• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is America the greatest nation on earth?

Is America the greatest country on earth?

  • Yes

    Votes: 45 45.9%

  • No

    Votes: 53 54.1%
  • Total voters
    98
Uncensored2008 said:
Particularly the last 8 years.

I certainly don't see "diversity" as a mark of greatness. Walmart is not a great music store because they sell mops and groceries. Guitar Center is a great music store because they do not.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think it's been going on for much longer than that, and is the result of several different sociological factors, especially prior successes and innovations, which have made us complacent and happy to rest on our laurels, and a general sense of entitlement and self-importance, without having had to do anything to feel accomplished about. We've become a fat and lazy society, both figuratively and literally.
 
Declan said:
The US stole german scientists to make it space program as well. Forgot to mention that.
Click to expand...

Lol !!

Every Nation ran off with German Scientists.

So what ?

Werner Von Braun wanted to land the entire Appollo Rocket on the Moon.

It was a American Scientist that came up with the Concept of a Lunar Lander.

It was American ingenuity and innovation that built the Guidance Computers for the Rocket and the Lander.

It was an American Scientists that invented the Integrated chip, and Transistors that made those Computers and the device your on right now possible.

Plus Rocket technology and German Scientists alone is not what landed men on the Moon.

If that were the case Russia wouldnt have stopped at a Orbit and a space walk.

We put Moon Buggies up there.

Suck it up. America is truely exceptional.
 
Tucker Case said:
Pasteur did not discover antibiotics. :lol:
Click to expand...

{Louis Pasteur and Jules Francois Joubert observed that cultures of the anthrax bacilli, when contaminated with moulds, became inhibited. Some references say that Pasteur identified the strain as Penicillium notatum.[citation needed]}

History of penicillin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He did not produce common antibiotics, but I believe he correctly credited with their discovery.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
{Louis Pasteur and Jules Francois Joubert observed that cultures of the anthrax bacilli, when contaminated with moulds, became inhibited. Some references say that Pasteur identified the strain as Penicillium notatum.[citation needed]}

History of penicillin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He did not produce common antibiotics, but I believe he correctly credited with their discovery.
Click to expand...

First sentence in your link:

"Alexander Fleming was the first to suggest that the Penicillium mould must secrete an antibacterial substance, and the first to concentrate the active substance which he named penicillin"

Fleming clearly invented antibiotics.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
A nearly 50% increase in per capita, inflation adjusted, federal spending in just 35 years is not a small change and certainly not conservative.
Click to expand...

First, I wish you would have put up the numbers you were citing, but I did you work for you.

Your statement implies that this stat somehow is evidence of progressive policy over the past 35 years. In making your statement you throw out a bunch of macro-data without really understanding its components. So, let me help you. Yes, per-capita expenditures are up.

Federal spending per capita, nominal and inflation adjusted.jpg

But, curiously, it has been flat to declining since 1980... that is, however, until the Bush Administration, when it started to climb. Why is that?

Let's see. The major components of spending are 1) Social Security, 2) Medicaid and Medicare, 3) the Defense Department and 4) all other government. Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare were programs enacted well before 1980. Yes, they are causing increasing expenditures, but that is because the population has gotten older, not because we have had progressive legislation to add to the burden (except Medicare Part D, enacted during the Bush Administration).

http://www.businessinsider.com/america-is-getting-older-2014-2

What we did add to our GDP per capita were two elective wars and occupations, which cost the taxpayers between $4 and $6T (that would be as much as $30,000 per tax payer.. all in), but there is nothing "progressive" of substance enacted since 1980 that is to blame here....

ttwtt78640 said:
Look at the CBO's numbers:

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/Tax_liability_Shares.pdf

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/top-20-percent-households-pay-94-percent-income-taxes
Click to expand...

Thank you for supporting your argument. I appreciate reasoned thinking. That said, you gave us another set of macro numbers without really understanding the micro. While it is true that the aggregate tax burden falls on the most wealthy quartile, or more specifically the 1%, that is NOT proof that we have a progressive tax system but rather proof that wealth is skewed to the few.

We actually have a de facto flat tax (which is NOT progressive, but rather more regressive) as almost all income groups pay 30% of their income in taxes. It just so happens that the very wealthy 30% contributes more to the government coffers.

Consider a man with a $1,000 income compared to a man with a $1,000,000 income. If each pays 30%, that the government gets $300,300, with 99.9% coming from the very wealthy. Its not a progressive taxing system as each are paying 30%, as we have now.

Taxes - Paid by income group2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Uncensored2008 said:
Difficult to say, internal combustion has been around since the 1300's with no clear inventor named. The modern engine using spark plugs and distributed charge for combustion is American.
Click to expand...

LOL ...

Otto demonstrated the first true 4-stroke cycle in 1876 after giving up active management of Otto & Langen and going back to an 1861 design of his own...

Otto patented his engine with patent number 365,701. Unfortunately, despite him being the first person to build a working four-stroke engine, Aphonse Beau de Rochas had already patented the idea (if not the design) in 1862 despite having never made such an engine himself. In 1886, Otto's patent was revoked. He did have other patents though and they were worded and enforced so well that many other designs were tried to get around the 4-stroke patent. Notably, the Atkinson engine was a 6-stroke engine with the extra 2 strokes being used to scavenge and clean the cylinder. Nevertheless, Otto's name stuck and that buzzing little beauty in your car today is the result.
Click to expand...
Car Bibles : The history of the internal combustion engine and Otto Cycle.

The Benz Patent-Motorwagen (or motorcar), built in 1886, is widely regarded as the first automobile; that is, a vehicle designed to be propelled by an internal combustion engine.

The vehicle was awarded the German patent, number 37435, for which Karl Benz applied on January 29, 1886. Following official procedures, the date of the application became the patent date for the invention once the patent was granted, which occurred in November of that year.
Click to expand...
Benz Patent-Motorwagen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So I think not. In fact American automotive design has lagged behind European design since the invention of the motor car. If you doubt that, take a look in the garages of the wealthy in the US, and note the number of Mercedes-Benz, BMWs, and Bentleys. Then look in garages of the European wealthy, and note the lack of US manufactured vehicles. :)
 
Leo said:
LOL ...


Car Bibles : The history of the internal combustion engine and Otto Cycle.


Benz Patent-Motorwagen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So I think not. In fact American automotive design has lagged behind European design since the invention of the motor car. If you doubt that, take a look in the garages of the wealthy in the US, and note the number of Mercedes-Benz, BMWs, and Bentleys. Then look in garages of the European wealthy, and note the lack of US manufactured vehicles. :)
Click to expand...


The Cadillac was the first automobile to use the pedal and gear shift configuration that's still used today.

American car manufacturers in the past catered to the American consumer, who were more interested in American Muscle than European luxury. The Luxury market appealed only to elderly Women and retirees.

Our manufacturers were building cars for the Blue collar workers, for Middle Income America.

I personally would take a 1970 Dodge Challenger, a 1955 Chevy Bel Air or a 1958 Plymouth Fury over any European luxury vehicle any day.
 
Fenton said:
The Cadillac was the first automobile to use the pedal and gear shift configuration that's still used today.

American car manufacturers in the past catered to the American consumer, who were more interested in American Muscle than European luxury. The Luxury market appealed only to elderly Women and retirees.

Our manufacturers were building cars for the Blue collar workers, for Middle Income America.

I personally would take a 1970 Dodge Challenger, a 1955 Chevy Bel Air or a 1958 Plymouth Fury over any European luxury vehicle any day.
Click to expand...

Apart for the last paragraph, which is merely a statement of personal preference, I would not disagree with any of that. But the fact that wealthy Americans buy European designed and engineered cars as a matter of preference, whereas virtually no Europeans would consider buying an American designed and engineered automobile, may be considered fairly conclusive evidence of the superiority of the European product.

I accept the fact that American cars are designed for local conditions and preferences, but so is the European and Japanese product. The target demographic does not alter the relative quality and utility of the product.

And bear in mind that my comments were in relation to the risible claim that the internal combustion engine, as we know it, is an American invention. :)
 
Peter Grimm said:
This is seen as nearly axiomatic in some circles. In others, it's seen as misguided arrogance.

I want to know whether the maxim rings true with you, and your reasoning.
Click to expand...

Focus specifically on these areas, if at all possible...... 1.) Freedom 2.) Diversity 3.) Opportunity
Click to expand...



One of the The worst things about the USA is that it has too many people who waste their time on BS like this thread
which accomplishes absolutely nothing.

There is no greatest nation on this planet.

Those who 'think' that there is are one of this planet's biggest problems. :roll:



If they would spend the same amount of time actually doing something, anything, then they might get something useful done.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
 
Last edited:
shrubnose said:
One of the The worst things about the USA is that it has too many people who waste their time on BS like this thread
which accomplishes absolutely nothing.

There is no greatest nation on this planet.

Those who 'think' that there is are one of this planet's biggest problems. :roll:



If they would spend the same amount of time actually doing something, anything, then they might get something useful done.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
Click to expand...

What country are you from?
 
Tucker Case said:
There's no better response to pure, unadulterated idiocy.
Click to expand...

Why, I beg to differ.

This is a considerably better response to pure, unadulterated idiocy. That's why I used it...

LOL Brilliant post TC

:thumbs:​

See Post #214 for the original. :peace
 
Leo said:
Apart for the last paragraph, which is merely a statement of personal preference, I would not disagree with any of that. But the fact that wealthy Americans buy European designed and engineered cars as a matter of preference, whereas virtually no Europeans would consider buying an American designed and engineered automobile, may be considered fairly conclusive evidence of the superiority of the European product.

