Question for all the Environmentally Conscious folks

[Corwen]

Then the sources I've read must be wrong. From what I gather, both by reading and by talking to contacts that live there, the crime rate is just as high as that in the US, it's just that more crimes are comitted with knives and bats rather than guns, but the rate is still the same.

US murder rate 0.042802 per 1,000 people per annum.
UK murder rate 0.0140633 per 1,000 people per annum

so if you live in the US you are 3 times more likely to be murdered than if you live in the UK.

who gets to define "reasonable"?

A jury of your peers.

How could you use a gun to defend yourself if their ownership is outlawed? A criminal won't care about the gun laws - that's why he is a criminal. If he can get his hands on a gun, he will.

If you are a farmer for instance you might have one for pest control. As for criminals having guns, well it is much harder for them to obtain them if there are far fewer firearms in circulation. Gun crime is still a rarity here.

Urban ethnic minorities have caused their own problems by not policing (i.e. reprimanding) their own, so now they suffer from gangs and other issues. It's a problem in non-minority neighborhoods as well. It's all about the lack of parenting, not the apathy of the rich or middle-class.

Personally I think it is about lack of hope and the low chance of social mobility leading young men to think the only way they can achieve status is through illegal means.

I don't like the debts any more than you do. I want the US to keep it's nose out of everybody else's business unless we're asked for help as we were in WWI and WWII. If the Middle Eastern governments want to kill each other off, and their people are content to let their governments do as they please, then I say let 'em have at it! People deserve the government they get if they do nothing to change it. Now, if somebody comes over here and bloodies our nose and threatens to do more, then we'll have to defend ourselves as we need to, and then take our toys and go home. I disagree with all the failed "nation building" that the US has done. In every country we have ever intervened in, we are still there (with the single exception of Vietnam, but we're still in Korea, so that's close enough). "Nation Building" doesn't work.

Well I agree, in fact I think the vast majority of the worlds population would rather the US kept its army and air force at home. Of course often regimes with terrible human rights records are maintained in power by help from the US, which stops people from changing their government. This was the case with Iraq which received massive amounts of US military aid, for instance.

You've misunderstood "individual freedom" as we see it and as it was designed in our Constitution. Many within our own borders have misunderstood it as well. The American Dream is not about getting medical care, education, housing and everything else handed to you on a silver platter. The American Dream is about giving everybody the equal opportunity to worship as they will, to pursue their own goals, and to work and earn their medical care, education, etc. If you don't work, then you don't deserve the benefits. For the rare few that can't work at all there should be a system in place to take care of them, but that system should be charity based and not governmentaly controlled. The governmentally controlled system is nortious for allowing those that are just lazy to be get housing, food, etc without working to earn it. Many poor are poor by their own choice.

That attitude is awful, and I just hope for your sake you don't become disabled or ill, because with your views you'll have no-one to blame but yourself should you become homeless or destitute. The simple fact is not everyone is equally able, not everyone can work, nor can everyone prosper in a system where the rich get richer on the backs of low paid workers. Not everyone can be a manager or a professional, whether they work hard or not because capitalist society is pyramidal in its shape with a lot of low paid folk at the bottom of the heap, thats simply how it works, its intrinsic to the system, but your 'American Dream' (which looks like a nightmare to us) just doesn't seem to recognise that.

It's like this: If you were to take the good grades from a straight-A student, give him all Bs instead, and give the straight-F student all Ds because "we feel sorry for his inability to pass". Call me weird, but that's unfair to the A student.

That's how many in America, myself included, see European-style socialism. We don't get it. And to our way of thinking, government-mandated environment efforts are part of that equation.

Its nothing like that, its just about recognising that we all live in a community, where people have different abilities and different needs, and building a society which leaves no-one's needs unmet whilst still allowing those who can achieve to do so. Human life is a collective effort, I am my brothers keeper, how can I be happy while he starves or goes homeless or without medical care? This is simple human compassion. The US seems astonishingly short of that, though your culture tries to compensate by substituting schmaltzy sentimentality.

I have run out of time and have to go out, more later.

[Aitrus]

A jury of your peers.

The jury doesn't make the laws, the politicians do. The jury decides whether or not somebody followed the law.

Personally I think it is about lack of hope and the low chance of social mobility leading young men to think the only way they can achieve status is through illegal means.

So, skipping school, robbery, and drugs is the way to achieve status? Even Hollywood dispels that myth with the movies. It's not that they have a lack of hope, it's that they have no ambition to work hard to be more than they are, and they get their cues from their parents. They would rather take the easy way out than make something of themselves. Getting their foot in at ground level at a burger joint just to get the experience is beneath them, so in their pride they resort to the thug lifestyle or would or they lay around and eat off the coattails of all the honest hardworking folks.

Those that work hard improve their lot in life. That's what capitalism is all about. You work hard, you get paid for it. You don't work, you don't get paid. Simple equation. The "top dogs" have to work hard to maintain and take care of their labor forces, otherwise the labor will quit and the bottom line plummets. Look at Bill Gates. He started out in a garage. Now he's one of the richest men in the world. I'd say that he's earned it. There are many in the inner city that have done it. If they can do it, anybody can.

Well I agree, in fact I think the vast majority of the worlds population would rather the US kept its army and air force at home. Of course often regimes with terrible human rights records are maintained in power by help from the US, which stops people from changing their government. This was the case with Iraq which received massive amounts of US military aid, for instance.

Are you sure you weren't thinking of Afghanistan? In the 80s the US helped the Afghanis defend against the USSR who, at that time, had far more human rights issues.

That attitude is awful, and I just hope for your sake you don't become disabled or ill, because with your views you'll have no-one to blame but yourself should you become homeless or destitute.

That's where you're missing the point. I have prepared myself, my family, and my finances so that if anything happens to me my family will be able to take care of me or go on without me should I die. If something happens and I can't provide for myself because of lack of prior preparation, then yes, I have only myself to blame. Society has no debt to pay to me, no responsibility to keep me fed or hold me by the hand. It should treat me as the adult as I am and let me take care of my own problems.

Part of being a responsible citizen is preparing for the unexpected so that society isn't left with the choice of whether or not to take care of you. For those that aren't able to work, why didn't their family prepare for it? Of if they were born that way, why doesn't their family care for them? Everybody is responsible for the care of themselves and their loved ones, not society. Then there are charities, friends, churches, etc.

The simple fact is not everyone is equally able, not everyone can work, nor can everyone prosper in a system where the rich get richer on the backs of low paid workers. Not everyone can be a manager or a professional, whether they work hard or not because capitalist society is pyramidal in its shape with a lot of low paid folk at the bottom of the heap, thats simply how it works, its intrinsic to the system, but your 'American Dream' (which looks like a nightmare to us) just doesn't seem to recognise that.

It's not a pyramid. Capitalism is a bell curve if everybody does what they're supposted to do. The majority are in the middle, with the priveledged few at one end and the truly disabled or ill at the other. However, that line has been skewed a bit in the US system because of the do-gooders that have interfered with the process because they let their feelings get in the way of thier logical thinking abilities. You're right, not everybody can be a manager. But just because you work the floor doesn't mean that you are poor. It means that you're just like most of the other Regular Joes that are around you. Work hard enough, and you might make manager. Quit working because you choose not to, and you deserve to eat dirt and bark for dinner.

Its nothing like that, its just about recognising that we all live in a community, where people have different abilities and different needs, and building a society which leaves no-one's needs unmet whilst still allowing those who can achieve to do so. Human life is a collective effort, I am my brothers keeper, how can I be happy while he starves or goes homeless or without medical care? This is simple human compassion. The US seems astonishingly short of that, though your culture tries to compensate by substituting schmaltzy sentimentality.

That's a pretty picture you paint. However, I don't want to live my life as a subject to somebody else's whims about where the efforts of my labor should be spent, especially if it's to support programs I don't agree with or on people I don't respect and don't like. I would rather live as a free citizen, in charge of my own destiny, where the only limits set upon me are those that I set before myself.

Subject = ruled by somebody else, told what to do and what not to do, unable to move beyond limits set by somebody else.
Citizen = freedom to live my life as I see fit, to include the freedom to help or not to help those in need, responsible for my actions and my own future. It might be a tougher life (or less civilized in your view) if I have a run of bad luck, but that's how Nature works. If a deer is crippled or otherwise unable to keep up, the herd doesn't hang around to protect it, they head out and thank their buddy for the diversion he provided for the wolves so his brothers could live another day.

Some like the former, some like the latter. Fortunately, there are places where everybody can go to live under the system they like the best. I just have a beef with those that try to turn citizens into subjects just because, as citizens, they have the freedom to try. Gotta love the irony.

I have run out of time and have to go out, more later.

Hurry back!

