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 reason nothing ever changes in America is that America is not very democratic. You've got Democrats and Republicans and they don't allow ANY other party to emerge EVER. In any other country, if people decide they don't like one party, let's say one on the right, they stop voting for them and replace them with another, less corrupt party that's similar. In Canada, for example, people got tired of the big left wing political party, the Liberals, and voted in another party from the left, the NDP, to replace them. other then being on the left they don't have much in common and come from totally different traditions so would never merge. Likewise, the Tea Party, in any other country, would have become a third party, but the American system informally doesn't allow for more then two ancient never-dying parties. Nowhere is this more apparent then at the state level. America is a vast, diverse country with hugely differing regions. That in every single state the two party system is replicated and a diversity of parties does not emerge is shocking. Regional parties that make in0roads in state governments are the seeds that give rise to new federal parties. Until states break the two-party mold America will never be able to sweep out the old and stale and bring in fresh, invigorating new ideas and political cultures.
I realize there are a lot of problems in the US, but I think there are problems everywhere. This article distorts and exaggerates, and the writer seems to be an extreme socialist who sees everything from a very biased point of view. He doesn't understand why our military defense is a priority. He thinks everyone who is not a socialist is brainwashed, and that our news media is all right-wing.
An article like this can seem convincing if you don't read it carefully. Yes, we have terrible problems with the cost of health care and higher education, and Americans have an unhealthy lifestyle and are over-drugged. But is all that because we are not socialist? And have other countries really solved all these problems?
It's easy to distort the facts by using emotional examples. There are small countries that are rich enough to provide health insurance to all citizens, but they may have several advantages over us. For one thing, they may not have as many poor immigrants to support. And they depend on us for military protection, so they save a fortune.
As for higher education -- yes some countries provide it free, but only for those who pass difficult entrance exams. All modern democracies have class systems based partly on education.
There are no paradises or utopias, although the article implies that there are. Yes, some countries do better than others at different times, and America is not doing very well now.
But lots of Americans are doing ok, and lots of people all over the world are starving.
I am not someone who thinks America is great in all ways. On the other hand, I don't think any real place is great in all ways. Socialists seem to live in a fantasy world where it is possible to permanently solve all problems. So they are always angry at the real world. They always have someone to blame, because they never accept that life is inherently difficult and full of problems.
The reason nothing ever changes in America is that America is not very democratic. You've got Democrats and Republicans and they don't allow ANY other party to emerge EVER. In any other country, if people decide they don't like one party, let's say one on the right, they stop voting for them and replace them with another, less corrupt party that's similar. In Canada, for example, people got tired of the big left wing political party, the Liberals, and voted in another party from the left, the NDP, to replace them. other then being on the left they don't have much in common and come from totally different traditions so would never merge. Likewise, the Tea Party, in any other country, would have become a third party, but the American system informally doesn't allow for more then two ancient never-dying parties. Nowhere is this more apparent then at the state level. America is a vast, diverse country with hugely differing regions. That in every single state the two party system is replicated and a diversity of parties does not emerge is shocking. Regional parties that make in0roads in state governments are the seeds that give rise to new federal parties. Until states break the two-party mold America will never be able to sweep out the old and stale and bring in fresh, invigorating new ideas and political cultures.
"Once the **** really hits the fan, do you really think you’ll just be able to jump into the old station wagon, drive across the Canadian border and spend the rest of your days fishing and drinking Molson? No, the government is going to lock the place down. They don’t want their tax base escaping. They don’t want their “recruits” escaping. They don’t want YOU escaping."
That is insane. We are not going to be locked into America.
I agree with BIMBAM. Our two-party system is corrupt to the core. One party skins you from the head down, the other from the feet up. We're allowing this government to humiliate a 95 year old dying woman at an airport, and we're giving up more and more of our liberties all in the name of freedom?
I'm 49 yrs old and I can't believe how bad things have gotten since I was a kid. The downfall of this country is accelerating at an accelerating pace.
Although the author sensationalized to a degree...unfortunately, I do think there is a lot of truth in the article. I would like to think a lot of the issues the author brings up could be improved and solved. But...to me...the worst thing about all of this is that our political system is hopeless. We are all at the mercy of two completely inept...impotent...and corrupt political parties and both of them seem to be willing to allow the entire nation to go down the drain.
I realize there are a lot of problems in the US, but I think there are problems everywhere. This article distorts and exaggerates, and the writer seems to be an extreme socialist who sees everything from a very biased point of view. He doesn't understand why our military defense is a priority. He thinks everyone who is not a socialist is brainwashed, and that our news media is all right-wing.
An article like this can seem convincing if you don't read it carefully. Yes, we have terrible problems with the cost of health care and higher education, and Americans have an unhealthy lifestyle and are over-drugged. But is all that because we are not socialist? And have other countries really solved all these problems?
It's easy to distort the facts by using emotional examples. There are small countries that are rich enough to provide health insurance to all citizens, but they may have several advantages over us. For one thing, they may not have as many poor immigrants to support. And they depend on us for military protection, so they save a fortune.
As for higher education -- yes some countries provide it free, but only for those who pass difficult entrance exams. All modern democracies have class systems based partly on education.
There are no paradises or utopias, although the article implies that there are. Yes, some countries do better than others at different times, and America is not doing very well now.
But lots of Americans are doing ok, and lots of people all over the world are starving.
I am not someone who thinks America is great in all ways. On the other hand, I don't think any real place is great in all ways. Socialists seem to live in a fantasy world where it is possible to permanently solve all problems. So they are always angry at the real world. They always have someone to blame, because they never accept that life is inherently difficult and full of problems.
I have no doubt that some of what the author says is true. But the line where truth ends and his agenda begins is heavily blurred. The author gives no sources for anything he says, so there is literally no way to verify the truth. Additionally, he fails to recognize a whole host of other factors that mpact life in these countries. He's choosing one item and making his whole argument on it. For example in education, much has been made by the Republican leaning foes of education about the terrific education system of Finland. But none of these foes bothers to mention that teachers in Finland are the most unionized in the world, and that the unions play a way way more significant role in the education of the children, and that the pay scale for teachers in Finland exceeds even the best pay in the USA. This is how truth is bent and twisted for an agenda.
So... I'm not really sure how much the author says is fabricated from minimal facts and how much he simply ignored.
The countries that he indicates also do not have huge outlays in military spending, nor are they countries which seem to believe that their role is to fight wars all over the globe. If the USA were to stop fighting wars and put the money for these wars and the over bloated military into health care perhaps we could be like them too.
Lots of distorted comments; lots of "truths" obtained by only mentioning part of the truth, not the whole truth so help you God.
Yes there are lots of truths. Some things may be distorted a bit. I have traveled to over 90 different countries. Have lived in a dozen for extended periods. Have found some as related to economy and health care fantastic, others not so great. The entire evaluation is based on ones owns perceptions and criteria.
An article like this can seem convincing if you don't read it carefully. Yes, we have terrible problems with the cost of health care and higher education, and Americans have an unhealthy lifestyle and are over-drugged. But is all that because we are not socialist? And have other countries really solved all these problems?
So, in your own words, if a country has a single payer health care system than it is "socialist"? And, presumably this is your major argument against a single payer health care system that it is "socialist"?
Please don't insult my intelligence. If you want to find fault with the healthcare system in other countries you can do so. However, do it with facts and logic not by labeling.
Thank you.
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.
