of a couple of weeks back, he was replaced by our then Deputy Leader.
  
  Ayyyeeiiiiii politics........messy schtuff that
  reply report
78
DzyMsLizzyposted 14 years ago
Let me be empress for a day: I'll fix everything with a few strokes of a pen! LOL
reply report
1. 60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I wish you could too.
  reply report
60
maplethorpejposted 14 years ago
It's our political philosophies that need to change before we can accomplish anything...

I'm doing the best I can to motivate people to change how they think. It's the key.

<promotional link snipped>
reply report
1. 60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And a reason for the collapse in the first place. Yes, business did that, but I feel that it's a normal cycle of life to help perpetuate that change as well. Our philosophies need to change but we won't recognize it until we are fast with some sort of disaster...systematic collapse in this case. Suddenly, people care for one another, and it will seep up into politics.
  reply report
  60
  PeppermintPaddyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oops, little typo. Until we are "faced" with some sort of disaster I meant to say.
  reply report
67
Greek Oneposted 14 years ago
It already happened... Sunday, Feb 28th, 2010....

reply report
73
Reality Bytesposted 14 years ago
Your one-party system has the same controllers as the western puppets. it is a simple truth. International bankers.
reply report
1. 0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It is not my one-party system, I am just an observer here.
  
  However I would say they are not controlled by International Bankers, and this is why their growth rate in every index has slowed to around one-third (my guesstimate) of what it was - and it is still higher than the US or the UK could achieve in their wildest dreams.
  
  Is this partly due to the 'discipline' that is the other side of the 'oppression' coin - yes it is.
  
  Is this because the government is still in control of the financial system - yes it is.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  International Financiers is that better. Those that control the liquidity of credit as well as the currency control the world.
  
  With the right amount of money any country can rise in prominence.
  
  http://www.pbc.gov.cn/english/ China's central bank. Please do not be naive it is so easy to see the web of global control interlinked by financial institutions globally.
  reply report
  0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  AS far as I am aware China Central Bank is still controlled by the government, they obey the central commitee dictates and reduce and increase lending to government orders - this is why the government still has control of its economy. Just because the China bank plays with the others does not make it the same thing, it clearly must be a conduit for global finance, tht does not mean that the global finaciers control it.
  reply report
2. 66
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  This international bankers thing is dumbfounding to me. Yes, there is a sort of conspiracy going on behind the scenes, but it is not one made up exclusively of bankers: lots of other types of Big Business are involved. Frankly, the "international bankers" thing just narrows down a much broader group of high-powered interests who indeed are controlling us all (depressing wages, making sure benefits are not accrued to workers wherever possible, shipping jobs offshore, abusing irreplaceable natural resources then moving on to some ther regio) and who have ALREADY made virtual slaves of the two out of three people on earth living on less than the equivalent of ten dollars a day.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  England funded both sides of the Civil War.
  
  Bankers funded both the French and Russian revolutions.
  
  Bankers (financers) can make anything happen, give enough money to a Castro and soon he will lead the country.
  
  Once a Nation accepts the Financers Central Bank scam that country has been co-opted.
  reply report
  0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You would be wrong about Castro, he has shedloads already - most left wing leaders are there for the good of their people as they see it, and the right wing dictators make so much off their own people that you can't buy them off, Marcos et al.
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

How long before the US collapses?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

How long before the US collapses?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies