http://gamingtrend.com
August 20, 2014, 05:09:34 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Could the US collapse like the Soviet Empire?  (Read 2595 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Drazzil
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 140


View Profile
« on: June 19, 2008, 02:31:40 AM »

With the economic and political situation the way it is, I am seeing this as a larger and larger possibility.

Our economy is in the most dire position it has been in for the last fifty years, the middle class is being squeezed like never before, the US dollar in a terribly perilous condition, we are carrying trillions in debt with little hope to repay it in our lifetimes, lobbiests and special intrests are running amok. With an oil shock imminent as the alternative energy technologies we could have been developing this whole time has been supressed by big oil.

All it would take is a moderate stock market crash and a run on the banks could lead to an economic bloodbath. Countries that have been buying our dollar would finally stop, the costs of cutting and running finally outweighing the terror of what would happen to the value of the dollars they have already bought. The US could rip itself into three or four pieces. The next cold war would be fought between the EU and China, with India taking the side of the EU, and China Allying with Russia.

How plausable is this? Why and why not?
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2008, 02:42:26 AM »

Shit.  All it would take is China turning in their paper to collapse this country economically.  "Voodoo economics", indeed.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
helot2000
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2008, 03:24:31 AM »

Quote from: Drazzil on June 19, 2008, 02:31:40 AM

The US could rip itself into three or four pieces.
The south is going to rise again, and the north and the east and the west?  Seriously, what could rip us apart on a scale even close to the American Civil War? 


Quote from: Drazzil
The next cold war would be fought between the EU and China, with India taking the side of the EU, and China Allying with Russia.  How plausable is this? Why and why not?
  I just don't see it.  I do see a slow fade, much like our brethren across the ocean. 
Logged

Saving the world one post at a time.
wonton
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 150


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2008, 07:07:53 AM »

Quote from: helot2000 on June 19, 2008, 03:24:31 AM

Quote from: Drazzil on June 19, 2008, 02:31:40 AM

The US could rip itself into three or four pieces.
The south is going to rise again, and the north and the east and the west?  Seriously, what could rip us apart on a scale even close to the American Civil War? 

Another civil war of course  icon_razz Although I actually agree, because despite the differences across america I think we're too homoginized to have splits like that occuring by region.  It might look similar to Iraq where there are no longer clear lines of battle if it actually came down to armed conflict, which seems nigh impossible for the forseeable future, imo.

Quote from: helot2000 on June 19, 2008, 03:24:31 AM

Quote from: Drazzil
The next cold war would be fought between the EU and China, with India taking the side of the EU, and China Allying with Russia.  How plausable is this? Why and why not?
  I just don't see it.  I do see a slow fade, much like our brethren across the ocean. 


I have always imagined that the US would go out with a big bang, considering its unique birth into the international scene.  I can't see that happening for at least 5-6 generations (more likely 15+).  All nations die at some point anyhow.
Logged
Zarkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4848


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2008, 07:16:58 AM »

I've been saying for over 10 years that the USA, in its current incarnation, will not survive the next 50 years.
Logged
CSL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1356


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2008, 09:35:21 AM »

Quote from: Zarkon on June 19, 2008, 07:16:58 AM

I've been saying for over 10 years that the USA, in its current incarnation, will not survive the next 50 years.

I'll take that bet and meet you back here in 2058.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2008, 12:34:34 PM »

you'll lose; he said "in its current incarnation". Things will change. 50 years (or is it 40 now, Zark?) is a long time for development in today's day and age.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11311


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2008, 01:00:31 PM »

Quote from: helot2000 on June 19, 2008, 03:24:31 AM

Quote from: Drazzil on June 19, 2008, 02:31:40 AM

The US could rip itself into three or four pieces.
The south is going to rise again, and the north and the east and the west?  Seriously, what could rip us apart on a scale even close to the American Civil War?
What if, hypothetically, Jeb Bush was the Republican candidate this year, and another Bush won the presidency despite again losing the popular vote?
Logged
mb737
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 232


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 19, 2008, 01:32:25 PM »

Quote from: CSL on June 19, 2008, 09:35:21 AM

Quote from: Zarkon on June 19, 2008, 07:16:58 AM

I've been saying for over 10 years that the USA, in its current incarnation, will not survive the next 50 years.

I'll take that bet and meet you back here in 2058.

