http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/six-ways-america-is-like-a-third-world-country-20140305

And yet our leaders puff themselves up like fat cats that eat all the canaries...

This has got to be one of the worst articles pasted on this site for some time, possibility forever. But then it does support and blame entitlement for all the problems, which would be absolutely true, except the article is just the obverse of the truth, it's a lack of additional entitlements the article blames. This article would be the absolute pinnacle of truth for those that believe theft by the government is an absolute right.

"Six Ways America Is Like a Third-World Country"

First the lead in, now this is Rolling Stone talking about politics:



So let's look at those six very important indicators of human development, number one:



This is the only one of the six indicators that half makes sense. Yes this authoritarian slave country has way to many people locked in cages that the government had no right to put there, those 60% that are incarcerated for non-violent crimes, most for offenses against one self, never harming another. There are also a large portion that are incarcerated for damaging another's property, why are they in jail? That is a civil matter, not criminal.

But death penalty is a righteous penalty for animals that murder others, not defending one's self, but the act of a violent attack on another. Oh, and as to the racial mix on death row, who cares, it is immaterial, do the crime, end of time.

Now we get into the fun entitlement stuff, number two:



Oh yeah, the ultimate entitlement, Statism, the brilliant idea that we give a small group of people the right to kidnap, imprison, harass, steal from and kill people, so that we can be protected from people who kidnap, harass, steal and kill people.

A statist is an individual who erroneously believes that there is such a thing as "authority" vested in certain human beings magically giving them the "right to rule" over other people. This "authority" means that certain people who we call "government", have the "moral right" to issue commands to those whom they rule (those under their "jurisdiction"), and that their "subjects" (slaves) have a "moral obligation" to obey the arbitrary dictates set by their masters. Most simply put, a statist is someone who believes in the legitimacy of slavery.

And now, will the true socialist please stand-up, number three:



The ultimate entitlement crime, failure of some states, mainly of the red team persuasion, refuses to expand free health care paid for by whom? I mean all of these states should be as successful as Kentucky, where all those people signed up for Odumbocare, 413,410 and of those 330,615 were Medicaid. Now if only all 50 states had that success, 16,530,750 new Medicaid enrollees.

And not to mention that they keep confusing health with medical care. Of course neither this country or most of the rest of the world offers health care, it just poison from the medical industry to extract huge sums of money and early life termination.

And not to the real problem, not as a solution but how to make the problem worse, larger entitlements, number four:



Did you know that paid maternal leave is the cause for these united States education woes? And did you know that racial bias in education is caused by local funding, but if we turn it over to those idiots in Washington, then everything would be ok? Gee, isn't that what Agenda 21 is all about, the national curriculum where instead of literature, the students study government literature, like the carbon tax to stall global warming, as if their weren't enough idiots already. But personally I like the one about civics being trashed so the students can learn government, the authority over their lives like good little slaves.

But just remember, with higher levels of funding from those that can pay will result somehow in better education than was available the last time funding was increased. If that works, why are the kids dumber now than they were before? Why are parents such idiots thy just agree with everything even when they haven't a clue about reality?

Now that the solution is to turn the kids into total imbeciles, let's address the biggest entitlement concern, number 5:



Just imagine, if we were to increase the welfare from it's current state, then there would be less inequality in this country. All our woes have nothing to do with the greed and inequities caused by the "government" and their laws and bailouts favoring all their favorite friends, would it? Nothing at all to do with "government" driving industry off shore and then allowing those same countries the freedom to bring back products made with cheap foreign labor to distill unemployment in this country with the additional benefit, not to the people mind you, but to the large corporations to destroy the level of living of the people, the first generations to lose the ground of a good living so enjoyed by our forefathers.

And now the entitlement crowd screaming for a wage that they are not worth, for work they are incapable of performing, to further reduce the sanctity of those they do earn their wage.

And last but not least, let's not forget that these united States are not getting what has been paid for, so let's just pay again, number 6:



America has been paying taxes for years, supposedly to maintain our aging infrastructures, but all those politicians just can't have that money just sit there and build up for when it is needed, they figure out new ways to spend and new projects to do, after all they tell the ignorant masses, "look we have this money just sitting here", and besides with this new project we can steal from you to hire additional public masters to more effectively tell you what we will do with your money, too bad your individual needs will just have to wait, we need a new park for the underprivileged.

