Not op, but on the business/sales side ‘midwesterners’ tend to put people at ease and are decent communicators. In my experience they’re also the clearest American speakers, so non-native english speakers have an easy time understanding them. Coming from an area (at face value) that is not widely desirable or well-known gives a decent perspective on the ability to perceive value for others and speak plainly to sell it.
Part of the above in my opinion is due to there being a far smaller gap between the wealthy people in the area and the poorest both financially and physically. A plumber, doctor and retail worker can live on the same street as homeowners. Not to knock the coastal cities too much, but contrast this culture to homeless people sleeping right outside a $3200/month flat, or primary teachers living out of their van, and you can see how it can have a different effect on those who are raised in those areas.
> In my experience they’re also the clearest American speakers, so non-native english speakers have an easy time understanding them.
Supposedly there is some history behind this and people who want to be in the media business will actually learn to speak Midwest-style English. Can’t find the article though.
They don’t have to necessarily deeply monetize to be successful, apple could play dumb and offer ad results based on search terms only. DuckDuckGo does similar and I do wonder at scale what kind of revenue this could end up being. Google doesnt behave in an entirely pro-business way as well. Google ads are not market efficient at the moment, with competitors taking keywords that are company names for example, forcing businesses to spend to be the first option even if the user searches your business’ exact name. Eliminating just a few insulting Google search behaviors and limiting data tracking could be a nice revenue stream
I find it interesting that you consider the mob-like behavior of Google forcing everyone to bid on their own name "not efficient". It seems to me like they are really efficient (at their goal of extracting tons of revenue from everyone and their dog).
I think this is forgetting a few things: The US benefits immensely by no longer being in Afghanistan, its a landlocked nation with limited accessible resources. For the first time in 20 years the US will not be bogged down in an active warzone. This doesnt benefit China or Russia. It might even get the US to finally realize their biggest risk is cyberwarfare/sabotage instead of blindly spending the equivalent construction cost of a high school on an Abrams tank
100% this, it says something that the citizens of the country did not rise up when the taliban entered their cities. They did not have ‘military superiority’ entering provincial capitals. Perhaps to the afghan citizens the government was not that much better than the taliban.
Odd statement, Afghanistan was a pseuo-state at the best of times, Taiwan is a nation with incredible air, naval and ground defenses for its size that doesn’t bleed America financially dry. Embarrassing photos of one of its ‘allies’ losing aside, America leaving Afghanistan makes America financially stronger and more militarily flexible.
I think its very straightforward to blame the US for the state of Afghanistan today, but the fleeing president had failed to collect any allies in the region, failed to get any formidable resistance to the taliban, and allowed warlords to spend US money lavishly on their homes and close compatriots. Ghani’s children benefited from immense nepotism by living in America working for thinktanks or going to university for phds, meanwhile taliban leaders planned suicide bombings involving their own children. They simply wanted it more.
The corruption in the government of Afghanistan is not to be underestimated. As much as we hate the Taliban here in the US, we should all also look into the government “we helped establish” in Afghanistan.
No US president wants this media attention but frankly Biden is the president who should take the least flak for taliban controlled afghanistan. 3 presidents before him failed to either remove US troops or find an achievable goal in Afghanistan
the ANA retreated from every fight they involved themselves in. I wouldn’t expect anyone to be fired because this is exactly what was expected when the US left, minus 2-3 months. Embarrassing photos for a few weeks sure, but saving the equivalent of the NHS budget every year by not spending it on a corrupt Afghan government and failed military project has its domestic benefits
But wasn't it some US general's job to train the ANA? If you're training someone to do a difficult dangerous job and the moment you hand things off to the person everything blows up - you probably deserve a lot of the blame.
The US directly trained the Afghan special forces, who in fairness to them did their job well but were often left with hardly any ammunition or air support. The Afghan government was in charge of funding operations and recruitment of the ANA. You can find countless evidence of how they frequently betrayed their units, fled, sold their equipment or were otherwise immensely incompetent. Added to this, the taliban forces stand between 50-100k troops across the entirety of afghanistan with no air support,tanks, or heavy artillery. Its often simply 100 guys with AK-47s on motorcycles going into a capital and claiming it. You cant solve will to fight as a foreign entity.
Saigon was an actual government that stood for 2 years after the US disengaged. Kabul has proven itself to be an embarrassingly dysfunctional puppet administration. Its been made clear today the US should have left 10 years ago or earlier.
So even worse than Saigon then because after 20 years of support there wasn't even any significant Afghani interest in having any other government than the Taliban.
More like a completely disfunctional government made up of a bunch of warlords of dubious background and character. AFAIK the Talibans massacred any possible opposition/contender around the 9/11 events, leaving effectively no cohesive group behind that could replace them.
The point is to not then escalate back into having more troops once the taliban inevitably regained control. The ANA had 20 years to prepare for the countrys defenses. The US has spent 100s of billions propping this government up, and it has become clear today (and frankly for years) that it couldn’t stand on its own. It wouldnt matter if the us left in 5, 10 or 20 more years
Part of the above in my opinion is due to there being a far smaller gap between the wealthy people in the area and the poorest both financially and physically. A plumber, doctor and retail worker can live on the same street as homeowners. Not to knock the coastal cities too much, but contrast this culture to homeless people sleeping right outside a $3200/month flat, or primary teachers living out of their van, and you can see how it can have a different effect on those who are raised in those areas.