Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The truth is you cannot bring any credible statistic showing that Americans give to charity a higher percentage of their GDP than other developed countries. You also need to enter the equation the definition of charity, what gets to be recorded as such, in whose ultimate interest, etc.
I just gave you an entirely reputable reference, and it is based off of private giving, an area that Americans excel at. The original proclamation was that Americans think "ever man for himself", and that is entirely untrue.
As a percentage of GDP, international aid is lower, if that is your definition, but that is only a small portion of charity by any definition. The US also has a habit of spending large amounts of money to defend other countries, and I assume you would not include those figures in your charity definition?
Thanks. I can PM you and leave a number so you can call me and extend the promised help asa you get rich.
Why do all such rational arguments end on this intellectual dead-end street?
Perhaps because they actually have a point?...
Which part is rational? The "big businesses are evil" part or the I should be able to walk to wherever I want and not have to buy anything from Malaysia part?
I have been in a great many small cities that would suit his/her needs well, but obviously that is going to require a relocation.
The US also has a habit of spending large amounts of money to defend other countries, and I assume you would not include those figures in your charity definition?
True individualism in America is stunted by corporate and statist collectivism. They want you to be an independent individual as long as you meet the needs of the corporate state.
I grew up in the U.S. but I simply do not understand why Americans have such a poorly developed sense of national solidarity. Just in terms of health care, don't they realize that if everybody is well cared for, the entire society benefits from it and not just those nasty sick people? In the U.S., often people do not go to the doctor when they need to, or they don't get the proper medicine, and their work and other contributions to society greatly suffer. When their condition gets serious, it costs much more than if they had been properly treated right from the start. And what is this business about insurance companies deciding whether people are worth it or not? Is thay any way for a civilized country to behave?
Kerouac....of course we realize this. But the thing people don't understand is that our government is a giant, corrupt, white elephant. It just does not do a good job at administering large scale health care plans. We have obvious and abundant proof of this. Our Medicare health care program for senior citizens costs more and more every year. Just about every financial analyst out there from across the political spectrum says the program is in horrible financial shape. But nothing is ever done to make it more effective.
That is the problem we have in America. Our Federal Government is not designed to carry forth large scale social programs. But people like yourself often think "It will be different this time". The problem is, it never is.
Personally, I think we'd all be better off paying cash. No insurance companies and no government intervention. Prices would come down and quality of care would go up. But most people in the Western World can not conceive of this, even though the cost of health care as a % of GDP is going up in most Western countries.
True individualism in America is stunted by corporate and statist collectivism. They want you to be an independent individual as long as you meet the needs of the corporate state.
LOL, very true. And liberals notice how the corporations strangle us, while conservatives notice how the government strangles us. Not too many realize it's both that strangle true competition and innovation. Instead, we're kept divided and fighting with each other so that the 2 warring factions of the elite and fight each other in their power struggle.
I think you ask a lot of good questions. Regarding the US and the devolution of power, it is an age-old issue that provokes a lot of debate. By our constitution, it is supposed to be that the states have the upper hand in the issue, as all rights not formally ceded to the federal government are to be reserved for the states. In the last century into this one that has become a joke as the federal government has inserted itself into every facet of life, from school lunches, to the latest health care monstrosity (IMO). Hand in hand with the power grab by the federal government is that the indebtedness of individuals and government has soared, and the country is now broke. As each new politician seeks to solve problems by spending more of the peoples' money, people who do not believe their money is being well spent--from foreign wars to health care and welfare--get more and more angry at the direction.
In short, the devolution of power would work, but it will take a great many rulings by a "strictly constructionist" supreme court to overcome the federal intrusion.
The paradigm you speak of is absolutely true, as both sides are irretrievably in disagreement, from social issues such as abortion, gun control and gay rights, to economic disagreements about the fiscal role of the state and underwriting areas such as housing (the entire secondary mortgage market in the US is now owned by the federal government).
I also think your point about the country being in decline is valid, because a house divided will always weaken itself. The US will continue to be a great power, but its citizens are sharply divided over the future of the whole. As a point of admission, I am a right-wing pro-market and socially conservative person, and I cannot imagine a future that can involve people that so oppose my view of the world compelling our future to be one of a ruined dollar and severely-degraded morals. At some point you cannot make a square fit into a circle.
Finally, in relation to Europe, I think much of what you are catching onto regarding a European consensus is just an example of a set of many small countries needing to get something done, and can only do so by cooperation. This in turn carries over to domestic politics, and is probably why there are coalition governments instead of two-party systems.
It is simply not an option in Europe at this point in history to force other cultures to abide by orders, and probably the public view reflects this. That is my opinion in any case. I am open to other interpretations.
What is your feeling about some of the problems that Europe faces, such as very low birth rates and sclerotic labor markets?
I'm like a kid in a candy store with the issues raised already on this thread.
I am going to stick with one in this particular post, leaving others aside for the moment. Above you write:
Quote:
I also think your point about the country being in decline is valid, because a house divided will always weaken itself. The US will continue to be a great power, but its citizens are sharply divided over the future of the whole. As a point of admission, I am a right-wing pro-market and socially conservative person, and I cannot imagine a future that can involve people that so oppose my view of the world compelling our future to be one of a ruined dollar and severely-degraded morals.
How do you see the US continuing as a "great power" in light of a future marred by a "ruined dollar?"
NB: I am taking it as a "given" that there are serious structural problems in the US economy, and that they are getting worse. (Whether such structural problems exist and/or are somehow "beyond repair" is a separate but related issue that perhaps we can take up later).
Really. Perhaps you will donate the millions I need in order to afford living in an attractive, walkable, inviting, as well as safe part of a big American city - similar to what Europeans enjoy when they go "exercising".
I didn't think so. Until then, it's not a choice.
I thought we just talked about the price we pay for that apparent "affordability". Developers provide "affordable" housing in an "efficient manner" so that they can make huge profits fast, not to improve people's quality of life.
There are two types of profits:
the ethical kind and the "evil" - as you called it - kind.
Ideally, in order to claim the kind of admiration and legitimacy you seem so eager to reserve for American-type Big Business, a business should create a useful, high quality, well-made product to be proud of - then keep a profit to make a living. It is how capitalism started before it was taken over by thugs. The goal of expanding forever in search of ever higher profits, all while the quality of your product goes down, is not something that will gain my respect any time soon.
Respectfully, I have no idea how the employees should be "evil" too if they work for the evil big businesses. Unless you count the preservation instinct as a choice too.
Also respectfully, you are apparently not aware of the ramifications of how those businesses manage to provide "affordable" products to you, and what happens when people feel they can buy and throw away all they want, as long as the product is "affordable" and they can buy some more.
Do you really think that "made in Malaysia" electronic whatever you grab off the shelf, feeling so comfortable with its "affordability", costs what it says on it is costs?
Hi Syracusa
We've been down this road before I think.....
As always, you raise many interesting points. I am just going to take up ONE; before I begin, lest you think I am "ganging up" on you, I want you to know that although we are at odds on this particular point, I am in agreement with you on several of the others you have articulated on this thread....so hold your breath, because I will be coming back to this thread later to stand up for you!
Ok, here is my opening pitch:
You write:
Quote:
Perhaps you will donate the millions I need in order to afford living in an attractive, walkable, inviting, as well as safe part of a big American city - similar to what Europeans enjoy when they go "exercising".
I didn't think so. Until then, it's not a choice.
That is complete and utter BS, Syracusa. Your problem is that you have "champagne tastes on a beer budget." I suggested to you nearly a year ago that you look at living in a nice, run-of-the-mill, middle-of-the-road middle class neighborhood with average to above-average schools. You dismissed my suggestion out of hand as though I was suggesting you place your kids in an orphanage or pitch a camper van and live in Boston Common.
I still don't know the Boston area, but last year I mentioned to you communities like Manchester, Wallingford, and Newington, CT as nice places you could likely afford, and suggested you find the Boston demographic equivalents but no, your response was "I want Newton."
Speaking personally, I have lived in suburban neighborhoods in the US that meet all the following criteria:
attractive
walkable
inviting
safe
They do not cost an arm and a leg, necessarily. But in my instance, my neighbors had jobs like nurse, checkout clerk at CVS, viola teacher, undertaker (not kidding), police officer, Catholic school secretary, and truck driver. If anyone within a 1/2 mile radius worked at a university (as something other than a non-tenured part-time lecturer or janitor) or had a degree from Columbia or Harvard, I was not aware of it.
Like I said: You have champagne tastes on a beer budget, and yes, you have a CHOICE in the matter. The problem is yours, not "America's."
Judge America on our history of success. It's in vogue now to point out our flaws. Tuning into a socialist nation will not improve anyone's situation.
Look at it this way, some of you out there who are having a hard time right now and are willing to sell your "American Dream" to the government for a few pennies worth of handouts. Things will get better. "This too shall pass."
Hang in there.
Just think of the opportunity that exists. Don't believe the hype about not having any opportunities. When you get back on your feet, as most will, you'll see that things are pretty good. Some of us will become successful beyond anything we ever imagined. Now imagine the federal government taking 50% of what you worked so hard for. Maybe you'll see reality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