This is possibly one of the most entitlement biased articles posted here lately, but then what can be expected from the entitlement crowd.

Au contraire, what leaders? A statist is an individual who erroneously believes that there is such a thing as "authority" vested in certain human beings magically giving them the "right to rule" over other people. This "authority" means that certain people who we call "government", have the "moral right" to issue commands to those whom they rule (those under their "jurisdiction"), and that their "subjects" (slaves) have a "moral obligation" to obey the arbitrary dictates set by their masters. Most simply put, a statist is someone who believes in the legitimacy of slavery.

And the idiotic masses just eat up those entitlements, stolen from those that can by coercion for those that can't or wont.

There is also the fact the Constitutional Republic is a Magna Carta era form of governing bureacracy.
European forms such as the Westminster model in fact evolved beyond the Magna Carta period through the assembly of peerage and legislative council, two institutions the United States completely lacks.

So whilst the United States makes a political claim of belonging to "the New World" where European nations represent "the Old World", in actual fact Europe continued politically evolving and the United States did not.

It remains frozen in a mediaeval governing bureacracy, which inherently generates medieaval political and legal bureacratic cultures.

That's why the US criminal justice system is barbaric compared to modern Europe, and why the US political culture is overburdened with bureacracy compared to modern Europe and the Commonwealth.

Best Americans can manage is to compare themselves with rogue nations in central asia and the middle east but c'mon with American jihad on the commies, jihad on crime, jihad on drugs and now jihad on terrorists, as well as guns in the hands of any idiot with citizenship, that's just the pot calling the kettle black.
American Conservatives and Muslim extremists are just two peas in a pod, doing the same thing and saying the same thing. What they both really are is two cultures locked into mediaeval routines.

Yeah, right. What is more medieval than claiming that a man or woman should become the head of state of a nation just because that person was born into the family of another head of state?

No, I am not talking about American politics.

I dont know Dodo, the Queen is mostly a figurehead who doesnt truly exercise power of any significant sort

we 'elect' leaders here, but its not that far off from selecting those 'born into' the right families,,

This is just one huge pile of malarkey. This whole tirade is just a showing that you ill understand forms of government, much less the workings of a republic, the form of government chosen by these united States. The constitution is but the written contract limiting the powers of that government. The founding fathers were big fans of John Locke, his social contract was the basis for the Constitution.

The Magna Carta has nothing to do with that government at all, it's only relevance was the understanding for a judicial system for government. It is all based on common law.

And the so called "Westminster" model is just an idiotic way of saying an ignotant mass believes some "divine" being not only exists, but is revered as the head of a nation, a nation so indoctrinated by thoughts of fiefdom (a form of slavery) they accept the authority of some aristocratic society instilled in a democratic parliament with another figure head, the prime minister, with no constitution, but a list of allowed rights, which means government has no bounds and the people are total slaves.

Is that the great evolution you refer to? That model that has plagued Europe throughout time, except that now instead of all those little kingdoms fighting each other, those royals spend all their time figuring out how to screw the common people.

And while your knowledge of government is limited to some technical jargon, if seems vast compared to your knowledge of legal systems, much less these united States system, even though it should be familiar to you, after all it has been hijacked by the same psychopathic group of elitist that believe they are gods.

But your belief in authority is but an illusion of a diseased psyche, based entirely in violence and built upon the erroneous and dogmatic belief that some people are masters who have the moral right to issue commands, and others are slaves who have a moral obligation to obey the masters.

That is the big difference in your beloved "Westminister" model and a "republic", in the republic their are no masters and the slaves are all volunteers that refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions.

Wrong on both counts, the Queen serves dominion not only on England, but the whole Commonwealth, just like her cousin Beatrice that just abdicated to her son, Willem-Alexander. And as with most things posted, little is understood about the subject, just statements with little substance.

And what leaders get elected? What part of the structure are they
elected to? Where in the constitution do we find this miracle?

The one true divide that separates humanity into two distinct types of individuals. The criterion for the divide is whether or not an individual believes in "authority" and therefore believes that there is legitimacy to slavery.