x
FJ is now mobile friendly. Try it out on your mobile browser!
Click to expand

stratosrider

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: female
Date Signed Up:10/03/2011
Last Login:3/05/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#12066
Highest Content Rank:#4458
Highest Comment Rank:#1431
Content Thumbs: 1364 total,  1526 ,  162
Comment Thumbs: 7773 total,  8533 ,  760
Content Level Progress: 64% (64/100)
Level 113 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 114 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 20% (20/100)
Level 275 Comments: Ninja Pirate → Level 276 Comments: Ninja Pirate
Subscribers:0
Content Views:53147
Times Content Favorited:57 times
Total Comments Made:1803
FJ Points:9274

Funny Pictures

latest user's comments

#45 - I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the exte…  [+] (1 new reply) 17 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +1
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#41 - If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our econom…  [+] (4 new replies) 18 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +1
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#39 - The idea that some people have is that opening trade and givin…  [+] (6 new replies) 18 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +1
#40 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
And as I said, I don't think tourism WILL end communism. What it will do is help individual people - maybe not in the way they most need, but enough that it is worthwhile.

Just curious, do you think we should end trade with China too? Because China is actually worse than Cuba in pretty much every condition we have for Cuba. Hell, they're holding an entire country hostage with nuclear weapons. Just because we don't have a law applying those conditions to China, doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to the same standards. Personally I think we should trade with both of them. But if you think we should continue trade with China and not with Cuba, why?
User avatar #41 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our economy, then yes, I would prefer not to trade with China. Unfortunately we are wholly dependent on them. I don't like it in the least, but at this point we have no choice with China (though we pretty much have a choice with Cuba). We are literally in debt to them. Regardless, I really can't understand how US companies continue to tolerate the unethical practices of China's Government who is the number one violator of human rights in China, who suppress freedom of speech, who literally control what the Chinese people can say and cannot say.
(Then again, as far as some economists predict, there is no bright future in China, especially under the auspices of the Communist Government. The growth of China's economy is slowing down, and indications are that it will continue to slow down).
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#37 - The main problem is the labor tax. I mean, obviously the touri…  [+] (8 new replies) 18 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +1
#38 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
The main point in that article is that giving loans to Cuba is a bad investment, but who ever said we had to give them loans? The author claims that would be necessary to normalize relations, but I fail to see how that is true.

As for the government living off of the people, certainly - but I maintain that having a job with low wages is better than not having a job. Furthermore, US tourism would represent such a massive boost in the monetary resources of Cuba that it might actually enable them to pay off loans, or expand their economic infrastructure, thereby creating jobs. It's not likely that people who already have jobs would benefit, but it would certainly benefit those who don't.

And don't forget under the table transactions. That would directly put money into the pockets of Cubans.
User avatar #39 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The idea that some people have is that opening trade and giving loans and whatnot to Cuba will help the country out of the hole that they are in. While that may be a possibility, the problem is that tourism and trade don’t lead to economic and political change (which is what Cuba needs!). No study I know of has found that tourism, trade or investments had anything to do with the end of communism (e.g. East Europe and Soviet Russia). The reasons for the economic misery of the Cubans are a failed political and economic system. Like the communist systems of Eastern Europe, Cuba’s system does not function, stifles initiative and productivity and destroys human freedom and dignity. That government has to GO, and I think until we see signs of that happening, the U.S. should keep their hands out of Cuba.
#40 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
And as I said, I don't think tourism WILL end communism. What it will do is help individual people - maybe not in the way they most need, but enough that it is worthwhile.

