Things America does right (2nd update)

[Colt45]

Originally posted by: Vonkhan

Originally posted by: Eeezee

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

You're either blind or gay

QFT. I can't get over how nice it is being in places without >50% of the 18-30 year old females being overweight.

And they dress better too.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Colt45

Originally posted by: Vonkhan

Originally posted by: Eeezee

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

You're either blind or gay

QFT. I can't get over how nice it is being in places without >50% of the 18-30 year old females being overweight.

And they dress better too.

WAY true! In fact, WAY, WAY true! In fact, in most of Europe, if you see a wide ride waddling, there's a good chance she's an American tourist.

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by: Vonkhan

Originally posted by: Eeezee

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

You're either blind or gay

Could he be both?

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
we spend enormous amounts of resources keeping the modern world going. The world fails to thank us for it.

You're right, and it really confuses me. Why do we give so much money to the rest of the world? This question is especially important now, when America is in a slowing economy!

And the answer is, we don't, really. In fact, even though we're still the richest country overall, Japan gives more aid than we do. And when you break it down to the more meaningful per captia by GDP, we rank 22nd out of the 22 most developed countries! You really need to educate yourself.

Read below. You now have no further excuse for ever again repeating this particular piece of "knowledgable ignorance."

In terms of generosity and altruism, the USA is the most stingy and self-interested giver in the developed world:

"[Americans] are regularly told by politicians and the media, that America is the world's most generous nation. This is one of the most conventional pieces of 'knowledgeable ignorance'. According to the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the US gave between $6 and $15 billion in foreign aid in the period between 1995 and 1999. In absolute terms, Japan gives more than the US, between $9 and $15 billion in the same period. But the absolute figures are less significant than the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP, or national wealth) that a country devotes to foreign aid. On that league table, the US ranks twenty-second of the 22 most developed nations. As former President Jimmy Carter commented: 'We are the stingiest nation of all'. Denmark is top of the table, giving 1.01% of GDP, while the US manages just 0.1%. The United Nations has long established the target of 0.7% GDP for development assistance, although only four countries actually achieve this: Denmark, 1.01%; Norway, 0.91%; the Netherlands, 0.79%; Sweden, 0.7%. Apart from being the least generous nation, the US is highly selective in who receives its aid. Over 50% of its aid budget is spent on middle-income countries in the Middle East, with Israel being the recipient of the largest single share"

Not only that, but according to one source cited by Sarder & Davies, 80% of that aid itself actually goes to American companies in those foreign countries.

% of USA aid 1988-1989
Israel 12.5
Egypt 9.5
Pakistan 3.9
El Salvador 3.3
India 1.9
Philippines 1.8

?US aid, which acquired an increasingly military flavour during the Regan years, is now concentrated on a relatively small number of countries of special political importance.?
"Introduction to International Politics" by Heater & Berridge, p80

According to Heater & Berridge, Israel has been receiving 12/13% of all American charitable foreign aid since 1979, the chart shows numbers from 1988-1989.


Tied Aid:


"The most generous countries are also the ones that do not tend to tie aid to their own products and services.
[...]
Countries that tie less than 10% of aid include Ireland, Norway and the UK, then Belgium, Finland, Switzerland and Sweden. The USA is the worst, and ties nearly 90% of its aid to developing countries. Italy is the second worst with 70%. The two worst countries for this obnoxious practice in aid-giving are also the two countries out of the most developed countries, who give least generously!"

 

[Vonkhan]

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: Vonkhan

Originally posted by: Eeezee

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

You're either blind or gay

Could he be both?

In theory, it's interesting to assume that

I, however, propose a different PoV

He's a chubbychaser

amirite??

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
Americans are the most generous, giving, benevolent group of people in the history of mankind.

I'm going to take you on a tour of places I've lived, and introduce you to some of my old neighbors.

 

[KMFJD]

Originally posted by: Savarak
the water and food quality here is undoubtedly the absolute best here... cleanest, clearest tap water

When was the last salmonella outbreak in the US again?

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: polarmystery
international ignorance runs high in this thread.

oh really? The enlighted us oh guru of international culture.

 

[neegotiator]

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

I totally disagree. I :heart: Spanish girls

[/quote]

spanish girls are good, but them polish/ukrainian girls? good lord they're ridiculously hot...

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: neegotiator

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

I totally disagree. I :heart: Spanish girls

spanish girls are good, but them polish/ukrainian girls? good lord they're ridiculously hot...

German women actually seem to improve into their 30's and 40's. They don't get fat, they don't dress like trailer trash, and they have a healthy, non-hysterical appetite for sex. :thumbsup:

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: polarmystery
international ignorance runs high in this thread.

Says the guy who wants to sound cosmopolitan but doesn't know what to say.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: LeadMagnet
2: Food handling , and food safety in USA is better that most other places

clearly, which is why other countries start rioting when their governments decide to allow imports of our beef. Shit, didn't the fda block a company from voluntarily teating all its meat for madcow (like they do in normal countries)

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Killerme33
Top colleges. US Dominates the top 15-20, with UK having a minor say.

i saw a ranking, i think was princtons ratings, and the entire ivy league, 10/11 of the big ten, and about a dozen+ other schools were rated in the top 50. Out of the top 50, only about 8 weren't american or english.

 

[neodyn55]

the constitution (+ amendments)

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: Cdubneeddeal

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
we spend enormous amounts of resources keeping the modern world going. The world fails to thank us for it.

Really, what would the word do without us? Aren't we pretty much the driving force of the world? The epicenter if you would.

Maybe thats why so many other nations hate us?

Funny how I keep hearing how much the rest of the world hates us... meanwhile they adopt our culture more than any other culture in the world, flock here by the millions and can't get enough of our goods and entertainment.

peopel tell you the rest of the world hates yo so that you hate them in return.

It makes you easier to control i think.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Colt45

Originally posted by: Vonkhan

Originally posted by: Eeezee

11) Girls (sorry Europe, you have some hot babes, but America has the best)

You're either blind or gay

QFT. I can't get over how nice it is being in places without >50% of the 18-30 year old females being overweight.

And they dress better too.

WAY true! In fact, WAY, WAY true! In fact, in most of Europe, if you see a wide ride waddling, there's a good chance she's an American tourist.

confirming all of this

 

[neodyn55]

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: Cdubneeddeal

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
we spend enormous amounts of resources keeping the modern world going. The world fails to thank us for it.

Really, what would the word do without us? Aren't we pretty much the driving force of the world? The epicenter if you would.

Maybe thats why so many other nations hate us?

Yeah, that's why half the world would immigrate here if they got the chance.

Yes, this includes people of countries who call the US the 'great satan'

 

[LeadMagnet]

Originally posted by: neodyn55
the constitution (+ amendments)

agreed - now if we had an administration that respects and obey it that would real make us great.

 

[miketheidiot]

1) higher education, outside of england, it is simple unrivaled. It is probably then most important contributer to our higher standard of living.

2) written constitution. While vague and too easy to change, it is much better than other countries

3) active legal system. A healthy, robust and active legal system leads to a more open and just society.

4) consistent government and rule of law. Unlike other countries, we don't make a new constitution every generation, nor do we have a real anti-government or revolutionary movement.

5) The federal reserve, one of the greatest pieces of legislation in the history of any country. While its had its errors and growing pains, it and the financial system is helps rule over is the another major reason we have a higher standard of life than almost any country in the world.

 

[neodyn55]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
1) higher education, outside of england, it is simple unrivaled. It is probably then most important contributer to our higher standard of living.

2) written constitution. While vague and too easy to change, it is much better than other countries

3) active legal system. A healthy, robust and active legal system leads to a more open and just society.

4) consistent government and rule of law. Unlike other countries, we don't make a new constitution every generation, nor do we have a real anti-government or revolutionary movement.

5) The federal reserve, one of the greatest pieces of legislation in the history of any country. While its had its errors and growing pains, it and the financial system is helps rule over is the another major reason we have a higher standard of life than almost any country in the world.

Wait, 2 contradicts 4.

The constitution is very resistant to change.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
clearly, which is why other countries start rioting when their governments decide to allow imports of our beef. Shit, didn't the fda block a company from voluntarily teating all its meat for madcow (like they do in normal countries)

Purely political (and a little fear mongering by the foreign press doesn't help either.) simply because not one case of human infection from eating beef from America has ever happened. All cases (and these are extremely rare) of Mad Cow Disease were found before the cows ever went to market.

In other words, our food inspection system is pretty efficient for the most part and does a decent, although not perfect job.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: neodyn55

Wait, 2 contradicts 4.

The constitution is very resistant to change.

No it doesn't. The Federal Reserve and income taxes were added as amendments to the Constitution in 1913. These are very much Constitutional now.

I agree with the second part. In 219 years there are only 27 amendments.

 

[erub]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
we spend enormous amounts of resources keeping the modern world going. The world fails to thank us for it.

You're right, and it really confuses me. Why do we give so much money to the rest of the world? This question is especially important now, when America is in a slowing economy!

And the answer is, we don't, really. In fact, even though we're still the richest country overall, Japan gives more aid than we do. And when you break it down to the more meaningful per captia by GDP, we rank 22nd out of the 22 most developed countries! You really need to educate yourself.

Read below. You now have no further excuse for ever again repeating this particular piece of "knowledgable ignorance."

