What Foreigners Don't Understand About America

[Toro]

What Europeans, Australians and Canadians don't understand about America. Well, at least one thing.

Most people from the industrialized world expect that when economic conditions turn poor for either the individual or the economy as a whole, the government should create or increase social spending programs. Not Americans. Rather than focusing on redistribution, Americans want their governments to focus on create the conditions for the situation to improve.

When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly -- by 84% to 13% -- prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.

...

A separate question finds Americans more likely to believe government is doing too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses (50%) as opposed to saying government should do more to solve the country's problems (43%). This broad question is not directed specifically at the economy, but reinforces the general idea that many Americans are leery of too much direct government intervention in fixing the country's problems.

,,,

In sum, free-market advocates can take considerable solace in Americans' overwhelming belief that the government should not focus on redistributing income and wealth, but on improving the overall economy. And, to a lesser degree, Americans also believe government continues to do too much -- not too little -- to solve the nation's problems. On the other hand, the economic turbulence of 2008 could end up getting government into significant new income and wealth redistribution programs unless the Treasury and the Federal Reserve act soon to stabilize and reduce today's unmanageable food and energy price increases.

Americans Oppose Income Redistribution to Fix Economy

 

[Diuretic]

And what Americans don't understand about ....

Well it 'splains much misunderstanding. The rest of us know that governments have minimal influence in a free market economy anyway so we want them to ameliorate the worst effects of a failing free market economy. Oh well, to each their own.

 

[editec]

As people continue to point out about these polls, much of the outcome on such polls really depends on how it is worded.

If for example you asked most Americans specific questions about specific programs which the authors of this poll obviously would call "economic distribution" what you'd find is that most Americans would support those programs.

So in principle Americans believe in self reliance.

But in practice they want controls on businesses, too.

And to prove that point, ask yourself how the government could"

"Take steps to improve the economy conditions and the jobs situation overall" without violating the principles of laissez fair
economics?

EVERYTHING the government does is some kind of welfare project.

It's either welfare for those who need it, or its welfare for those who don't need it, but it is STILL a violation of laissez[/I] fair
economics.

Most libertarians really don't want a laissez fair economy for themselves, they just want it for everyone else.

After all what is a laissez fair economy?

What would it look like?

Well, it really means no government since government can't help but interfer with the markets. Everything the government does affects business, folks...everything

For better or for worse, everything the government does, every law every policy, is a violation of the pricniple of laissez fair economy.

The only real laissez fair advocates are anarchists.

Because the only way to have a laisse fair economy is to have NO GOVERNMENT AT ALL. NONE!

 

[greenpartyaz]

Most people here seem to be under the impression that corporations are ethical beings that can be trusted. Corporations that are left un-checked will run rampid with greed. (Enron) De-regulation only lets corporations get away with murder. When a corporation smells profit, they will do anything, including break the law to attain it. Corporations have too much control over our lives on a day to day basis. Corporations do not pay their fair share of taxes, and move offshore to avoid the tax laws of the United States. Walmart as far as I am concerned can move to China for all I care. Good Riddance! Let small business, in. More competition!

 

[Charles_Main]

Most people here seem to be under the impression that corporations are ethical beings that can be trusted. Corporations that are left un-checked will run rampid with greed. (Enron) De-regulation only lets corporations get away with murder. When a corporation smells profit, they will do anything, including break the law to attain it. Corporations have too much control over our lives on a day to day basis. Corporations do not pay their fair share of taxes, and move offshore to avoid the tax laws of the United States. Walmart as far as I am concerned can move to China for all I care. Good Riddance! Let small business, in. More competition!

agreed, however we walk a fine line, because those same evil cooperations are the very back bone, and power house of our economy.

Charles

 

[Shogun]

Toro, i'll direct you to our thread about AB. You cannot expect a people with as much inherent pride in a nation to sacrifice their culture for the sake of some fabricated economic pipedream. We didn't just say "too fucking bad" during the depression. In a democracy the people make the gov what it is. I guess Europe might be slow to catch on considering their affinity for monarchs and shit like that.

 

[Toro]

Shogun

Economic nationalism is everywhere and is generally stronger in Europe and Canada than in America. In the past, Europeans and Canadians had no problem using the government to nationalize businesses if they thought it was in their interests to do so. They have also generally made it more difficult to buy companies deemed in the national interest. For example, in France, Danone, a milk company, is deemed to be in the national interest.

