Bill Clinton: U.S. should be prepared to lose global dominance

Any thoughts? I have many; but thought I'd open it up for first read, before commenting...

He should have added "..thanks to the dumbass Black Jesus currently in the WH."

This would have never happened if Hillary had won.


Oh, wait.

Maybe lol. How much do you know about Hillary's plan to help the economy? She was for investing in greater trade-related education so that people could go back to work, ie., retraining people so that they could learn something where they could actually get a job afterward. Not as glamorous as the bourgeois fantasy of the Obamaphiles, to be sure, but there ya go. At least it was something to put people back to work. Either that or use that skill to start their own businesses. Maybe that was some influence from her Republican father who himself started a textile manufacturing business.

Of course, she was also talking about ending corporate welfare long before it became the now popular thing to say: I remember well when she even named names as to which corporations were taking government handouts at a rally in Los Angeles!

But...Hillary is not the point of this thread.

More curious as to what people think about a possible end to American global dominance...

The new American Spirit: "We're gonna go into this corner and get fat and lazy, yay!"

Makes me want to fucking puke.

All good things must come to an end. The interesting thing to see is will the new global superpowers be as generous as the U.S.A. has been.

If it'll finally put an end to countries looking to us to help them every time they have an earthquake, Skin's all for it. Oh, look! Another country full of stick-worshipping proto-humans registered an earthquake and it's going to take trillions of dollars to rebuild their mud-and-thatch huts! Hey, China! You're up, buddy!

Is there another source for this? I've never heard of voltairenet and nothing is coming up on google news.

China will be the next in line full stop. I would add that between our consumption of their goods and our own demise in the manufacturing arena has made this happen.

Why do Democrats seem to root for the US to fail?

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk

Be realistic, even the Department of Defense is saying that the biggest threat to the US is debt. Within a few years our interest payments are going to be equal to the current defense budget.

Sanolich, this seems to be the only record that I have found, and that's only because I keep an eye out for these things...

However, President Clinton was indeed at the Yalta European Strategy meeting on Friday, the day before this article was published, and the title of his scheduled speech was: The United States and the Global Shifts of the 21st Century. I can't be sure, but my guess is this is accurate.

But...but...I thought Liet said the debt is nothing to worry about?!?!?

Because most of them -- most, mind, not all -- are leftist morons who believe that one man's success results inevitably and exclusively from someone else's woe. Therefore, they see success only as exploitation, therefore the most successful are the biggest monsters. To recap: They're fuckin' morons.

The Iranians, making us look impotent, a communist superpower, slapping us silly. A terrible economy, double-digit unemployment, and everyone yammering on about the environment.

The last time we were in this boat, we elected Reagan. It took 12 years to unfuck Carter's mess. God knows how long it will take this time.

Geez, back in the days when I used to complain about this, I was assured that the loss of our industrial base was a wonderful thing, and that if watching greenish-white people with their ribs sticking out lying in the street didn't give me sexual arousal, something was wrong with me.

Now it's a BAD thing?

I wish people would make up their minds.

This is one thing Bill is seeing clearly.

You only have to look at our national debt, the insanity in DC, and the betrayal of traditional American values to understand that our hegemony is at an end. Like someone else posted, it merely remains to be seen if the new superpowers are as altruistic as we have traditionally been. America's heyday has passed. The progressives have effectively killed the golden goose.

:fuckoff:

Oddly enough, this seems to sum up a large part of your opposition to liberalised immigration.

Oh my yes, I remember that one time when the democrats were in power and the national debt increased from $5 trillion to $10 trillion. Oh right, that was the republicans.

Politicians didn't kill America, apathy did.

China and the EU are the only conceivable "new leaders" of the world order, being the only states with an economy comparable to the U.S. The EU countries will spend all their money on welfare state goodies, so they can be counted out. China is probably 20 years away from economic parity and, even if they do become more assertive in world affairs, it will likely be another 20-50 years before their military capabilities exceed those of the U.S.

So, yes, China probably will one day be the pre-imminent power in the world, but it may not happen in our lifetimes.

As for the demise of manufacturing jobs: if you think losing them was expensive, try retaining them. The jobs of the future are about intellect and creativity, not converting raw materials into crude products. We're moving past that and should embrace the change; insulating ourselves from it will only make us less competitive against those who do embrace it.

And the Indians slurped up those.

The dominance of the US has gradually been on the wane for some time. In an economic sense, they are no longer that far ahead of their major competitors. They retain dominance only in the military sphere, which is why they're trying to use this advantage to gain control of energy reserves, for instance.

Joss saw it comin'. Learn Chinese, kids.

My only problem with this statement is that Clinton was a strong advocate of globalism as well. He did a lot of setting us up in regards to losing / giving up this dominance.

Bush1 and Clinton should both be flogged. Bush1 for negotiating NAFTA and Clinton for signing it into law.

I give you grief for supporting Obama, right? Here's my moment of truth. I was a big proponent of NAFTA and even thought Clinton's support of it was one of the things he actually got right. I have to admit it didn't work the way I thought it was going to.