A question for the americans on this forum

[HIBred]

Comparing civil war era politics to today's world is not possible..in fact Lincoln was a republican ..and the south was mainly democrat..Further, the first grand wizard of the KKK was honored at the 1868 Democratic National Convention...so applying
those party lines to today's climate doesn't make a lot of sense.Besides ,I feel that there are no real parties..just money..the bankers and rich run everything and have from the beginning..anything that threatens the stability of said establishment doesn't have a long shelf life imo..

 

[SteelHorse]

@Cryogenic Flare: I wouldn't expect a northerner to get it, so I forgive you.

 

[HIBred]

http://topekasnews.com/oklahoma-pro...-union-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-cancelled/
this is why I'm not too worried about secessionists...Some people have valid points and views but even they will always get grouped in and with the more "out there" groups...

 

[DamageINC]

That town doesn't exist. I think it's a hoax article.

 

[HIBred]

could be ..still , I highly doubt the country will split in two, if anything it will fall completely in on itself and into something new or much more fractured than just 2 ..who knows

side note: the only state with legitimate claims to dissolve from the union is Hawaii ,having it's kingdom's overthrow been recognized as illegal by the U.S. government,but so far only an apology has been issued . There's no way in hell that we could ever dream of being a kingdom again or survive without the U.S. in our current state.Nor would I want it to..although I sometimes wish the brits had gotten a hold of us instead..as far how commonwealths like New Zealand have turned out..sorry for going off topic

 

[NickHouston]

That town doesn't exist. I think it's a hoax article.

There ARE people who will deny testable science because it conflicts with their religion though...

 

[PrestoN]

A civil war in a country with a 640 billion dollar military budget? Talk about great television!

Can we skip the BS and have a 315 million person hunger games?

 

[TheDude]

The civil war wasn't about slavery. Abraham Lincoln was loosing and needed a rallie so he made up the emancipation proclamation. He didn't care about whether there were slaves or not. He just needed to give his troops a reason to keep fighting and he used slavery to get what he wanted. You would need a couple college courses to compeatly understand the whole thing. If the south had of won we would prolly have the split nation that Take is talking about. Socialist liberals would be in the north, and conservative republicans would be in the south.

I think that's a little oversimplified.

The OP in this thread represents exactly the kind of polarized, arbitrary views that are condemned in these posts.

America is a huge, powerful country. More than that, though, it is VERY complex. There are a lot of nuances.

People oversimplify all the time. It is easier to understand when there is a clear enemy. However, there is not one. There are millions of people, all with different goals and intents.

People say "AMERICA is doing this."

I think you are forgetting that AMERICA doesn't do anything. The millions of people that live there do.



Oh and by the way, Abe wasn't losing.

The army of the potomac was going to win from the beginning. It was just a matter of time. The reason they were losing battles is because of terrible military leadership on the side of the potomac, while the confederates had general Lee (and other good leadership). General Lee's arrogance lead, in part, to his defeat. The Northern army greatly outnumbered the south from the start and continued to produce better weaponry and transportation.

Abe waited for a serious victory to give the emancipation proclamation because he knew that it would get no traction if the north was still floundering around for victories, despite it's greater size and power. He did not give emancipation while the north was losing in order to rally people.

Most of the time abe was just at his generals.

Oh and by the way, highly "conservative" (Republican party line voting) states use much more federal tax money than highly "liberal" (Democratic party line voting) states. Those democratic voting states also supply much more federal tax money than those republican voting states.

So the whole "I wish the federal government would just leave me alone" thing is utter nonsense. Self proclaimed conservatives are not funding a bunch of freeloading "libtards"




Oh and by the way,

Let's just say the confederate states did secede right now (mega lolz), that country would be mega fail and mega impoverished and would be paying the rest of the states mega money to do things like trade with china and europe, for one. Include the fact that almost all large tech research and development is done on the east and west coasts. States like texas are trying to give HUGE incentives (usually tax based) to companies to move there and build there. That would be great, but hardly anyone is doing that yet.

I would love to see industry and manufacturing move to the midwest instead of china. We'd produce better products. Only problem is there isn't the infrastructure or cheap labor to do it, right now.




It's much more complex than most people would like to make it.




I'm sorry I held off as long as I could

 

[theGenius]

I think that's a little oversimplified.

The OP in this thread represents exactly the kind of polarized, arbitrary views that are condemned in these posts.

America is a huge, powerful country. More than that, though, it is VERY complex. There are a lot of nuances.

People oversimplify all the time. It is easier to understand when there is a clear enemy. However, there is not one. There are millions of people, all with different goals and intents.

People say "AMERICA is doing this."

I think you are forgetting that AMERICA doesn't do anything. The millions of people that live there do.



Oh and by the way, Abe wasn't losing.

The army of the potomac was going to win from the beginning. It was just a matter of time. The reason they were losing battles is because of terrible military leadership on the side of the potomac, while the confederates had general Lee (and other good leadership). General Lee's arrogance lead, in part, to his defeat. The Northern army greatly outnumbered the south from the start and continued to produce better weaponry and transportation.

Abe waited for a serious victory to give the emancipation proclamation because he knew that it would get no traction if the north was still floundering around for victories, despite it's greater size and power. He did not give emancipation while the north was losing in order to rally people.

Most of the time abe was just at his generals.

Oh and by the way, highly "conservative" (Republican party line voting) states use much more federal tax money than highly "liberal" (Democratic party line voting) states. Those democratic voting states also supply much more federal tax money than those republican voting states.

So the whole "I wish the federal government would just leave me alone" thing is utter nonsense. Self proclaimed conservatives are not funding a bunch of freeloading "libtards"




Oh and by the way,

Let's just say the confederate states did secede right now (mega lolz), that country would be mega fail and mega impoverished and would be paying the rest of the states mega money to do things like trade with china and europe, for one. Include the fact that almost all large tech research and development is done on the east and west coasts. States like texas are trying to give HUGE incentives (usually tax based) to companies to move there and build there. That would be great, but hardly anyone is doing that yet.

I would love to see industry and manufacturing move to the midwest instead of china. We'd produce better products. Only problem is there isn't the infrastructure or cheap labor to do it, right now.




It's much more complex than most people would like to make it.




I'm sorry I held off as long as I could

i was literally waiting for a long deep dude post

what you wrote made alot of sense, but to be fair, there have been dozens of parts of contrys seceeding far less developed and far worse of economically. if people really want it, usually they get.

 

[jasmine]

next history book that I bought it will be on the war of secession
(small board accepted)

 

[TheDude]

yea i guess that's true too

 

[theGenius]

lets turn this around a sec, what do democratz and republicans have in common?

 

[TheDude]

I don't think the labels really mean that much anymore accept for political alliances in congress.

A lot of people who are registered democrats have really conservative ideologies, and a lot of republicans are exactly what they accuse democrats of being.

The reality is that most people choose party affiliation based on what their parents we registered as or as a result of where they live.

In general, though, they both care about money. Money runs this government.[DOUBLEPOST=1397777729][/DOUBLEPOST]Governor O'Malley is a democrat. He's a slimeball.

 

[SteelHorse]

@TheDude, I will do my best to explain how I have been taught. May not be 100% correct but ima do my best.

I think that's a little oversimplified.


The OP in this thread represents exactly the kind of polarized, arbitrary views that are condemned in these posts.

America is a huge, powerful country. More than that, though, it is VERY complex. There are a lot of nuances.

People oversimplify all the time. It is easier to understand when there is a clear enemy. However, there is not one. There are millions of people, all with different goals and intents.

People say "AMERICA is doing this."

I think you are forgetting that AMERICA doesn't do anything. The millions of people that live there do.



Oh and by the way, Abe wasn't losing.

The army of the potomac was going to win from the beginning. It was just a matter of time. The reason they were losing battles is because of terrible military leadership on the side of the potomac, while the confederates had general Lee (and other good leadership). General Lee's arrogance lead, in part, to his defeat. The Northern army greatly outnumbered the south from the start and continued to produce better weaponry and transportation.

Abe waited for a serious victory to give the emancipation proclamation because he knew that it would get no traction if the north was still floundering around for victories, despite it's greater size and power. He did not give emancipation while the north was losing in order to rally people.

Most of the time abe was just at his generals.

Oh and by the way, highly "conservative" (Republican party line voting) states use much more federal tax money than highly "liberal" (Democratic party line voting) states. Those democratic voting states also supply much more federal tax money than those republican voting states.

So the whole "I wish the federal government would just leave me alone" thing is utter nonsense. Self proclaimed conservatives are not funding a bunch of freeloading "libtards"




Oh and by the way,

Let's just say the confederate states did secede right now (mega lolz), that country would be mega fail and mega impoverished and would be paying the rest of the states mega money to do things like trade with china and europe, for one. Include the fact that almost all large tech research and development is done on the east and west coasts. States like texas are trying to give HUGE incentives (usually tax based) to companies to move there and build there. That would be great, but hardly anyone is doing that yet.

I would love to see industry and manufacturing move to the midwest instead of china. We'd produce better products. Only problem is there isn't the infrastructure or cheap labor to do it, right now.




It's much more complex than most people would like to make it.




I'm sorry I held off as long as I could

Yes I did leave it very simplified and dumbed down since I wasn't wanting to delve as deep into this as you did, but I guess I'll go a little deeper now.

Why would condemn anyone for posting what they have been taught or what they believe? To make yourself feel better or smarter? Childish to me, but w/e.

You think the north was winning, I think they were loosing. No real way to 100% prove either way unless you were there. Although the north had more troops the south was winning every battle. The south killed 3 northerners to every 1 of them dying. They couldn't continue like that. Abe was loosing every battle they fought against the south. And yes it was because of his generals. I feel like and have been taught that Abe used slavery to rally more people to his side. It worked too. Now because I feel like this particular subject is mostly a matter of an opinion and I'm using my phone to write all of this I'm going to stop on this subject.

As far as who uses more federal money democratic or republican? Democratic just about every time. I have never seen a single democratic state refuse a bailout. Conservative South Caroline refused federal education bailout money from Obama (a democrat). And I don't know of a single democratic state that doesn't need bailing out from a federal government that also needs bailing out. Texas right now has a surplus in state finances, mostly from the massive Eagle Ford Shale that has been bringing the state way more money than they had anticipated.

As far as the idea that "conservatives fund a bunch of freeloading libtards". In some aspects it is true. My projected yearly income is 29995. That's working a 24hr on 48hr off shift schedule. The way the work weeks line up for me is I have 2 weeks that I work 72 hours in and then 1 week I work 48 hours. And the weeks rotate like that for my particular schedule. Now some deadbeat that doesn't give a fuck about working can live off the government for a yearly income of just over 28000 a year. So what's my point in all that? It's this, it is democratic people that put programs like welfare and social security out there so that deadbeats have the ability to live off of people like me. Every paycheck the government takes out 1/4th of what I make. If I make 2000 in a 2 week pay period. I only see 1500 of that money. That is the federal government that does that. So why is it democrats that are the deadbeats? Because deadbeats aren't totally stupid. They know who will give them what they want. So they will continue voting for the people that put forth these programs that allow them to be deadbeats, Democrats. And IF, notice I said IF, democratic states bring in more federal income, that is because they have way more federal programs than conservative states do. Conservatives do their best to stay away from just about anything federal. So they tend to attempt to deny any federal programs that come their way. Democratic states welcome just about anything the federal government will give them.


