Democracies are better
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
And who gets to decide that? Dictators always go funny in the head because they're paranoid, probably justifiably, that someome is aiming to knock them off. In the end there are no benevolent dictators. It's an oxymoron.
Then there is no hope for mankind as no system is perfect. BTW Despite what people say, I do think the rulers of the PRC do act in the best interest of their people almost all the time. Did you know that nobody starves in the PRC?
Nobody in the PRC is starving. Along with economic progress will come greater human rights. Some Loony Liberals said that the PRC's "one family one child" policy was a gross violation of human rights (loony liberals firmly believe that welfare mothers should produce as many babies as nature allows) but it was the right policy for the times.
LOL, a democracy that is similar to Italy when it comes to gangs pervasive involvement and influence.
Taiwan may have its issues but on the whole its citizens enjoy remarkable freedom, and its elections are not only free and fair, but vigorously contested.
I agree that Mexico has a lot of issues, some of those issues threaten its democracy, and it has a high degree of corruption.
Saudi Arabia is a hell of a lot worse, especially if you're a woman. It's a dictatorship that denies even the most basic human rights to fully half of its citizens.
Given a choice I would live in Mexico ANY day, compared to Saudi Arabia.
From a democratic standpoint Russia is fucked. It's a kleptocracy in which if you cross the wrong people you wind up either dead, or jailed on trumped up charges. It WAS an emerging democracy, but Putin "fixed" that.
Is it better that Cuba? I don't know. I'm not really interested in holding a beauty contest in the burn victim ward.
I hope so too. In the meantime it's not a democracy.
B
burt-oh-my!
Well they are thriving, all their citizens have Universal Healthcare and they can retire with a pension at 50 so they are doing something right!....
Baloney, you dont have a clue what you are talking about. There is no Universal Healthcare in Singapore - employees contribute to Health Savings Accounts - known as Medisave. When they use medical services they spend their own money from these accounts. Wrong on count 1.
On count 2, in the same vein, no, they don't even slightly retire at 50, they again have forced savings, akin to our RRSPs, although without the income tax deduction, which is what they live off of in retirement. Not a defined benefit pension.
In both cases, they have a SMALLER government role in the process than we do. Very very low taxes. No welfare to speak of.
From the ECONOMIST:
FOND of having the last word, Singapore's government can nevertheless be flexible. Who would have thought it would be building casinos? But one policy that shows no sign of reversing is Singapore’s antipathy towards public welfare. The state’s attitude can be simply put: being poor here is your own fault. Citizens are obliged to save for the future, rely on their families and not expect any handouts from the government unless they hit rock bottom. The emphasis on family extends into old age: retired parents can sue children who fail to support them. In government circles “welfare” remains a dirty word, cousin to sloth and waste. Singapore may be a nanny state, but it is by no means an indulgent nanny.
This will really piss off the loony liberals and the NDP, plus it would not be a vote getter.
LOL, nothing speaks the one of the few occasions when the superiority of the Chinese mindset (70%+ of Singaporeans are Chinese heritage BTW) over the Caucasians and Blacks (Ghost people in their racial slurs) is recognized.
LOL, they had already been pissed off big time when their Mandarin Speaking Comrades in Mainland China act more Capitalists, even Fascists than those teabaggers could dream of.
Keep in mind I am not saying their Mandarin Speaking comrades are in the closet, waiting to come out or something.
Funny how you didn't say anything I said was untrue. The USA will attempt to overthrow any democratically elected socialist government they can and replace it with a Fascist government, as they did in Chile, any time the needs of capitalism dictate this outcome.
Chile turned out to be one of the best economy in LatAm, better than the neighboring jokers Argentina and definitely better than Ecuador and Cuba.
And the "Fascist" government in Chile did return the government to civilian ownership as promised, unlike the Communists and their Pinko Kook allies in the same neighborhood.
BTW, Chilean red wines, especially those Carmenere and Cabernet Sauvignon varieties are top notch and money for value.
How do you expect other people to choose how they want to live if they don't have a democracy?
But loonie left nutjob like Eric Blair will say because Chile is run by a "Fascist" government popped up by the "Great Satan", the needs of capitalism resulted to have the miners trapped.
Funny to notice many in-house pinko kook and their wannabe turn blind eyes on mining deaths in China, where as a Communist country manages to sustain the largest number of mining fatalities annually, second to none.