Just curious, do you think we should end trade with China too? Because China is actually worse than Cuba in pretty much every condition we have for Cuba. Hell, they're holding an entire country hostage with nuclear weapons. Just because we don't have a law applying those conditions to China, doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to the same standards. Personally I think we should trade with both of them. But if you think we should continue trade with China and not with Cuba, why?
User avatar #41 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our economy, then yes, I would prefer not to trade with China. Unfortunately we are wholly dependent on them. I don't like it in the least, but at this point we have no choice with China (though we pretty much have a choice with Cuba). We are literally in debt to them. Regardless, I really can't understand how US companies continue to tolerate the unethical practices of China's Government who is the number one violator of human rights in China, who suppress freedom of speech, who literally control what the Chinese people can say and cannot say.
(Then again, as far as some economists predict, there is no bright future in China, especially under the auspices of the Communist Government. The growth of China's economy is slowing down, and indications are that it will continue to slow down).
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#35 - Whoa whoa. We're just having a discussion here. No need to res…  [+] (10 new replies) 18 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures 0
#36 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Sorry, but it's irritating when you make a claim that is specifically refuted in the quite short and very readable article I just provided, colorful line graph included.

I don't think letting Americans visit and do business in Cuba would turn it into a democracy. I do think that it would put more money into the hands of more Cubans. Think of it this way - would it help or hurt the Cuban people if Canada stopped letting her citizens vacation there?
User avatar #37 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The main problem is the labor tax. I mean, obviously the tourism keeps the people afloat, but the state essentially lives off of these people. The more we try to give to the regular citizens, the more and more the government can take from them. Until their government situation is fixed/rehashed, I don't think lifting the embargo will make much of a difference, unfortunately...
By the way, here's another article looking at it from a different view: www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/02/27/lifting-the-us-embargo-on-castros-cuba-would-be-a-mistake

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Cuba up on their feet again, but it's going to take a lot of work, and the situation that they are in has more to do with their own inner workings than what the U.S. has done. But that's just my view on it.
#38 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
The main point in that article is that giving loans to Cuba is a bad investment, but who ever said we had to give them loans? The author claims that would be necessary to normalize relations, but I fail to see how that is true.

As for the government living off of the people, certainly - but I maintain that having a job with low wages is better than not having a job. Furthermore, US tourism would represent such a massive boost in the monetary resources of Cuba that it might actually enable them to pay off loans, or expand their economic infrastructure, thereby creating jobs. It's not likely that people who already have jobs would benefit, but it would certainly benefit those who don't.

And don't forget under the table transactions. That would directly put money into the pockets of Cubans.
User avatar #39 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The idea that some people have is that opening trade and giving loans and whatnot to Cuba will help the country out of the hole that they are in. While that may be a possibility, the problem is that tourism and trade don’t lead to economic and political change (which is what Cuba needs!). No study I know of has found that tourism, trade or investments had anything to do with the end of communism (e.g. East Europe and Soviet Russia). The reasons for the economic misery of the Cubans are a failed political and economic system. Like the communist systems of Eastern Europe, Cuba’s system does not function, stifles initiative and productivity and destroys human freedom and dignity. That government has to GO, and I think until we see signs of that happening, the U.S. should keep their hands out of Cuba.
#40 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
And as I said, I don't think tourism WILL end communism. What it will do is help individual people - maybe not in the way they most need, but enough that it is worthwhile.

Just curious, do you think we should end trade with China too? Because China is actually worse than Cuba in pretty much every condition we have for Cuba. Hell, they're holding an entire country hostage with nuclear weapons. Just because we don't have a law applying those conditions to China, doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to the same standards. Personally I think we should trade with both of them. But if you think we should continue trade with China and not with Cuba, why?
User avatar #41 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our economy, then yes, I would prefer not to trade with China. Unfortunately we are wholly dependent on them. I don't like it in the least, but at this point we have no choice with China (though we pretty much have a choice with Cuba). We are literally in debt to them. Regardless, I really can't understand how US companies continue to tolerate the unethical practices of China's Government who is the number one violator of human rights in China, who suppress freedom of speech, who literally control what the Chinese people can say and cannot say.
(Then again, as far as some economists predict, there is no bright future in China, especially under the auspices of the Communist Government. The growth of China's economy is slowing down, and indications are that it will continue to slow down).
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#33 - The thing is, this legislation was made just for Cuba. And why…  [+] (12 new replies) 19 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +1
#34 - mayoroftownsville (19 hours ago) [-]
"Like I mentioned before, the majority of Cuban Americans, the people who understand the situation best, support the embargo"

Wrong. Read the article I linked you dipshit. fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/cuba-embargo-obama-backlash/

Why do you think newer Cuban immigrants oppose the embargo? It's because they know lifting it actually would help. Who do you think works for the 90% government owned sectors of the economy? It's Cubans. Moreover, allowing US businesses to open branches in Cuba would create employment opportunities. Having a job where your wage is set by the government is still better than not having a job.
User avatar #35 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
Whoa whoa. We're just having a discussion here. No need to resort to name-calling. Different news sources will give you different names. As far as I know, a little more than half still support the embargo. Besides, even though the U.S. has had restricted trade with Cuba does not mean that they've been completely isolated all this time. From what I can tell, lifting all travel/trade restrictions to Cuba wouldn't necessarily lead to improved conditions or the spread of democracy. More than 2.7 million people from around the world visited Cuba, including more tourists from Canada than any other country. Despite the steady flow of tourism from western countries, the Cuban government still maintains total control over its people. Besides, U.S. policy allows people to visit family members and send money to relatives in Cuba, and also permits travel for humanitarian and educational reasons. Over one billion dollars in remittances (money transferred from abroad) are sent to Cuban families each year, mostly from relatives in the United States.
In the end, I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this. I just like having discussion like this, to hear from other points of view and to share my own.
#36 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Sorry, but it's irritating when you make a claim that is specifically refuted in the quite short and very readable article I just provided, colorful line graph included.

I don't think letting Americans visit and do business in Cuba would turn it into a democracy. I do think that it would put more money into the hands of more Cubans. Think of it this way - would it help or hurt the Cuban people if Canada stopped letting her citizens vacation there?
User avatar #37 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The main problem is the labor tax. I mean, obviously the tourism keeps the people afloat, but the state essentially lives off of these people. The more we try to give to the regular citizens, the more and more the government can take from them. Until their government situation is fixed/rehashed, I don't think lifting the embargo will make much of a difference, unfortunately...
By the way, here's another article looking at it from a different view: www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/02/27/lifting-the-us-embargo-on-castros-cuba-would-be-a-mistake

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Cuba up on their feet again, but it's going to take a lot of work, and the situation that they are in has more to do with their own inner workings than what the U.S. has done. But that's just my view on it.
#38 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
The main point in that article is that giving loans to Cuba is a bad investment, but who ever said we had to give them loans? The author claims that would be necessary to normalize relations, but I fail to see how that is true.

As for the government living off of the people, certainly - but I maintain that having a job with low wages is better than not having a job. Furthermore, US tourism would represent such a massive boost in the monetary resources of Cuba that it might actually enable them to pay off loans, or expand their economic infrastructure, thereby creating jobs. It's not likely that people who already have jobs would benefit, but it would certainly benefit those who don't.

And don't forget under the table transactions. That would directly put money into the pockets of Cubans.
User avatar #39 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The idea that some people have is that opening trade and giving loans and whatnot to Cuba will help the country out of the hole that they are in. While that may be a possibility, the problem is that tourism and trade don’t lead to economic and political change (which is what Cuba needs!). No study I know of has found that tourism, trade or investments had anything to do with the end of communism (e.g. East Europe and Soviet Russia). The reasons for the economic misery of the Cubans are a failed political and economic system. Like the communist systems of Eastern Europe, Cuba’s system does not function, stifles initiative and productivity and destroys human freedom and dignity. That government has to GO, and I think until we see signs of that happening, the U.S. should keep their hands out of Cuba.
#40 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
And as I said, I don't think tourism WILL end communism. What it will do is help individual people - maybe not in the way they most need, but enough that it is worthwhile.