I accept the fact that American cars are designed for local conditions and preferences, but so is the European and Japanese product. The target demographic does not alter the relative quality and utility of the product.

And bear in mind that my comments were in relation to the risible claim that the internal combustion engine, as we know it, is an American invention. :)
Click to expand...


Its interesting to see how different National cultures shape the vehicles they drive

Australians drive around those funky half trucks called " Utes "

That style doesn't appeal to me personally ( or anyone I know and have ever met ) but Australians apparently love them.
 
I think in some ways it is, and in some ways it isn't.

The US has an incredible can-do attitude. The US has the world's largest economy. The US has the world's most powerful military. Americans are friendly and outgoing. Americans have achieved incredibly in both the arts and the sciences.

On the other hand, the US has a pretty noxiously close-minded worldview. The US has the world's highest incarceration rate. The US doesn't have the institutional continuity or cultural staying power of nations like Britain or France. Americans kill each other in droves, and often with a severe racial undertone to it. Americans consistently fail at self-criticism and introspection on anything like a national platform.

So, it depends on your metric. In some ways the US is progressive, in some ways it is backward. In some ways Americans have a unique spirit, in some ways Americans fail to see their crushing averageness.

I could draw up the same sort of list for the usual contenders on "greatest nation in the world" lists, like Britain, France, China, Russia, etc.

I suspect what we'll find is that they each excel above all others in some ways, and yet they too are not perfect and fall prey to some serious flaws that they're sometimes blind to.

America is no different. Maybe that in itself is enough to conclusively answer "no" to the poll question.
 
Peter Grimm said:
This is seen as nearly axiomatic in some circles. In others, it's seen as misguided arrogance.

I want to know whether the maxim rings true with you, and your reasoning.


Focus specifically on these areas, if at all possible...... 1.) Freedom 2.) Diversity 3.) Opportunity
Click to expand...

I said no. I prefer to think of countries like people. There are leaders. The U.S. is certainly a leader. There are exceptional people. The U.S. is certainly that.

But every country has something unique to offer to the world. We are all, together, one earth. We are more interconnected than ever before. We move from country to country, travel extensively, trade, have relatives in different countries.

The U.S. is one of the greatest countries on earth. It is THE greatest, if you look at only certain areas. But if you look at other areas, other countries would be the greatest.

The U.S. is not the greatest nation, for example, as far as health care goes (either receiving it, or the cost of it), or as far as education goes, or as far as the health of its citizens. But it has the greatest military, and it offers wonderful opportunities to its citizens (other countries have now passed up the US in ability for the average citizen to move up).

So it's not black and white to me. And I'm not sure it's that meaningful to declare one country or another "the greatest." Remember that the Roman Empire was "the greatest" at one time, and lasted many more centuries than the U.S. has. So was Great Britain (or so Great Britain thought). So was France (or so France thought). So was Germany (or so Germany thought).

Humility is important, I think. But recognizing the leadership role is important, since it imposes a duty on the U.S. to do the right thing, when called upon, as a leader in the world.
 
Last edited:
Peter Grimm said:
This is seen as nearly axiomatic in some circles. In others, it's seen as misguided arrogance.

I want to know whether the maxim rings true with you, and your reasoning.


Focus specifically on these areas, if at all possible...... 1.) Freedom 2.) Diversity 3.) Opportunity
Click to expand...

During my lifetime I have visited many countries and have not found one that could compare with ours...Not only is it the greatest country in the world but in history.
 
Leo said:
Apart for the last paragraph, which is merely a statement of personal preference, I would not disagree with any of that. But the fact that wealthy Americans buy European designed and engineered cars as a matter of preference, whereas virtually no Europeans would consider buying an American designed and engineered automobile, may be considered fairly conclusive evidence of the superiority of the European product.

I accept the fact that American cars are designed for local conditions and preferences, but so is the European and Japanese product. The target demographic does not alter the relative quality and utility of the product.

And bear in mind that my comments were in relation to the risible claim that the internal combustion engine, as we know it, is an American invention. :)
Click to expand...

The fact that a certain demographic likes a specific type of product has absolutely zero bearing on if that product is any good or not. The main reason that wealthy folks in America buy European cars is because they are expensive and this a status symbol. Nothing more.
The US automakers could very easily build a car that matched every single capability of a European car but it would still not have that status attached to it as a euro car does.
Your argument is not a good one.
 
Peter Grimm said:
This is seen as nearly axiomatic in some circles. In others, it's seen as misguided arrogance.

I want to know whether the maxim rings true with you, and your reasoning.


Focus specifically on these areas, if at all possible...... 1.) Freedom 2.) Diversity 3.) Opportunity
Click to expand...

Ask us 10 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom