• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      16 days ago

      No shit, what American thinks either are true?

      America, fuck yeah!

      Has been a joke for like 30 years now

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          15 days ago

          Literally the opposite…

          Where are you see conservatives talking about how great America has been under Bidnen?

          Like, you put zero thinking into your comment, just like you assume the people you’re “dunking on” do.

          You’re a different side of the same coin, that’s never meant opposites, you’re th same thing.

          Just neither sid bis smart enough to figure it out, and both think only the other side is dumb

    • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      Believe me there’s no shortage of people who know that were not the shining city on the hill, unfortunately we’re drowned out by pandering patriotic country music and gunfire from mass shootings.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      What? We have two right wing parties to choose from! Is that not enough? Should we make three right wing parties so you feel we are better represented?

  • EgoNo4@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    We can’t understand how millions can vote for a senile, convicted sexual predator as president…

    • Meltrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      16 days ago

      Dude half of us don’t understand it either.

      It’s amazing what decades of defunding education will do when you mix it with a healthy dose of conservative talk show TV and social media algorithms.

      • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        15 days ago

        I dunno, i understand it pretty well. Lack of education, lead paint/gasoline, nationalism, fascism, racism, sexism, economic disparity, lack of healthcare to deal with neural degeneracy common in trump supporters, and finally lower borth rates among the more educated. America is a shithole, and has been for the past 40 years at least. Until we finally grow a spine and start “adjusting”, things are going to continue getting worse until were all dead and the olligarchs own everything. Then theyll move on to fucking the rest of the world (harder than they already are)

        • Meltrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Was with you to the last bit. What does it mean to “grow a spine and start ‘adjusting’”? Why is “adjusting” in quotes?

        • Meltrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          15 days ago

          I guess it’s much less than half.

          About 1/7 are less than voting age. Another 1/7 or so voted for the oompa loompa, and another 1/7 voted against. So actually, about half of the population just doesn’t vote because they’re a different type of idiot.

          I do hate it here, for what it’s worth.

    • kalkulat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Hah! Let’s make a list of the countries where leadership of that ilk has never existed. (We’ll just ignore that most of them did not allow elections.) Won’t take much paper.

  • theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    16 days ago

    Most “third world” or “developing” countries aren’t that bad, and there are places in the US far worse than the median developing country.

    Also most people in most places do not want to go to the US, even to visit much less immigrate. It’s generally either the worst of a particular society or those specifically harmed by the US previously and feel their chances are better off with the abuser instead of in the abused country. It’s not a wanted destination.

    • eatthecake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      16 days ago

      Everyone i’ve known who wanted to go to the US was interested in making easy money by scamming people. That’s the type who admire the US.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 days ago

      The UN General Assembly Human Rights Council 2018 report on USA’s poverty and human rights is a pretty quick and clear overview which makes it clear that parts of the USA are just undeveloped:

      http://undocs.org/A/HRC/38/33/ADD.1

      “5.3 million live in Third World conditions of absolute poverty”

      “69. In Alabama and West Virginia, a high proportion of the population is not served by public sewerage and water supply services”

  • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    Affordable healthcare

    Public transit

    Civilian oversight

    Prisoner rehabilitation

    Universal income

    Free education

    Separation of religion and state

    Wealth taxes

    Law enforcement accountability

    Environmental regulations…

    • StopTouchingYourPhone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      You made me think of my buddy from the states visiting me in Toronto 2010-ish laughing at the Canadian flags they sometimes saw flying from people’s houses and other buildings. I asked her what struck her so funny about them and she blanked for a second. She said, “It’s just weird seeing so many flags that aren’t American… Like, this is a country too… um.” We had a brilliant talk about flag-waving patriots for a bit, but seeing that glitch was really interesting and I’ve never forgotten it.

      That said, I had plenty of teachers growing up and know tonnes of educators now who’d totally be into forcing students to salute the Canadian flag and pledge allegiance to their God & Country every morning. The only thing stopping them is legislation preventing it, not national identity.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        14 days ago

        If there’s one thing the US is great at, it’s exporting the most stupid stuff they can come up with. At the moment, unfortunately, it seems to be politics.

    • Bosht@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      I’m definitely ready to hear this, have heard it, know it, and hope it changes. Under our current political system it never will. We’re just an oligarchy in a trench coat at this point.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      As an American, I’m not convinced we can be anything close to the greatest country. We are incapable of solving massive problems that should be abundantly obvious. And it’s not just the government, it’s also a huge number of dumb civilians that don’t want to educate themselves on how our own systems are failing.

  • InFerNo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    Your traffic laws are weird.

    • Overtaking/passing on the right

    • 4 way stops and whoever comes first can go

    • No strict right of way when coming from the right

    • Right on red

    • Grinding all traffic in all directions over multiple lanes to a stop when a school bus stops

    At least the last one I can understand a little with the nearly non-existent pedestrian infrastructure.

    • Tinks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      15 days ago

      I’m so confused here.

      The right lanes are the slow lanes - we overtake/pass on the left, and you are advised to stay out of the left lane unless you are passing. This makes sense because you need to slow down to exit the freeway, or in case of emergency, you are closer to the side of the road to be able to do so.

      How else are you supposed to deal with 4-way stops? In my state it’s first arrival goes first, however if two cars arrive at the same time the car on the right proceeds first. It’s not that complicated, and I’m not sure what’s wrong with it?

      And I’m not at all sure what you’re referring to regarding coming from the right? Coming from the right in relation to where?

      • InFerNo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        In the US I believed it’s legal to pass people from the right if they are driving to your left. That’s illegal here, you can only pass from the left.

        It’s also illegal to hog a lane, you must always use the right most lane when it’s free, unless you’re passing.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      Grinding all traffic in all directions over multiple lanes to a stop when a school bus stops

      This varies by state, but I think I most of them are setup so that you don’t have to stop if the road is divided, or if there are more than 4 lanes (so 2 lanes for each direction, plus a turn lane in the middle, you don’t have to stop). As always, check your local laws, and when in doubt, signal and stop.

      Edit: to clarify, the oncoming lanes don’t stop, the lane behind and adjacent to the bus still have to stop.

    • asmoranomar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      A note, not all states operate this way, but the concept of ‘right of way’ is going away. Judges do not like the idea of someone feeling privileged enough to make a situation worse. In general, they want to implement fail-safes and not fail-unsafe situations.

      Edit: To add - we’ve actually had this for a while, it’s called ‘failure to yield’. The switch is actually being more driven by emergency services making things worse, which is kind of relieving given the general sentiment. Unfortunately it’s just another phrase for the same thing, semantics…but if you do go to court, you’re better off presenting who failed vs who’s entitled.

      • fouloleron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        I think I have seen this and been confused by it. Does it mean that nobody should assume they have right of way? For example, having right of way isn’t necessarily an excuse for being in an accident because you didn’t give way to someone driving badly.

        If a person didn’t yield at a sign saying they should, and caused an accident as a result, they are demonstrably at fault.

        • asmoranomar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          Pretty much, the only caveat I’d add is the assumption of ‘right of way’. You can have situations where road conditions were unusual but drivers are not certain to all the conditions. The involved parties can all assume they have the ‘right of way’, when in reality the best option would have been for everyone to yield until conditions ARE certain.

          I’ll give a personal example: I once came upon an accident on a bridge, and the cop cars were already on the scene. It was night, raining hard and the cop cars were facing the oncoming lane with headlights set to high. I couldn’t see anything past the cop cars, so I slowed down from 50 to 25. As I passed, I briefly saw a shadow of a person and heard them say “SLOW DOWN”. I still have no idea how close I was to hitting them, but they must have been very close to hear them thru the rain and sirens. I should have gone much, much slower, maybe even stopped. Fortunately, nothing bad happened, but I had assumed that since the one lane was open that it was ok to use. I don’t know why the cop cars oriented themselves in a way to blind oncoming drivers, but had something happened, the fault would have ultimately been mine regardless.

          Another example is parking lots, so many accidents occur at busy locations. People forget how you are not supposed to block ingress (to prevent traffic backing up into the street and making things worse) and get road rage because they can’t leave. I’ve seen people try to “squeeze in” and end up blocking an entire lot because they can’t move. One side will say “zipper” (ie: “my turn for RoW”) the other will say “right of way”, and parking lots are notorious for not having any signs.

