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.
Best propaganda I've read in a long while. All completely untrue unfortunately, you rank below the EU in all of these things.
Except as far as timeliness, comprehension of healthcare service, and outcomes for serious ailments (heart disease, cancer, etc.), the U.S. does quite well. This is despite our country's admittedly, horribly unhealthy diet systems. For instance, 60% of U.S. patients receiving care for heart diseases receive medication; that figure is a 53% average in the E.U. Pretty significant difference.
I'm not implying that other nations' healthcare systems are necessarily inferior or "lacking," or that the U.S. is the best all the way across the board. I don't think that the U.S. is the best all the way across the board because of how expensive our care is. But I also think that if you go to a Cleveland Clinic, UCLA Reagan, UCSD, UCSF, UAB, Mayo, University of Texas, University of Chicago or New York Presbyterian, which are some of the best hospitals in the world, you definitely get what you pay for. Those hospitals are in the U.S. (Although I admit that your University Medical Centre Groningen is supposed to be one of the best research hospitals in the E.U.)
By the way, I'm living in The Netherlands, albeit temporarily--between the North Sea and Utrecht (I don't like to give exact locations). Experience matters. I'm qualified to speak.
Last edited by EclecticEars; 09-07-2014 at 06:07 PM..
Why shouldn't I be allowed to have a firearm in my home even in an extremely safe area? Crime happens anyway. The need for self-protection can therefore arise anywhere. I don't even OWN a firearm. In fact, I've lived in Orange County, a suburban region of 3.2 million people in the shadows of Los Angeles, with my doors unlocked at night time and again because I felt safe and wasn't paranoid. I just defend the right of people who choose to for purposes of self-protection or hunting for food (not for people who use them just to harm people or animals maliciously).
And "well-regulated"? Do some research. Our Founding Fathers called for well-trained men (and, to extend it to today's terms, women) who could wisely and judiciously use firearms. That's why I call for mandated firearms training for people who choose to own firearms. Apparently in parts of Canada and most of the rest of the world, "judiciously" means "almost not at all," but I digress...
Our country is set apart from the rest of the industrialized world in terms of its crime rates because of our socially ill urban areas. That is a proliferation of the urban culture that has evolved in our country since the 1960s. Guns are not the effect of that; people who use guns for bad means are. I don't know why Canadians, Brits, French, Dutch, Italians, Japanese, etc. by and large can't seem to understand that. Also keep in mind that the population of just our top two metropolitan regions combined, NYC and L.A., exceed that of all of Canada. Either Greater N.Y.C. or Greater L.A. has a population greater than The Netherlands. NYC proper has more residents than Denmark or Norway. The U.S. is one country without a predominant ethnicity or common heritage, unlike other industrialized countries. While Canada is like the U.S. in this regard, people up there are closer to being "on the same page" politically, meaning that there isn't as large of a disparity between liberals and conservatives as in the U.S., meaning Canadians are more on board with having stricter gun laws than their southern neighbors. Anyway, in short, America and even its regions is too large and too complex to simplify.
I can see easier accessibility to guns for all as allowing the "bad guys" to buy guns more easily, yes. Many of those guns are also purchased in the black market--illegally! But this also makes it easier for "good guys" to purchase guns, and firearms in general, more easily--and legally. Tradeoffs, mi amigo. And even if we seriously heightened our gun restrictions nationwide, what will stop "bad guys" from purchasing firearms, or other weapons of their choosing, in the black market? That's right...nothing will stop them!
Look at Mexico, Venezuela, and Honduras. These are countries with gun control laws as strict if not stricter than what is typically found even in the E.U. Would you feel safe in many parts of Juarez, Caracas, or San Pedro Sula? Hell no you wouldn't. On the other hand, in New York, Los Angeles and Boston, crime rates have gone way down since the 1980s to the point where you typically don't need a gun in most parts of those cities, and those cities in essence have veritable gun control. It's typically about the "healthiness" of a society of people, and those cities have invested billions of dollars in reinventing neighborhoods and increasing the sizes of their police forces.
On the other hand, at least in our dangerous cities--Detroit, Oakland, Houston, for example--there are provisions for self-defense, regardless of use of firearms in so doing. Crime unfortunately has been high for many years in DET and OAK, but has started to come down in HOU. At any rate, none of these cities consistently reflect national tends. One national trend, for example: we have actually expanded accessibility to guns in most states in the U.S. since the late 1980s because of the admitted war zones that many of our cities became during the crack era. The result? A 50% reduction in violent crime nationwide. So in some areas where even the inner cities aren't so "healthy," the gun is the neutralizer, or at least more so than in the past, also a healthy national trend. Look up FBI crime stats if you don't believe me, by the way.
My ultimate point: having a society where the value of human life is paramount is the best deterrent to crime. I fully agree with that premise. But exercising a Constitutional right to protect yourself only paramounts that freedom to live in peace. And screw the fact that we're in 2014, not the time of the musket.
And see there, folks... Even though I don't like Fox News, to quote their slogan, I'm "fair and balanced." America is far from perfect, but I sincerely believe we got the Right to Bear Arms correct.
Last edited by EclecticEars; 09-07-2014 at 06:30 PM..
You should compare the likelihood of yourself being a victim of violent crime + robbery to other similar risks and see how many of those other things you think require their own devices to prevent them from happening. It doesn't make sense - some risks you just live with since they're so small. Even in the most violent places in the USA, it's paranoia to feel the need to need a gun just because some guys hundreds of years ago said you should. Guns are obviously contributing to gun violence anyways, so it's like living in a logical vacuum. Everywhere else in the developed world doesn't feel the need to carry insanely dangerous weapons around and it's looking comparatively swell for them.
You should compare the likelihood of yourself being a victim of violent crime .
i read somewhere it's statistically far more common to be victim of violent crime in big US city than in any euro city.
add to that everythin' else:
1. american black women bi4in why you ain't be liking curvy girls?
2. baseball better than football..."soccer"?
3. people against global warming (against the IDEA that global warming exists...).
^ for now will suffice. not country for euros to live. But it's their country (of the Americans), their country - their choice.
My opinion is that the USA keeps letting foreigners, especially from countries that have made threats or even attacked us! Plus they are helping other countries when they are already Trillions in debt and can't even take care of our own people. I have neighbors that put loud broadcasts from their country that damns the USA, why are they here if they hate it? I also have to pay a ton of money for medical insurance while if I'm an illegal immigrant I can get it for free! I think some people are just tired of being treated badly, the people born here are treated like second class citizens while immigrants are given interest free loans along with tons of other freebies.
I'm born and raised in Pennsylvania, but given the chance and the cash I would happily move some where like Iceland or New Zealand. Some place Neutral and quiet.
Why shouldn't I be allowed to have a firearm in my home even in an extremely safe area? Crime happens anyway. The need for self-protection can therefore arise anywhere. I don't even OWN a firearm. In fact, I've lived in Orange County, a suburban region of 3.2 million people in the shadows of Los Angeles, with my doors unlocked at night time and again because I felt safe and wasn't paranoid. I just defend the right of people who choose to for purposes of self-protection or hunting for food (not for people who use them just to harm people or animals maliciously).
And "well-regulated"? Do some research. Our Founding Fathers called for well-trained men (and, to extend it to today's terms, women) who could wisely and judiciously use firearms. That's why I call for mandated firearms training for people who choose to own firearms. Apparently in parts of Canada and most of the rest of the world, "judiciously" means "almost not at all," but I digress...
Our country is set apart from the rest of the industrialized world in terms of its crime rates because of our socially ill urban areas. That is a proliferation of the urban culture that has evolved in our country since the 1960s. Guns are not the effect of that; people who use guns for bad means are. I don't know why Canadians, Brits, French, Dutch, Italians, Japanese, etc. by and large can't seem to understand that. Also keep in mind that the population of just our top two metropolitan regions, NYC and L.A., exceed that of all of Canada. Either Greater N.Y.C. or Greater L.A. has a population greater than The Netherlands. NYC proper has more residents than Denmark or Norway. The U.S. is one country without a predominant ethnicity or common heritage, unlike other industrialized countries. While Canada is like the U.S. in this regard, people up there are closer to being "on the same page" politically, meaning that there isn't as large of a disparity between liberals and conservatives as in the U.S., meaning Canadians are more on board with having stricter gun laws than their southern neighbors. Anyway, in short, America and even its regions is too large and too complex to simplify.
I can see easier accessibility to guns for all as allowing the "bad guys" to buy guns more easily, yes. Many of those guns are also purchased in the black market--illegally! But this also makes it easier for "good guys" to purchase guns, and firearms in general, more easily--and legally. Tradeoffs, mi amigo. And even if we seriously heightened our gun restrictions nationwide, what will stop "bad guys" from purchasing firearms, or other weapons of their choosing, in the black market? That's right...nothing will stop them!
Look at Mexico, Venezuela, and Honduras. These are countries with gun control laws as strict if not stricter than what is typically found even in the E.U. Would you feel safe in many parts of Juarez, Caracas, or San Pedro Sula? Hell no you wouldn't. On the other hand, in New York, Los Angeles and Boston, crime rates have gone way down since the 1980s to the point where you typically don't need a gun in most parts of those cities, and those cities in essence have veritable gun control. It's typically about the "healthiness" of a society of people, and those cities have invested billions of dollars in reinventing neighborhoods and increasing the sizes of their police forces.
On the other hand, at least in our dangerous cities--Detroit, Oakland, Houston, for example--there are provisions for self-defense, regardless of use of firearms in so doing. Crime unfortunately has been high for many years in DET and OAK, but has started to come down in HOU. At any rate, none of these cities consistently reflect national tends. One national trend, for example: we have actually expanded accessibility to guns in most states in the U.S. since the late 1980s because of the admitted war zones that many of our cities became during the crack era. The result? A 50% reduction in violent crime nationwide. So in some areas where even the inner cities aren't so "healthy," the gun is the neutralizer, or at least more so than in the past, also a healthy national trend. Look up FBI crime stats if you don't believe me, by the way.
My ultimate point: having a society where the value of human life is paramount is the best deterrent to crime. I fully agree with that premise. But exercising a Constitutional right to protect yourself only paramounts that freedom to live in peace. And screw the fact that we're in 2014, not the time of the musket.
And see there, folks... Even though I don't like Fox News, to quote their slogan, I'm "fair and balanced." America is far from perfect, but I sincerely believe we got the Right to Bear Arms correct.
So, you're saying that the population of Canada is a little over 12 million?
Try again.
(And don't try to get on Jeopardy)
Yes. Most of the areas within the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, and San Bernardino are typically seen as the Greater Los Angeles area. Put it this way also: if you enter the California cities of Banning, San Clemente, and Ventura on Google Maps, you'll see the triangle (the urbanized area taking up parts of the five counties) I'm talking about. Anything within that triangle is commonly referred to as just "L.A." It's a huge area, yes, but these counties fall under the same regional planning entity and media market!
Last edited by EclecticEars; 09-07-2014 at 07:04 PM..
i read somewhere it's statistically far more common to be victim of violent crime in big US city than in any euro city.
add to that everythin' else:
1. american black women bi4in why you ain't be liking curvy girls?
2. baseball better than football..."soccer"? 3. people against global warming (against the IDEA that global warming exists...).
^ for now will suffice. not country for euros to live. But it's their country (of the Americans), their country - their choice.
It's our country, our choice except the whole climate chagne/global warming part. That has, well, global impacts so the rest of the world has a right to be angry.
Just curious, why the borderline racist 1st point?
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.
