What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- davidhallstrom, on 04/20/2008, -89/+57So true but it is not so different than what our politicians in the Democratic party are trying to do in this country. We too are becoming a nation of people demanding entitlements. After all both Clinton and Obama keep telling us that it is the responsibility of our goverment to take care of everyone, not just the people that can't help themselves but also the people that are too lazy to help themselves.
- jackspade, on 04/20/2008, -23/+58yeah, it's better to take that money and piss it away in iraq then to help our own people,
- cygnus2112, on 04/20/2008, -3/+15That's always been the old stand-by. But even when America was in it's economic hey-days like the Clinton tech bubble .. the money wasn't really spent on improving the lot for the homeless or for healthcare or for infrastructure, was it?
It's just propaganda. Social measures to fight homelessness and poverty has more to do with local industry, communities and city spending than it will ever have to do with foreign wars. That's where the solution is, anyway. - zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -7/+4Keep telling yourself the lie pal - we can't stop you.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3YES - because we MUST ACT against the enemy !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faFuaYA-daw
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3YES - because we MUST ACT against the enemy !
- BESTenemy, on 04/20/2008, -1/+6If you blindly entrust your money to the government, hoping for it to do what's best, then you don't really have a say in how it spends it.
- cygnus2112, on 04/20/2008, -3/+15That's always been the old stand-by. But even when America was in it's economic hey-days like the Clinton tech bubble .. the money wasn't really spent on improving the lot for the homeless or for healthcare or for infrastructure, was it?
- Mootabolife, on 04/20/2008, -7/+15When your government controls everything around you, it's a bit difficult to be completely self-sufficient. Are we going to start hunting our own food now? No.. we need big business for that, which is controlled by the government (subsidies, regulations, etc..), which helps us. When the government helps, it doesn't always hurt.
And didn’t this whole phase pass by during the 60s in the US?- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -13/+9The level of control exerted by the US government is fairly minimal. If you see a demand for something in the market, and you want to start your own business, the government does not stand in your way. If you want to go move to the middle of nowhere and subsist off the land, there are many places left where no one is going to find you or bother you. Despite all our infrastructure, people are still relatively free in the US to invent and re-invent themselves as they see fit. As long as you act socially responsible, there are few cases where the government will intervene in your life.
While we certainly do depend on large global corporations for many of the goods and services most people rely on, and there is a need to regulate such business once it starts to affect the lives of significant portions of the population, we still do exert a significant level of influence upon these companies, and it's ultimately the consumer that allows them to continue to exist. If someone can find a better way to do something, there is nothing preventing them from supplanting existing players.
This is in sharp contrast to more socialized countries in Western Europe, where the state owns and controls relatively large portions of the economy, and it's not so easy to make progress or displace an entrenched player. You want to set up a company that competes with a big local union employer, good luck. Farmers in France are forced to destroy large portions of their crops if they want their subsidies, while the price of food at the grocery store keeps soaring to new heights (well before the current food crisis hit).
The main problem is that it's the middle class that ends up paying for all the social management, in higher commodity prices, decreased job prospects from non-government agencies, constantly reduced benefits from their government retirement plan, effectively capped salaries with limited work weeks, and a complete inability to start their own business, due to unfavorable bureaucracy, labor laws, tax laws, and business loan infrastructure.
Personally, I cherish the relative lack of government management we see stateside, and it's liberating to be given enough rope to hang ourselves with, or to build a bridge with. An individual can achieve a great deal in the US if (s)he's driven, easily moving between social classes, whereas life in those socialist paradises of Western Europe feels stifling. If I were sick or somehow incapable of caring for myself, I'd rather be in their socialized institutions, but as a healthy human happy to take my own life in charge, there's nowhere I'd rather be than in the US. - Laughsatyou, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2whats wrong with hunting for your own food? its healthier and tastes better ;-)
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Cat scratch fever?
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -13/+9The level of control exerted by the US government is fairly minimal. If you see a demand for something in the market, and you want to start your own business, the government does not stand in your way. If you want to go move to the middle of nowhere and subsist off the land, there are many places left where no one is going to find you or bother you. Despite all our infrastructure, people are still relatively free in the US to invent and re-invent themselves as they see fit. As long as you act socially responsible, there are few cases where the government will intervene in your life.
- Stormwern, on 04/20/2008, -6/+30Poor europe, how do we survive without a lower class. :)
- JointVenture, on 04/20/2008, -16/+12Yeah, you dont have a lower class. I guess it was a bunch of lawyers and art students burning down paris last summer.
- Laughsatyou, on 04/20/2008, -0/+4I dugg you up, there are still some anti-socialist capitalists on digg
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -5/+1That's because Digg - unlike Slashdot - has a large portion of users who don't have a real job because they are still in high school. Wait till they start working in their career and see how much money is stolen out of their check to go to social programs to pay for people who are unwilling to contribute to society or were too stupid to do their homework in school and now are unemployable.
Wait until they learn that legal immigrants can receive $3600 a month for doing nothing and then qualify for low interest loans to start their own businesses and then employ their own family members so they don't have to pay into Social Security. I bet that will make them change their minds about a lot of things economically.
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -12/+3By turning them into wards of the state? Congratulations on your massive (prosperous) slave population...
- Laughsatyou, on 04/20/2008, -4/+4the only thing worse than a religious radical is a socialist.
- PaulOwen, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4Q. Which is the world's largest economy?
A1: USA
A2: EU
Think about it ....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ ...- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -3/+3The USA is a nation state, the EU is not. The USA has 300 million people, whereas the EU has 470 million and barely has a larger economy collectively than the US.
What makes me laugh also is a lot of the knee-jerk anti-American comments on Digg are coming from users from the UK which is the most anti-EU of all the so-called "member-states" in that wanna-be superstate.- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3We started over 100 years later our integration to that "wanna-be superstate", but we will integrate more than the US is, and will be. We don't want that so called superstate because of economics, we do want that because last century we were the center of 2 World Wars.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -4/+1Zeabu, you don't need to create a superstate to keep the peace in Europe. That's like saying Canada and the United States must become one nation to preserve the peace. We at least share a recent common history and the majority of both nations share the same language, whereas "Europe" does not.
- zeabu, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2The US and Canady were never archenemies. France and Germany were. France and Brittain were. Germany and Brittain were. Italy and France were. Croats and Serbs were. Serbs and Kosovars still are. Hongarians and Czechs were. Germany and Poland were.
Continue? - mrigns, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1Even the Eurozone with just as much citizens as the US surpassed the United States in terms of economic power.
Just telling people that the US isn't failing atm (last 20 years maybe) isn't making it go away.
The US needs major reforms.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -3/+3The USA is a nation state, the EU is not. The USA has 300 million people, whereas the EU has 470 million and barely has a larger economy collectively than the US.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -3/+6The US does not HAVE a lower class - it has PRISONS !
- blackjack75, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3To be fair we do have a lower class (yes, even in Switzerland). The difference is how we treat it. Though love is not always the right answer.
I'd rather live in a country that silently cures its poor for free than one that is powerful enough to get everyone else to shut up and bow.- WhiteRaven, on 04/21/2008, -4/+4I'd rather live in a country that allows all it's citizen the basic freedom to choose for themselves how much they will help their fellow man. It's that whole liberty thing. Europeans don't even seem to understand the concept.
- mrigns, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1We understand the concept of helping others
- WhiteRaven, on 04/21/2008, -2/+3Wow... ignorant much?
The so-called lower class in America is at *least* as well off as the middle class of Europe.- mrigns, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1in your dreams...
- JointVenture, on 04/20/2008, -16/+12Yeah, you dont have a lower class. I guess it was a bunch of lawyers and art students burning down paris last summer.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -8/+49Yes do not listen to the Europeans.
In my country for example (the netherlands) we have a blooming economy, economic growth, a fiscally sound policy, decent wellfare, everyone has standard medical insurance, our infrastructure is incomparably effective to that of the US, our pensions are accounted for and a strikingly low unemployment figures and business screaming for workers. Mix an accountable parliamentary democracy with decent social values.
And you can smoke and own pot legally too.- JointVenture, on 04/20/2008, -18/+13While I dig the NORML stance your country is also the size of NY state.
We've got 49 more to deal with.
Small countries can embrace socialism, especially when they live under the UMBRELLA of the USA's military.
If you had to supply your own defense you would be broke.- Stormwern, on 04/20/2008, -9/+18If USA dismanteled its military, noone would be happier than us, trust me. The last 50 years you've done more harm than good, alot more.
- WhiteRaven, on 04/21/2008, -4/+3Wow. That you actually believe this spells doom for the entire planet. You'd be starving under a soviet regime, eating grass like North Koreans if *someone* hadn't maintained a strong military to protect yo. Of course, that someone didn't have to be America... but as it happens, it was.
- FatherVic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1yeah... let's dismantle our military.
And remove seat belts and airbags
And destroy child safety seats
And Open out borders
And stop using metal detectors in airports
And stop having a police force
And stop using condoms
And hell, while we are at it, no Doctors!!
...douchebags
- mbeauchez, on 04/20/2008, -5/+26Errr.... No. The Netherlands is under no direct threat. Nor were/are the USA. The only reason you have such a huge army is because you feel the need to play the global watchdog. Also, there's this thing called 'NATO' which prevents individual countries from needing huge armies.
- roodammy44, on 04/20/2008, -2/+25There's this thing called the "european union".
Both Britain and France have nukes capable of hitting anywhere on earth (when someone asked thatcher to dismantle the UK's capability she famously said "and let the French control Europe's only deterrent??")
Plus our combined militaries could cause quite a bit of damage.
