Jul 2016
169 / 182
May 2019
Jun 2021
baasinsimple
May '19
Mari

No one has the obligation to say it and you aren't punished for insulting it, (or at least teachers aren't allowed to punish you for it now) unlike North Korea where you're literally deported to gulags and forced to eat your peers to survive. The pledge also doesn't really bare any meaning towards children, it's a couple sentence long statement with a bunch of words they don't understand and then it's never mentioned ever again for the rest of the day. The US also doesn't have any sort of worship towards our leaders, The U.S. Government classes and even some regular US history classes teach us that our country has done wrong things and we'll continue to do so, that includes the acts of conscription, the atomic bomb, The massacre of Native Americans etc. That criticism carries over to our leaders and officials.

Really, you have a huge misconception of how things are over here, it's actually impressive. Comparing the US to North Korea is like comparing a decently made pie with some flaws to cow dung. If children spout "jingoistic" ideals it's usually by their parents as much as the child being religious is also a result of parenting. The pledge is just as much as kneeling and praying five times each day in Islam, or saying a blessing before a meal, except, y'know, more inconsequential. The US educational system is much more critical than you're giving it any credit for, my dude. Even in areas where I grew up, being South Texas and North Alabama, which are known for being stereotypically redneck by other Americans and Europeans alike.

Trevor
May '19
1
Mari

I mean, it's still 100% creepy and brain-washy.

With the amount of students I hear seeing reciting it as a useless chore (me being one of those students) I'd almost say that reciting it in schools is doing the exact opposite of brain washing especially considering that most young children don't know what "allegiance" would probably mean in the first place, and by the time they found out they'd have gotten bored and annoyed with the pledge by then.

Even in like those really 'red neck' areas, the people there aren't as patriotic as they are because of reciting the pledge of allegiance in school lol.

Trevor
May '19
Mari

I mean saying that you're a young nation is kinda off, most countries in europe are way younger as their own independent things (including the one I live in)

you say this as if the countries of Europe don't have their own fuckery going on or something

Mari
May '19

You guys can stop treating me like I'm braindead, I'm fully aware that the pledge is not the reason US people are patriotic, and I never said US is like North Korea, I said the pledge is North Korea-like (which it objectively is). I'm going to bow out of this thread with this, since I see no point continuing an argument like this with the constant belittling and intentional misinterpretations of whatever I say..

Also this thread is about the US so I tried to keep it related to it. I did make a thread for other countries and their fuckery. My country is well-fucked. I never said it wasn't.

Thanks o/

baasinsimple
May '19

I mean you were objectively wrong with that statement and which You, without any kind of knowledge on the subject and insight as to why Americans do that decided to make. Then there's the fact that your definition of brain-washy is so loose it could make the U.K. and France sound conservative. Anyway, since you decided to dip out because you don't like being treated like your brain-dead for making a misinformed comment and then you tried to defend that comment, I just kind of want to get the last word in and bid you adieu.

skicoak
May '19
Mari

Pretty sure we're not "misinterpreting" you at all.

Belittling?.....Maybe.

Trevor
May '19
2
Mari

I'm sorry if I came across that way, but it seemed like that was what you were saying when you called it "brain washy". When someone tells me something is "Brainwashy" my mind immediately goes to Big Brother in 1984.

I never said US is like North Korea, I said the pledge is North Korea-like

image.png600x512 188 KB

I suggest you should probably have used a comparison less extreme than North Korea. Like if you compared it with one of the dictators of the middle east, that would've been more accurate than North Korea and then I would've argued against that as well heh heh.

I have aspergers so I don't quite interpret everything I hear or read correctly the first couple of times I hear or read it, so I might not be getting it because of that, but I really am finding a hard time interpreting the phrase "The US having schools recite the pledge every day is North Korea-like" as anything else other than "The US is like North Korea"

Unless you mean like the actual pledge itself is north korea-like and not the schools that recite it?

scythe
May '19

Kids in primary school in Australia stand and sing the national anthem every week. I think that's great. People are too cynical these days when it comes to even a little bit of national pride.

skicoak
May '19

Be an interesting case to follow, I wonder why it's just aimed at generics?

I know there's already an existing case of pharmaceuticals executive, former hedge funder, Martin Shkreli who raised the price of a life-saving AIDs and cancer drug from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill ... and he successfully defended the action in court. (Later was arrest for something involving moving stocks/funds illegally.

Short_Insomiac
May '19

As a person in the US, I can vouch. We kinda really suck, and are nosy in international affairs, but we could be worse. And we're trying to improve, I guess.

Cavechan
May '19
skicoak

I'm not an expert in this field, so I'm assuming the way things typically work is... Company A does research into a new drug. They pour a lot of money into the research and eventually it's able to go to market. To make up for the loss of money during research, Company A can charge a very large price for the medicine.

After making up for their loss (or maybe to help make up for it?), Company A is then able to release the patent so Companies B, C, etc can now use it to make their generic drugs. They have not shouldered any loss in research, so they should and typically do sell the medicine at a much lower cost.

If that is basically correct, then I can see how they wouldn't be able to sue the original maker of the drug as that company can more easily show how they had to upcharge in order to make up for the debt during research. Generic drug companies wouldn't have that same evidence so it may be more difficult for them to have evidence that can hold up in court.

Penni
May '19

The US is like any other country, we have our ups and downs. We have good and bad ideas, good and bad people, etc. From the outside I'm sure the US looks like a flaming hot mess but all countries have had these periods. In terms of most of the countries in the world, the US is young so yeah we got some things to figure out but there is a lot of good running through the veins of the US. It just tends to get covered up with all the bad.

skicoak
May '19
Cavechan

You probably missed the earlier posts but Company A's patent in your scenario only has viability in countries respecting the patent. Other countries just reverse engineer these drugs as soon as they're released. It's one of the reasons for such an increase in initial costs. They have to recoup development costs in limited protected markets.

vfinnigan
May '19
Cavechan

The whole rural voter/urban voter discrepancy isn't resolved in the Legislature, least of all in the House of Representatives, which is weighted heavily in favor of more populous states, as the number of representatives in each state is determined by the state's population. It's in the Senate where rural states get equal say.

However, like I said, the rural/urban discrepancy isn't addressed in the Legislature. We need the electoral college, because the President, the only person in office that's voted on by the whole country, makes all judicial and Cabinet appointments. And many Cabinet appointees, such as the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture and the head of the EPA, have a very disproportionate impact on rural voters. The senate doesn't make these appointments. The president does. Therefore, we need a say that's proportionate to the impact the president and his (or her) appointments have on us. But as it is, the more populous states still get a whole lot more electoral votes, since the electoral votes each state has is based on the number of senators and representatives each state has, from Wyoming's three (for one representative and two senators), to California's eighty gajillion.

Short_Insomiac
May '19

Inclusively, while we're mentioning the electoral college, Individual votes for the president don't matter. AKA as a US citizen, I'm only letting the electoral college know who i want to be President, but they don't have to take that into account. This is actually why most people in the US are shocked that Hillary Clinton isn't president, because she did get a lot of voters in her favor. The electoral college swung Trump's way, and therefore affecting the whole of the country.

Personally, I think we need to pay more attention to the electoral college for that exact reason. Nothing so far on any media has told me concerns about the college being bribed, or blackmailed, or anything. It's just another flaw in the system i guess.

Trevor
May '19

there was a lot of rogue voters that year in the electoral college who voted third parties lol

Short_Insomiac
May '19

Exactly, and try comparing this map to the map of supporters presidents had in that same time, it's way off

2 years later

closed Jun 29, '21