Would Scandinavia please take Obama?

[Wrath of Dagon]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30458.html Some stuff we've been discussing here recently.

[Rosbjerg]

I think he would fit in here quite well actually and we could use a black leader to help deal with our own problems with immigration and racism.. so ship him over!

[Lare Kikkeli]

could you please take all of our right wing anti immigrant populists? fair trade...

[Walsingham]

No way, you bastards. He's ours if anything. Can't be worse than the one-eyed funster.

 

[Wrath of Dagon]

could you please take all of our right wing anti immigrant populists? fair trade...

Deal. At least your right wingers have somewhere to move to.

[Rostere]

It works pretty well there. Historically homogeneous, affluent and well-educated Scandinavians generally accept working hard and giving up much for people for the poorer members of societies. These admirable attitudes reflect noble Nordic virtues of thrift, study and social trust.

 

Now who's racist?

 

The dense land use policies associated with the climate change agenda area fit better into small compact cities like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Oslo than their sprawling American counterparts.

 

WTF? Stockholm is anything but compact. You could wonder if the person in question has even been there himself. Stockholm is very thinly spread out with almost no tall buildings, especially central Stockholm. This has been the central issue for local politics for decades, it's strange to see someone claim the opposite. Although it is true that Sweden is, compared to the US, a more urban country the cities in question does not have very large population per unit of area.

[Wrath of Dagon]

It works pretty well there. Historically homogeneous, affluent and well-educated Scandinavians generally accept working hard and giving up much for people for the poorer members of societies. These admirable attitudes reflect noble Nordic virtues of thrift, study and social trust.

 

Now who's racist?

Could be cultural, not necessarily racial or ethnic.

 

The dense land use policies associated with the climate change agenda area fit better into small compact cities like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Oslo than their sprawling American counterparts.

 

WTF? Stockholm is anything but compact. You could wonder if the person in question has even been there himself. Stockholm is very thinly spread out with almost no tall buildings, especially central Stockholm. This has been the central issue for local politics for decades, it's strange to see someone claim the opposite. Although it is true that Sweden is, compared to the US, a more urban country the cities in question does not have very large population per unit of area.

So Stockholm is mostly single family houses? Not the impression I got from Project Gotham Racing 2.

[Calax]

It works pretty well there. Historically homogeneous, affluent and well-educated Scandinavians generally accept working hard and giving up much for people for the poorer members of societies. These admirable attitudes reflect noble Nordic virtues of thrift, study and social trust.

 

Now who's racist?

Could be cultural, not necessarily racial or ethnic.

Except that for the most part when sombody says scandavian they come up with a particular brand of white (meaning white, blond, athletic...) thus racial.

The dense land use policies associated with the climate change agenda area fit better into small compact cities like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Oslo than their sprawling American counterparts.

 

WTF? Stockholm is anything but compact. You could wonder if the person in question has even been there himself. Stockholm is very thinly spread out with almost no tall buildings, especially central Stockholm. This has been the central issue for local politics for decades, it's strange to see someone claim the opposite. Although it is true that Sweden is, compared to the US, a more urban country the cities in question does not have very large population per unit of area.

So Stockholm is mostly single family houses? Not the impression I got from Project Gotham Racing 2.

this statement is just a point of how idiotic you can sometimes be. You're using PGR2 to give you cultural impressions of a society. Particularly a racing game where the speeds are such that you barely can see the buildings as they whiz by.

 

And before you say something like this please look at the link that was posted in the previous post about THE THING YOU JUST SAID IS INCORRECT!

[Wrath of Dagon]

You got something up your ass? And how does that link show I'm incorrect?

[Gfted1]

For the life of me, I cant figure out how that statement is racist. It actually seems complimentary to me.

[Gorgon]

How did we get to Scandinavian home density, and who the hell cares ?

[Aristes]

I'm more and more disappointed by Obama, but I think his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace prize was long overdue. I'm tired of his hat in hand bowing attitude, and this was a welcome change. In fact, while I doubt there's any chance in hell that I'll vote for him in any election, he went a long way to overcome some of the animosity that I've had for him in the months since he took office, at which point I was actually neutral.

 

Of course, I think the domestic programs he either supports or is pushing will be the ruination of our country. The health care overhaul didn't actually worry me until this disasterous plan for lowering the age for medicare by an entire decade. ...And before someone insults themselves by saying that the move doesn't include all people 55 and over, just stop. Programs of this ilk start out with any number of restrictions and end up encompassing larger and larger portions of the population. Hell, the biggie is the age restriction and congress is making noise about reducing or removing that long term.

 

The big excuse for this overhaul is that the United States spends too much on Healthcare as a % of GDP. These programs fail to do anything about even that situation. If the Dems want single payer universal health care, restructure the entire system. Don't bankrupt us by tinkering with these crazy assed schemes. Honest to goodness, my conspiracy therorist friends are making more and more sense to me.

[Meshugger]

You guys dislike him for inane reasons. At least try to attack him on issues that matter (A long read, but very well written one).

 

Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy. What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.

 

 

I love that kind of writing. It's...colorful.

Edited December 11, 2009 by Meshugger

[Wrath of Dagon]

So we're supposed to dislike him for not being enough of a commie? Actually I think he handled the economic crisis pretty well, at least we didn't go into a depression. I didn't like the stimulus though, and if he continues spending like a drunken sailor we'll have an even bigger crisis down the road.

[Walsingham]

*sigh*

 

Not this again. I know I won't change your mind but it has to be said: Government spending can kickstart an economy. Didn't Roosevelt prove that back in the day?

[Meshugger]

So we're supposed to dislike him for not being enough of a commie? Actually I think he handled the economic crisis pretty well, at least we didn't go into a depression. I didn't like the stimulus though, and if he continues spending like a drunken sailor we'll have an even bigger crisis down the road.

 

The article isn't about that. Read it. It is about blatant corporatism, which should be your greatest consern with him.

[lord of flies]

For the life of me, I cant figure out how that statement is racist. It actually seems complimentary to me.

A statement can be racist and "complimentary" too. Sorting humans into groups on the basis of ethnicity and then ascribing characteristics to them (beyond superficial ones, e.g. skin color) is racism.

 

For example, "asians are all good at math" is a "complimentary" statement, but it is also racist.

[Gorgon]

*sigh*

 

Not this again. I know I won't change your mind but it has to be said: Government spending can kickstart an economy. Didn't Roosevelt prove that back in the day?

Free market is religion to these people, there is no other way to explain it. One can't really relate until one has heard the likes of Ron Paul rant on the subject. Anything done by government to affect the economy, even regulating interest rates which all countries do, is inherently evil and a sin against the free movement of Capital.

Edited December 11, 2009 by Gorgon

[Calax]

You got something up your ass? And how does that link show I'm incorrect?

A bit of something given your partisanship and the fact that you seem to take that which you see in a game as truthiness.

 

Stockholm has a population density of 1 person per 22.2 km2 as of 1996

NYC NYC has a population density of 26,402.9 per mile squared

Stockholm has about 1.2 million people about the same as San Diego

 

Diego has a pop density of 3,771.9 per Mile (or 1,456.4/km2)

 

Stockholm is NOT "compact"

[Rostere]

WTF? Stockholm is anything but compact. You could wonder if the person in question has even been there himself. Stockholm is very thinly spread out with almost no tall buildings, especially central Stockholm. This has been the central issue for local politics for decades, it's strange to see someone claim the opposite. Although it is true that Sweden is, compared to the US, a more urban country the cities in question does not have very large population per unit of area.

So Stockholm is mostly single family houses? Not the impression I got from Project Gotham Racing 2.

 

Seriously, man. Let's take San Diego as comparison as Calax did (even though his numbers are a bit strange)...

 

This is central San Diego. This is central Stockholm.

 

Now, which one looks to be more densely populated? The one where people live in apartment blocks from the 19th century or the one where people live in skyscrapers? You tell me.

[Guard Dog]

*sigh*

 

Not this again. I know I won't change your mind but it has to be said: Government spending can kickstart an economy. Didn't Roosevelt prove that back in the day?

Actually no. WW2 ended the depression, the New Deal really just extended it in an attempt to prvent it from getting worse. Some interesting (at least I thought so) reading if you ever have the time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forgotten_Man

 

 

As for the topic, we are stuck with that miserable statist SOB until 2012. If current polling holds the Repubs will recapture at least one house of Congress next year. That at least will mitigate the damage Obama can do to us. If the Repubs capture the house and erase the super majority the Dems have in the Senate I'll sleep a lot better at night. Divided government; the only time when everyone in America is safe.

 

To tell the truth, as long as Congress is controlled by the other party, I don't care who is in the White House.

Edited December 12, 2009 by Guard Dog

[Trenitay]

Are you saying you'd rather have a dem congress and a republican president than a completely republican government?

[Guard Dog]

Are you saying you'd rather have a dem congress and a republican president than a completely republican government?

 

Without a doubt. And vice versa.

 

My ideal US government is:

 

House: Republican Majority by 20-30 seats

Senate: Democrat Majority by 2-5 seats ( enough so the Vice President will probably never be a factor).

Supreme Court: Constructionist majority by at least 5-4, 6-3 is better, but not more than that.

 

Give me all that and I would not care who is in the White House. Remember Awesomeness, the Executive does not wield very much power. Influence yes, but not much power. The real power in the US is in Congress, the Executive was meant to be a check on them. When you get one political party running everything the results are almost always all bad.

[Calax]

WTF? Stockholm is anything but compact. You could wonder if the person in question has even been there himself. Stockholm is very thinly spread out with almost no tall buildings, especially central Stockholm. This has been the central issue for local politics for decades, it's strange to see someone claim the opposite. Although it is true that Sweden is, compared to the US, a more urban country the cities in question does not have very large population per unit of area.

So Stockholm is mostly single family houses? Not the impression I got from Project Gotham Racing 2.

 

Seriously, man. Let's take San Diego as comparison as Calax did (even though his numbers are a bit strange)...

 

This is central San Diego. This is central Stockholm.

 

Now, which one looks to be more densely populated? The one where people live in apartment blocks from the 19th century or the one where people live in skyscrapers? You tell me.

the numbers are pulled from wiki, I wasn't gonna look very hard for numbers to show such an obvious fallacy.

[Gorgon]

*sigh*

 

Not this again. I know I won't change your mind but it has to be said: Government spending can kickstart an economy. Didn't Roosevelt prove that back in the day?

Actually no. WW2 ended the depression, the New Deal really just extended it in an attempt to prvent it from getting worse. Some interesting (at least I thought so) reading if you ever have the time: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org

It's not like a war is anything like a huge government spending spree where one actually takes control of key industries, oh wait, maybe government can do something.