The EU also has the biggest economy in the world, even with all of the social programmes which make our lives a lot easier and more worry free than the US.
If everyone in the US didn't start crying and screaming every time anyone mentioned "socialism" maybe you'd have it as good as we do.
I believe if there is a world government it will more likely be modelled after the EU's "we're all in this together but you can control your countries how you want" than america's "we will control the world by militarily enforcing trade and you're all our bitches" - Breepee, on 04/20/2008, -2/+8So you're suggesting the US splits up? I've always been of the opinion that the world would be better of with lots of smaller countries.
While it's true the Royal Dutch Army couldn't hold larger armies at bay (it is a country of 16m after all) it also has a military force that's disproportionally large. We spend 1.0% of the global defense budget and that makes us the 17th military spender in the world. I don't have a current assessment ready for you, but the Airforce, Navy and Special Forces are among the best in Europe.
Also, we choose our friends wisely. Because of smart politicking, we don't need an army the size of the US'. We didn't cofound the EU just to piss money away, it's meant to ensure our safety and sovereignty.- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -10/+4Sure, co-founding the EU gives you sovereignty... War is peace, prison is freedom. I give it one generation, maybe two at most, before there's little "Dutch" cultural identity left, let alone any kind of real political autonomy.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Oh, we'll be globally integrated then? Well, I am an avid singulariatarian, so your projections are kinda relative to me.
- Stormwern, on 04/20/2008, -9/+18If USA dismanteled its military, noone would be happier than us, trust me. The last 50 years you've done more harm than good, alot more.
- nixfu, on 04/20/2008, -17/+7And more Islamo-Facists than you can shake a stick at(because they are already shaking them all at you) who will be running YOUR ASS out in a few years when they rename it to "Netherstan" and leave the EU to join EUrabia.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+9I can do little else than laugh at this. It is a level of infantile, pre-information age propaganda both sides used in world war one.
* http://www.firstworldwar.com/posters/index.htm
Here are a few good ones:
* http://www.firstworldwar.com/posters/images/pp_uk_ ...
* http://www.firstworldwar.com/posters/images/pp_uk_ ...
http://newdeal.feri.org/survey/39b16.htm
http://www.teacheroz.com/WWIIpropaganda.htm
Real spicy ones:
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGNyc_LlJhs
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sksix0GI16M&feature ...
Your assertion is clear evidence of a state being divided and ruled, and not by mother theresa either.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+9I can do little else than laugh at this. It is a level of infantile, pre-information age propaganda both sides used in world war one.
- gobbleplex, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Yep. It's one of my top places to move to if I find myself single and without much in the way of attatchement here. There's a treaty between the US and the Netherlands that makes it comparatively very easy for a US citizen to start a business in The Netherlands. Getting a work visa to be an employee is just painful.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3First off, in your country (the Netherlands) they are now cracking down on pot coffee shops and the red light district because they foolishly moved in the Muslim immigrants next door. That's one of the reasons why Van Gough was killed. Compare that to California, and if you have 1g of pot on you, the worst thing they can do you is write you up on a misdemeanor and charge you $100. If you have a medical marijuana card, they can't even do that.
As for your booming economy, if you sat next to a third-world country like California does, you wouldn't have a booming economy and your social safety net would be stretched too damn thin for your actual citizens. Illegal immigrants - excuse me, "undocumented workers" - cost the State of California more than $4 billion annually to pay for their health care, not to mention education for their children and all the other benefits that they use.
- JointVenture, on 04/20/2008, -18/+13While I dig the NORML stance your country is also the size of NY state.
- JettaMan, on 04/20/2008, -27/+5The actions of Europe and the comments here by Europeans tell me one thing: Europeans have no concept of what true freedom is. THey have no concept of free markets. They wonder why scarcely any of their products (especially the UK) succeed in the markets, so they go begging to the government to make things work. They need to read Atlas Shrugged.
- rhodydog, on 04/20/2008, -4/+14You are sadly so misinformed.
- Breepee, on 04/20/2008, -5/+6Well, at least we don't have to worry about planes flying into buildings. You know, it's nice to be friends. Yes, sometimes that means you can't do exactly what you want, but at least you know that you're ass is covered.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Really? Didn't Muslims bomb the Double Decker busses in London? What about that ricin (sic) scare in Paris...and that happened without France being involved with the Iraq War. Then you had the Spanish bombings before that. Al-Qaeda linked groups wanting to blow up the Vatican, etc. So yeah, regardless of whether European nations join up with the US - or support Israel - on various military actions, they still have to deal with Islamic terrorist threats.
- niczar, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1The ricin scare was BS. Good to know it worked with idiots like yourself.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Really? Didn't Muslims bomb the Double Decker busses in London? What about that ricin (sic) scare in Paris...and that happened without France being involved with the Iraq War. Then you had the Spanish bombings before that. Al-Qaeda linked groups wanting to blow up the Vatican, etc. So yeah, regardless of whether European nations join up with the US - or support Israel - on various military actions, they still have to deal with Islamic terrorist threats.
- powatom, on 04/20/2008, -2/+9I bet it feels good living in a bubble, JettaMan!
- Azio, on 04/20/2008, -8/+9Stupid, fat Yank is confused and frightened by the idea that individual freedom can be reasonably restricted in the interest of community standards; thinks Americans have a monopoly on freedom
News at 11- schnikies79, on 04/20/2008, -9/+6Individual freedom is more important the community standards.
There is nothing reasonable about limiting individual freedom.- Azio, on 04/20/2008, -2/+10Yes, that is the difference in philosophy between America and social democracies like the Netherlands, Canada, etc
What we have works very well for us. It's incredibly ignorant to suggest that we have "no concept of real freedom" just because we choose to exchange the tiniest measure of personal liberty for superior education (especially post-secondary which is far cheaper in Canada than the US), healthcare that works for everyone, and markets that are fair and competitive - schnikies79, on 04/20/2008, -5/+8@Azio
The United States was built from the ground up on individualism. Without it, it's not America. Individual achievement will always be valued higher. It's incredibly ignorant to think that the U.S. in the same as Europe. We are a different people, with a different culture. We glorify people who can do it on their own.
We will never, ever have the social system that Europe. Many would truly rather starve than have the government pay their way. It happens ever day.
Oh yea. A big ***** off for the "fat yank is frightened". I'm a yank. I'm not fat and I'm not frightened. I just very strongly disagree and would rather fight and die than be spoon fed by the government. - KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -4/+2No I understand, you are a race of warriors!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h4dVFOi3Xg&NR=1
Citizenship Guaranteed! - JettaMan, on 04/20/2008, -5/+2Education!? Why is it the very best universities are all in the USA? Harvard, Yale, Stanford. Why is it the best ones always start off private, even in the UK? Because privately operated institutions work better than government controlled institutions.
- TheCatsPants, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2You mean there should be no laws at all? Of course your personal freedom has to be restricted in some way.
- Azio, on 04/20/2008, -2/+10Yes, that is the difference in philosophy between America and social democracies like the Netherlands, Canada, etc
- schnikies79, on 04/20/2008, -9/+6Individual freedom is more important the community standards.
- Ananda725, on 04/20/2008, -5/+12Oh idiocy, do you ever fail? I am curious, David, is America's floundering economy the fault of Democrats? You know that the current administration AREN'T Democrats, right? ...Are you actually trying to proactively blame all of this ***** on the party which is set to gain power, because of the failure of the current admin.? Wow. I will say one thing, your idiocy takes huge (infertile) balls...
- TLAKABM, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4Infertile? I think you mean sterile.
Women are fertile; men are virile, and when they're not virile they're sterile.- Ananda725, on 04/20/2008, -4/+3Edit: he has huge (sterile/smelly) balls...
thanks TLAKABM.
- Ananda725, on 04/20/2008, -4/+3Edit: he has huge (sterile/smelly) balls...
- FatherVic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1interesting...
Democratic Controlled House
Democratic Controlled Senate
More Democrat Mayors and Governors than Republicans
The only thing we really have is the President right now.
So....
FAIL
- TLAKABM, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4Infertile? I think you mean sterile.
- jackspade, on 04/20/2008, -23/+58yeah, it's better to take that money and piss it away in iraq then to help our own people,
- davidmesaaz, on 04/20/2008, -14/+36Milton Friedman stated that collectivism is the natural state of man. Its much easier to argue for a government that passes a law every time there is a problem.
- KyleGoetz, on 04/20/2008, -8/+44Eating raw meat and dying at the age of 30 is also the natural state of man, but you don't see doctors advocating that.
- TLAKABM, on 04/20/2008, -8/+1Was natural.
See: evolution.- Cerebron, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Natural *assumption*.
- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2No, see: economic and technological progress created in large part due to western capitalism.
- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1Progress is made due to wars. The need to be better and more advanced as your enemy.
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -0/+3Evolution of civilization, not of humans. Without civilization we would most likely be "eating raw meat and dying at 30".
You can argue that civilization is the natural evolutionary step in humanity, but not the single human. - DaveDaveson, on 04/20/2008, -3/+2digg me down
- TLAKABM, on 04/24/2008, -0/+2I would like all the people who dugg me down to eat a slab of raw meat.
See what happens.- FatherVic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Done
- mburner21, on 04/20/2008, -0/+12Friedman wasn't advocating collectivism.
- ZenMojo, on 04/21/2008, -3/+1Considering France and Germany have higher life expectancies than the United States, maybe some "natural states of man" ain't that bad?
- Picaroon, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3*woosh*
- TLAKABM, on 04/20/2008, -8/+1Was natural.
- JettaMan, on 04/20/2008, -16/+15No surprise that state-run high schools like promoting the state. What I find funny about these Digg comments is how they criticize the problems of the US without realizing that those problems are caused by the state! If the US moved further to free markets these problems would go away. It's the same old thing: Socialism causes problems, and the government proposes more Socialism to cure it.
- Breepee, on 04/20/2008, -11/+7Haha, I suppose that's why Europe performs so well, being the biggest economy and all that, AND having primarily sociodemocratic leaders.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -2/+4You only have the biggest economy because you have 470 million people within the 27 nation states that belong to the EU. That should be shameful considering the EU barely out ranks the US economy when the US only has a population of 300 million. Furthermore, the size of the EU economy is artificially higher the past year due to the increase in the value of the Euro and not real economic factors.
Add Canada as part of the US economy - excuse me, as NAFTA but without the third-world country of Mexico - and our economy is bigger and just with 25 million ish more people.- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -3/+2The dollar is low because your economy isn't doing well, it's not the other way around.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -2/+4You only have the biggest economy because you have 470 million people within the 27 nation states that belong to the EU. That should be shameful considering the EU barely out ranks the US economy when the US only has a population of 300 million. Furthermore, the size of the EU economy is artificially higher the past year due to the increase in the value of the Euro and not real economic factors.
- Breepee, on 04/20/2008, -11/+7Haha, I suppose that's why Europe performs so well, being the biggest economy and all that, AND having primarily sociodemocratic leaders.
- Breepee, on 04/20/2008, -12/+9Read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" to learn why we should avoid at all costs to take Friedman serious,
- Stevethegreat, on 04/20/2008, -8/+11Friedman advocates freedom, if you're too damn stupid to use Freedom then indeed Friedman's ideas are dangerous, they would lead to a more primitive world than the one we have today. If -however- the consumer was active and knew that with the way (s)he spends his/her money is actually voting for a new state of events we would have a lot less people buying what they don't need, no monopolies to begin with and even cartels would be something rare. Everything bad in economy is caused by governmental interventions in the basis that people are not fit to choose for themselves.
If indeed people are as stupid as not to be able handle freedom and -at the same time- not being able to grow smarter so that survive in those new conditions, then -indeed- Friedman had it wrong and the part he failed was human psychology. If we accept this type of determinism -though- we're nothing but slaves who always need some kind of daddy to look after us which happens to be elected by our vote. Naomi Klein's world view is that of slavery and subjection, if she's right -though- we hardly deserve anything better.......
- Stevethegreat, on 04/20/2008, -8/+11Friedman advocates freedom, if you're too damn stupid to use Freedom then indeed Friedman's ideas are dangerous, they would lead to a more primitive world than the one we have today. If -however- the consumer was active and knew that with the way (s)he spends his/her money is actually voting for a new state of events we would have a lot less people buying what they don't need, no monopolies to begin with and even cartels would be something rare. Everything bad in economy is caused by governmental interventions in the basis that people are not fit to choose for themselves.
- pin0chet, on 04/20/2008, -2/+9The Shock Doctrine isn't an indictment of free markets and limited government. Naomi Klein falsely blames the libertarian wing of the republican party for the failures of the Bush Administration and a small group of big-government, neocons. Massive spending on useless wars, corporate-welfare subsidies paid for by tax dollars, and massive expansion in health care entitlements are NOT what Friedman would advocate today.
Also see Tyler Cowen's review of Naomi Klein's book in the New York Sun, in which he explains that she misrepresents economic reality routinely. Even Joseph Sitglitz, a noted critic of globalization, admits she doesn't do justice to economic truths. - ZenMojo, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5Milton Friedman was brilliant, particularly his statement in his last few years that the free market only truly works in small individual interactions and not on the national scale.
- davidmesaaz, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3From the article How to Soak the Rich on my Digg account.
Oh really. New IRS data released last month tell a very different story: In the aftermath of the Bush investment tax cuts, the federal income tax burden has substantially shifted onto the backs of the wealthy. Between 2002 and 2004, tax payments by those with adjusted gross incomes (AGI) of more than $200,000 a year, which is roughly 3% of taxpayers, increased by 19.4% -- more than double the 9.3% increase for all other taxpayers.
Between 2001 and 2004 (the most recent data), the percentage of federal income taxes paid by those with $200,000 incomes and above has risen to 46.6% from 40.5%. In other words, out of every 100 Americans, the wealthiest three are now paying close to the same amount in taxes as the other 97 combined. The richest income group pays a larger share of the tax burden than at anytime in the last 30 years with the exception of the late 1990s -- right before the artificially inflated high tech bubble burst.
Millionaires paid more, too. The tax share paid by Americans with an income above $1 million a year rose to 17.8% in 2003 from 16.9% in 2002, the year before the capital gains and dividend tax cuts.
The most astounding result from the IRS data is the deluge of revenues from the very taxes that were cut in 2003: capital gains and dividends. As shown in the nearby chart, capital gains receipts from 2002-04 have climbed by 79% after the reduction in the tax rate from 20% to 15%. Dividend tax receipts are up 35% from 2002 to 2004, even though the taxable rate fell from 39.6% to 15%. This is as clear evidence of a Laffer Curve effect as one will find: Lower rates produced increased revenues.- FatherVic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1b-b-b-b-but wealthiest 1%
...well said, sir
- FatherVic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1b-b-b-b-but wealthiest 1%
- davidmesaaz, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Good article in todays WSJ that talks about European Immigration. '
http://digg.com/world_news/WSJ_com_Opinion_Immigra ...
- KyleGoetz, on 04/20/2008, -8/+44Eating raw meat and dying at the age of 30 is also the natural state of man, but you don't see doctors advocating that.
- chicofaraby, on 04/20/2008, -58/+216This is funny as hell. I have to laugh when I see nonsense like this put out by the right wing as if their ideology HASN'T failed utterly in every promise they made. Yeah, sure guys, Europe is an economic failure and the Chicago School's ***** is a huge success in the US. BTW, how many euros can I buy with my dollar today? Oh yeah, that's right... none.
- KingRat6, on 04/20/2008, -28/+52Oversimplification is the fools best argument tool.
- robbiemuffin, on 04/20/2008, -17/+33as personified by your reply. what is being oversimplified??
- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -5/+19The idea that currency=economy/standard of living/etc.
- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -4/+25I timed out...
The US currency is dictated by the FED (Government) not free markets. So pointing it out as a failure of free markets while trying to promote bigger government with more economic power is a bit ridiculous.- robbiemuffin, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2ok that's a great point. :) I can't say that you can just discount old money (read real estate), but otherwise its fine and I was only trying to point out the comic ambiguity
- robbiemuffin, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2ok that's a great point. :) I can't say that you can just discount old money (read real estate), but otherwise its fine and I was only trying to point out the comic ambiguity
- yodaj007, on 04/20/2008, -3/+7The FED isn't part of the government.
- pin0chet, on 04/20/2008, -0/+4it received its monopoly power over currency from Government. Take that away, and the Fed becomes relatively meaningless...
- Cerebron, on 04/20/2008, -1/+4It's not part of the elected government, but the elected government has delegated it's authority to it.
- robbiemuffin, on 04/20/2008, -17/+33as personified by your reply. what is being oversimplified??
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -26/+75Socialism works when coupled with real democratic values, a multi-party system and fiscal accoluntability. Don't let the social darwinists and the corporate elite classes of the US deceive you. They have been proven pretty selfserving in the last years and irresponsible as hell.
- JointVenture, on 04/20/2008, -32/+9..and a country the size of NY that lives under the protective umbrella of the United States.
If the EU countries would have had to supply their own defense without the help of the US for the past 60 years they would be broke.- roodammy44, on 04/20/2008, -2/+17We do supply our own defense.
60 years ago britain was one of the countries at the bargaining table remember. If we're talking history you're forgetting the british empire - Breepee, on 04/20/2008, -1/+12If the US had to supply money for their protection today they would be broke too. The US economy works on European and Chinese money, so let's not fool ourselves here: us Europeans buys that protection.
- powatom, on 04/20/2008, -4/+13If the US wasn't such a dick to everyone else, we probably wouldn't NEED to use America's defence.
- roodammy44, on 04/20/2008, -2/+17We do supply our own defense.
- pin0chet, on 04/20/2008, -2/+10The Netherlands has undergone significant deregulation in recent years, and is now doing quite well economically. Still, look at average income between Netherlands and the U.S.-- $46,000 per capita PPP in the US, $36,800 in Netherlands.
Socialism works if we are willing to sacrifice some economic growth and wealth creation in exchange for a bigger social safety net. Europeans seem quite content living somewhat poorer on average, while having fewer truly impoverished individuals thanks to a much more generous welfare state.
And don't forget many of Europe's most successful nations benefit from huge natural resources relative to the nation's size. While the U.S. does have a good amount of oil, as a percentage of our economy, it's nothing compared to what Norway and Netherlands make off petroleum. Netherlands made $150 billion from its massive natural gas reserves last year alone. Considering the entire economy is only $630 billion, that extra income makes it a lot easier to sustain high public expenditures without causing stagnation.
- JointVenture, on 04/20/2008, -32/+9..and a country the size of NY that lives under the protective umbrella of the United States.
- N0vember, on 04/20/2008, -13/+55Thank you for being the first to criticize this ridiculous propaganda.
I see only vague generalizations about Europeans, but not much facts. - robbiemuffin, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4The idea that there is a real division between the US and the American market is laughable. The real economic horizons are around south america, asia, and the rest.
- robbiemuffin, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1eke! US and the European market... I meant european :)
- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -15/+18The ideology has been more successful by than any other ever practiced by any measurable means. You point out the US as a supposed failure, though in a 200 year period it has become the largest economic power in the world. Millions of the world's poorest (like my ancestors) have come here and found great prosperity. If you look to Asia, you can see the same remarkable success in countries like South Korea and Taiwan and even China as it becomes more capitalistic. Their quality of life has skyrocketed. You point out that the Euro has been gaining against the dollar in the last few years as Europe has been moving UP in free market rankings over the last few years as well, all the while American's and its politicians are leaning more towards protectionism, an ideology that truly has failed utterly everywhere it has bee tried. I would think your ignorance is funny as hell but it is actually depressing as this is how many people are starting to think now adays, as the article points out. I would have thought with the vast amount of history demonstrating the success of free markets and the failure of protectionism / over the top government regulation that over time this leftist thinking would end, but I guess history's lessons are only as accurate as the teachers that teach it dictate.
- theodenking, on 04/20/2008, -8/+211. Free market capitalism originated in Europe
2. America's success is far more the result of its vast natural resources than its economic policies.
3. If Protectionism is such a sure-fire way to failure how do you explain most nations using it successfully (including the US, shockhorror) right up to the end of the 19th century?- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -4/+121. So!? Does that mean it can't be contributed to success in the US, Asia, or anywhere else in the world? If unemployment increases (as it did) with Germany's increased spending on social welfare programs, is it put to rest by the fact that 'capitalism originated in Europe?'
2. If we were we still an industrial manufacturing economy that might make sense. What does the fact that 90% of every computer runs either a Microsoft or Apple based operating system (two (shockhorror) US companies), or that the most popular Internet search engine is run by an American company have to due with the fact that we have a lot of farm land?
3. If these systems worked so well why did we stop using them in the 19th century? And why have we experienced such huge growth since then without them in place?- Azio, on 04/20/2008, -9/+6twomeyw23334: read a ***** history book, and do some travelling in other countries
- niczar, on 04/20/2008, -0/+10The US was very protectionnist up to the late 1950s, actually.
- Lynxpro, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2Free market capitalism started in the UK. The UK is not exactly "Europe". In fact, when the French complain about the free market, they generally call it "Anglo-American Capitalism".
- niczar, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2"anglo-saxon," actually
- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -4/+121. So!? Does that mean it can't be contributed to success in the US, Asia, or anywhere else in the world? If unemployment increases (as it did) with Germany's increased spending on social welfare programs, is it put to rest by the fact that 'capitalism originated in Europe?'
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -1/+8who's talking about protectionism in Europe?who's talking about NOT having free markets?so if i say that America's success come from taking the place that once was of the Britain's empire (conquering with army), not because of its economic system, am I possibly implying that free market is wrong by design?
but if you say that Europeans are failing for absolutely non existent reasons, and that we are ALL indoctrinated by teachers, i say *****.
We know very well history of our and other countries.- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3How can you take the place of Britain's empire without being successful for other reasons? How can you develop a military capable of defeating the rest of the world's combined military might without developing an economic system that is successful? Europe is in a state of decline because their population is no longer procreating to keep up with their death rate. This is in large part due to the Government taking care of everything. Now they need immigrants to replace the children that should be born but that won't. America is a strong country because it has embraced free market capitalism and entrepreneurship. China was a weak country until they reformed their system to embrace capitalism, globalization, and trade.
- makis, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1pfff--- china was a weak country???
don't be a fool
China has ever been a strong country, but you didn't have to deal with them since they didn't conquered your market with "almost free" goods
now USA respect them cause they own a large part of their economy.
do you think it's better now??
i don't
they still kill people for being homosexual or because they express their opinions against the regime.
but today everyone is scared of China, because of its economic power.
20 years ago west countries would have boycotted Olympic games...
- makis, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1pfff--- china was a weak country???
- roboticrickshaw, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2"America is a strong country because it has embraced free market capitalism"
In the 1950's when it had consolidated its role as a superpower.
Britain used to harp on about being the champion of the free market back in the day as well- makis, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1It's called "army power".they don't own it anymore.the same will happen with the US...history is a cycle that always repeat itself
- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3How can you take the place of Britain's empire without being successful for other reasons? How can you develop a military capable of defeating the rest of the world's combined military might without developing an economic system that is successful? Europe is in a state of decline because their population is no longer procreating to keep up with their death rate. This is in large part due to the Government taking care of everything. Now they need immigrants to replace the children that should be born but that won't. America is a strong country because it has embraced free market capitalism and entrepreneurship. China was a weak country until they reformed their system to embrace capitalism, globalization, and trade.
- roodammy44, on 04/20/2008, -2/+17These "free markets" you talk of are anything but free.
What's happening is america can freely trade with other countries while setting their own import tariffs. Food is a good example of this.
If you're talking about quality of life, you have to realise that in a lot of cases capitalism is another word for exploitation.
America was built on slaves and now exploitation of foreign workers, the british empire was built from colonies doing all the work, the chinese expansion built on the backs of their enormous population.
The only way you can get incredible growth is by forcing people into economic slavery.
These "rich" asian countries. How many of them have sweat shop practices?
Sure, socialism has slower growth but isn't it worth it for a 35hr week?- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -9/+2"Capitalism is another word for exploitation" this is exactly the type of BS this article is talking about.
Is the exploitation in other countries happening because America is capitalistic or because of their LEFTIST systems. Blaming everything evil on capitalism doesn't work. And the last time I checked the country people in China working for $50 a week to assemble IPODs were literally fighting for those jobs. Do you really think way would prefer to live in absolute poverty with butterflies in their stomaches knowing they weren't being exploited? Obviously not or there wouldn't be such great competition for those jobs in the first place, they would just live in poverty. You want to make the world a 'better' place my mandating / dictating / regulating everyone else's lives which IS NOT worth a 35hr week. If you want to work 35 hours than do it for God's sake instead of forcing everyone to do the same thing. You see, socialism is another word for laziness, and even though you are lazy, you don't want to feel lazy so you FORCE everyone else to be just as lazy as you. (I realize I was just as polarizing as the previous comment but I'm doing it to make a point).- roodammy44, on 04/20/2008, -3/+5Lazy? Lol. I just don't want to work like a slave.
I hear you don't even get any mandatory holiday there in the US? What's the point in being the "greatest" country in the world if only the super rich benefit?
China is about as far from left socialist as the US is. They're just more authoritarian, which the US is moving towards.
This might be news to you but we're already regulated, mandated and dictated to every day by our employers. What a good capitalist socialist government does is tell your employers what they're allowed to do to you.
Can you imagine the construction industry without regulation? - twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -6/+4I'm sure you heard lots of horrible things about America. If you don't want to work like a slave here, you don't have to, and not only the super rich benefit from our system. You continue to repeat more leftist propaganda that this article speaks about. The idea that EVERYONE needs to work 80 hours a week to have a middle class lifestyle in a capitalistic country is absurd. You might need to work that hard to live the lifestyle of the rich, but if you want to be rich, work hard, want to sit on your ass, than don't work hard, but don't regulate everyone else's working habits to what YOU want, or what you personally think is good. I work more than 40 hours BY CHOICE, so leave me alone. As for the construction industry, can you imagine people hiring a construction company that made buildings that collapsed, or easily burned down, or can you imagine insurance companies insuring these buildings? Your policies are based on emotional fear (companies all try to rape and exploit people ... as thats the best way to make money) and hatred (the evil, evil, evil!!!!! rich) and not logic or history. I'm not an anarchist, government is good and has its place, but so does the free market. Believing that all government is evil or all corporations are evil two sides of the lunatic coin. A good government lets PEOPLE decide what they want to do as long as it doesn't hurt other people. If you let your employee tell you what your allowed to do you're lazy and a push over, better call mommy government to protect you.
- roodammy44, on 04/20/2008, -3/+5Lazy? Lol. I just don't want to work like a slave.
- Cerebron, on 04/20/2008, -3/+3America was built on the idea that any man is free to achieve his dream. Many other countries had slaves as well, and that fact is deplorable, and was taken care of many years ago. The way you get incredible growth is by creating an environment in which success can thrive; this also allows dismal failures and stagnation *at your own discretion*, which is not generally possible under socialism. (except stagnation)
- tian2992, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2Exaclty, it's about living, not making money
- twomeyw23334, on 04/20/2008, -9/+2"Capitalism is another word for exploitation" this is exactly the type of BS this article is talking about.
- enri, on 04/20/2008, -0/+5There isn't a "vast amount of history" for capitalism, only a few hundred years; and while what history we do have has shown us great successes it has also revealed some deficiencies. What bothers me is that some people are so committed to the idea that they refuse to accept the reality. No one system is perfect. I depend on true conservatives (not neocons) and progressives to strike a proper balance.
- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2No, capitalism has existed for thousands of years. Trading has existed even longer before currency developed. The Roman empire, while brutal, laid the foundations for many of the things modern western society takes for granted, including capitalism.
- lowhauler, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2TRADE has existed for thousands of years. Capitalism only came into existence in the nineteenth century at the behest of the new merchant class and with the advent of a relatively stable nation-state system. Before then trade and the economy took place within a rigidly regulated social context--prices were set, trade only took place on certain days etc.Capitalism was legislated to suit the needs of capital. Do not mistake trade and capitalism. Read Polanyi's The Great Transformation.
- curtisag, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1You obviously need to read up on history. Capitalism was at the heart of the Roman Empire thousands of years ago. In fact, I'm collecting ancient roman coins as a hobby. The definition of capitalism is: an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth. This most certainly existed for thousands of years. I am not mistaking trade and capitalism at all. Go back in history with a bit of gold and you could buy your own slaves, farmland, business, or whatever you wished thousands of years ago.
- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Curtisag: 2 words for you: Adam Smith.
- makis, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1@curtisag
i repeat myself.roman empire was built on ARMY, not coins...
you can buy whatever you want with your gold, but some barbarian can take it away with their strength in FIGHTING wars
obviously you can buy soldiers too, but will they fight as truly motivated once?
that's the difference between us.In Italy we learn it when we are 10 years old...
- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2No, capitalism has existed for thousands of years. Trading has existed even longer before currency developed. The Roman empire, while brutal, laid the foundations for many of the things modern western society takes for granted, including capitalism.
- chicofaraby, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2"You point out the US as a supposed failure"
No I didn't. I said the Friedman-style, extremist economics that the past two Republican administrations have tried has failed. The "de-regulation and tax cuts" nonsense of the ideologically straightjacketed Chicago School nuts fails. Twice now.
Economics isn't math. Two plus two aren't always four when humans get involved. Right wing economics, with it's ridiculous assumptions about perfectly functioning free markets that only exist in textbooks is a freakin joke. It's as wooly headed as the ideological Communists thinking the state would wither and die. It's not real. The world doesn't operate like that. It's messy and you have to mix capitalism with socialism for it to work right. That's why it's important to elect people who want government to work. Electing anti-government ideologues is what got the USA into the mess we're in right now.
You are talking about "history's lessons" as if you learned something. Obviously, you didn't.- twomeyw23334, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1The US was founded by anti-government types, which is why it has been so successful.
Bush certainly isn't Friedman like, and the idea that the President controls the economy is absurd. He may have an impact on the economy, but maybe you can point out a specific Friedman-style act by Bush that has failed miserably? The biggest free trade agreement in recent history, NAFTA, was signed by a Democrat President, so I'm not sure what your hissy fit against Republicans is about.
- twomeyw23334, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1The US was founded by anti-government types, which is why it has been so successful.
- hcmc, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2You are a prime example of American indoctrination. You are so lost in your ideology that you can't see even obvious things happening around you. For example:
-- The US economy is currently staggering because of financial services companies run amok in the absence of government regulation. But no, every problem is caused by government.
-- Asian economies such as Japan, Taiwan, Korea, and now China grew rapidly in a regime of strong protectionism and heavy state intervention in the economy. But no, growth only happens with free trade and hands-off government.
-- America is staggering under unsustainable government debt because the Republican party is a machine for fighting Israeli proxy wars and enriching the defense industry, and will support any level of government spending (financed by borrowing) necessary to keep themselves in power. But no, everything is the fault of lefties, socialists, and the Democratic party.
Black is white, up is down, the Iraq war is a success, you say what you were indoctrinated to say and you have lost all ability to see beyond the propaganda. Good luck to America.
- theodenking, on 04/20/2008, -8/+211. Free market capitalism originated in Europe
- theodenking, on 04/20/2008, -9/+9I for one think this article is completely superfluous. Everyone in the world knows not American = wrong! Duh.
- grunion, on 04/20/2008, -6/+10I'd say that the decline of the dollar's worth relative to other world currencies is the result of more of the US government meddling in the economy rather than a case of not enough governmental control. The state is attempting to legislate everything from what an individual is permitted to eat to what, if any, crops are grown on private land using taxes and subsidies.
The closest that the Chicago School's ideology has come to truth was in the recovery from the US recession of the early 1980's, and that was far from a total adoption, so calling it a failure is laughable at best.- jsebrech, on 04/20/2008, -2/+8No, what you're seeing in the US is the direct result of chicago school ideas. The idea that the more you deregulate, the healthier the market becomes creates environments that encourage monopolization. The great corporate behemoths in the US were only able to grow in an atmosphere of deregulation, specifically the one you gloat about so much, in the early 80's. Ofcourse, now that they're king of the hill, they don't want anyone else to benefit from that same system, so they use undue influence over politicians to create laws, taxes and subsidies that keep them in place.
This is the lesson of laissez faire economics that is relearnt again and again by each generation that sees it fail: the parties in a laissez faire system which benefit most, and thus become most powerful, are also the ones who are least in favor of extending the laissez faire benefits to new competitors. Such a market will always fail over time, because power aggregates into the hands of those who actively work against it.- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1The answer is to prevent politicians from being influenced by big corporations, not to throw the system out the window.
- jsebrech, on 04/20/2008, -2/+8No, what you're seeing in the US is the direct result of chicago school ideas. The idea that the more you deregulate, the healthier the market becomes creates environments that encourage monopolization. The great corporate behemoths in the US were only able to grow in an atmosphere of deregulation, specifically the one you gloat about so much, in the early 80's. Ofcourse, now that they're king of the hill, they don't want anyone else to benefit from that same system, so they use undue influence over politicians to create laws, taxes and subsidies that keep them in place.
- JettaMan, on 04/20/2008, -14/+4The pro-Socialist, pro-Government views expressed by Europeans now make complete sense. You are brainwashed by your state-run high schools to think the state is the solution to everything. No wonder there is so much misinformation on free markets bandied about by Europeans.
- Rapsting, on 04/20/2008, -1/+20Please take note that the American system is not a true free market, and that our system is too corrupt for a free market to work.
- JettaMan, on 04/20/2008, -4/+4I agree with that statement. When these Socialists criticize American problems they always fail to acknowledge that the problems with America are caused by the idiot pro-Statist socialist policies that have crept in past our constitution.
- DestroyFascism, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1WTF? There are no lefties in American politics. It's right wing evangelists or Right wing Capitalists and both of them are crazier than a coconut.....
(cue the song)
- DestroyFascism, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1WTF? There are no lefties in American politics. It's right wing evangelists or Right wing Capitalists and both of them are crazier than a coconut.....
- JettaMan, on 04/20/2008, -4/+4I agree with that statement. When these Socialists criticize American problems they always fail to acknowledge that the problems with America are caused by the idiot pro-Statist socialist policies that have crept in past our constitution.
- davidmesaaz, on 04/20/2008, -2/+8Well last time that I check Europe has adopted many of the Chicago schools proposal and therefore the Euro is higher. Ireland Switerzland have flat taxes Sweeden has the voucher system. What you overlooking is this is not attacking the welfare state or socialism its attacking the idea that capitalism is inherantly exploitive. Naomi Klein comdemns capitalism yet at the same time she benefits from it. She condemns corporations then gets grants from the largest corporations there is such as the Ford Foundation which gets its money from assets in the Ford Motor Company's stocks. Which gets its money from SUV so if you really want to contribute to the anti-globalization movement buy an SUV.
- hcmc, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Yes, the author's argument would be more convincing if American-style unregulated, unlimited corporate greed, screw the consumer, outsource the jobs, borrow and spend capitalism weren't in the process of imploding at this very moment.
- KingRat6, on 04/20/2008, -28/+52Oversimplification is the fools best argument tool.
- sfacets, on 04/20/2008, -37/+139Why, because they won't conform to US propaganda and intimidation?
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -12/+48Precisely. The US is sacred ***** now their state ideology of fascist social darwinism is collapsing, having been proven a manifestation of evil and state irresponsibility, and they dread the emergence of tested and functional socialism, solidarity and states actually *gasp* protecting its own citizens from the ruthless excesses of market sadism.
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -9/+2Yes, let's place all our faith in our benevolent leaders. They will solve all our problems and make the trains run on time. Let's not attempt to find our own solutions or improve our own lot in life, but instead DEMAND that our government do it for us. Thinking makes my head hurt, and the government allows me not to.
Who are these magical, infallible beings that make up your perfect socialist government, and how can we clone them to emulate your fabulous system of governance? You are so fortunate to not have to worry about what is good or bad for you and your children, since your government does that for you... You're lucky not to have to concern yourself with corruption, poor leadership, bad decisions, government waste and inefficiency, or questions of social justice, since your government is made up of being so clearly superior to us mere mortals.
Socialism means little more than centralization of power, in the hopes that some kind of intellectual elite is more suited to running everyone's lives. Unfortunately, not only does this centralization often lead to corruption and abuse of power, but also to a lack of progress as good solutions are ignored, and ultimately, to decisions made in the interests of the leadership instead of the population. Where a free market allows consumers to make decisions based on their preference, central planning makes those decisions for them, and not always in their best interests. It's downright foolish to believe that some kind of benevolent dictators are going to solve all your problems for you, and that's basically what you're arguing for. Sure, you may still be electing 'representatives', but you still must choose between dictator A or dictator B, now that you've consolidated such vast powers into their hands. Forgive me for being less than enthusiastic about emulating that political system in my own country, and for choosing to keep power as decentralized as possible, ultimately distributed to the citizens themselves.- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -2/+6The complete propaganda blinded ignorance dazzles me.
Funny enough all (dozens) americans that actually visited Europe, and I talked to, sure liked what they saw over here. Quite a few chose to stay. In fact ALL americans that visited the netherlands I talked to were unanimous - things work a lot better here.- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2There are things I like better about the Netherlands (especially legal Marijuana), but what of the low birth rate in all of Europe? The average age of a European is getting older each year. Who is going to pay for all the social spending of the elderly when you grow older? Immigrants seems to be the short term solution for much of Europe, but you will lose your culture in the process.
There's nothing wrong with some social spending on the needy, but Europe seems hell bent on completely discrediting capitalism entirely. It's not a perfect system, but it has too many advantages to completely disregard it as irrelevant, as your people seem to do. A country that doesn't have enough children to replace their population has structural problem that is being ignored. A country that doesn't have enough domestic economic demand and activity and relies too heavily on exporting to other countries with more demand for products has a structural problem that's being ignored. Your lack of domestic demand for goods and services is a symptom of a larger problem that cannot be ignored forever. - KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Since of 2003, the murder of Pim Fortuyn, immigration is shut down over here. Refugee immigration went down to a trickle, there was a vicious lashback against leftism and advocation of multiculturalism and currently the dutch model of immigration and forced integration of immigrants reform are assimilated by the whole of Europe - and regarded as a form of repression by quite a few americans, dare I add.
I'd say I am not worried about the netherlands and northern European countries to lose their culture. Immigrants are massively returning *fleeing* this new repressive anti-muslim climate. Muslim girls are integrating and emancipating faster than archaic immigrant cultures can adapt, selecting their own husbands and driving second generation young traditional (and macho) immigrant males to desperation - the girls are marrying later and later and making serious demands to parents and spouses, as they tend to make a lot more in income than the (largely unemployed and unemployable immigrant youths. If I can make a prediction - I think the mullahs in the middle east are stark raving terrified of this quick and merciless emancipation process. You can't out-terrorize, outfund or out-gospelize these new european immigrants. Saudi Arabia might very very soon be faced with a rebound generation of young muslims that have different ideas on Islam that'll shake the foundations of the old patriarchy over there. It might finally be time for enlightenment in the middle east if that trend catches on.
Regarding Europe NOT having enough births replenish its deaths I am personally in FAVOR of that. I am personally staunchly opposes to importing chattel slave immigrants, just to keep an economy going. We can't keep a defect economic system (paying for social security by continuously growing a population) by importing the good labourforce from poor countries. Likewise countries with largely defect population growth rates (half the middle east is younger than 30 and largely unemployed!) can't hope to syphon off their excess useless youths on a slowly depopulating Europe. I am active in a small fringe movement that actually seeks a healthy population reduction, cultivating liberal, freedom loving values and good social care. More information on that ideal can be found here
- http://www.tienmiljoen.nl/index.php?lang=2
Additionally I am personally very much convinced that *in this generation* we will see a large portion of the workforce displaced by spectacular gains in work-efficiency technologies, robotics, virtual reality, tele-operation, work from home and artificial intelligence AS WELL AS an increase in average lifespan of the average citizin in a rich country of probably up to several years per decade and maybe more. Both area's of development will sweep the current status quo in terms of unmployment, wellfare, the social contract, state responsibility, civilian demands and pensions into the garbage desposal - By 2025 a basic income will be unavoidable in Europe. Maybe the US will elect alternatives, such as put half its population in prison.
Finally on your silly accusation that Europe is staunchly socialist - I WISH. I vote socialist myself and I consider Europe, especially the netherlands, as increasingly liberal and market-oriented. I personally don't mind capitalism, as long as it is mixed with solid safety nets. I like society about the same as I like a healthy, functional family - productive but also safe and nurturing. What I personally abhor and oppose isn't capitalism, globalization or free market practices - I vehemently oppose corporatism, elitism, pathological societal rifts between the rich and the poor, exploitation of the poor, a rich elite class doing whatever it wants with no regard for the poor, overconsumption, unaccountable politicians, too strong ties between politics and the corporate sector, corrupt politicians, states that use force in order to propagate hidden agenda's, exploitative states, incompetent politicians, shortsighted politicians and most of all any semblance of social darwnism or fascism.
As such you can see why I am extremely critical, ad many like in Europe me are, of the US. The idea we are critical of globalisation, free markets and capitalism is of course the typical oversensitive paramoid blind ideological mentality that has become so endemic in the right in the US - I think that's largely a guilty response and not rooted in any reality I'd care affirm.
European's love the US. You have been a shining example of freedom and the US mentality of personal freedom as well as personal; get up and go responsibility has been a guiding light. However many Europeans are seeing blazing signs that Americans THEMSELVES are betraying that cultural heritage, with all the silly politics, the lobbyists, the corrupt politicians, the panderers, the populists and the theocrats. We in Europe feel you americans are acting like spoiled brats who had a good luck run for too long and now you are drunk with power and entitlement and feeling your luck might change, your empowered class is throwing a power mad tantrum.
Dont ever confuse criticism from Europe with criticism of your and our most cherished ideals. Listen more closely, you guys mighy learn something if you do.
- curtisag, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2There are things I like better about the Netherlands (especially legal Marijuana), but what of the low birth rate in all of Europe? The average age of a European is getting older each year. Who is going to pay for all the social spending of the elderly when you grow older? Immigrants seems to be the short term solution for much of Europe, but you will lose your culture in the process.
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2@KhanneaNL: I've been to the Netherlands, and I love your country. I'm from France, however, and there are some serious, serious issues there. The French economy is floundering, and all my friends and relatives there are in relatively ***** financial situations, with poor job prospects. Personally, I live in the US and go visit from time to time, and it never ceases to amaze me how obstructive the French government can be when it comes to creating new employment and economic opportunity.
I don't doubt that it might be possible to have a relatively prosperous socialist country, but I would argue that to be the exception rather than the norm. In most cases, the centralized power inherent in a socialist government is not used for the benefit of the population. As a system of checks and balances, I feel much more comfortable with the distributed power embodied by capitalism, where consumers dictate the direction of the economy. Obviously, extremes in any direction lead to suffering, but the goal should not be complete centralization of power if we are to remain free and happy.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -2/+6The complete propaganda blinded ignorance dazzles me.
- Picaroon, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2If you knew anything about the ideology of fascism and the theory of social darwinism, you would realize that neither are in any major way prevalent in American politics--especially economically! One of the more absurd things I've ever read.
"Market sadism" is a stupid thing to say as well. To act as though the market has any intention or desire to cause pain is woefully ignorant. American capitalism, and free markets in general, have led to the great prosperity that the world is experiencing now (RELATIVE to the past). The evidence is very clear that in Europe their excessive lack of laissez-faire policies are crippling industry.- KhanneaNL, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1So a billion people in the third world surviving of one dollar, now unable to buy food - that's just unfortunate fallout?
Well it is pure sadism in my book, considering at the same moment all western governments subsidize biofuels. It is a close as intentional cruelty as it gets.
And YES both the US and Europe could do something about it - open their borders to food exports from the third world and reduce artificial and restrictive tariffs.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1So a billion people in the third world surviving of one dollar, now unable to buy food - that's just unfortunate fallout?
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -9/+2Yes, let's place all our faith in our benevolent leaders. They will solve all our problems and make the trains run on time. Let's not attempt to find our own solutions or improve our own lot in life, but instead DEMAND that our government do it for us. Thinking makes my head hurt, and the government allows me not to.
- Takayama, on 04/20/2008, -3/+17You did notice what the US did to other countries/regions that did not conform to their propaganda, right?
- zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -14/+4Gave them economic aid for all their starving children. Or, was it something else you were looking for?
- juniorb, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3Or tore down and rebuilt their infrastructure at a tax-free profit. How about both to superficially absolve themselves?
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www. ...
- zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -14/+4Gave them economic aid for all their starving children. Or, was it something else you were looking for?
- Picaroon, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1No, because they're simply incorrect. The economic facts do not match what they are teaching. That's a big problem--schools teaching people things that are not based on evidence or fact, but simply the bias of a system and an author.
If your knowledge of economics comes from the internet, you probably agree with sfacets.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -12/+48Precisely. The US is sacred ***** now their state ideology of fascist social darwinism is collapsing, having been proven a manifestation of evil and state irresponsibility, and they dread the emergence of tested and functional socialism, solidarity and states actually *gasp* protecting its own citizens from the ruthless excesses of market sadism.
- camelseye, on 04/20/2008, -75/+13Capitalism works well when coupled with Christian compassion. If the Christian ethics, "love your neighbor as yourself," and "be a good samaritan" are thrown out, it often gives way to selfish greed (evidence of the greedy side of Capitalism is most often seen among those who supposedly oppose it--and the freedoms associated with it--in favor of "socialism.") Socialism never helps anyone. In the end, there are still those "awful" class divisions--only the state-dependent class becomes larger--overwhelming and discouraging those who are (or would be) able to provide for their own needs with heavy taxation. As an American who has spent 3+ years in Europe and 8+ years overseas--in other partly "socialized" societies, I have seen this first-hand. And I have often wished that those who idolize "socialism" would move to Europe, taste it for themselves, and be forever cured or absorbed by their delusional "paradise."
Capitalism is rightly equated with Americanism. Let those who oppose it admit that they oppose America. And may America have the discernment to take notice of those who would destoy her best ideals.- ElAssoWipo, on 04/20/2008, -6/+32Let's see here:
Health care: free.
You lose.- makis, on 04/20/2008, -5/+28we have free health care in many countries in europe
it does work
it's expensive, that's why we pay more taxes, but we don't die because assurance plans are not affordable...- jgtg32a, on 04/20/2008, -24/+3You die in the waiting for your turn.
- powatom, on 04/20/2008, -0/+10Better to get a turn than to have no hope at all, don't you think?
- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2You wait one hour on a non-emergency. Or you make an appointment, and come back in one hour. Or use a phone.
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -1/+9my parents worked in Italy in an hospital for 40 years.i know what you mean.I'm not saying it's perfect.I'm saying it's absolutely the right thing to do.and no one will stop you from opening your private hospital, or go in one of them the be cured.if it's true that to many people goes to hospital only because it's free, it's also true that too many doctors ask the patient to go to their hospital because they can earn more money...and many times they get surgery when they don't need it, or are treated with unnecessary and expensive medicines...at least in a free health system their pockets are not drained.
- jgtg32a, on 04/20/2008, -24/+3You die in the waiting for your turn.
- Pake, on 04/20/2008, -1/+4There's no such thing as free healthcare, just government controlled healthcare. I won't comment on whether or not it's good, but don't call it free when you pay taxes for it.
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3you're right.we call it public or private, which, i think, explains better what's going on.
- camelseye, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Actually health care is one of the things I was specifically thinking about when I posted my comment. Just because it's "free" doesn't mean it's free. If you pay for it with taxes than you are paying for it...you just don't have any control over what you get for your money. You have given up your individual "rights." As I said, I have first-hand and first sight experience. If you pay for private care, you double-pay.
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -5/+28we have free health care in many countries in europe
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -3/+24Compassion without the christian element would do nicely thank you. When christians arbitrarily dictate what is moral and what not you might find that churches give compassion and charity to married couples but point the door to (say) gay couples. You can't trust churches, they base their ideologies or strange and outdated books thousands of years old.
- jpittawa, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Actually the history of free hospitals and orphanages can be traced with history of Christian revivals. The liberal movements of England during the time of Charles Dickens resulted in free public education, elimination of work houses, child labor laws and many other compassionate services being introduced into the public arena as a direct result of the preaching from pulpit during the great revival of that period. The idea that all all men are created in the image of God is the root of this charity. The statistics in the U.S. bear this out. States with the highest numbers of self-confessed Christians are also the states that have highest rate of charitable giving.
- izackcarson, on 04/20/2008, -2/+22Compassionate capitalism is an oxymoron created to justify the desire to never think about the system we have in place. Christianity (and other religions) serves to allow people to feel better about themselves and justify their obstinate stupidity. The most self-centered people I have ever met have all been Christian. Compassion? Are you kidding?
- TheAkolyte, on 04/20/2008, -3/+24Religion is a crutch. If jesus is the only reason you dont shoot up a shopping mall, you need help.
- zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -12/+1What's the difference without a moral standard, Akolyte? If it comes from the Bible, Torah, or whatever, its still a standard. Who makes it? Why SHOULDN'T people shoot up shopping malls without one?
- powatom, on 04/20/2008, -0/+14The golden rule: treat others as you would like to be treated. Would you like to be shot at? No? Then don't shoot at other people.
Welcome to grown-up world - please leave imaginary friends at the door.
- powatom, on 04/20/2008, -0/+14The golden rule: treat others as you would like to be treated. Would you like to be shot at? No? Then don't shoot at other people.
- camelseye, on 04/20/2008, -9/+1What on earth are you referring to? Me, "shooting up a shopping mall"--???-- Buried for being entirely irrelevant.
- zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -12/+1What's the difference without a moral standard, Akolyte? If it comes from the Bible, Torah, or whatever, its still a standard. Who makes it? Why SHOULDN'T people shoot up shopping malls without one?
- yodaj007, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3The reason capitalism works so well is it turns human greed into productivity. Human greed then becomes a tool the fuels the system. Christianity has nothing to do with it.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -3/+1Amazing ! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6020152164 ...
- yodaj007, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1So... you like parrots?
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -3/+1Amazing ! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6020152164 ...
- ElAssoWipo, on 04/20/2008, -6/+32Let's see here:
- DonWigler, on 04/20/2008, -22/+45"In France and Germany, students are being forced to undergo a dangerous indoctrination. Taught that economic principles such as capitalism, free markets, and entrepreneurship are savage, unhealthy, and immoral"
Sounds like the American public school system.- loulan, on 04/20/2008, -10/+13Being French...
LOL WTF???
Buried. - Mahoney07, on 04/20/2008, -5/+10No it doesn't.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -3/+27Exploitation of human beings is inherently ruthless and a responsible government protects its citizens from excesses and rampant poverty.
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -3/+1Yes, we have labor laws and welfare in the US, too... It is possible to do those things without teaching schoolchildren that capitalism is evil. European countries themselves rely largely on capitalism as the foundation of their economy and society, so it's a bit strange that they would be so hostile to it.
On a more philosophical note, money is the glue that binds our societies together and allows us to work together. Exactly what would you replace it with, as something we can all place common value in, other than fear of retribution? Capitalism allows for society to work on a large scale without direct coercion. If you want to replace it, how are you going to get people to be contributing members of society except through force?- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2We're not hostile to capitalism. That's a misconception. We don't agree some guy earns 1000 times more than an employee, because of a risk he actually isn't running. There's always that reference to the responsability and the risk they take, but that's only true for starter-enterprises.
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -3/+1Yes, we have labor laws and welfare in the US, too... It is possible to do those things without teaching schoolchildren that capitalism is evil. European countries themselves rely largely on capitalism as the foundation of their economy and society, so it's a bit strange that they would be so hostile to it.
- jgtg32a, on 04/20/2008, -9/+2Yes but in the US its not as bad.
- grunion, on 04/20/2008, -0/+14If this were to be taught in US public schools, there'd be more pictures. Otherwise the students would have to feel bad about their reading ability.
The other reason this can't be taught in US public schools (though US academia would LOVE to do so) is that it's economics. All Americans know that economics is best taught by sound bites in a popularity contest held every 4 years. - zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Sounds like public University. My thoughts EXACTLY, Don.
- scamper22, on 04/20/2008, -5/+2exactly.
Why do you think the left is so scared of school choice. When you control the education, you control their political leanings.- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Yah, you sound almost as smart as this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wppjYDj9JUc
- logpony, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Sir? I believe you dropped this shiny hat...
- jpittawa, on 04/23/2008, -0/+0>>Sounds like the American public school system
A bit of an overstatement. Universities are hot-beds of anti-Capitalism. That is no coincidence. Gus Hall, head of the American Communist Party, targeted the future teachers in American universities in the 1930's. He said that the goal was create "state of mind" Communists, not party members. Impact their thinking in the formative years and have them view Marxism as "a compassion alternative" rather then "the inevitable conclusion of social evolution." His success can be seen the universities today. - glibpaxman, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1"Millions of children are being raised on prejudice and disinformation. Educated in schools that teach a skewed ideology, they are exposed to a dogma that runs counter to core beliefs shared by many other Western countries. They study from textbooks filled with a doctrine of dissent, which they learn to recite as they prepare to attend many of the better universities in the world. Extracting these children from the jaws of bias could mean the difference between world prosperity and menacing global rifts. And doing so will not be easy. But not because these children are found in the madrasas of Pakistan or the state-controlled schools of Saudi Arabia. They are not. Rather, they live in"... the United States?
- loulan, on 04/20/2008, -10/+13Being French...
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -22/+86indoctrination?
in European schools?
are you simply stupid or what?
only because we think that the system is broken and it works only in countries such us USA, that can have oil (and other resources) for free because of their military power?
i think the indoctrinated is you....- KyleGoetz, on 04/20/2008, -17/+11I live in the US, and I can tell you that I don't exactly go grab some free oil every time I need to fill my tank.
- swab, on 04/20/2008, -4/+18Actually you pretty much do! Although things are certainly changing.
- camelseye, on 04/20/2008, -5/+2WHAT???? ARE YOU INSANE???? You definitely have some sort of truth-denial disease.
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -2/+9so, why is Ugo Chavez the american's public enemy, since he nationalized oil companies???
- grunion, on 04/20/2008, -7/+7Um, let me think abou that... Hugo siezed private property for his own benefit, targetting political opponents as much as possible? Or was it the fact that he's little more than an authoritarian thug moving to tyrant as quickly as possible? The US hasn't been real cozy with Castro or Kim Jong-Il either, funny how the three have so much in common, no?
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -3/+8I'm not pro Chavez.But he gained much "oil-power" with this decision.Before that, the first oil producer in Venezuela was Exxon, which is an American company.And was paying for very low fare.That demonstrate that oil (still today) means political power.If you control or have great influence on Saudi Arabia (guess who?), you are in the right position to take over the world politic and economic system...
And if you wanna talk about USA politics in South America, think about Allende.Removed with the help of CIA for Pinochet...
I frankly understand why persons like Chavez or Castro can gain power in those countries.Even if I'm not with them. - Azio, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4Chavez took away from profiteering Americans resources that rightfully belonged to the people of Venezuela
- Azio, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1np
- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2He made Venezuelian oil property of Venezuela and its citizens. That's theft? From whom? The US? Really?
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -3/+8I'm not pro Chavez.But he gained much "oil-power" with this decision.Before that, the first oil producer in Venezuela was Exxon, which is an American company.And was paying for very low fare.That demonstrate that oil (still today) means political power.If you control or have great influence on Saudi Arabia (guess who?), you are in the right position to take over the world politic and economic system...
- CrushThemTorg, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Oh golly gee. I dunno. Perhaps because he's threatening a resource that's vital to our national security and place as the largest global military power.
- grunion, on 04/20/2008, -7/+7Um, let me think abou that... Hugo siezed private property for his own benefit, targetting political opponents as much as possible? Or was it the fact that he's little more than an authoritarian thug moving to tyrant as quickly as possible? The US hasn't been real cozy with Castro or Kim Jong-Il either, funny how the three have so much in common, no?
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -0/+2Americans (like myself) are often surprised to know that the rest of the world (or at least Europe specifically) pays a lot more for oil than we do. Last I heard the price of gas is twice as much over there.
- KyleGoetz, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Just because Europe pays out their ass for gas doesn't make gas in the US free. Also, France pays less for wine than we do (because they're a wine producing country and the US isn't for the most part). You don't see me complaining about France's free wine, do you?
- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1France produces wine, like saudi-arabia does oil. Your Logic would be that the US pays less for wine, than the rest of the world except for France.
- makis, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1free means that US (the country and oil companies from US, not you!) are not forced to buy oil at market prices and they can still own one of the largest oil reserve in the world!
- KyleGoetz, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Just because Europe pays out their ass for gas doesn't make gas in the US free. Also, France pays less for wine than we do (because they're a wine producing country and the US isn't for the most part). You don't see me complaining about France's free wine, do you?
- ciaran036, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3Well it is true that the education system is rubbish and they teach us lies about things like how the economy actually works and religion etc. ...BUT it's not indoctrination in the way that this article describes it!
- makis, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1tell me one of the lies they teach us...i'm sure we can have teachers with different views, and they can try to teach you to love or hate something... but that's a totally different story.religion is a lie per se.. so it's pointless..
- ciaran036, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1In Business Studies, I'm told of the 'economic cycle', and that booms and recessions are part of a 'natural' cycle, yet in Economics they teach us that booms and busts are MADE to happen.
And when it comes to religion, the only version of why we are on this planet is provided in the form of the Bible - which is the only thing I've been taught. They have made everything I know of in life revolves around the Bible and the characters and stories from it.- makis, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1booms and recessions are indeed part of the system... that's a fact.that's how capitalism works.
when it comes to religion, they can tell you whatever they want, but it's up to you believe them or not.i don't. - ciaran036, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1part of the system yes but they're not part of a 'natural' cycle, like they make it out to be.
- makis, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1booms and recessions are indeed part of the system... that's a fact.that's how capitalism works.
- ciaran036, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1In Business Studies, I'm told of the 'economic cycle', and that booms and recessions are part of a 'natural' cycle, yet in Economics they teach us that booms and busts are MADE to happen.
- makis, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1tell me one of the lies they teach us...i'm sure we can have teachers with different views, and they can try to teach you to love or hate something... but that's a totally different story.religion is a lie per se.. so it's pointless..
- davidmesaaz, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2Wow please think next time you post ok. You provide no evidence or logic or reasoning. You just call me dumb and indoctrinated.... Think next time you might like it.
- ciaran036, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Where I live, our religious education revolves around the holy Bible - there has never been any mention of any other alternatives or about what other religions believe in or what proof there is. Religious education is particularly awful.
- obamayomama, on 04/24/2008, -1/+0Oil for free??? Where do I get it?
- KyleGoetz, on 04/20/2008, -17/+11I live in the US, and I can tell you that I don't exactly go grab some free oil every time I need to fill my tank.
- knumbknuts, on 04/20/2008, -10/+14Let's hope it fails enough for me to afford a trip to Italy and European made hang gliding gear again, soon.
/didn't RTFA - poidh, on 04/20/2008, -61/+11It's amazing really. Surely it's plain to see that socialism had its chance and failed again and again, and yet in Europe there is an almost religious belief in it.
- CSBPRS, on 04/20/2008, -8/+47All you have to do is look at the strength of the Euro and the state of healthcare and education in Europe to realize that your argument is a crock of s***.
- Noiremorte, on 04/20/2008, -5/+28But but but.... They're taking away his hard earned money to help someone else to continue living! Come one! Everyone knows here in America, the thickness of your pocketbook is more important than the life of a stranger!
- poidh, on 04/20/2008, -10/+1Who said I resent paying taxes? I don't.
- WiseWeasel, on 04/20/2008, -4/+2Wow, how easy it is to conveniently forget that it's the US that donates the most food aid to the developing world, BY A HUGE MARGIN:
http://www.wfp.org/interfais/index2.htm#
(take a look at Table 5)
In private donations to charity, the US is also far ahead of our friends across the pond:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-25-cha ...
You Europeans love talking about how generous you are, as long as it's your government that handles the redistribution. Knowing that your country doesn't allow poverty or poor health, no matter how strongly the poor and unhealthy might disagree with that view, makes you feel so contented. Never would you think of actually going out of your way to help your fellow man in need yourself; instead it must be the government that makes the suffering go away somehow, you're not quite sure how.
You live in a dream world; it might feel warm and comfortable, but the reality is cold and hurtful. Somehow, you've been lead to believe that humanity is composed of predators, and you need the government to keep you happy and safe. The reality is that people make good decisions for themselves, and by working together, often without any need for government intervention. A reliance on outside help means that we can't help each-other.
- poidh, on 04/20/2008, -4/+16Your argument might hold weight if Europe was run under a socialist system. It isn't. European states are capitalistic in nature.
- zeabu, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1We're in the middle, between communism and capitalism, 2 systems that proved to fail. Or what has the Fed Reserve done with Bear Stearns? That's quite different than let the market handle.
- Pake, on 04/20/2008, -12/+3The only reason socialism is able to survive is because on a global scale, it's basically one giant company who competes against the much smaller ones from capitalistic societies. If all countries were to convert to socialism, the overall desire to innovate would dramatically decrease from the dramatic decrease in competition. Take this into account also, the Euro is strong right now, but it wasn't nearly as strong just 5 years ago. That's hardly anything to write home about when you take into account that the US dollar has been higher majority of the time. In another 5 years, the Euro and dollar could easily shift places. Simply put, looking at the strength of the Euro is a bad way to judge the performance of the two separate opinions on how to run a market.
- Noiremorte, on 04/20/2008, -5/+28But but but.... They're taking away his hard earned money to help someone else to continue living! Come one! Everyone knows here in America, the thickness of your pocketbook is more important than the life of a stranger!
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -1/+29do you know what are you talking about???
is it possible that everyone thinks only in terms of "how much money i can get"??
we are talking of EUROPE, not USSR!!! (an hint for you, Scandinavian social democracy... i think life is better Stockholm than in Detroit...)
you should study more geography and politics, and think less about "this system is the best we can get"- poidh, on 04/20/2008, -7/+2Scandinavian countries are run on capitalistic principles. You invest money and work for a return. Simple.
- DM05, on 04/20/2008, -1/+15If you actually understood economics, you would know that there are socialism does not equal communism. You can still have a partially open market, but at the same time have several government owned industries, such as telcos or utility companies along with government regulation. Several European countries do have that, making them closer to socialism. Hell, no country that I can think of in the world runs on solely capitalistic principles.
- makis, on 04/20/2008, -0/+15i know better than you!!!you said socialism, i said social democracy.No one in Europe wants soviet socialism.But we are socialist because of socialism is not something to be scared about, it's about fair redistribution of richness.And it means that nobody gets left behind only because it's poor or can't invest money or work for a return.That's it.
- Noiremorte, on 04/20/2008, -1/+16The majority of Americans don't know the difference between Socialism and Communism. =/
- poidh, on 04/20/2008, -7/+2Scandinavian countries are run on capitalistic principles. You invest money and work for a return. Simple.
- chilipeppers4u, on 04/20/2008, -1/+30This article is complete American propaganda. By "beliefs shared by other western countries" they mean the United States only. The UK, Australia, and Canada are all more "socialist" than the US. And whose economy is the one that is tanking again? Complete capitalism or complete socialism are both evil and can lead to abuse. If you have complete capitalism you start to have companies that try to benefit from peoples misery to make extra money - e.g. just take a look at health care in the united states. It's a complete failure. The US has the worst infant mortality rates http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/parenting/05/08/mot ... and teen pregnancy rates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_incidence_of_t ... (scroll down to north america) of any of the developed countries around the world. European countries have a greater level of satisfaction and happiness in their lives http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew ... . If you blindly believe what this article tells you without actually visiting, or at least learning about the other countries it mentions then you are the one being raised on prejudice and misinformation.
- Cronus6, on 04/20/2008, -0/+7"This article is complete American propaganda."
It's American 'Right-Wing' propaganda, not all Americans think this way.- chilipeppers4u, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Thank you for restoring some of my faith in the American people after reading that article (coming from a duel Australian-Canadian Citizen)
- chilipeppers4u, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2.
- Cronus6, on 04/20/2008, -0/+7"This article is complete American propaganda."
- ShootTheCore, on 04/20/2008, -1/+6Looking after poor people? WHATEVER NEXT!?!?
- zaptoman, on 04/20/2008, -8/+1It's here too. Its exemplified by these clowns on digg (the same ones that dugg you down) and by a large number in the Democratic party.
- logpony, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Woo! Generalizations!
- CSBPRS, on 04/20/2008, -8/+47All you have to do is look at the strength of the Euro and the state of healthcare and education in Europe to realize that your argument is a crock of s***.
- zelig, on 04/20/2008, -46/+13How dare you submit something on digg that doesn't trash America and make Europe smell like a rose.
- davidmesaaz, on 04/20/2008, -2/+1I assume that your joking. But I think rationaly and therefore I submitted it.
- KhanneaNL, on 04/20/2008, -17/+88Complete *****. I am in favor of globalization and capitalism, but if we implement let's implement it correctly - no import tariffs for anyone, period, including food grown in the third world. We don't have capitalism in the US and america. We have some kind of watered down fake version. I'd say capitalism and REALLY STRONG unions, because that is capitalism too.
But on the other hand, we cant trust unbridled capitalism - people need protection, even if they are lazy. I personally don't really believe people are all that lazy; give them enough incentive and they will move mountains. But in this world, I see a lot of bitter, damaged, broken people and a lot of ruthless, exploitative business practices and bad job conditions. Forcing people to do crap work for low pay is exploitative. Free markets should also offer people, ALL people, a fair deal.
I have a counter proposal - let's get rid of all border tariffs and implement in europe a tariff over products manufactured under slave wages. Imports from third world countries are taxed and *gasp* the tax is send BACK to the works and ONLY the workers. That's fair and equitable too! Import chocolate from africa, the chocolate produced using slave labour is taxed and the workers that manufactured the product get the tax 1:1. That's fair because it applies to every product and the other side is free to do precisely the same.
We need a world where people are treated like human beings BEFORE profit. Efficiency is nice and all that, but not at every price.- evilcaptain, on 04/20/2008, -2/+6I agree. It's all this secrecy behind it all that is the real problem. If it's the market that supposed to decide everything, how come most of the decisions about the world's resources ar