[Aylyn]

Those that work hard improve their lot in life. That's what capitalism is all about. You work hard, you get paid for it. You don't work, you don't get paid. Simple equation. The "top dogs" have to work hard to maintain and take care of their labor forces, otherwise the labor will quit and the bottom line plummets. Look at Bill Gates. He started out in a garage. Now he's one of the richest men in the world. I'd say that he's earned it. There are many in the inner city that have done it. If they can do it, anybody can.

That is BS, as the old saying goes: Hard work never nade anyone rich. How do you explain all the working poor in your country, who work 2,3 jobs and still do not have enough to feed or clothe themselves, let alone prepare for the future. And there is many, it is not justr the "lazy" who have given up hope.

That's where you're missing the point. I have prepared myself, my family, and my finances so that if anything happens to me my family will be able to take care of me or go on without me should I die. If something happens and I can't provide for myself because of lack of prior preparation, then yes, I have only myself to blame. Society has no debt to pay to me, no responsibility to keep me fed or hold me by the hand. It should treat me as the adult as I am and let me take care of my own problems.

Part of being a responsible citizen is preparing for the unexpected so that society isn't left with the choice of whether or not to take care of you. For those that aren't able to work, why didn't their family prepare for it? Of if they were born that way, why doesn't their family care for them? Everybody is responsible for the care of themselves and their loved ones, not society. Then there are charities, friends, churches, etc.

I hope for your sake you never have to put it to the test, you might be disappointed. And even if you are not, not everybody is as lucky as you, see my comment above. Not all people earn enough to be able to afford horrendous medical insurance costs, and if you are not insured for everything, you will be lost. Yes, we can let them die in the streets, but a rich country should be able to afford looking after those that cannot help themselves.

That's a pretty picture you paint. However, I don't want to live my life as a subject to somebody else's whims about where the efforts of my labor should be spent, especially if it's to support programs I don't agree with or on people I don't respect and don't like. I would rather live as a free citizen, in charge of my own destiny, where the only limits set upon me are those that I set before myself.

That is what democracy should be about: The will of the people, and that means you DO get a say where your taxes are spent. If you live in a community, though, you will have to make compromises, be that in a family or a whole country, and you might see your money spent for something you do not like. The only way to avoid that is to be all alone, neither give nor take help. None of us can or wants to do that, we will all be, at some point in life, be dependent on somebody else.

I agree with Corwen, your attuitude is frigthening. Survival of the fittest? Why not go down Hitler's route and kill them all - that way, you don't have to provide for anyone who does not fit your criteria. Just make sure never to be unfit enough to qualify for euthanasia...

[Aylyn]

And just to clarify the image of the pyramid and the bell curve:

The bell curve should describem in statistical terms, the distribution of wealth in a rich country: A few rich people, a feew poor people, and a mass of middle class. It is, however, seriously skewed in most countries, and the US as well, with the middle become ever flatter and more people on the poor end, while the rich end stretches out ever further. Normal distribution in stats terms is long lost.

As for the pyramid: It is more like the Bostoin Marathon: A few winners, the mass of "also-rans", the stragglers and those that fell to the wayside. And as with every highscore, there is only space for a few on the top, which is what Corwen means. As for those who fell: Let them die? If that was a real-life scenario in Boston, there would be a public outrage, but that is what you propose for a large part of your fellow humans.

I am all for getting the lazy bums to work, but just cutting everybody off and let them fend for themselves is not the way. Or would you throw one of your kids on the streets if it became seriously disabled in an accident? After all, the lazy bum cannot work anymore, so why look after it? I am sure you would think it your responsibility to look after your kid, just as a government has the responsibility to look after the weaker members of the population.

[DJ Droood]

I am all for getting the lazy bums to work, but just cutting everybody off and let them fend for themselves is not the way. Or would you throw one of your kids on the streets if it became seriously disabled in an accident? After all, the lazy bum cannot work anymore, so why look after it? I am sure you would think it your responsibility to look after your kid, just as a government has the responsibility to look after the weaker members of the population.

I think it is obvious, from watching news reports around the health care debates, listening to and reading U.S. commentators, and from visiting an American city of any size, that there is a profoud philosophical difference between Americans (of the United States variety) and most other countries in the Western world, when it comes to a broad range of social issues. You can argue the historical roots of their attitudes, right back to the 17th Century fronteer, but I don't think attitudes will change. (Good luck to you in-country idealists!) I find it somewhat baffeling...we think we know USA, because we are saturated by their culture and share the same language (well, at least if we are reading this messageboard), but I think many of us misunderstand the ideological divide that seperates most (not all, but for sure, most) Americans and other Western nations. The best in human nature, and the very worst seems to reside there in extremes. Its a great place to visit, but I always like coming home.

[Aitrus]

I think it is obvious, from watching news reports around the health care debates, listening to and reading U.S. commentators, and from visiting an American city of any size, that there is a profoud philosophical difference between Americans (of the United States variety) and most other countries in the Western world, when it comes to a broad range of social issues. You can argue the historical roots of their attitudes, right back to the 17th Century fronteer, but I don't think attitudes will change. (Good luck to you in-country idealists!) I find it somewhat baffeling...we think we know USA, because we are saturated by their culture and share the same language (well, at least if we are reading this messageboard), but I think many of us misunderstand the ideological divide that seperates most (not all, but for sure, most) Americans and other Western nations. The best in human nature, and the very worst seems to reside there in extremes. Its a great place to visit, but I always like coming home.

I think this is the crux of what's going on here. I don't understand the European culture, and you guys don't understand mine. We each have preconcieved ideas about how the other feels about the issues, and it's difficult to fully explain them in terms the other can understand. Our separate cultures, indoctrination and upbringing make it hard to understand each other in this kind of forum.

For example: you all seem to think that I want the poor to die off and that the crippled don't deserve help. I'm not saying that, but I can't get the idea of what I do want into clear enough words for you to understand.

I'll take all the blame. I opened up the discussion by trying to get dialogue going about a position that I did't agree with, but wanted to understand the opposing side. I wanted to understand why certain people felt the way they do about certain topics relating to the environment, and it went places I never meant it to go because I just couldn't understand what was being said. I still don't understand, neither the original issue nor the others.

I'm willing to just agree to disagree, and press on to other things. Fair enough?

Edit: I hope I haven't come across as the stereotypical "Arrogant American". Americans are not, as a rule, arrogant (at least we don't try to be, and some just can't help themselves. We just seem like it sometimes to European sensibilities.). We are just very passionate about our country, what it stands for in our eyes, and our history, short as it is compared to European histories. If I seemed offensive, derisive or inflamatory, I apologize, as this is not how I meant to come across.

[Jake]

Corwen,

I've been following this conversation and wondering why I kept feeling the overwhelming urge to pipe in with "we're not all like that" every other post when everything you've been saying about the US is what I've been saying virtually every day of my adult life to anyone willing to put up with my ranting for more than two minutes.

I thought maybe it was just because I wanted to distance myself from Aitrus's opinions. Then I realized it's actually because you're British. And it's not because spending some time in Northern Ireland in the early '90s led me to think of the UK as a fascist state. I got over that a long time ago, I swear.

It's because so many of the issues you've raised are issues in the UK as well, albeit many of them to a much lesser degree. There is no question that your health care system and social services highlight the shameful state of our failure to provide for the basic needs of our citizens. But income inequality is only slightly less appalling in the UK than it is in the US (see the graph on page 14: http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/re ... -03870.pdf). Your government were partners in crime with ours in the war in Iraq. Both the New Labour and Conservative parties look like corporate shills to me. And let's face it, the UK is hardly a model of racial and ethnic harmony.

It's not uncommon here on the American Left to hear discussion of several disturbing developments in the UK during the past decade or so. I mean things like the anti-terrorism laws, some provisions of which are even more draconian than aspects of our Patriot Act (by the way, my city as well as many others across the country declared right after its passing into law that they would not comply with the Patriot Act - an entirely symbolic gesture but nonetheless important I think), the cameras all over the place, the bizarrely Orwellian Anti-Social Behavior Orders like the one making it illegal for that poor woman to have noisy sex anywhere in England, and of course the shocking rise in popularity of the BNP.

All of that to say while you may be miles ahead of us in many ways, both of our countries have a lot of work to do. The UK is not a rainbow family socialist eco-paradise and the US is not a mob of imperialist egomaniacal social darwinists (well not entirely anyway).


DJ,

It would be a mistake (not one I'm saying you've made) to view Aitrus's views as representative of the US mainstream. If they were he wouldn't be a member of a 'third party.' As he's a Libertarian and I'm some sort of anarcho-socialist green, in many ways we represent two radical extremes of political thought, though I'm confident we'd be in agreement on many issues of civil liberties. But both of us are pretty much politically homeless in the US right now.

Things can change here. They have in the past and they will in the future. If I'm not mistaken, the US enacted social security legislation 30 years before Canada did and our Social Security remains the largest government-run program in the world, for good or ill.

The medical reform legislation currently being debated in the US doesn't represent nearly as sweeping a change as even the more minor laws passed during the New Deal, none of which anybody except the most 'radical extremists' (yes Aitrus, this means you ) wants to do away with.

Social policies and the attitudes that shape them, and are in turn shaped by them, can take generations to change in the US or they can change almost overnight.

I try to hold that thought whenever I read Emma Goldman and think "holy crap she could have written this just this afternoon! We haven't advanced an inch!"

I say 'try to' when I actually mean 'have to,' because the only place I could even conceivably afford to emigrate to is Canada. And it's just too damned cold.

[Aitrus]

Well written, you crazy Greenie. Most of what you say is true. I sure as heck don't think for a minute that everybody feels the way I do.

Radical extemist? Me? But..but..you're the one that...aw, nevermind. Seriously though, I don't think that I'm that extreme, just different and vocal about it.

One caveat: I don't think that in America that there's such a thing as "mainstream" when it comes to political beliefs. True, you have two major sides with lots of bit players (such as myself). But within those two sides there is a huge variety of opinions as well, from extreme to moderate.

America is, by it's very nature, diverse in just about every aspect.

[Avariel]

I agree with Aylyn on a lot of her points, especially on the "working poor." Our country, Aitrus, is very much about talking the talk of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" while the gap between the very rich and the very poor is getting wider and wider simultaneously. Middle class is shrinking; pulling yourself up by your bootstraps simply doesn't work anymore when those running the system are simply sucking all this hard work for everything it's worth and paying us back in scraps. I work 3 jobs, myself, I'm a freelance graphic designer with a handful of full time contracts, I have an internship as a graphic designer for the university press that demands about 20 hours a week from my life, and I'm in the Air national guard. I'm also a full time student, and I pay everything out of my pocket. My days are roughly about 15-16 hours long, give or take on weekends when I decide to sleep longer. If I hadn't gone through the military gauntlet and gotten some education benefits I'd probably have had to eat my parrot and prostitute my body for milk money, and despite all that I STILL have student loans. So the "illusion" that we live in a country where hard work is rewarded....No. I work WAY too hard to be this poor; if hard work was equally rewarded by payoff then I'd be richer than most people twice my age at this point.

What I've SEEN in my own experience is that this sort of financial system (capitalism) leads to a lot of people being willing to carve out their own neighbors eyesockets for a quick buck because it IS so damned hard just to make enough to survive. We've seen our huge financial organizations do this to their own stock-holders, and large banks do this with their bailout money (i.e. give themselves huge monetary bonuses so they can go vacation to tropical islands instead of relieving some of the debt they owe; instead, they take THAT out on the consumers and we end up paying for it.) The idea here isn't mass socialist takeover, but of fostering an environment where people's BASIC NEEDS are taken care of already, and cooperation is cultivated because that cut-your-throat-for-a-sandwich attitude is assuaged somewhat. No one is starving, everyone is relatively healthy and under the mindset that if they suddenly become NOT healthy they'll be taken care of, and everyone has the same opportunities to go to school and get an education so that they have the same foundation as everyone else to THEN attempt to pull on some bootstraps. We're not talking about giving to lazy fat bastards that don't want to work...we're talking about giving those of us who are so goddamned exhausted we can barely see straight most days a bit of a break on the financial flogging.

Jake: Good on you guys on the Patriot Act, it was horrifying when I was researching it I still can't believe they got away with passing some of the stuff they did. Canada is damned cold, and that's where a lot of people tell this old vet to run to when I start to whine about things. I just point to the camo in the back of my car and tell them where they can shove it

I think we're going to see a lot of splits up and coming in the next decade or so in political views, and not because anything's really changing; but the old "hard right, hard left" people are getting old and eventually will be gone, LOL, and the next few generations are a lot more scattered in their thought processes than those two old rutted paths. Raymond Rowe said it best about his physicist compatriots: ‘Old scientists do not change their minds, they just die off.'

[Corwen]

Jake, you make some fair comments, and I'd be the last to argue that everything is fine in the UK. But the UK and Europe does look like a socialist paradise in comparison to the US. Universal healthcare, unemployment benefits, sickness and disability benefits, free care for the elderly in Scotland and hopefully elsewhere soon, etc etc, all these things do exist here. We also have at least one party that whilst no longer a real Socialist party (though that too will change in time I hope when the current clique is finished, and of course Socialist parties do exist in Europe) does at least believe in the principle of redistributive taxation. Of course it could be better, and there are lots of activists working here to try to improve things, from both inside and outside the political parties, as there is in the US. We have seen a drift to the right in the last 30 years, in both countries, starting with the evil Thatcher here whose appalling legacy in UK society can't be overstated. They will have to bury her halfway up a wall because so many people will queue up otherwise to dance on her grave. Thatcherite economics took hold in both the US and the UK and it is sad that the current leadership of the Labour party has swallowed them whole, a lot of people are trying to change that.

I'm sure you know that a majority of UK citizens have been against the war from the beginning, that more than 2 million people marched against the war, an enormous proportion of our population and almost certainly the biggest protest march ever in the UK. Yesterday Tony Blair was being questioned about his involvement in the war as part of an inquiry into its legality. A significant proportion of people here would like to see him indicted on war crimes. It is unlikely to happen, but I can tell you he will never be able to rest in the UK, he is regarded as a criminal by a lot of people here.

As for a fascist state, all states are like that when it comes to it, it is the role of the free press to show it and the populace to hold the state accountable through protest if necessary. After the protests in the UK against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq it is unlikely that any administration here could do anything similar for at least a generation.

A jury of your peers.

The jury doesn't make the laws, the politicians do. The jury decides whether or not somebody followed the law.

Politicians make the laws yes, in this case they have said that reasonable force is OK. Judges interpret the law, and it is up to the Jury to decide if you are guilty of breaking it, ie whether you used unreasonable force or not in this case. As happened in the 19th century Juries will refuse to convict if they regard laws as unfair, and that is part of the process.

So, skipping school, robbery, and drugs is the way to achieve status? Even Hollywood dispels that myth with the movies. It's not that they have a lack of hope, it's that they have no ambition to work hard to be more than they are, and they get their cues from their parents. They would rather take the easy way out than make something of themselves. Getting their foot in at ground level at a burger joint just to get the experience is beneath them, so in their pride they resort to the thug lifestyle or would or they lay around and eat off the coattails of all the honest hardworking folks.

Yes, those are all ways of achieving status in the eyes of their peers, which is what matters to these young men. They know as well as I do that should they get that Mcjob, that they will most likely be there forever, working full time for what is essentially not a living wage. They don't want to be exploited by a corporation, or by the US military machine which is the alternative for many, and why should they? We need to make alternative ways for them to gain status, and smooth their way into mainstream society. It is unlikely this could be done without substantial state investment.

Those that work hard improve their lot in life. That's what capitalism is all about. You work hard, you get paid for it. You don't work, you don't get paid. Simple equation. The "top dogs" have to work hard to maintain and take care of their labor forces, otherwise the labor will quit and the bottom line plummets. Look at Bill Gates. He started out in a garage. Now he's one of the richest men in the world. I'd say that he's earned it. There are many in the inner city that have done it. If they can do it, anybody can.

I'm afraid you have a very narrow and commonly held misunderstanding of capitalism. Capitalism isn't about work, or talent, it is about capital. Wealth. Capital generates money without a stitch of work. Surely you must realise that? It is the shareholders of corporations, those wealthy enough to own shares, who get rich, the corporation exists to further that and for no other end. Those who work for a company are only paid the minimum to get them to work there, if they were paid more then the corporation could be sued by the shareholders for failing to maximise returns.

Possessing capital allows an individual to generate wealth in lots of ways. Primarily by owning shares, but if you wanted to avoid risk even putting that money in the bank will generate an income, without work. Having enough money to buy investment property gives you the ability to generate an income without work, by renting it out. This is particularly a problem here in the UK where many property speculators own large numbers of houses rented out to people, often people on low incomes whose rent payments are subsidised by the state, essentially the taxpayer is paying the speculators mortgage for them and giving them a healthy profit for no work. This is a result of the Thatcher government essentially destroying the infrastructure of state owned social housing in the UK.

Essentially you can use money to make money in a capitalist system, without a stitch of work. This of course serves to concentrate the wealth of a society in the hands of those already wealthy, a reverse Robin Hood effect, where the poor are exploited to make the rich richer.

Are you sure you weren't thinking of Afghanistan? In the 80s the US helped the Afghanis defend against the USSR who, at that time, had far more human rights issues.

No I mean Iraq, though thanks for reminding me that the US did the same thing in Afghanistan, propping up the Taliban that they are now fighting against. In Iraq the US govt backed $5 billion of loans to iraq between 85 and 89, along with a lot of other military and other support. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqgate). Of course the US has a long history of backing corrupt regimes, Indonesia, Chile, the Nicaraguan contras etc etc. There is a long list. The UK often worked with you on these, so I'm not claiming our government was innocent for a moment! US-UK even jointly deposed the democratically elected government of Iran in the fifties, leading to the regime that is there now. That was a bit of an own goal too.....

Just seems like you can't get long term peace by supplying guns to the side you like, or deposing people you don't. Funny that.

That's a pretty picture you paint. However, I don't want to live my life as a subject to somebody else's whims about where the efforts of my labor should be spent, especially if it's to support programs I don't agree with or on people I don't respect and don't like. I would rather live as a free citizen, in charge of my own destiny, where the only limits set upon me are those that I set before myself.

Good luck! I hope your plans turn out as you expect, and that if they don't you'll have the good grace to die along with your family. At least you'll die knowing that you died with dignity without being a burden to anyone, even if they were happy to help.

Subject = ruled by somebody else, told what to do and what not to do, unable to move beyond limits set by somebody else.
Citizen = freedom to live my life as I see fit, to include the freedom to help or not to help those in need, responsible for my actions and my own future. It might be a tougher life (or less civilized in your view) if I have a run of bad luck, but that's how Nature works. If a deer is crippled or otherwise unable to keep up, the herd doesn't hang around to protect it, they head out and thank their buddy for the diversion he provided for the wolves so his brothers could live another day.

Some like the former, some like the latter. Fortunately, there are places where everybody can go to live under the system they like the best. I just have a beef with those that try to turn citizens into subjects just because, as citizens, they have the freedom to try. Gotta love the irony.

Nope, there is just people, some of whom never learned to share when they were in the nursery. Dressing selfishness and arrogance up as proud independence and righteous indignation seems a little sad to me. Choosing not to help those in need is a choice with consequences, you also choose to be less of a person, to close your heart. Compassion is the primary spiritual virtue from which all others flow.

[Jake]

JBut the UK and Europe does look like a socialist paradise in comparison to the US.

Fair enough, yeah.

Universal healthcare, unemployment benefits, sickness and disability benefits, free care for the elderly in Scotland and hopefully elsewhere soon, etc etc, all these things do exist here.

Most of those programs exist here too. They're just horribly inadequate.

I agree with every single syllable of your response to me and to Aitrus. So much so that I'd be jumping out of my seat and shouting "yes!" except I'm at work right now and can't afford to damage my reputation at this place any more than it already has been. So:

[Aelfarh]

I think that even when Aitrus views are not the views of all the US people, they reflect the views of a majority of the people of the States, this Darwinist rampant capitalism and selfishness that define the US characteristics, their so called "dream", which I agree is a nightmare really.

I agree with Corven, even when not perfect, Europe does look like a socialist paradise in comparison to the US, is not by chance that of the first 10 places in the human development index nine are European countries, but this goes beyond statistics is a mindset so unique in the States that makes difficult for them to understand not only the rest of the American continent, but the rest of the western world. Of course there are exceptions, and activists and idealists there, but sadly are minority.

[Jake]

is not by chance that of the first 10 places in the human development index nine are European countries

I count seven. Are we looking at two different Human Development Indexes? Canada, Australia and Japan are not European countries.

The 2009 report I'm looking at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... ment_Index) has the US in lucky position 13, just ahead of Austria, Spain, Denmark and Belgium and way ahead of the UK and Germany which are at positions 21 and 22 respectively, only barely edging out Singapore and Hong Kong.

I'm thinking the HDI might not be the best evidence for an argument about how poorly the US fares on the socialist paradise scale.

but this goes beyond statistics is a mindset so unique in the States that makes difficult for them to understand not only the rest of the American continent, but the rest of the western world. Of course there are exceptions, and activists and idealists there, but sadly are minority.

Activists and idealists are a minority everywhere. Otherwise they'd hardly be called activists and idealists.

And I think there are a lot more of us than you seem to think there are. I suppose it could just be my typical American arrogance at work, so forgive me for feeling confident that I have a better idea of the size and scope of the activist community in my country than a Mexican living in the UK would generally have.

[Aelfarh]

double post

[Aelfarh]

I count seven. Are we looking at two different Human Development Indexes? Canada, Australia and Japan are not European countries.

You're right, those three are not. But taking into account the GDP per capita, being the USA the biggest economy of the world, is the 13th place really to be proud of....well, that's a retoric question, you answer it for yourself.

And I think there are a lot more of us than you seem to think there are. I suppose it could just be my typical American arrogance at work, so forgive me for feeling confident that I have a better idea of the size and scope of the activist community in my country than a Mexican living in the UK would generally have.

Yes, maybe I’m just an ignorant who can’t see how the people who don’t follow this Darwinist selfish mindset are reflected in the behaviour of people, laws and government of the USA, but, well the thing is that this Darwinist capitalist mindset is what it’s reflected to the rest of the world, and sadly it is spreading to the rest of the world; this idea of selfishness it’s seen in the global politics also, rich countries and corporations exploiting poor countries people and resources and thinking just in themselves. And the problem here is that we can’t just ignore it and say “each their own” if the USA want to live and treat their people like that is their business, no, no when that country consumes the majority of resources of the world and causes the biggest emissions, because we are talking of the survival of our species as a whole, not the survival of one country. So forgive me if I don’t see the scope of the activist community as significative in your country.

[Aitrus]

Forgive us foolish conservative Americans, but we just can't understand why socialism is a good idea. We further don't understand why you think it's a good argument to get the US do do anything. And to force it on the US on a global scale? We don't understand the logic behind that either.

As an example: the UN, UK, and every other socialist nation is the guy in the middle. The US is the guy on the right.

Socialism illustrated.gif

(24.04 KiB) Downloaded 345 times

[DJ Droood]

Forgive us foolish conservative Americans, but we just can't understand why socialism is a good idea.

We know.

[oaklight]

Forgive us foolish conservative Americans, but we just can't understand why socialism is a good idea. We further don't understand why you think it's a good argument to get the US do do anything. And to force it on the US on a global scale? We don't understand the logic behind that either.

As an example: the UN, UK, and every other socialist nation is the guy in the middle. The US is the guy on the right.

Socialism illustrated.gif

What makes me scratch my head is: the very same folks who have a deep mistrust of government, would surrender yet even more control of their lives to that very same government which they don't trust.

[Jake]

But taking into account the GDP per capita, being the USA the biggest economy of the world, is the 13th place really to be proud of....well, that's a retoric question, you answer it for yourself.

Actually the EU is the world's largest economy. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... nominal%29 )

But if we're looking at single nation states then yeah, the US is number 1 in GDP and number 13 on the HDI, a difference of 12. Something to be proud of? Not at all.

So let's see, the UK has the world's 6th largest economy and it's number 21 on the HDI. A difference of 15. Oops!

I think you have a rhetorical question to answer. Here's a second one - isn't "my country is better than your country" a silly game to play?

Please remember it was not I who brought in the HDI as evidence for my argument. I'm sorry that it didn't work out as you had planned.

Yes, maybe I’m just an ignorant who can’t see how the people who don’t follow this Darwinist selfish mindset are reflected in the behaviour of people, laws and government of the USA, but, well the thing is that this Darwinist capitalist mindset is what it’s reflected to the rest of the world, and sadly it is spreading to the rest of the world; this idea of selfishness it’s seen in the global politics also, rich countries and corporations exploiting poor countries people and resources and thinking just in themselves.

I'm not sure what you mean by Darwinist capitalism. But it doesn't sound like it describes the situation in the US or any other modern western capitalist country at all since it's hardy survival of the fittest (ie most adaptable). In modern statist capitalism, corporations are on the dole and propped up by billions and billions in corporate welfare and other handouts.

Selfishness was not invented by the US. Unfortunately there's plenty of it to go around. I don't think it's fair to characterize Americans as inherently greedy people any more than it's fair to characterize Europeans as inherently racist.

And please let's be realistic. The US did not invent imperialism. Just ask any of the former European colonies in Africa, Asia or the Caribbean whose land and labor were being exploited for centuries before the Americans even really got into the game.

And the problem here is that we can’t just ignore it and say “each their own” if the USA want to live and treat their people like that is their business, no, no when that country consumes the majority of resources of the world and causes the biggest emissions, because we are talking of the survival of our species as a whole, not the survival of one country. So forgive me if I don’t see the scope of the activist community as significative in your country.

Well we certainly have a lot of work to do, and definitely more than in some other places. That doesn't mean we haven't accomplished anything, again more than in some other places. And it doesn't mean we're insignificant. I'd hate to think of what things might be like right now without groups like Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth, founded by insignificant American activists.

[Kernos]

Forgive us foolish conservative Americans, but we just can't understand why socialism is a good idea.

We know.

This has puzzled me. The conservative Americans, esp the far right wingers, are largely Christians, but against socialism. Would not Jesus have been a socialist? Should not Xtians want to take care of others especially the poor and unfortunate?