As far as the confederate states seceding, I would support it, but I highly doubt it will ever happen so I'm not one to openly say "yes" I think it's the way to go. I have many doubts that it would work as well. And Texas is trying to get companies to come down here. I don't rlly get what your point is on this but who cares. Texas doesn't need companies down here. I live here and Texas is growing like crazy and if there wasn't national news I'd laugh at someone that tried to tell me we are having economic problems, because we aren't here. Texas is doing just fine. I wish it wasn't growing so fast as a matter of fact. It kinda sucks.

I may be doing a lot of editing as I wrote all this on my phone. My computer is sick at the moment.

 

[HIBred]

I'm going to go ahead and assume that wishing the confederacy won is not based on slavery issues because in no way do i believe that Steel or anyone would wish that upon our country...
that being said, what are the issues at hand that would have been beneficial? (honest question)
I assume it would along the lines of less federal involvement i.e. taxes etc
States rights was the main credo of the south if I'm not mistaken...

The media is at fault in inflaming american against american..

 

[TheDude]

The point of moving manufacturing to texas is to improve efficiency and quality of products. To reduce the amount of money paid in taxes (to china) for using their capital. More money goes straight into the product that way, as well.

@TheDude, I will do my best to explain how I have been taught. May not be 100% correct but ima do my best.


As far as who uses more federal money democratic or republican? Democratic just about every time. I have never seen a single democratic state refuse a bailout. Conservative South Caroline refused federal education bailout money from Obama (a democrat). And I don't know of a single democratic state that doesn't need bailing out from a federal government that also needs bailing out. Texas right now has a surplus in state finances, mostly from the massive Eagle Ford Shale that has been bringing the state way more money than they had anticipated.

As far as the idea that "conservatives fund a bunch of freeloading libtards". In some aspects it is true. My projected yearly income is 29995. That's working a 24hr on 48hr off shift schedule. The way the work weeks line up for me is I have 2 weeks that I work 72 hours in and then 1 week I work 48 hours. And the weeks rotate like that for my particular schedule. Now some deadbeat that doesn't give a fuck about working can live off the government for a yearly income of just over 28000 a year. So what's my point in all that? It's this, it is democratic people that put programs like welfare and social security out there so that deadbeats have the ability to live off of people like me. Every paycheck the government takes out 1/4th of what I make. If I make 2000 in a 2 week pay period. I only see 1500 of that money. That is the federal government that does that. So why is it democrats that are the deadbeats? Because deadbeats aren't totally stupid. They know who will give them what they want. So they will continue voting for the people that put forth these programs that allow them to be deadbeats, Democrats. And IF, notice I said IF, democratic states bring in more federal income, that is because they have way more federal programs than conservative states do. Conservatives do their best to stay away from just about anything federal. So they tend to attempt to deny any federal programs that come their way. Democratic states welcome just about anything the federal government will give them.

Dude all I see you saying is that you're angry that you work really hard and assholes live off the government.

You should be. That ruins the system. They aren't all democrats. That's ridiculous crap that people like Rush Limbaugh spew. Rush Limbaugh, who BY THE WAY, spent years and years living on unemployment while not seeking a job at all, and did things like pay someone ELSE to mow his lawn with the money from the government. The money YOU pay the government from your paycheck went to Rush Limbaugh so he could sit on his fat ass while someone else mowed his lawn. Hating that shit has nothing to do with being a democrat or republican, it has to do with being a decent hard-working human being and an active member of society.

The top 10 highest net contributors to the federal budget are liberal states. The top ten are:

1. New Jersey
2. Connecticut
3. New Hampshire
4. Minnesota
5. Illinois
6. Nevada
7. Massachusetts
8. California
   
9. Colorado
10. New York

As of mid-2012, states that are receiving the most federal funding per tax dollar paid in the United States are:

1. New Mexico: $2.63
2. West Virginia: $2.57
3. Mississippi: $2.47
4. District of Colombia: $2.41
5. Hawaii: $2.38
6. Alabama: $2.03
7. Alaska: $1.93
8. Montana: $1.92
9. South Carolina: $1.92
10. Maine: $1.78
    
    7 of those are "red" states.

And I'm not condemning anyone on this forum? Who did I condemn? I disagreed with you. I'm not condemning you or anyone else.


By the way I also only get paid 9 bucks an hour on one job and work another part time job to supplement that which pays differently for different jobs. The government gets a shit ton of my money too, also because I live in maryland where taxes are one of the highest in the USA.


Taxes are fine with me, as long as the money gets used correctly..... not stolen by lethargic assholes who are too lazy to get a job. Unemployment checks are fine, as long as they are doing things like supporting an impoverished family while the mom and dad look for jobs actively.... and then getting OFF unemployment as quickly as possible.

The problem isn't the system, it's the people who abuse the systems. No legislator in their right mind is saying "hey let's make a program to throw money away to lazy people who give nothing back to the economy."

 

[SteelHorse]

Nah I'm not "angry". I love working my job. And I don't rlly care if other people don't work, that's their decision, until it effects me. I'm always for a smaller government. The government sucks at just about everything when compared to companies. Shut the government down let the people lookout for themselves and stop creating government programs. If you got rid of Obamas idea of making the government bigger every chance he gets I'd be just fine.

 

[TheDude]

Nah I'm not "angry". I love working my job. And I don't rlly care if other people don't work, that's their decision, until it effects me.

Prior to a lot of government reforms and regulations, companies did a horrible job at things like protecting human rights. The government does a shitty job because it's run by shitty people and is constantly fighting the likes of big business. Do you really wanna see a nation run by big corporate, where 95% of the nation is poor and works for a company basically like Walmart while the other 5% make the decisions and deal with all sociopolitical functions of our nation?

If you privatize everything, the gap between rich an poor will just grow and you'll have horribly impoverished and undereductated sections of this nation being utterly abused by the rich for profit.


I would like to think that the richest nation in the world could do things like provide good infrastructure, transportation, legal protection, and healthcare for its citizens.

 

[Maccabeus]

It doesn't take several college classes to know the civil war... which is an awful name for it. The appropriate name is war between the states. The actual meaning of civil war is far different. so the real point of the Civil War was nothing to do with slavery in the beginning the whole point of the Civil War was just for the the southern states to be able to be free from the northern states and have their own form of government where they can freely rule over there farm land of they pleased the the taxation that was brought on by the northern states was it was just too much for the the farmers to build the handle and succeed at the ER for me so what they did with the band together to basically make another revolution in the point of this revolution was for them to have free Forums thats more money more farming you and then trade afterwards when is the new OS for their items that are mass-produced such as metals in a new railroad parts in you know stuff like that but we were agriculturally strong in the south and they wore it was the word industrially strong in the north which when it comes to the war itself the south was far more prepared for the war the new earth was just able to bring in more supplies from the Industrial Revolution and from you know other countries such as Britain and France I believe when it when it comes to Britain and France helping they originally were helping the south which is why we were doing so well earlier on in this war because they had actual guns they needed to know to talk to go to war with however by the time live as a patient Proclamation was written Britain and France head and said that they're not going to help the south unless they stopped slavery so at this point in the war was turning into a war about slavery and that's when you know the masturbation Proclamation was written that sealed the deal so now is officially only only the North Britain and France fighting the south and it only became about slavery near the end of the war before that there was wondering know no point in it was about slavery as far as the south of winning I don't think it literally elemental think it would have been a good I don't think it would have been a good thing necessarily because you know by the time Sherman's march to the sea we were so bitter we probably would have just destroyed the the northern states instead of actually loling them to grow after we would have won personally I think that the only way it would work is if the new one as they did obviously because they allowed us to you know continue doing what we do as far as your farming and eventually start progressing in our part of the country.... sorry about any grammatical mistakes. Used my phone speech recognition.

 

[DamageINC]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph