Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

At 8/8/08 09:31 AM, jakobhummelen wrote: You're still pushing your believes on to mine claiming they are superior, well than: Why is it that America has a shitty currency, an enormous debt to a country most of her citizens are scared off and why is it that your financial system recently took a big kick in the groin?

because their empire is falling and they've made terrible economic decisions since like Reagan, borrow borrow borrow, spend spend spend, oil oil oil; they've been in a precarious position for ages.

It's not all gonna end or anything, you'll just be more like Russia, still a big player but less annoyingly big. I reckon every American sees that the end is almost nigh.

---

At 8/8/08 09:31 AM, jakobhummelen wrote:
Dude, seriously, again: I'd rather pay my government to help developmental nations etc, you again see this as stealing. I'm not sure what your problem is, do you feel you pay so many taxes already? I think it's just silly to consider structural help from your government as stealing but unstructural help to non profit organisations not, it's the same money.

Except you know, charity is your choice to pay and taxes aren't.

That's like saying there's no difference between the two bit hustler who demands a thousand dollars a month for "protection" for a restaurant, and that same guy instead spending a thousand a month on a security force to protect his business.

---

If you were planning on giving that money anyway I see no difference, that's what I meant :)

---

At 8/8/08 07:38 AM, ThePretenders wrote:

At 8/6/08 12:34 AM, Chavic wrote: Apparently french people can't spell or use proper grammar, so you're losing already.

As opposed to stupid anglofags that only know one language?

I am fluent in English, American Sign Langugage, and proficient in Spanish.

On another note, I'm pretty sure that the french share some anglo-saxon heritage

---

At 8/8/08 09:31 AM, jakobhummelen wrote:

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that on one hand not having a large social security policy and a universal healthcare system are both shortcomings, and then at the same time complain about the government babysitting.

Yes I can actually, and you should never think it's either this or that.

Except it IS.

On one hand you support government babysitting in form of large social security systems and universal healthcare systems. And then you pretend like you don't like the idea that the government is babysitting you.

Yes, again, I'm not wanting it one way or the no way. I believe that the American social safety net is just not cutting it (mind you this is my opinion and you obviously think otherwise).

And what are you basing that on? Michael Moore movies?

Not only is your opinion different on what criteria to use to decide which system is better, but your opinion in the matter is no doubt highly tainted by propaganda you get in your country.

When I was in America I definitely saw more homeless/poor people who couldn't afford food, it was quite clear to me that they were having a harder time getting food than the homeless I see in Holland.

Were that true, that doesn't necessarily reflect a problem in the system as a whole. You have to factor in the fact that the US has a much higher proportion of minorities and illegal immigrants who tend to make up the homeless/poor end of the country. Even if our system was like yours, it wouldn't be easy to provide for all of those people. And if your country looked like ours as far as minorities and illegal immigrants, you probably wouldn't even be able to afford to extend universal healthcare to those people.

And then again, I as recently as 2005 your country was having a serious problem with poverty and hunger.

Actually, in Europe healthcare tends to aim at keeping people healthy

In what way?

I hear this a lot from people but they can never specify or provide evidence of higher quality preventative care in universal healthcare systems.

rather than curing them, I guess this is either a way to explain the difference in medical expertise or the outcome of it. I feel that you do not have a realistic perspective on the problems that people encounter trying to acces this great US healthcare. Not everybody can just go out and loan a whole bunch of money you know?

And yet for diseases like cancer which is the biggest risk to public health in both the US and Europe, Americans, regardless of their coverage situation, have greater access to treatments, and are more likely to be treated quickly and successfully than people in Europe and Canada

Early Diagnosis. It is often claimed that people have better access to preventive screenings in universal health care systems. But despite the large number of uninsured, cancer patients in the United States are most likely to be screened regularly, and once diagnosed, have the fastest access to treatment.

Because of this, the US as a whole has the highest cancer survival rate in the world. And it's not just treating people, its about access to preventative screenings... i.e. the preventative care in the US, based on keeping people healthy rather than just curing them, is better than in Europe and Canada, where they have universal healthcare.

And because of this, Americans have the highest cancer survival rates, by far.

Just for example, compare US survival rates from cancer to those in your country:

US cancer survival rates (all cancers):

Female: 62.9%
Male: 66.3%

Netherlands cancer survival rates (all cancers):

Female: 58.3%
Male: 47.1%

I think this argument is about fundamental differences in opinion again, I'd rather have somewhat less awesome healthcare (which still does the job perfectly in 99% of the cases I think) than awesome healthcare which is a lot harder to acces.

Um, except the options aren't like that.

I'd rather have the best possible healthcare, that I have the most control over and most access to. That would be a whole hell of a lot better than having a system that everyone is "covered" based purely on the fact that the government has the ability to give healthcare to everyone. Yet people are covered by a system that forces them to wait for long times to get treated, longer than people in the US that aren't don't have healthcare coverage, and where people have less survival rates and less success rates in medical treatments compared to Americans.

*sigh*, alright, it's not selfish to assume that a government of one of the wealthiest country's in the world will take care of you if you fal behind

Um, yeah it is. Not only is it selfish, it's arrogant because you're refusing to acknowledge that the government is taking its money from the people. It's not the government taking care of you, it's all the other people in your country, whether they like it or not, whether they feel like the government has the right to take away their money and give it to people who don't work for it themselves.

you're just focussing on the take take part, it's selfish to not care about those left behind

It's selfish to be "left behind" simply based on your own failure while simultaneously relishing the fact that your government is taking giving you money and services that are provided by taking away the money of other people.

That's selfish. You came in to this thread saying France is a better place to live based on its healthcare, yet you basically admit that they don't have better quality.

So that means that your opinion of what country would be better to live in is based on which one you can do the most freeloading in.

This whole bit about the founding principles... come on man, it's called progress

No it's not.

If the US became like your country it would not be progress, it would be a step in the wrong direction.

just because people 250 years ago thought things had to go a certain way doesn't mean it's the right way, don't be close minded.

You're the one that's closed minded. Just because your country with its overbearing government is under the illusion that its way is "progress" doesn't mean that it is. You think government control and large government are good things, that this is somehow progress. Progress would be a country where the government's involvement in people's lives is the most minimal.

Nice study yes, can you imagine that Americans are twice as generous with non profit organisations than the Dutch?

Americans give more to charity than the Dutch, by about 3 times over. You pretending that Americans are selfish is completely delusional and hypocritical.

Wow! Americans are awesomely generous!!!

They are, and the Dutch and other Europeans who have the audacity to say Americans are selfish are so stingy that only taxes that they have no choice over can get them to give up money for other people basically.

Dude, seriously, again: I'd rather pay my government to help developmental nations etc

You'd rather have the government decide where your money goes. You'd rather have a society where the source of money to charity comes from the government taking it from other people against their will, rather than having people give it up by their own choice for actual good intentions.

Once again, big contradiction when you were previously pretending like you don't want the government to babysit you.

---

I'm not sure what your problem is, do you feel you pay so many taxes already?

Any taxes is too many taxes at the moral foundation of the issue. I wish taxes were lower in the US, but I'm sure as hell glad that our taxes are they way they are when I look at countries like yours. When more of the money in the country is in the hands of the people rather than the government, that's a good thing.

I don't understand how you actually believe that it's good for the government to be in such a position of power.

I think it's just silly to consider structural help from your government as stealing but unstructural help to non profit organisations not, it's the same money.

It's the same money, but the entire spirit and principle of it is dissimilar. In your country, you think you're generous because your GOVERNMENT takes money from people and gives it to other people. You count that money and the services it provides as some proof that your country has "social cohesion" and is not selfish, even though it's your government calling the shots. How many of those people in your country would choose NOT to pay those taxes if they had the choice? Hmm?

A society is better when not only is more of the money going to charity, but everyday citizens are donating it freely and get to decide who they are giving it to.

Um... by land mass, yes. But the EU alone has a GDP about equal with the US, and it has almost 500 million people compared to 300 million in the US.

And yet, 78% of global biotechnology spending is done by the US, and only 16% is done by Europe.

That shows you who puts more effort into saving lives.

Ah come on, don't make me drag Kyoto, CO2 emmissions and that shit in...

Drag it in buddy, because I'd love to see what lies you're going to spew out when replying to the fact that:

EU-15 emissions have increased since 2005 (when Kyoto went into effect). And since the treaty went into affect, European emissions have rose at a rate 3 times higher than the US emissions have.

EUROPE FAILS TO MEET KYOTO TARGETS

The Kyoto Protocol requires industrialized countries to cut carbon dioxide emissions by an average 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012. However, 13 of the 15 original members of the European Union have increased their emissions, not reduced them:

- New data by the EU's European Environmental Agency shows that by 2010, the 15 nations' emissions collectively will exceed 1990 levels by seven percent.

- Kyoto could cause the gross domestic product of the United Kingdom to fall more than one percent in 2010 from what it otherwise would be, Italy's by more than two percent and Spain's by more than three percent.

- The U.K., Italy and Germany each would lose at least 200,000 jobs and Spain would lose 800,000.

- Even if European nations did comply with the Kyoto targets, they would achieve a paltry reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of just 0.1 percent by 2010.

----------------

So drag it in then. Go ahead, because it's just going to be further proof of how horrendously misinformed, hypocritical, and brainwashed Europeans are. It's just going to further validate the fact that Europeans are willingly to lie to themselves just to propagate their bias against the US.

If you think the only criteria by which a country can claim superiority is the amount of people that are covered by its healthcare system, even if the actual coverage consists of inferior care, then you have your priorities mixed up.

I never said the EU is superior to the US or the other way around thank you.

Um... you were arguing that France has better healthcare because it covers everyone. This would suggest that you think that universal healthcare, which EU countries have, is the better system. The fact that you said France is a better place to live based on that, even though the US healthcaer system is better at saving lives... DOES show you have your priorities mixed up.

The reason you have your priorities mixed up is because in your country you're falsely taught that since your government controls healthcare, that you're morally superior to the US. Oddly, you people conveniently leave out the fact that the US healthcare system does what healthcare is supposed to do - save lives - better than your universal healthcare systems.

Consider this: people in Europe are raised multiculturally

Americans are raised to be multicultural. We are the most ethnically diverse country in the world.

Next.

learn multiple language (one of which is English of course)

I admit that not many Americans learn 2nd languages (I did though). But you're not considering the context.

Notice how Europeans outside of the UK tend to learn ENGLISH as their second language? You know why that is? That's because of the UK and the US, English is the most important language in the world. The reason that countries learn English as their 2nd language is because the Anglo-American economic and business structure in the world makes it necessary. American cultural influence is a large part of it as well.

While people in your country have a huge incentive to learn English, Americans don't have that because they already speak it. So you can't suggest that Americans not learning another language is that big of a deal.

I'm sure that if Japan was the world's largest economy and biggest cultural force in the world, Americans would probably learn Japanese. But since the US is the worlds largest economy, biggest cultural force, and since American businesses dominate in the global economy, Americans don't need to learn second languages.

Hell, I speak German, yet I probably didn't even need to in a lot of parts of Germany considering how many people there speak English.

---

and are used to crossing national borders more than Americans are.

Um, have you never seen a map of the world before?

While you have several other countries right next to you because Europe is filled with several small neighboring countries, the US is a huge country and the only other countries that border us are also huge. We would have to cross enormous distances to go to other countries, let alone several other countries... let alone Europe (though I've been all around Europe myself).

The fact that Europeans always harp on that shows how fucking incapable they are of simple logic. They are so determined to bash the US that they ignore a simple fact like the GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE in the entire situation in our respective regions in how people are able to travel.

Here's a little experiment: How much would it cost you, and how far would you have to travel to go to another country?You could take a train to say... Berlin for how much? 30 Euros, maybe 40? You know how much it would cost me to get to Berlin, just 1-way? Probably about $1000-$2000. And frankly, I'd rather go there than Mexico city or anywhere in Canada. But for many Americans, Berlin wouldn't be an option unless they had THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS to pay for the trip.

It's quite ignorant to criticize Americans for not being able to travel when we share the majority of our continent with only 2 other countries.... while in Europe, you have dozens of countries in a smaller amount of space.

But even then, let's mention the irony of Europeans pretending Americans never travel. What about the complaint by Europeans that annoying American tourists are invading their countries in droves? Nice double standard. Quite a bit of proof that you people are so determined to bash the US that you take both sides of an issue just to do it.

Another little fact, Americans are often schooled in one language and are not used to crossing national borders, I talked to Americans who thought leaving their state was exciting.

And the funny thing is that most US states are bigger than your entire country.

You're still pushing your believes on to mine claiming they are superior, well than: Why is it that America has a shitty currency

Keep parading your ignorance.

"Shitty currency". The value of currency doesn't necessarily reflect the standing of a country. The Japanese Yen has about 1/10th the value of the Mexican Peso... now are you going to suggest that Japan is worse off than Mexico?

an enormous debt

Your country's debt is actually bigger than the US debt in relative terms.

US:

Debt: $12.25 trillion

GDP: $13.84 trillion

Debt as % of GDP: 88%

Netherlands:

Debt: $2.227 Trillion

GDP: $639 billion

Debt as % of GDP: 348%

------------

Our debt is huge, but it's only 88% of our yearly income. Your debt may be smaller in absolute terms, but it's almost 3 and a half times as big as your yearly income.

Feel free to insert your foot into your mouth.

to a country most of her citizens are scared off

China is actually in possession of only a fraction of debt that is owed to foreign lenders. 19% to be exact. And Japan, not China, is the single largest debtor.

We only owe China $506 billion out of our total $12.25 trillion debt. That's only 1/24th, or about 4%.

So guess again.

and why is it that your financial system recently took a big kick in the groin?

LOL you Europeans are so horrendously hypocritical. YOUR financial system took a big kick in the groin as well. YOUR markets are having trouble as well. You're just so fiendishly obsessed with bad news in the US that you allow yourself to ignore your own problems so you can masturbate at the thought of the US having trouble.

Pathetic.

---

Cellardoor6, do you have ANY criticism of the United States?

---

At 8/8/08 09:09 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: Cellardoor6, do you have ANY criticism of the United States?

Oh, so I should cease basing my arguments on facts just to appeal to people like you who think there has to be criticism of the US?

Kindly piss off.

---

At 8/8/08 09:14 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 8/8/08 09:09 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: Cellardoor6, do you have ANY criticism of the United States?

Oh, so I should cease basing my arguments on facts just to appeal to people like you who think there has to be criticism of the US?

Kindly piss off.

I'm sorry if I came off as someone who needs to see a criticism of the United States. The reason I capitalized "any"(if that's what set you off) is because I see you bashing Europe and that's it. I never said you should stop basing your arguments on facts nor did I ever intend to imply that you do such a thing. I assume that because you like to use facts, so do I as should anyone who wishes to be taken seriously, you would include something that makes you at least appear not so one-sided(to me, anyway, I could be wrong and would happily and kindly admit if I am). The words you put in my mouth were delicious though.

---

Oh, can't you see how obvious it is? USA has never simply done anything wrong, ever. There are no actual facts that could possibly show USA in a negative light, none whatsoever. Ever since it was founded, USA has never made a single mistake. That's why it's impossible to criticize USA without being deliberately dishonest or self-deceiving in one's own insecurity and national inferiority complex.

---

At 8/8/08 09:33 PM, AapoJoki wrote: Oh, can't you see how obvious it is? USA has never simply done anything wrong, ever. There are no actual facts that could possibly show USA in a negative light, none whatsoever. Ever since it was founded, USA has never made a single mistake. That's why it's impossible to criticize USA without being deliberately dishonest or self-deceiving in one's own insecurity and national inferiority complex.

I'm Aapojoki, I disagree. The US is actually the worst thing to ever happen to the human race. America is a country where the only people that aren't starving to death in the streets at all times from gunshot wounds or dying from the common cold are Jews and their Zionist supporters. America has never done anything good. Every aspect of America is inferior to the socialist countries in Europe, especially awesome Nordic countries like Finland which are basically a manifestation of heaven on earth by contrast to America, which we Finnish have nicknamed "Ajatar's Anus", referring to our awesome mythology and culture, which by the way is so much more interesting and just plain superior to that of America even though all we do in Finland basically is watch American sitcoms and listen to American music ironically. No amount of facts can be shown to claim to the contrary to these truths, no amount of fact or logic can override these beliefs, oops, I mean truths that we have pounded in to our heads our entire lives. And if anyone comes in and provides evidence that completely shreds our false beliefs, we have the right to have the sheer hypocrisy to suggest that they are one-sided or highly biased even though not only are we more biased and narrow-minded than they, but our beliefs are based purely on bullshit lies that we make up to feel better about our irrelevant little countries, while their beliefs are based on facts.

Have fun with that one, vittupää.

---

At 8/8/08 09:46 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 8/8/08 09:33 PM, AapoJoki wrote:

I'm Aapojoki, I disagree. The US is actually the worst thing to ever happen to the human race. America is a country where the only people that aren't starving to death in the streets at all times from gunshot wounds or dying from the common cold are Jews and their Zionist supporters. America has never done anything good. Every aspect of America is inferior to the socialist countries in Europe, especially awesome Nordic countries like Finland which are basically a manifestation of heaven on earth by contrast to America, which we Finnish have nicknamed "Ajatar's Anus", referring to our awesome mythology and culture, which by the way is so much more interesting and just plain superior to that of America even though all we do in Finland basically is watch American sitcoms and listen to American music ironically. No amount of facts can be shown to claim to the contrary to these truths, no amount of fact or logic can override these beliefs, oops, I mean truths that we have pounded in to our heads our entire lives. And if anyone comes in and provides evidence that completely shreds our false beliefs, we have the right to have the sheer hypocrisy to suggest that they are one-sided or highly biased even though not only are we more biased and narrow-minded than they, but our beliefs are based purely on bullshit lies that we make up to feel better about our irrelevant little countries, while their beliefs are based on facts.

AapoJoki wasn't asking for you to stoop to his level, cellar. I agree that America is one of the best things to happen to the human race. What my specific problem is how you appear hesitant to give facts to support that maybe America isn't perfect. Why do you insist that a country owes something to the U.S. because they listen to American music or use an American product? What exactly do you expet them to do or give us because they use something made in America? The fact that they actually buy our stuff is their way of saying thanks for the product I just purchased. Yes, they use what originally came from America, but they pay money for it, isn't that enough? What do we owe China for our use of gunpowder? Or Germany for our use of a printing press? Or Jamaica for our use of Reggea music in the 1960's and today even? Or Europe for the tank? Or Greece and the ancient world for Democracy, ironically enough? Or Europe for the first steam-powered auotmobile, possibly the inspiration for future American car producers? Or Sweden for Alfred Nobel, our use of dynamite that helped carved Mt. Rushmore? See, it's not the country that produces a product that deserves the credit, it's the person that country harbored who developed it. If a German man came to America and created a most fabulous invention that saved millions, would you call it soley and American invention, or a German one? Did you notice that a few "American" inventions and things America uses weren't even made by American-born people?

---

Haha, you think I give a shit about how I feel about my country. Naturally, I'd like to live in the best society that's achievable, but that doesn't mean I will lie to myself about it and pretend it's true (note: that doesn't mean I think Finland should adopt many of the traditional American values to "improve" our society). I'm quite ready to criticize and complain my own country, and I despise Finnish patriots just as much as I despise American patriots and French language fascists, who feel the need to have French language heard in every event where France is present (the most recent example being the opening ceremony of the Olympics).

Ajatar's

Who?

Have fun with that one, vittupää.

I'm wondering which English word you had translated into that.

---

At 8/8/08 10:22 PM, AapoJoki wrote:

Ajatar's

Who?

An evil spirit in Finnish mythology. Basically the mother of the devil.

Have fun with that one, vittupää.

I'm wondering which English word you had translated into that.

I didn't use a translator. I've known that word for quite a while. Don't think that I know nothing about your country or your language just because I'm American.

---

At 8/8/08 10:42 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Don't think that I know nothing about your country or your language just because I'm American.

It's not because you're American. I wouldn't have expected anyone outside Finland to know that word. I doubt that there are even too many people in Sweden who know it. However, if a foreigner knows any Finnish words at all (besides some of the basic greetings), they're usually curse words or insults, so it wasn't all that surprising.

---

At 8/9/08 06:24 AM, AapoJoki wrote:

At 8/8/08 10:42 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Don't think that I know nothing about your country or your language just because I'm American.

It's not because you're American. I wouldn't have expected anyone outside Finland to know that word.

I've been to Finland.

Mystery solved.

---

At 8/6/08 01:21 PM, Earfetish wrote: I love Americans but far more of you talk about how your country is the best country than any other place I've been to or any other nationality I've spoken to, and yeah it is pretty good but sheesh it's not Utopia

I think thats closely related to how America is everyones punching bag.

---

At 8/8/08 08:56 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 8/8/08 09:31 AM, jakobhummelen wrote:

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that on one hand not having a large social security policy and a universal healthcare system are both shortcomings, and then at the same time complain about the government babysitting.

Yes I can actually, and you should never think it's either this or that.

Except it IS.

Yes you can, I'm not sure if you know this but Holland has a tradition of mixing up extensive social security plans with liberal free market ideas. Like our health insurance: It's mandatory for everybody to have it, and the government still has quality control, but it is in commercial hands. I think you're thinking too black and white, consider that the Dutch are quite different than the Americans, this stuff is actually possible here.

And what are you basing that on? Michael Moore movies?

Not only is your opinion different on...propaganda you get in your country.

First off, I'm not sure what kind of 'propaganda' you get on the EU, I have made this clear in my other post, we are all 'pro-America', you cannot be ticked of at me because I'm pointing out some of the downsides of America. I will never say that America is worst than the EU or the otherway around because they are interdependent, I will however criticize (it's not like we're perfect here).

I'm actually basis my opinion on your census even though it's very hard to get reliable data.

Were that true, ...., you probably wouldn't even be able to afford to extend universal healthcare to those people.

And then again, I as recently as 2005 your country was having a serious problem with poverty and hunger.

Fair enough, it does not represent a fundamental flaw in the American system, but it is a indicator. You telling me that in 2005 a lot of people had to go to foodbanks (relatively), it's true, but mostly a result of people loaning money from companies with high interest (you know, the ones that screw you over in a heartbeat). But, I don't feel that you can hide behind illegal immigrants and minorities, it's your country's policy that led to this so it is part of the US system. You're probably right on the universal healthcare part, that's why you cannot just come and live here.

Actually, in Europe healthcare tends to aim at keeping people healthy

In what way?

I hear this a lot from people but they can never specify or provide evidence of higher quality preventative care in universal healthcare systems.

In healthpromotion, the reason that you cannot find (a lot of) evidence is because the results of these studies are very hard to evaluate. How do you measure if someone did not die from that disease that you put work in to fight. It's a core problem of healthpsychology, but over here health promotion is quite big.

And yet for diseases like cancer which is the biggest risk to public health in both the US and Europe,

Not true, leading cause of death in America and the EU are related to heart and coronary problems.

Americans, regardless of their coverage situation, have greater access to treatments, and are more likely to be treated quickly and successfully than people in Europe and Canada

And because of this, Americans have the highest cancer survival rates, by far.

Please realize that America has 10,326,000 with cancer and Holland has a prospect of having 95,000 people having cancer in 2015, 2/3 of which will be because of a lot of old people. Because of the higher occurence (and probably more related to smoking cancer), Americans have a higher survival rate. Your numbers are colored.

Um, except the options ...people have less survival rates and less success rates in medical treatments compared to Americans.

The options are like this, I can take out extensive healthinsurance if I want to but I have to have the basic insurance. The numbers that you dragged into this argument can be explained using the governments' policies, in the EU health promotion is a big thing ergo people who do get a problem are most likely to be struck hard thus making survival rates/treatment rates lower. In America there are a lot of people not caring about their health and they can get ill or whatever, most of the time it's not that bad so it's treated with greater succes but still falls under the same category.

Um, yeah it is. Not only is it selfish, it's arrogant because you're refusing to acknowledge that the government is taking its money from the people. It's not the government taking care of you, it's all the other people in your country, whether they like it or not, whether they feel like the government has the right to take away their money and give it to people who don't work for it themselves.

you're just focussing on the take take part, it's selfish to not care about those left behind

...

That's selfish. You came in to this thread saying France is a better place to live based on its healthcare, yet you basically admit that they don't have better quality.

Answering the last statement first: I'm not saying France is a better place to live in because of the healthcare system, I'm saying this for other reasons also (you know, you should come over some time).

The rest of your argument, I'm not sure how democracy works in your country, but I'm pretty sure it's something along the lines of by the people for the people. The government in Holland is chosen by the people and thus reflexs her ideas. In Holland we feel that it's your duty to help you fellow person in times of need. I understand what you are saying about making it on your own and I agree with you to some extend, but not all the way.

So that means that your opinion of what country would be better to live in is based on which one you can do the most freeloading in.

No it does not >_<

If the US became like your country it would not be progress, it would be a step in the wrong direction.

Because of people like you.

You're the one that's closed minded.....where the government's involvement in people's lives is the most minimal.

Power to the people, I kinda like it. The government's involvement in our lives here are not as great as you may assume. It's more that our government stimulates us to make better choices that promote better health and better living. And again, our government is chosen, and the vast majority of Holland wants this 'meddling'.

They are, and the Dutch and other Europeans who have the audacity to say Americans are selfish are so stingy that only taxes that they have no choice over can get them to give up money for other people basically.

Structure vs No Structure, I believe I have talked about this, next.

You'd rather have the government decide where your money goes. You'd rather have a society where the source of money to charity comes from the government taking it from other people against their will, rather than having people give it up by their own choice for actual good intentions.

Again, is your government not chosen or something??? We, the people, choose to have this government. If there weren't enough people wanting to give, the policy would change...

Once again, big contradiction when you were previously pretending like you don't want the government to babysit

Again, your lack of perspective amazes me.

---

At 8/8/08 08:58 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Any taxes is too many taxes at the moral foundation of the issue....he hands of the people rather than the government, that's a good thing.

I agree, Holland has too many taxes at this point (yes, you can be a liberal here!), but I feel that America has too little.

I don't understand how you actually believe that it's good for the government to be in such a position of power.

Structure vs No Structure, people get by just fine here, we may not have the ultra rich as you guys do but there are enough people making a very decent living. This position of power (which the people control), is just taking away some money. It's not like we live in cardboard boxes or something :S

It's the same money, but the entire spirit and principle of it is dissimilar....How many of those people in your country would choose NOT to pay those taxes if they had the choice? Hmm?

I guess not enough because we've had a similar policy for a very long time now and I know very little people who say stuff like "man, we really should start giving less to poor countries". It is a sign of social cohesion because the Dutch know that we have to work together as a small nation to do great things. We like to give money through our government because it's more structural help.

A society is better when not only is more of the money going to charity, but everyday citizens are donating it freely and get to decide who they are giving it to.

Ehm, Americans may give two or three times (you changed it), more to charity than Americans, but this is excluding the government's money. So, I guess according to your argument Dutch society is better.

Um... by land mass, yes. But the EU alone has a GDP about equal with the US, and it has almost 500 million people compared to 300 million in the US.

And yet, 78% of global biotechnology spending is done by the US, and only 16% is done by Europe.

That shows you who puts more effort into saving lives.

Ah come on, don't make me drag Kyoto, CO2 emmissions and that shit in...

Drag it in buddy, because I'd love to see what lies you're going to spew out when replying to the fact that:

EU-15 emissions have increased since 2005 (when Kyoto went into effect). And since the treaty went into affect, European emissions have rose at a rate 3 times higher than the US emissions have.

Yeah, its rising, easy if you guys are already poluting at record highs, America, rank 10 with 20.4 metric tons per capita, Holland rank 43 with 8.74 metric tons per capita in 2004, 11,10 per capita in 2007 for Holland and 20.4 per capita for America

EUROPE FAILS TO MEET KYOTO TARGETS

.......

- The U.K., Italy and Germany each would lose at least 200,000 jobs and Spain would lose 800,000.

- Even if European nations did comply with the Kyoto targets, they would achieve a paltry reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of just 0.1 percent by 2010.

The reasons for this are that America did not sign the Kyoto treaty, thus putting pressure on European countries to not fall behind economically. Also, everybody knows Kyoto had impossible goals, but steps in the right direction could be made if everybody stould together. It's easy to say, hey look CO2 emmissions have gone up, but consider that they are much lower per capita than the US.

If you think the only criteria by which a country can claim superiority

I have said this before, I don't think any nation is superior. (look it's actually quoted)

I never said the EU is superior to the US or the other way around thank you.

Um... you were arguing that France has better healthcare because it covers everyone. This would suggest that you think that universal healthcare, which EU countries have, is the better system. The fact that you said France is a better place to live based on that, even though the US healthcaer system is better at saving lives... DOES show you have your priorities mixed up.

I point to my argument made earlier.

The reason you have your priorities mixed up is because in your country you're falsely taught that since your government controls healthcare, that you're morally superior to the US. Oddly, you people conveniently leave out the fact that the US healthcare system does what healthcare is supposed to do - save lives - better than your universal healthcare systems.

Again, point made earlier.

Consider this: people in Europe are raised multiculturally

Americans are raised to be multicultural. We are the most ethnically diverse country in the world.

Too bad all the ethnic groups kinda stick together, thus making the US less diverse and more scattered.

learn multiple language (one of which is English of course)

I admit that not many Americans learn 2nd languages (I did though). But you're not considering the context.

I consider the context yet it's no reason to not learn other languages. In Holland you are required to learn Dutch, English, German and French. Then there are a lot of people also choosing Spanish as an extra language and some people (if they are smart enough) take Latin and Greek. Intellectual curiosity is a great good but there is little to no incentive to actually try and learn a different language.

I'm sure that if Japan was the world's largest economy and biggest cultural force in the world, Americans would probably learn Japanese.

Probably not.

But since the US is the worlds largest economy, biggest cultural force, and since American businesses dominate in the global economy, Americans don't need to learn second languages.

Number 1 global business: Shell - Dutch.. For that matter, businesses are usually not related to any one country, but I believe Chinese investors are buying many nowadays.

---

At 8/8/08 08:59 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

and are used to crossing national borders more than Americans are.

Um, have you never seen a map of the world before?

While you have several other countries right next to you because Europe is filled with several small neighboring countries, the US is a huge country and the only other countries that border us are also huge. We would have to cross enormous distances to go to other countries, let alone several other countries... let alone Europe (though I've been all around Europe myself).

The fact that Europeans always harp on that shows how fucking incapable they are of simple logic. They are so determined to bash the US that they ignore a simple fact like the GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE in the entire situation in our respective regions in how people are able to travel.

Here's a little experiment: How much would it cost you, and how far would you have to travel to go to another country?You could take a train to say... Berlin for how much? 30 Euros, maybe 40? You know how much it would cost me to get to Berlin, just 1-way? Probably about $1000-$2000. And frankly, I'd rather go there than Mexico city or anywhere in Canada. But for many Americans, Berlin wouldn't be an option unless they had THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS to pay for the trip.

It's quite ignorant to criticize Americans for not being able to travel when we share the majority of our continent with only 2 other countries.... while in Europe, you have dozens of countries in a smaller amount of space.

But even then, let's mention the irony of Europeans pretending Americans never travel. What about the complaint by Europeans that annoying American tourists are invading their countries in droves? Nice double standard. Quite a bit of proof that you people are so determined to bash the US that you take both sides of an issue just to do it.

Another little fact, Americans are often schooled in one language and are not used to crossing national borders, I talked to Americans who thought leaving their state was exciting.

And the funny thing is that most US states are bigger than your entire country.

Not my point, I realize very well that America is a vast country, you really only read what you wanna read don't you??
I told you that Europeans are much more used to crossing national borders and dealing with different cultures in response to your claim that Europeans tend to go to America and not the other way around. I guess you just validated my point, thanks.

Also, stop being such an 'American asshole', I'm not attacking you or your country, I was not brainwashed, I am not a raging socialist, I know very well how things work yet you like to treat me like some type of idiot who shouts that everything about America is shit.

Fuck off, start taking me seriously or stop debating with me, this is not a contest on who's country is the better, this is about acknowledging obvious differences and downsides in each, and if you cannot handle critique than I suggest you better just say so instead of taking shit out of context and attacking me personally.

You're still pushing your believes on to mine claiming they are superior, well than: Why is it that America has a shitty currency

Keep parading your ignorance.

"Shitty currency". The value of currency doesn't necessarily reflect the standing of a country. The Japanese Yen has about 1/10th the value of the Mexican Peso... now are you going to suggest that Japan is worse off than Mexico?

The dollar is obviously not as stable as the yen and that makes it a shitty currency, this was not always the case but failing economic policies made it this way.

an enormous debt

Your country's debt is actually bigger than the US debt in relative terms.

US:

Debt: $12.25 trillion

GDP: $13.84 trillion

Debt as % of GDP: 88%

Netherlands:

Debt: $2.227 Trillion

GDP: $639 billion

Debt as % of GDP: 348%

------------

Our debt is huge, but it's only 88% of our yearly income. Your debt may be smaller in absolute terms, but it's almost 3 and a half times as big as your yearly income.

Feel free to insert your foot into your mouth.

Lol, I guess they forgot to put in a comma there, in 2007 the nation's debt was 39,1% of our GNP, and for 2008 expectations are that it will become 37.5% plus: Holland has bounded itself so that we cannot be in debt more than 60% of our GNP.....

to a country most of her citizens are scared off

China is actually in possession of only a fraction of debt that is owed to foreign lenders. 19% to be exact. And Japan, not China, is the single largest debtor.

We only owe China $506 billion out of our total $12.25 trillion debt. That's only 1/24th, or about 4%.

So guess again.

I was referring to the fact that Chinese investors are buying a lot of, and major companies in the US, thus taking control over your economy.

and why is it that your financial system recently took a big kick in the groin?

LOL you Europeans are so horrendously hypocritical. YOUR financial system took a big kick in the groin as well. YOUR markets are having trouble as well. You're just so fiendishly obsessed with bad news in the US that you allow yourself to ignore your own problems so you can masturbate at the thought of the US having trouble.

Pathetic.

Oh please, European economic growth is still steady, the prospectives had to be turned down a little from 2,4% to 2,0 overall but this is without silly governmental actions such as your president giving people cash also the American growth was put almost to a stop with the mortgage crisis.

I do not wish to attack the US but if you continue to assume I am, I probably will, I refuse to live in a wonderland or something.. :S

---

At 8/8/08 09:33 PM, AapoJoki wrote: Oh, can't you see how obvious it is? USA has never simply done anything wrong, ever. There are no actual facts that could possibly show USA in a negative light, none whatsoever.

The existence of Paris Hilton - although I'm starting to believe she's actually an al-Qu'eda operative following instructions to make America even more hated. It makes sense...

---

At 8/9/08 10:12 AM, jakobhummelen wrote:

And what are you basing that on? Michael Moore movies?

Not only is your opinion different on...propaganda you get in your country.

First off, I'm not sure what kind of 'propaganda' you get on the EU, I have made this clear in my other post, we are all 'pro-America', you cannot be ticked of at me because I'm pointing out some of the downsides of America.

Except you didn't point out a downside, you pointed out something that was both untrue, and was based on your opinions which differ from other people's opinions on what constitutes a downside anyway.

I'm actually basis my opinion on your census even though it's very hard to get reliable data.

Something interesting:

Homelessness is often thought to be rare in countries with a superior safety net). However, this is not the case. In the Netherlands, which is a welfare state, the number of homeless people was estimated at 20,000 in 1995. This point prevalence estimate of .13 percent of the Dutch population is similar to some of the lower estimates of the number of homeless people in the United States.

-------

Granted, that was 13 years ago. But something else that was interesting:

Amsterdam has never had large, warehouse-style shelters. Fifteen years ago only two types of services for homeless people in Amsterdam existed: long-term shelters for older homeless people who mostly had alcohol abuse problems and emergency shelters where homeless people were allowed to sleep for five nights a month. Both types of services still exist.

Present public policies aimed at ending homelessness in Amsterdam are often based on the results of American research. Many service programs for the homeless in Amsterdam have been borrowed from successful programs in New York City. For example, the implementation of separate housing programs for homeless persons with mental illness and proactive outreach was a result of experiences of service providers in Amsterdam supported by research conducted in the United States.

----

It seems that your welfare system for the homeless is based on what the US has done. The fact that US homelessness is higher shows that it's not just based on the system, but can be due in large part to the higher rate of minorities and illegal immigrants, or other differences that aren't affected by the system.

Fair enough, it does not represent a fundamental flaw in the American system, but it is a indicator. You telling me that in 2005 a lot of people had to go to foodbanks (relatively), it's true, but mostly a result of people loaning money from companies with high interest (you know, the ones that screw you over in a heartbeat).

You're making excuses for something, but then you refuse to accept one:

But, I don't feel that you can hide behind illegal immigrants and minorities, it's your country's policy that led to this so it is part of the US system.

Wait, so the fact that the US has a more diverse population and gets illegal immigrants counts against our welfare system? How did you make that conclusion?

Did you not consider the differences in where our countries are located? Your country is surrounded by other mostly homogeneous European countries. We border a 3rd world nation that is more populous than any European country, and our minority population today is due to centuries of immigration both legal and illegal.

You can't say it's the fault of our welfare policies that this is true.

If your country, or ANY other western country had the same situation the US has, they would have similar problems.

In healthpromotion

That cannot be attributed to your healthcare system. You have to consider the variables of culture, human choice, etc...

And even then, there is no proof that "healthpromotion" is better in countries with universal healthcare, and that it has any measurable difference compated to the US private system in dissuading people from certain unhealthy activities that lead to diseases.

Unless you can provide evidence of superiority in preventative care in your country, you can't use it in the argument.

And yet for diseases like cancer which is the biggest risk to public health in both the US and Europe,

Not true, leading cause of death in America and the EU are related to heart and coronary problems.

Americans, regardless of their coverage situation, have greater access to treatments, and are more likely to be treated quickly and successfully than people in Europe and Canada

And because of this, Americans have the highest cancer survival rates, by far.

Please realize that America has 10,326,000 with cancer and Holland has a prospect of having 95,000 people having cancer in 2015, 2/3 of which will be because of a lot of old people.

1) Since the US has better screening practices, the number of people diagnosed with cancer will be higher compared to the Netherlands where people who have cancer won't be accurately diagnosed.

2) You're comparing 2004 US to some hypothetical 2015 Holland, not an applicable comparison.

3) In the process you're not even accounting for population differences between Holland, which is just one part of the Netherlands which itself is small, and the entire US. I might as well compare my city, Seattle, to your entire country and suggest that our lower incidence of cancer is because of our "healthpromotion"

Because of the higher occurence (and probably more related to smoking cancer), Americans have a higher survival rate.

Um what? That makes no sense. It's not the total number of people that survive, its the amount of people that get treated successfully as portion of the people who have it. Therefore the US having such higher survival rates shows that the US has an actual measurable superiority in cancer treatment.

You're in denial.

Answering the last statement first: I'm not saying France is a better place to live in because of the healthcare system, I'm saying this for other reasons also

That you didn't mention. You said healthcare. That means that at least one reason you'd want to live in France over the US is because of its universal healthcare system, because it's quality of healthcare is not better. This implies you'd rather live in a country where the government foots the bill for your healthcare, i.e. you want to live in a country where the taxpayers have to support you.

---

(you know, you should come over some time).

I've been all over European including France and the Netherlands. You're so ignorant of the US that you actually just assume that France is better, and you allude that if I, an American, went there that I'd see it.

When in fact, the exact opposite is true. Going to Europe actually made me more grateful of where I come from, and made me even more critical of the European model.

If the US became like your country it would not be progress, it would be a step in the wrong direction.

Because of people like you.

That makes no sense. If the US became like your country, it would be the step in the wrong direction because we'd be increasing the size of our government and squandering the founding principles of our country. We'd be squandering our superior healthcare, we'd be squandering our greater personal and financial freedom, and we'd basically cease to become the US as it is supposed to be.

You may thing that larger overbearing governments constitute progress, but I guess that's a result of your European upbringing.

Power to the people, I kinda like it. The government's involvement in our lives here are not as great as you may assume. It's more that our government stimulates us to make better choices that promote better health and better living.

Babysitting.

You think that it's the job of the government to do that? AND you think your government actually does do that? Sad.

Again, is your government not chosen or something??? We, the people, choose to have this government.

And the Chinese chose to have a Communist Revolution and it ended up with a government that controlled every aspect of their lives. Willful slavery is still slavery.

You may choose to have a larger government, but that doesn't negate the fact that the government is still making choices for you where it shouldn't. It doesn't negate the fact that it's your government doing the charity work and not you.

Once again, big contradiction when you were previously pretending like you don't want the government to babysit

Again, your lack of perspective amazes me.

Your lack of logic and consistency repulses me. On one hand you say the government shouldn't babysit, then you support the government doing exactly that.

At 8/9/08 10:34 AM, jakobhummelen wrote: I agree, Holland has too many taxes at this point (yes, you can be a liberal here!), but I feel that America has too little.

Hah!

I don't understand how you actually believe that it's good for the government to be in such a position of power.

Structure vs No Structure

You're using ambiguous terms.

people get by just fine here, we may not have the ultra rich as you guys do but there are enough people making a very decent living.

I'm no talking about wealth. I'm talking about freedom. For some odd reason, you actually like your government having more power over things when it could easily be in the hands of everyday people in your country like you. Wouldn't YOU rather make your decisions than have your decisions made for you?

See, you keep mentioning that your people voted your government in. But what about the opposition groups? What about the minority who vehemently oppose the government having so much control over their lives? Now, in the US, there are of course people who disagree with what our government is doing, but since our government fundamentally has less power, there is less tyranny of the majority.

This position of power (which the people control), is just taking away some money.

It's taking away money, deciding where it goes to an excessive degree. It also controls services like healthcare. You have a mixed healthcare system, but your government still calls the shots. It has the power to cut costs, lower the frequency of treatments, decide who gets what, when, and where. A Dutch person does not control their healthcare, their government does.

It's not like we live in cardboard boxes or something :S

That's a separate issue. But some of your homes are pretty tiny.

A society is better when not only is more of the money going to charity, but everyday citizens are donating it freely and get to decide who they are giving it to.

Ehm, Americans may give two or three times (you changed it)

Um, Americans give over 3 times per GDP (and per capita obviously, because our GDP is higher) to charity than the Dutch. I think I said Americans give twice as much as the next most generous country... which is the UK.

National Giving levels shown as % of GDP:

US: 1.67
UK: .73
Canada: .72
Australia: .69
South Africa: .64
Republic of Ireland: .47
Netherlands .45

So, I guess according to your argument Dutch society is better.

Um, how did you come to a conclusion like that so flimsily? Did you show how much the Dutch government gives? Nope. Did you show that combined personal and government aid, the Netherlands gives more per capita or per GDP? Nope.

---

EU-15 emissions have increased since 2005 (when Kyoto went into effect). And since the treaty went into affect, European emissions have rose at a rate 3 times higher than the US emissions have.

Yeah, its rising, easy if you guys are already poluting at record highs

As is the EU.

Funny that you ignore the fact that the EU and people in EU countries are in NO POSITION WHATSOEVER to criticize the US based on Kyoto because although the Europeans signed it, they have failed to abide by it and have actually increased their emissions faster since the Kyoto Protocol than the US has.

America, rank 10 with 20.4 metric tons per capita, Holland rank 43

It's funny how you disown the fact that you're in the EU, and you disown the fact that you're in the Netherlands, both. You only use stats from Holland.

The reasons for this are that America did not sign the Kyoto treaty, thus putting pressure on European countries to not fall behind economically.

And yet, China didn't sign the Kyoto protocol, and is now the world's largest emitter. Yet you make no mention of China and blame your own failures on the US.

Also, everybody knows Kyoto had impossible goals, but steps in the right direction could be made if everybody stould together.

You mean, if the US got the blame for everything.

The fact is that the US knew Kyoto would fail, and there'd be no point because China didn't sign on to it. Any cuts made by the west, including the US, would be irrelevant considering the fact that China and other developing nations were and are completely immune. The Europeans who are a union of the most pretentious bastards in the world, signed the Kyoto protocol knowing full well they wouldn't abide by them, simply for political reasons. They complained about the US so much for political purposes as well even though it was beyond obvious that Kyoto would be a total failure and would not decrease global emissions even if the US signed on to it.

It's easy to say, hey look CO2 emmissions have gone up, but consider that they are much lower per capita than the US.

And it's easy to say "hey look, the US didn't sign Kyoto" even the the signing of Kyoto by EU countries was a pathetic, dishonest ploy, and they haven't abided by it, and have actually done worse in emissions increases compared to the US since then.

Oh, and that's in addition to the fact that humans aren't causing global warming, and a decrease in emissions won't halt it. But that's another debate.

Again, point made earlier.

How many times have you done that? Not even replied to anything but just kept it all for filler?

Too bad all the ethnic groups kinda stick together, thus making the US less diverse and more scattered.

You just keep making shit up off the top of your head so you can avoid dealing with something that is inconvenient to your argument. The fact you think that the US isn't diverse and Americans aren't multicultural shows you've never been here.

I consider the context yet it's no reason to not learn other languages.

Except it is a reason. There is actually no reason to learn another language when you have absolutely no incentive. Why would you learn another language when your job and livelihood doesn't require it at all?

In Holland you are required to learn Dutch, English, German and French.

Except the majority of Dutch probably only speak Dutch and English fluently. The majority of Germans who know a second language probably only speak English fluently aside from German, and the same goes for the rest of Europe.

Then there are a lot of people also choosing Spanish as an extra language and some people (if they are smart enough) take Latin and Greek. Intellectual curiosity is a great good but there is little to no incentive to actually try and learn a different language.

You should then admit that Americans not learning a 2nd language is not a reasonable criticism given the gigantic difference in the necessity of it. It's a necessity in your country to learn a 2nd language, it's not a necessity in the US.

I admit learning a new language is a good thing, but it doesn't make sense for Americans who may probably never have an opportunity to make much use of it. The only language that Americans would have an real incentive to learn is Spanish, and frankly Spanish is a shitty language.

I'm sure that if Japan was the world's largest economy and biggest cultural force in the world, Americans would probably learn Japanese.

Probably not.

But since the US is the worlds largest economy, biggest cultural force, and since American businesses dominate in the global economy, Americans don't need to learn second languages.

Number 1 global business: Shell - Dutch..

You just LOVE to make points that make non sense? One company? And that's NOT EVEN TRUE.

Wal-Mart is the top global company, followed by Exxon Mobil. Both are American companies. Royal Dutch Shell is 3rd.

The US is the most competitive economy in the world.

The US dominates the global economy, and the UK plays a large, yet smaller role as well. That is partly why so many people learn English all around the world... they have to in order to compete. And the fact that American culture is so widespread facilitates it.

At 8/9/08 10:53 AM, jakobhummelen wrote: Not my point, I realize very well that America is a vast country, you really only read what you wanna read don't you??

Were criticizing Americans for not traveling, crossing borders, or learning 2nd languages... and you ignored all the context that showed that your criticism was completely ignorant of context.

I told you that Europeans are much more used to crossing national borders and dealing with different cultures in response to your claim that Europeans tend to go to America and not the other way around.

It's a simple fact that Europeans come migrate to the US yet the opposite is not true. That shows you there's a difference in who wants to live where. If Europe is so great, why do Europeans leave and become US residents or US citizens?

Also, stop being such an 'American asshole', I'm not attacking you or your country

See this is what's so hilarious.

You think that your criticisms of the Us are so normal. You think that your views are completely acceptable and status quo because you're so used to them, and you never hear the other side. If an American defends against your criticism and shows his/her opinions, you are so unaccustomed to an alternate view that you have to start calling people "American asshole".

For you, it's quite okay to rip on the US. But heaven forbid an American defend against your nonsense, and begin making a counter argument about your country and your views of things.

---

Lol, I guess they forgot to put in a comma there

Sounds like you're making up excuses off the top of your head again.

in 2007 the nation's debt was 39,1% of our GNP, and for 2008 expectations are that it will become 37.5% plus: Holland has bounded itself so that we cannot be in debt more than 60% of our GNP.....

I provided proof that your debt is relatively larger than ours. You have not provided proof to the contrary. Either you're lying/being lied to, or you're only talking about public debt, which would be a separate issue considering you were referencing the US supposedly owing huge amounts of debt to China.

We only owe China $506 billion out of our total $12.25 trillion debt. That's only 1/24th, or about 4%.

So guess again.

I was referring to the fact that Chinese investors are buying a lot of, and major companies in the US, thus taking control over your economy.

You were not making any such argument. You were saying the US owes China a lot. I showed you that what the US owes them is actually relatively small.

Now you're completely changing your tune after you got proved wrong.

Pathetic.

Oh please, European economic growth is still steady, the prospectives had to be turned down a little from 2,4% to 2,0 overall

WRONG.

Seriously thanks for giving me yet another opportunity to show you how brainwashed and misinformed liberals like you are. You sit there in your countries, completely obvious to what is happening, and you cream your pants at the thought of the US having economic problems.

In fact, the troubles that exist in the US are actually WORSE in the Eurozone than in the US:

The eurozone is tipping into a deeper downturn than America itself despite the tremors in the US mortgage industry, and may already be in full recession for the first time since the launch of the single currency.

Are you people so obsessed with the US, so determined to find something to point your finger at the US for, that you COMPLETELY NEGLECT the fact that the very things you criticize the US for are worse in your own countries? The housing and property problems in severall European countries are as bad or worse as what the US is facing. The financial problems in among lenders in Europe is just as bad or worse than what is happening in the US.

Man, thanks for giving me yet another opportunity to document the sheer ignorance of reality that is rampant among Europeans.

but this is without silly governmental actions such as your president giving people cash also the American growth was put almost to a stop with the mortgage crisis.

You mean an economic stimulus package which actually did help the economy? Oh that's right, you think it's silly because the government gave Americans back their money. You're not used to the idea that money in the hands of the people is a good thing.

---

I don't see how one country is so much better than the other. It's not like being born in the US is so much better than being born in France. They both have good things and bad things about them. Your arguments are foolish. You say nothing that indicates the US is better than France, rather you state where France has failed compared to other countries, dispite the fact the France fares better in some of those areas. An example is the statement about medicare. You respond with saying how France falls short of a EU standard, dispite faring better than the US in that area. Also, you begin by insulting how the French person you are replying to doesn't speak good English. Am I the only that can see how stupid that is?

---

I am done with you, even though you actually proven me wrong on some points you still refuse me to respect me as a debate opponent, and refuse to accept some of the points I've made.

I can spend my time debating to you or debating with a brick wall, it doesn't matter, I don't feel you respect my opinion or respect any critique whatsoever and that's too bad because I feel that you're not a complete idiot and that you hold a liberal economic point of view that I like. Yet, you cannot find it in you to respect different views on different aspects of life.

So, I guess we're done here, I warned you on forehand, I still hope you can see the positive and negative points both our ways of living give and if you cannot, so be it.

---

This is a repost, but I'm re-posting it so someone can give me a good answer. He knows who he is.

I agree that America is one of the best things to happen to the human race. What my specific problem is how you appear hesitant to give facts to support that maybe America isn't perfect. Why do you insist that a country owes something to the U.S. because they listen to American music or use an American product? What exactly do you expet them to do or give us because they use something made in America? The fact that they actually buy our stuff is their way of saying thanks for the product I just purchased. Yes, they use what originally came from America, but they pay money for it, isn't that enough? What do we owe China for our use of gunpowder? Or Germany for our use of a printing press? Or Jamaica for our use of Reggea music in the 1960's and today even? Or Europe for the tank? Or Greece and the ancient world for Democracy, ironically enough? Or Europe for the first steam-powered auotmobile, possibly the inspiration for future American car producers? Or Sweden for Alfred Nobel, our use of dynamite that helped carved Mt. Rushmore? See, it's not the country that produces a product that deserves the credit, it's the person that country harbored who developed it. If a German man came to America and created a most fabulous invention that saved millions, would you call it soley and American invention, or a German one? Did you notice that a few "American" inventions and things America uses weren't even made by American-born people?

---

Actually, you know what? Forget about answering my above post. I flipped back quite a few pages in your BBS Posts file on your userpage, cellardoor6, and I found what I was looking for. You said on page 372 that "I don't think America is everything. I do believe it's the best country in the world and the only benevolent superpower." That's ALL I was looking for from you.