These countries have placed trade and capital restrictions on foreigners, as well as a myriad of other economic restrictions. However, these countries have also generally grown slower than America and have not created as much wealth as America over the past 3 decades. Their standards of living have lagged. Nobody is clamoring to replicate the French model anywhere, for example.

Most Americans generally would not change their place with people in France or most countries in Europe. That graph above is the inverse of what you would see if that poll were taken in France and most other countries in Europe.

 

[Diuretic]

Toro you said:

Most Americans generally would not change their place with people in France or most countries in Europe. That graph above is the inverse of what you would see if that poll were taken in France and most other countries in Europe.

If Americans don't realise that they're living in crap conditions then how could they possibly know they're living in crap conditions?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Toro you said:



If Americans don't realise that they're living in crap conditions then how could they possibly know they're living in crap conditions?

Sure thing.

 

[Toro]

Toro you said:



If Americans don't realise that they're living in crap conditions then how could they possibly know they're living in crap conditions?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Couldn't you say that about anybody? There are a lot of misconceptions about how Americans live that foreigners have.

It has generally been my impression that when you meet Americans who have lived in Europe for awhile, their misperceptions about many of the criticisms they may have are blunted. Talk to an American who has lived in Holland or Denmark or Sweden, and society hasn't collapsed because of gay marriage or legalized drug use. However, the same generally goes for Europeans when they live in America. America isn't an uncaring cultural wasteland as it is portrayed in those countries and Europeans often admire the dynamic and optimistic nature of American society. Of course, you'll always have some individuals whose stereotypes will be reinforced for some reason, but generally, the more exposure people have to others, the more tolerant they become.

Having said all that, America is still different. It is a place where the American Dream is not a cliche to most. It is a place where reliance on individual initiative is more important than reliance on the state. Americans believe they can solve any problem. Having lived in Europe and Canada, this belief that people can solve their problems on their own with less help from the government is nowhere near as strong elsewhere. America is a wonderfully optimistic place. I don't get the strong sense of optimism elsewhere as I do here. Its a fabulous country. [/4th of July soliloquy]

 

[editec]

Shogun

Economic nationalism is everywhere and is generally stronger in Europe and Canada than in America. In the past, Europeans and Canadians had no problem using the government to nationalize businesses if they thought it was in their interests to do so. They have also generally made it more difficult to buy companies deemed in the national interest. For example, in France, Danone, a milk company, is deemed to be in the national interest.

Just as farming output is deemed to be in the natiuonal interest in America, you mean?

These countries have placed trade and capital restrictions on foreigners, as well as a myriad of other economic restrictions.

Just as we have right here in america, you mean?

However, these countries have also generally grown slower than America and have not created as much wealth as America over the past 3 decades.

Define growth, please. You mean they aren't creating social feudalism as quickly as we are? Yes, I think your are right.

Their standards of living have lagged. Nobody is clamoring to replicate the French model anywhere, for example.

Their standards of living are superior to ours.

Most Americans generally would not change their place with people in France or most countries in Europe. That graph above is the inverse of what you would see if that poll were taken in France and most other countries in Europe.

I would be quite happy to see many of the policies in Europe applied to this nation.

So would tens possible hundreds of millions of Americans.

And no, I can no more prove that than you can prove your diametically opposed presumption which prompted me to respond with my counter assertion.

 

[Toro]

Just as farming output is deemed to be in the natiuonal interest in America, you mean?

But Americans aren't using the power of the state to stop this process. You are more likely to see government intervention in France to effect business decisions than you are in America.

Just as we have right here in america, you mean?

Every country has some restrictions. In America, foreigners cannot own or control media and defense companies. However, such controls are less in America.

Define growth, please. You mean they aren't creating social feudalism as quickly as we are? Yes, I think your are right.

Economic growth in America has averaged a about 1% higher than in America than in Europe since about 1980. When you adjust for population growth the difference has been about 0.6%-0.7%. That may not sound like much but 0.7% compounded over three decades is about 25%.

As for your feudalism comment, I'll assume that is a reference to the widening income gaps. That is true. The top end of the income scale has benefited more over the past few decades than the bottom end. Society tends to work better when everyone is both participating in and believes they are participating in increasing prosperity.

Their standards of living are superior to ours.

Depends what you mean. Not economically. However, it you mean quality of life, you could make a strong argument that Europeans have a better standard of living, since they work less, take more vacations and retire earlier. However, the population of Europe is aging faster and growth is slower, which has enormous ramifications in 15-25 years, far greater than in America since Europeans rely on the state more for retirement income and healthcare.

I would be quite happy to see many of the policies in Europe applied to this nation.

So would tens possible hundreds of millions of Americans.

And no, I can no more prove that than you can prove your diametically opposed presumption which prompted me to respond with my counter assertion.

No doubt many Americans would like to see the country become more European. However, it is not borne out in the attitudes of the vast majority of Americans in the poll above.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

We didn't just say "too fucking bad" during the depression.

Sure we did. Well, the federal government did. And it was over within a year.

I'm talking about the depression of 1921 of course.

 

[editec]

But Americans aren't using the power of the state to stop this process. You are more likely to see government intervention in France to effect business decisions than you are in America.

A completely groundless assertion.

American farm subsidies are some of the highest in the world. I doubt you know anything about France's farm programs, given the fact that your assertions are completely lacking substance

Every country has some restrictions. In America, foreigners cannot own or control media and defense companies. However, such controls are less in America.

Another assertion without data for comparison. You are giving us your impression of things without supporting data.

Economic growth in America has averaged a about 1% higher than in America than in Europe since about 1980. When you adjust for population growth the difference has been about 0.6%-0.7%. That may not sound like much but 0.7% compounded over three decades is about 25%.

that is true. But that does not tell us a damned thing about the comparison of the quality of life of the people. That number describes the American macroeconomy, but tells us nothing about the various microeconomies that each of us live in depending on our socioeconomic classes.

As for your feudalism comment, I'll assume that is a reference to the widening income gaps.

Astute assumption. that is exactly what I was referencing

That is true.

The top end of the income scale has benefited more over the past few decades than the bottom end.

No you are dramaticly understating the facts. The uppermost top end of the scale is getting richer than Cresus. The upper end of the economic system is doing better. The middle classes on down are LOSING purchasing power. They didn't benefit, they LOST during this growing (marcoeconomically speaking) economy.

Society tends to work better when everyone is both participating in and believes they are participating in increasing prosperity.

Yes, like it was in the 1950, and 1960s.

The same time, incidently when the top tax rates were 90%.

I was around and cogent during that time, and I lived around very wealthy people, then, too. Let me assure you that the rich were rich then, despite the theoretical high rrate of taxes.

The difference was, that the middle class incomes were actually growing against inflation at that time.

Then we were getting richer as a people.

NOW, on the very highest incomes are doing better.

Unbridled capitalism is a snake that eats the geese that lay the golden eggs.(the working class)

Depends what you mean. Not economically. However, it you mean quality of life, you could make a strong argument that Europeans have a better standard of living, since they work less, take more vacations and retire earlier.

Yeah, that is what I mean. Raw numbers can be very misleading. Don't tell me what you make tell me how you live.

However, the population of Europe is aging faster and growth is slower, which has enormous ramifications in 15-25 years, far greater than in America since Europeans rely on the state more for retirement income and healthcare.

Yes, that is a problem Europe has that we don't have as bad, I agree.

No doubt many Americans would like to see the country become more European. However, it is not borne out in the attitudes of the vast majority of Americans in the poll above.

I'll accept that as an opinion rather than a statement of fact.

 

[Toro]

A completely groundless assertion.

American farm subsidies are some of the highest in the world. I doubt you know anything about France's farm programs, given the fact that your assertions are completely lacking substance

Another assertion without data for comparison. You are giving us your impression of things without supporting data.

I'll stand by it, since you offer nothing other than an opinion in denial. Its well known that France actively interferes in mergers and acquisitions, preferring French companies take over other French companies and blocking mergers in all sorts of industries, from water to telecom to milk companies to casinos. They are called "national champions," and the Enarques who run France freely move between the upper reaches of government and French industry.

National Champions: A Waste of Taxpayers’ Money

As for the farm subsidies, I am certainly not going to defend the egregious welfare given to farmers in this ridiculous policy. However, it was shown here several months ago by another poster that per capita, American farmers receive far less in subsidies than other farmers around the world. You can search the threads. I will leave it at that.

No you are dramaticly understating the facts. The uppermost top end of the scale is getting richer than Cresus. The upper end of the economic system is doing better. The middle classes on down are LOSING purchasing power. They didn't benefit, they LOST during this growing (marcoeconomically speaking) economy.

Depends on the time frame. Since 2000, middle class real income has either stagnated or fallen slightly. Over the past four decades, it has risen. The long-term pattern in income has been one of stagnation for several years followed by rising income for several years. This pattern has repeated itself since the 19th century. The most recent data for this is the tri-annual Federal Reserve household report and the Census. For over the past 150 years, the thesis and empirical evidence is in a book entitled "The Economic Consequences of Economic Growth." Go to Amazon for it.

As for rising inequality, I believe that the difference between the richest 1% and the rest of society is now the highest since the robber barons.

I'll accept that as an opinion rather than a statement of fact.

Actually, you should accept it as fact, not opinion, since it comes from Gallup, not me. Whether you accept it is merely your opinion.

 

[Paulie]

The middle classes on down are LOSING purchasing power. They didn't benefit, they LOST during this growing (marcoeconomically speaking) economy.

Because of inflation, and an overwhelming desire to spend rather than save and invest intelligently.

 

[Shogun]

Shogun

Economic nationalism is everywhere and is generally stronger in Europe and Canada than in America. In the past, Europeans and Canadians had no problem using the government to nationalize businesses if they thought it was in their interests to do so. They have also generally made it more difficult to buy companies deemed in the national interest. For example, in France, Danone, a milk company, is deemed to be in the national interest.

These countries have placed trade and capital restrictions on foreigners, as well as a myriad of other economic restrictions. However, these countries have also generally grown slower than America and have not created as much wealth as America over the past 3 decades. Their standards of living have lagged. Nobody is clamoring to replicate the French model anywhere, for example.

Most Americans generally would not change their place with people in France or most countries in Europe. That graph above is the inverse of what you would see if that poll were taken in France and most other countries in Europe.

you can take that "generally grown slower" crap back to whatever free market think tank it came from. Two words, buddy GENERAL MOTORS.



1992 is when THIS exchange occured. You tell me. Has Greenspan or Riegle been proven correct?


[youtube]SZffPTyHGDk[/youtube]

 

[Shogun]

Sure we did. Well, the federal government did. And it was over within a year.

I'm talking about the depression of 1921 of course.

Indeed, FDR's New Deal sure does sound like the fed saying "fuck you" to our society.

 

[Toro]

you can take that "generally grown slower" crap back to whatever free market think tank it came from. Two words, buddy GENERAL MOTORS.

I never thought of the OECD, the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the National Bureau of Economic Research as "free market think tanks," but if that makes you feel better, okay.

1992 is when THIS exchange occured. You tell me. Has Greenspan or Riegle been proven correct?


[youtube]SZffPTyHGDk[/youtube]

Shogy...

I ain't gonna spend five minutes of my time watching this. Give me the Readers Digest version, then I will tell you what's going to happen over the next 20 years in 10 sentences of less.

 

[editec]

Here's what the Chicago School of Economics genuses want us to believe, folks.

That they had NO IDEA that:

1. offshoring tens of millions of jobs; PLUS,

2.allowing corporation to shelter their money from taxation off shore;
PLUS,

3. giving trillions of dollars in tax breaks to the people who doing the aforementions things to America; PLUS,

4. getting us into an expensive war and occupation of TWO ASIAN NATIONS ...

...WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The fact that they convinced starry eyed I just read Atlas Shrugged and Oh my god! it's like the most brilliant thing I've ever read libertopians doesn't surprise me, since most of them are conceited enough to think they're John Galt and are somday going to dine at the Mansion with the super wealthy.

But you cannot convince me that any honest economist could possible imagine that the above policies wouldn't BANKRUPT the national goverment AND the people, too.

Anyone who supports the neo-cons must truly hate their nation and th epeople in it, because those policies are likely to make us a banana republic in the next generation or so.

Welcome to BananAmerica. folks.

Compliments of neo-con masters of our universe and the class traitors and goverment haters who supported them.