In terms of generosity and altruism, the USA is the most stingy and self-interested giver in the developed world:

"[Americans] are regularly told by politicians and the media, that America is the world's most generous nation. This is one of the most conventional pieces of 'knowledgeable ignorance'. According to the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the US gave between $6 and $15 billion in foreign aid in the period between 1995 and 1999. In absolute terms, Japan gives more than the US, between $9 and $15 billion in the same period. But the absolute figures are less significant than the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP, or national wealth) that a country devotes to foreign aid. On that league table, the US ranks twenty-second of the 22 most developed nations. As former President Jimmy Carter commented: 'We are the stingiest nation of all'. Denmark is top of the table, giving 1.01% of GDP, while the US manages just 0.1%. The United Nations has long established the target of 0.7% GDP for development assistance, although only four countries actually achieve this: Denmark, 1.01%; Norway, 0.91%; the Netherlands, 0.79%; Sweden, 0.7%. Apart from being the least generous nation, the US is highly selective in who receives its aid. Over 50% of its aid budget is spent on middle-income countries in the Middle East, with Israel being the recipient of the largest single share"

Not only that, but according to one source cited by Sarder & Davies, 80% of that aid itself actually goes to American companies in those foreign countries.

% of USA aid 1988-1989
Israel 12.5
Egypt 9.5
Pakistan 3.9
El Salvador 3.3
India 1.9
Philippines 1.8

?US aid, which acquired an increasingly military flavour during the Regan years, is now concentrated on a relatively small number of countries of special political importance.?
"Introduction to International Politics" by Heater & Berridge, p80

According to Heater & Berridge, Israel has been receiving 12/13% of all American charitable foreign aid since 1979, the chart shows numbers from 1988-1989.


Tied Aid:


"The most generous countries are also the ones that do not tend to tie aid to their own products and services.
[...]
Countries that tie less than 10% of aid include Ireland, Norway and the UK, then Belgium, Finland, Switzerland and Sweden. The USA is the worst, and ties nearly 90% of its aid to developing countries. Italy is the second worst with 70%. The two worst countries for this obnoxious practice in aid-giving are also the two countries out of the most developed countries, who give least generously!"

this statement is usually given in reference to charity giving by individuals, which is far ahead of any other country. we don't expect our government to do it for us, we give to all sorts of causes..tsunamis, starving kids in S America/Africa, etc.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: toonces

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

2nd update:

Most important: Healthcare. In GB there is no economic incentive for research. If it weren't for American research and technology, GB wouldn't have anything to buy to treat people with; they'd be stuck using their same old technology.

Of the top 10 pharmaceutical companies in the world, 6 are based out of Europe, 2 in the UK. Text

Pretty good for not having an economic incentive for research. GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca's USD$10 billion on R&D in 2006 must have produced some mighty hearty leeches and powerful ether.

I'm saying the GB system doesn't encourage/reward research. If the US's healthcare system functioned like in GB, then much less money would be spent on research. The money goes to treating known problems, and nothing more.

I was talking to a guy on Britrail the other day who was telling me how about now they're beginning to see a compromise in treatment, where EVERYONE is getting what is cheapest and best for the PEOPLE as a whole for the problem at hand; but people are not getting the individual treatment that they specifically need, because there are not enough of those people to justify paying research in that area to treat them in the special way they need care.

For example, a cure for AIDS might never be developed under the GB heathcare system, because not enough people have it to justify the government spending money on a cure. America's system, however, would basically pay for the treatment if it were available, no matter the cost. So with a cure on the horizon, SOMEONE would pony up the venture capital for the cure to be developed, because our privatized healthcare could and would pay for that AIDS cure, almost no matter what the cost; this entices the venture capitalist because he know if the cure can be developed, then he will get his money back for sure. So GB's populace's health in general, as far as advancement goes, is at the mercy and ability of our own industry. In the long run, theirs, and ours, will suffer stagnation in development of new cures if we move to a nationalized healthcare system.

So basically if it weren't for our healthcare system, where money can be made hand over fist for cures for even a small portion of the population (like AIDS), GB wouldn't have any technology to buy to help treat their citizens, because they wouldn't have developed it in the first place. That fate awaits us, too, if we move to a NHS under Obama; and we would have to resign to trusting medical developments to some other nation. Rest assured that other nation would not have the resources we have to throw at the problem.

 

[Eeezee]

soccerballtux, I do agree that it's good to get cures for diseases that affect small parts of the population. However, US pharm companies are partly responsible for the ridiculous cost of healthcare here. Their markup on drugs is ludicrous; you can't even begin to claim that it's for research expenses when said expenses are paid for within the first quarter due to the insane markup.

The European healthcare systems (whether it's insurance or govt provided service) collectively bargain with pharmaceutical companies that develop cures so that the drugs get to the people at a fair price. On the other hand, American health insurance companies will pay any ridiculous premium; they just offload the costs onto their customers. As such, people with the premium plans get the best healthcare at a ridiculous cost, and people with more affordable plans either get a generic or get the shaft.

You don't see an inherent flaw in such a system?