          Edit: and ofc, old ladies who think blinkers give them RoW

          Edit2: an example for cops: blowing thru red lights without making sure intersections are clear. To be fair, everyone should yield to a cop car in the performance of their duties, but this doesn’t mean cop cars get a free pass for RoW and can plow thru full speed, damn the consequences. They still have to take safety of others in mind and yield if required.

          Edit3: because I’ve had the discussion before. Yes, it’s semantics. RoW and FTY are the same thing. I’m only saying the phrase is being sunsetted, no Judge wants to hear someone say RoW. Some laws even use them together as “Failure to Yield Right of Way”. The goal is to prevent the mindset of entitlement, to make sure the clarity of safeguards remain in place.

          • InFerNo@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Interesting and also makes me want to clarify something. “Right of way” as in “I’m allowed to do this” is not what I initially meant. The concept I’m talking about is called “Voorrang van rechts” where voorrang means right of way, but as you can see it only translates half of it. “Van rechts” means “from (the) right”. I just looked it up to get a proper full translation or equivalent, but all translations stop at “right of way”, which simply is “voorrang”. A language barrier if you will.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      I’d be more inclined to take responsibility if we had a more representative electoral system like STAR voting. Then more then 2 political parties would be viable, with no spoiler effect.

      But we don’t see the democratic party (self described democracy lovers) passing this much needed reform in states they control.

      Perhaps the democrats enjoy yelling and screaming at people online and IRL that a vote not for (insert pro genocide status quo candidate) is a vote for Trump. They love it so much they prefer trump winning over having to compete for our votes.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    A while ago I watched a live stream of CSPAN (I think?) where the House failed to form a government for several consecutive days. The way the entire process started with a prayer, and the many references to religion throughout, is just as disturbing as the personality cult around Stalin. That whole gang is fucked in the head.

  • steeznson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    You wasted your chance as a hyper-power. The Soviet Union had fallen and the world was essentially yours but you did nothing with it. Now India and China are rising powers and you are going back to being a regular super-power.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        As an American, I can think of a few things we shouldn’t have done. The whole debacle in Iraq comes to mind. A few trillion dollars pissed away. Thousands of American lives lost. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead. All for Iraq just to end up a puppet state of Iran. We’ve also destabilized the international system, particularly the trade system, that we built up in the first place. We’ve repeatedly violated our own trade agreements so many times it’s not even funny anymore. How could we have used this unique historical opportunity for the betterment of the world? Here’s one idea.

        In an ideal world, the US would have used its hyperpower status to truly advance democracy around the world. We would have taken this opportunity to once and for all finally drive the last nail in the coffin of global authoritarianism and dictatorship. In our timeline, we looked past the CCP’s human rights abuses and let China into the global trade system. We did this because our corporations got greedy and wanted to make bank in the Chinese market. We gave in to their greed at the expense of global human rights and our own long term national security. Now we’ve turned the government of China (which has morphed into some horrible amalgamation of communism and fascism) into the most capable manufacturing power on the planet. It didn’t have to be this way. We could have told China, and everyone else. “Democracy first, then trade. We’re only interested in trading with and enriching fellow free nations.”

        After the Cold War ended, the US was ascendant. The economic power of us and our allies was unmatched. The US, Europe, and allies dominated the world economically and militarily. Imagine in a different timeline if we had used that power to peacefully advance democracy worldwide. Imagine if after the Cold War, the US international policy became:

        “We allied with dictatorships when necessary during the Cold War to contain the USSR. That is no longer needed. From now on, we’re happy to open up markets and trade with anyone, as long as they are a liberal democracy. You want to join the global economy and get rich? Give your people freedom. Petty dictatorships can remain poor and undeveloped, thus limiting the amount of damage they can cause outside their borders. We’ll give food and medical supplies to nations in crisis, even those ruled by dictators. But full economic integration will only be done with fellow democracies. We will not trade with tyrants.”

        That is the kind of visionary approach that a hyperpower like the US could have taken to really make the world better. You don’t need to invade countries to have an influence on them. And this really does represent a lost opportunity. The time immediately after the fall of the USSR was the moment when the free and democratic countries were at the absolute peak of their economic power. But since we allowed China into the WTO and opened up trade with them, we have created an industrial juggernaut that is ruled by an absolute dictatorship.

        At the end of the Cold War, the democracies could have banded together and used their utter dominance of the global economy to push for further democratization around the world. There just wasn’t anyone else to trade with for many advanced consumer and industrial goods. But now? That kind of strategy wouldn’t work. If all the democracies tomorrow insisted on trading only with other democracies, the various dictatorships around the world can now just keep trading with China.

        TL:DR: After the fall of the USSR, democracy as a global force was at the absolute historic peak of its power, both economically and militarily. If the US and allies had really brought their full economic and cultural power to bear, they could have attempted a last final push to ensure democracy reigned everywhere. Even without invading anyone, we could have used that immense economic power to at least attempt to throw down the last of the dictators and to bring democracy to every man, woman, and child on the planet. Instead, we tried to line our own pockets and ended up creating a monster by turning communist China into the workshop of the world.

        • pjwestin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Why would the U.S. have started trying to expand democracy after the Cold War? They were willing to support anti-Democratic coups in Iran, Syria, Brazil, Iraq, Bolivia, and probably dozens of others I’m forgetting. America was promoting capitalism during the Cold War, not democracy.

          • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Sure. You’re correct, but irrelevant. That’s why I said “in an ideal world.” In an ideal world, what kind of actions could the US have taken immediately after the Cold War to make the world better for everyone? Obviously the Cold War was more about advancing capitalism than advancing democracy. Hence us forming alliances with dictators, as I mentioned. But in an ideal world, with capitalism triumphant around the globe, the US would have at least used its hyperpower status to push hard for democracy globally.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              You’re calling for the USA to brutally repress and dominate the world, that’s not Democracy.

        • kreskin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          Its sad that I am old and cynical enough to think your entire TLDR paragraph is targically absurd. Of course we’d never do those things. I used to think such things could happen.

        • steeznson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          The USA could also have stopped China manipulating their currency exchange rates. This is artificially making their exports cheaper and boosting their economy. Simultaneously this is exporting their economic imbalances to the global economy and destablising other countries, typically manifesting as manufacturing declining and ‘service’ based sectors becoming more prominent than they should be.

          • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Yes, there were a whole series of things that could have been done. But looking back, it seems obvious now that helping China to get rich was a poor decision. A wealthy and more industrialized country is simply a far more serious geopolitical threat than a poorer one. I’m glad that the Chinese population have been able to pull themselves up out of poverty. But in terms of our own national security and the security of democratic countries everywhere, enriching such a brutal dictatorship was a terrible mistake. Without its economic explosion, China wouldn’t today be on the brink of potentially invading Taiwan, and they wouldn’t be serving as the main economic backer for Russia’s war in Ukraine. In our world, wealth is power, and power is wealth. And by trading with the CCP, we magnified their power many fold.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          14 days ago

          Typical American: “what we did wrong was not be even more brutally repressive to other countries”.

    • Jimmycakes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 days ago

      American capitalists needs other countries to get rich too so we can sell them shit. If those countries stayed rural and backwards who would buy our wares.

  • Masterbaexunn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    16 days ago

    For millions of United States Americans, the so called “American Dream” is achieved in Mexico. They’re often illegal immigrants. They often have mental health problems. They gentrify our cities and are entitled as fuck.

    Pot calling kettle and all, but I do wish they’d go back to their own shithole country. They have demonized my country for decades and have weaponized the cartels to feed their own addictions. Most of the problems here can be tied directly to their humongous drug problems.

    Yankee go home. The United Mexican States is tired of your shit.

    • Truffle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      16 days ago

      Spot on about the gentrification bit. Entire town populations have shifted from local people to the self called expats and snowbirds. Just look at Chelém, Mérida, San Miguel de Allende, Tulúm, Cancún and many many more including most upitty neighborhoods in México City (Condesa, Roma, San Angel).

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      16 days ago

      I had no idea we had people illegally immigrating that much. Bet they’re the type to use the word “illegals” pejoratively.