That's not how that works.  It's like promising to get to something tomorrow.  Today is always today, tomorrow never comes.

And I think sooner than later CA is going to have a big blowup from/about all the Aztlan people when the state govt goes bankrupt from providing all the free services to the border jumpers.

MI, WI, MN, ME, northern NY, and maybe VT and NH will get absorbed back into the Great White North, eh.
Logged
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5451


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 19, 2008, 01:44:26 PM »

Quote from: CSL on June 19, 2008, 09:35:21 AM

Quote from: Zarkon on June 19, 2008, 07:16:58 AM

I've been saying for over 10 years that the USA, in its current incarnation, will not survive the next 50 years.

I'll take that bet and meet you back here in 2058.

I'll simply be happy if I'm still around in 2058 smile
Logged
Zarkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4848


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2008, 02:22:15 PM »

Note that I'm not saying that the USA won't exist.  It just won't be a 'democracy' (actually, a Plutocracy, more or less, or maybe an Oligarchy), composed of 50 (or more or less) states.  The actual style of government will change.  There may or may not be a civil war or invasion involved.  Personally, I have a feeling the next 'terrorist' activity will be an American citizen who has had enough of what's going on and has just enough knowledge to be dangerous, possibly involving an oil refinery. 

I'd love for our country to come back from the brink, but to be honest, we're only a few steps removed from the end days of the Holy Roman Empire (Reality shows / sports = Gladiatoral combat, in a sense?)
Logged
Two Sheds
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 63


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2008, 02:52:30 PM »

I don't think you mean the Holy Roman Empire, and I think you're delusional. We already had an American citizen who was fed up with the government, and who had "just enough knowledge to be dangerous." There's a very nice memorial to his victims in downtown Oklahoma City. And hey look, our system survived.

I'm with CSL: I'll take that bet.
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3047



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2008, 03:25:12 PM »

I think the worst possible scenario would be we lose our "leading superpower" status and become a runner-up superpower to China.

Other than that, we're not going anywhere. Other countries have survived thousands of years with only a fraction of the natural resources, freedoms, etc. that we enjoy.

Talk of the US collapsing within our lifetimes is just silly.
Logged
Freezer-TPF-
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1372


First in war and peace, second in the NL East.


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2008, 03:33:21 PM »

No.
Logged

Signature on file at the county clerk's office.
wonton
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 150


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2008, 08:40:46 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on June 19, 2008, 03:25:12 PM

I think the worst possible scenario would be we lose our "leading superpower" status and become a runner-up superpower to China.

Other than that, we're not going anywhere. Other countries have survived thousands of years with only a fraction of the natural resources, freedoms, etc. that we enjoy.

Talk of the US collapsing within our lifetimes is just silly.

The US losing its superpower status IS the US collapsing.  Other countries survived thousands of years with only a fraction of etc. because they built their country upon a system that didn't require those copious amounts of resources to function (and frankly, it would seem a rare case for a country to bear a tight resemblence to itself after that period of time).  Certainly I have no doubt that a single act by an individual is unable to bring about that type of change, ala the OK bombing.  Again, this type of change requires either a large majority or an extremely powerful minority (such as a military branch).  I agree, this happening in our lifetime seems unlikely but with WMDs, major change can happen with the drop of a hat... if that hat is attached to several nuclear warheads anyway.

As far as our country "coming back from the brink", I just don't agree with that type of argument.  Our country didn't suddenly change face in the last decade, it's been following this path for some time now.  Believe it or not, I think the populace is just making progress while the 'system' is planting its feet firm, so with the seperation a more objective look at how the gov't functions is possible. It was less than 100 years ago that the govt locked up 110,000 japanese, over half of which were americans, without substantial reason.  Now, look at the strife caused by locking up less than 1,000 forign war suspects.  Our societal change is outpacing the government, and a major overhaul will happen when/if that distance reaches a critical point.

So yeah, 'we' the people are not going anywhere.  The government just might though.
Logged
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3383



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 20, 2008, 09:00:01 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on June 19, 2008, 03:25:12 PM

I think the worst possible scenario would be we lose our "leading superpower" status and become a runner-up superpower to China.

Other than that, we're not going anywhere. Other countries have survived thousands of years with only a fraction of the natural resources, freedoms, etc. that we enjoy.

Talk of the US collapsing within our lifetimes is just silly.

Agreed.

The world is becoming multipolar again. Sheesh, we've only been the undisputed top dawg since the 1990s. That's just a blip. We'll cope. In fact we should cope very well, since the rising powers are rising within the framework that we spent the past couple of centuries trying to spread: market economies, representative governments, individual rights, rule of law, etc. The US had a huge role in defining the global civilization that's spreading and growing now. They're playing our game.

I think "runner-up to China" is unlikely apart from raw GDP, which doesn't mean very much. China's history of collectivism, bureaucracy, and hostility to individualism is a competitive disadvantage in the emerging global civilization. It's not something they can easily change (if they even wanted to; their rich cultural traditions convey plenty of strengths that we would do well to admire). The most likely outcome in the next 50 or so years is a multipolar world based on cooperative competition, rather than on the hostility that characterized the the Cold War.

The Pax Americana was pretty short and not all that pax-ful, though. 
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2992


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 20, 2008, 11:30:29 PM »

I think it would be foolish to predict the fading of America yet.
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 20, 2008, 11:34:30 PM »

I could see our economy collapsing under the weight of all the current social welfare obligations we are placing on it, and that the dems want to add to it, so I dont see a collapse as something that could never happen.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 20, 2008, 11:39:37 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on June 20, 2008, 11:34:30 PM

I could see our economy collapsing under the weight of all the current social welfare obligations we are placing on it, and that the dems want to add to it, so I dont see a collapse as something that could never happen.

Hahaha.  The Dems run a surplus with Clinton in office, and yet, it's the Democrats who're the risk?  What about the "war obligations", brettmcd?
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 20, 2008, 11:41:08 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on June 20, 2008, 11:39:37 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 20, 2008, 11:34:30 PM

I could see our economy collapsing under the weight of all the current social welfare obligations we are placing on it, and that the dems want to add to it, so I dont see a collapse as something that could never happen.

Hahaha.  The Dems run a surplus with Clinton in office, and yet, it's the Democrats who're the risk?  What about the "war obligations", brettmcd?

Ive never thought we should be in Iraq at all, and will not be voting for McCain either, so do you actually have a valid point there?
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: June 20, 2008, 11:47:43 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on June 20, 2008, 11:41:08 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 20, 2008, 11:39:37 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 20, 2008, 11:34:30 PM

I could see our economy collapsing under the weight of all the current social welfare obligations we are placing on it, and that the dems want to add to it, so I dont see a collapse as something that could never happen.

Hahaha.  The Dems run a surplus with Clinton in office, and yet, it's the Democrats who're the risk?  What about the "war obligations", brettmcd?

Ive never thought we should be in Iraq at all, and will not be voting for McCain either, so do you actually have a valid point there?

Yes - my point was that you, as is your wont, ignore facts in favor of ideology.  Republican presidents and congresses have run huge deficits, and yet you blame "social welfare obligations" that the "dems want to add" to.
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 21, 2008, 12:09:08 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on June 20, 2008, 11:47:43 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 20, 2008, 11:41:08 PM

Quote from: Brendan on June 20, 2008, 11:39:37 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 20, 2008, 11:34:30 PM

I could see our economy collapsing under the weight of all the current social welfare obligations we are placing on it, and that the dems want to add to it, so I dont see a collapse as something that could never happen.

Hahaha.  The Dems run a surplus with Clinton in office, and yet, it's the Democrats who're the risk?  What about the "war obligations", brettmcd?

Ive never thought we should be in Iraq at all, and will not be voting for McCain either, so do you actually have a valid point there?

Yes - my point was that you, as is your wont, ignore facts in favor of ideology.  Republican presidents and congresses have run huge deficits, and yet you blame "social welfare obligations" that the "dems want to add" to.

I blame both parties for the spending issues we have, but I see things like national health care and other social spending that once it is there will never be done away with coming mostly from the dems.   Both McCain and Obamas plans will add trillions to the debt, I believe it was 3.5 trillion for Obama and 4.5 Trillion for McCain, or very close to those number from a post that was made earlier on this forum.    We need to spend less at the federal level not more, but neither party wants to do that, as its easier to try and buy votes.

Edit here is the link the that topic.

http://www.gamingtrend.com/forums/index.php/topic,27372.0.html
« Last Edit: June 21, 2008, 12:12:19 AM by brettmcd » Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.168 seconds with 67 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.044s, 2q)