Just curious, do you think we should end trade with China too? Because China is actually worse than Cuba in pretty much every condition we have for Cuba. Hell, they're holding an entire country hostage with nuclear weapons. Just because we don't have a law applying those conditions to China, doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to the same standards. Personally I think we should trade with both of them. But if you think we should continue trade with China and not with Cuba, why?
User avatar #41 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our economy, then yes, I would prefer not to trade with China. Unfortunately we are wholly dependent on them. I don't like it in the least, but at this point we have no choice with China (though we pretty much have a choice with Cuba). We are literally in debt to them. Regardless, I really can't understand how US companies continue to tolerate the unethical practices of China's Government who is the number one violator of human rights in China, who suppress freedom of speech, who literally control what the Chinese people can say and cannot say.
(Then again, as far as some economists predict, there is no bright future in China, especially under the auspices of the Communist Government. The growth of China's economy is slowing down, and indications are that it will continue to slow down).
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#28 - Well of course they are NOW, after years and years of how they…  [+] (14 new replies) 19 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +3
#31 - mayoroftownsville (19 hours ago) [-]
Acts of aggression? Like what?

As for the conditions, first of all we trade with China which has not met ANY of those, and second of all the law can be changed.
User avatar #33 - stratosrider (19 hours ago) [-]
The thing is, this legislation was made just for Cuba. And why would you want to change the law? Besides, the reasons stretch beyond just legislation. If you think about it, since there is virtually no private sector in Cuba, opening trade would only help the government, not regular Cuban citizens. The 90% state-owned economy ensures that the Cuban government and military would reap the gains of open trade with the United States, not private citizens. And of course the uncertainty over who will succeed Raúl Castro makes it unwise for the United States to change its policy before a new leader is in place. Like I mentioned before, the majority of Cuban Americans, the people who understand the situation best, support the embargo.
"In addition to imposing economic pressure on the Castro regime and holding it accountable for actions against U.S. interests, the embargo is a moral stance against the brutal dictatorship. Over the last 50 years, the embargo has served as a constant form of solidarity with the Cuban people." - US Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a Cuban American
#34 - mayoroftownsville (19 hours ago) [-]
"Like I mentioned before, the majority of Cuban Americans, the people who understand the situation best, support the embargo"

Wrong. Read the article I linked you dipshit. fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/cuba-embargo-obama-backlash/

Why do you think newer Cuban immigrants oppose the embargo? It's because they know lifting it actually would help. Who do you think works for the 90% government owned sectors of the economy? It's Cubans. Moreover, allowing US businesses to open branches in Cuba would create employment opportunities. Having a job where your wage is set by the government is still better than not having a job.
User avatar #35 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
Whoa whoa. We're just having a discussion here. No need to resort to name-calling. Different news sources will give you different names. As far as I know, a little more than half still support the embargo. Besides, even though the U.S. has had restricted trade with Cuba does not mean that they've been completely isolated all this time. From what I can tell, lifting all travel/trade restrictions to Cuba wouldn't necessarily lead to improved conditions or the spread of democracy. More than 2.7 million people from around the world visited Cuba, including more tourists from Canada than any other country. Despite the steady flow of tourism from western countries, the Cuban government still maintains total control over its people. Besides, U.S. policy allows people to visit family members and send money to relatives in Cuba, and also permits travel for humanitarian and educational reasons. Over one billion dollars in remittances (money transferred from abroad) are sent to Cuban families each year, mostly from relatives in the United States.
In the end, I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this. I just like having discussion like this, to hear from other points of view and to share my own.
#36 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Sorry, but it's irritating when you make a claim that is specifically refuted in the quite short and very readable article I just provided, colorful line graph included.

I don't think letting Americans visit and do business in Cuba would turn it into a democracy. I do think that it would put more money into the hands of more Cubans. Think of it this way - would it help or hurt the Cuban people if Canada stopped letting her citizens vacation there?
User avatar #37 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The main problem is the labor tax. I mean, obviously the tourism keeps the people afloat, but the state essentially lives off of these people. The more we try to give to the regular citizens, the more and more the government can take from them. Until their government situation is fixed/rehashed, I don't think lifting the embargo will make much of a difference, unfortunately...
By the way, here's another article looking at it from a different view: www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/02/27/lifting-the-us-embargo-on-castros-cuba-would-be-a-mistake

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Cuba up on their feet again, but it's going to take a lot of work, and the situation that they are in has more to do with their own inner workings than what the U.S. has done. But that's just my view on it.
#38 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
The main point in that article is that giving loans to Cuba is a bad investment, but who ever said we had to give them loans? The author claims that would be necessary to normalize relations, but I fail to see how that is true.

As for the government living off of the people, certainly - but I maintain that having a job with low wages is better than not having a job. Furthermore, US tourism would represent such a massive boost in the monetary resources of Cuba that it might actually enable them to pay off loans, or expand their economic infrastructure, thereby creating jobs. It's not likely that people who already have jobs would benefit, but it would certainly benefit those who don't.

And don't forget under the table transactions. That would directly put money into the pockets of Cubans.
User avatar #39 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The idea that some people have is that opening trade and giving loans and whatnot to Cuba will help the country out of the hole that they are in. While that may be a possibility, the problem is that tourism and trade don’t lead to economic and political change (which is what Cuba needs!). No study I know of has found that tourism, trade or investments had anything to do with the end of communism (e.g. East Europe and Soviet Russia). The reasons for the economic misery of the Cubans are a failed political and economic system. Like the communist systems of Eastern Europe, Cuba’s system does not function, stifles initiative and productivity and destroys human freedom and dignity. That government has to GO, and I think until we see signs of that happening, the U.S. should keep their hands out of Cuba.
#40 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
And as I said, I don't think tourism WILL end communism. What it will do is help individual people - maybe not in the way they most need, but enough that it is worthwhile.

Just curious, do you think we should end trade with China too? Because China is actually worse than Cuba in pretty much every condition we have for Cuba. Hell, they're holding an entire country hostage with nuclear weapons. Just because we don't have a law applying those conditions to China, doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to the same standards. Personally I think we should trade with both of them. But if you think we should continue trade with China and not with Cuba, why?
User avatar #41 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our economy, then yes, I would prefer not to trade with China. Unfortunately we are wholly dependent on them. I don't like it in the least, but at this point we have no choice with China (though we pretty much have a choice with Cuba). We are literally in debt to them. Regardless, I really can't understand how US companies continue to tolerate the unethical practices of China's Government who is the number one violator of human rights in China, who suppress freedom of speech, who literally control what the Chinese people can say and cannot say.
(Then again, as far as some economists predict, there is no bright future in China, especially under the auspices of the Communist Government. The growth of China's economy is slowing down, and indications are that it will continue to slow down).
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#25 - I'm pretty sure Cuba ****** themselves up by allo…  [+] (16 new replies) 19 hours ago on Lil´ Jam´ adventures +2
#27 - mayoroftownsville (19 hours ago) [-]
There is a strong trend towards newer immigrants from Cuba being in support of lifting the embargo. fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/cuba-embargo-obama-backlash/
User avatar #28 - stratosrider (19 hours ago) [-]
Well of course they are NOW, after years and years of how they've been living. Besides, there are some major issues still at hand in regards to opening trade with Cuba. According to US law, Cuba must legalize all political activity, release all political prisoners, commit to free and fair elections in the transition to representative democracy, grant freedom to the press, respect internationally recognized human rights, and allow labor unions. Since Cuba has not met these conditions, the embargo should not be lifted. Not to mention that the Cuban government has consistently responded to US attempts to soften the embargo with acts of aggression. It's pretty concerning to think what would happen if the sanctions were fully lifted.
#31 - mayoroftownsville (19 hours ago) [-]
Acts of aggression? Like what?

As for the conditions, first of all we trade with China which has not met ANY of those, and second of all the law can be changed.
User avatar #33 - stratosrider (19 hours ago) [-]
The thing is, this legislation was made just for Cuba. And why would you want to change the law? Besides, the reasons stretch beyond just legislation. If you think about it, since there is virtually no private sector in Cuba, opening trade would only help the government, not regular Cuban citizens. The 90% state-owned economy ensures that the Cuban government and military would reap the gains of open trade with the United States, not private citizens. And of course the uncertainty over who will succeed Raúl Castro makes it unwise for the United States to change its policy before a new leader is in place. Like I mentioned before, the majority of Cuban Americans, the people who understand the situation best, support the embargo.
"In addition to imposing economic pressure on the Castro regime and holding it accountable for actions against U.S. interests, the embargo is a moral stance against the brutal dictatorship. Over the last 50 years, the embargo has served as a constant form of solidarity with the Cuban people." - US Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a Cuban American
#34 - mayoroftownsville (19 hours ago) [-]
"Like I mentioned before, the majority of Cuban Americans, the people who understand the situation best, support the embargo"

Wrong. Read the article I linked you dipshit. fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/cuba-embargo-obama-backlash/

Why do you think newer Cuban immigrants oppose the embargo? It's because they know lifting it actually would help. Who do you think works for the 90% government owned sectors of the economy? It's Cubans. Moreover, allowing US businesses to open branches in Cuba would create employment opportunities. Having a job where your wage is set by the government is still better than not having a job.
User avatar #35 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
Whoa whoa. We're just having a discussion here. No need to resort to name-calling. Different news sources will give you different names. As far as I know, a little more than half still support the embargo. Besides, even though the U.S. has had restricted trade with Cuba does not mean that they've been completely isolated all this time. From what I can tell, lifting all travel/trade restrictions to Cuba wouldn't necessarily lead to improved conditions or the spread of democracy. More than 2.7 million people from around the world visited Cuba, including more tourists from Canada than any other country. Despite the steady flow of tourism from western countries, the Cuban government still maintains total control over its people. Besides, U.S. policy allows people to visit family members and send money to relatives in Cuba, and also permits travel for humanitarian and educational reasons. Over one billion dollars in remittances (money transferred from abroad) are sent to Cuban families each year, mostly from relatives in the United States.
In the end, I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this. I just like having discussion like this, to hear from other points of view and to share my own.
#36 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Sorry, but it's irritating when you make a claim that is specifically refuted in the quite short and very readable article I just provided, colorful line graph included.

I don't think letting Americans visit and do business in Cuba would turn it into a democracy. I do think that it would put more money into the hands of more Cubans. Think of it this way - would it help or hurt the Cuban people if Canada stopped letting her citizens vacation there?
User avatar #37 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The main problem is the labor tax. I mean, obviously the tourism keeps the people afloat, but the state essentially lives off of these people. The more we try to give to the regular citizens, the more and more the government can take from them. Until their government situation is fixed/rehashed, I don't think lifting the embargo will make much of a difference, unfortunately...
By the way, here's another article looking at it from a different view: www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/02/27/lifting-the-us-embargo-on-castros-cuba-would-be-a-mistake

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Cuba up on their feet again, but it's going to take a lot of work, and the situation that they are in has more to do with their own inner workings than what the U.S. has done. But that's just my view on it.
#38 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
The main point in that article is that giving loans to Cuba is a bad investment, but who ever said we had to give them loans? The author claims that would be necessary to normalize relations, but I fail to see how that is true.

As for the government living off of the people, certainly - but I maintain that having a job with low wages is better than not having a job. Furthermore, US tourism would represent such a massive boost in the monetary resources of Cuba that it might actually enable them to pay off loans, or expand their economic infrastructure, thereby creating jobs. It's not likely that people who already have jobs would benefit, but it would certainly benefit those who don't.

And don't forget under the table transactions. That would directly put money into the pockets of Cubans.
User avatar #39 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
The idea that some people have is that opening trade and giving loans and whatnot to Cuba will help the country out of the hole that they are in. While that may be a possibility, the problem is that tourism and trade don’t lead to economic and political change (which is what Cuba needs!). No study I know of has found that tourism, trade or investments had anything to do with the end of communism (e.g. East Europe and Soviet Russia). The reasons for the economic misery of the Cubans are a failed political and economic system. Like the communist systems of Eastern Europe, Cuba’s system does not function, stifles initiative and productivity and destroys human freedom and dignity. That government has to GO, and I think until we see signs of that happening, the U.S. should keep their hands out of Cuba.
#40 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
And as I said, I don't think tourism WILL end communism. What it will do is help individual people - maybe not in the way they most need, but enough that it is worthwhile.

Just curious, do you think we should end trade with China too? Because China is actually worse than Cuba in pretty much every condition we have for Cuba. Hell, they're holding an entire country hostage with nuclear weapons. Just because we don't have a law applying those conditions to China, doesn't mean we shouldn't hold them to the same standards. Personally I think we should trade with both of them. But if you think we should continue trade with China and not with Cuba, why?
User avatar #41 - stratosrider (18 hours ago) [-]
If China wasn't essentially supporting the whole of our economy, then yes, I would prefer not to trade with China. Unfortunately we are wholly dependent on them. I don't like it in the least, but at this point we have no choice with China (though we pretty much have a choice with Cuba). We are literally in debt to them. Regardless, I really can't understand how US companies continue to tolerate the unethical practices of China's Government who is the number one violator of human rights in China, who suppress freedom of speech, who literally control what the Chinese people can say and cannot say.
(Then again, as far as some economists predict, there is no bright future in China, especially under the auspices of the Communist Government. The growth of China's economy is slowing down, and indications are that it will continue to slow down).
#43 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
*Nigeria, not Niger
#42 - mayoroftownsville (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh, we have a choice. Don't you think India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, or Niger (all nations with better rights records than China and massive, cheap labor providing populations) would clamor for the opportunity to take on China's role with the US? We may be in debt to them, but it doesn't mean we have to conduct business with them. India and Indonesia in particular already have the infrastructure to support a quick takeover of China's role, and close relationships with the US.

Sure, China's economy is slowing, but it will in all likelihood continue growing faster than ours, and it will certainly grow faster than Europe's which is essentially stagnant.
User avatar #45 - stratosrider (17 hours ago) [-]
I know, man. I wish we traded with THOSE countries to the extent that we do with China. I think we need to dial back our dealings with China a HUGE amount. I also am a huge proponent of the U.S. making more and more jobs so we don't have to rely on China so much. I think among the many other issues that prevent this is the U.S.'s addiction to cheaper goods. Also, China's relationship(?) with other "warning flag" countries like North Korea and Russia and such kind of puts us on edge, as far as the repercussions of ending trade with them, debt repaid or not.
#46 - mayoroftownsville (17 hours ago) [-]
I support continued trade with China because it has clearly had an effect of making China more capitalist. Their government may be communist, but their trade policies are more in line with the more socialist EU countries. In fact, China recently had the single largest stock market launch of a private corporation in world history, look up Alibaba.
#104 - Holy **** the dueling Carls one 03/03/2015 on The Dankest of Webms +2
#75 - Picture 03/03/2015 on comic +10
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#5 to #4 - stratosrider (03/06/2013) [-]
...I love you
...I love you
#6 to #5 - kitsunemochalite (03/07/2013) [-]
....I love you too...
#1 - karidagur ONLINE (09/07/2012) [-]
COMMENT RAPE


your virginity is mine!
#2 to #1 - stratosrider (09/07/2012) [-]
....good for you...?
User avatar #3 to #2 - YoursTruley (10/30/2012) [-]
i loled
 Friends (0)