Pages: 1 2

 

2007-03-21 22:25:50
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7121|Canberra, AUS
Today, in English, while studying the "American Dream", I came across this amazing poem.

Langston Hughes wrote:

Let America Be America Again

Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It never was America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There's never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.")

Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."

The free?

Who said the free?  Not me?
Surely not me?  The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.

O, let America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.

Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!

Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!
Thoughts?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2007-03-21 22:32:28
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7213|Cambridge (UK)
Interesting. What d'u make of it young Sparky m'boy?
2007-03-21 23:57:48
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7121|Canberra, AUS

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Interesting. What d'u make of it young Sparky m'boy?
It affirms my views on the "dream" beautifully.

I wrote this today on the Dream:

I wrote:

What is the American Dream? In my opinion, the American Dream isn't what it used to be. I know that, well, practically everyone else in the class is saying this, but I'm convinced that the American Dream has changed so significantly that it can no longer be called "The American Dream".

A hundred years ago - even up to just sixty years ago The American Dream meant two things - the Californian Dream and the Immigrant Dream. The Californian Dream represented the land-of-opportunity represented by the West, particularly California, where there was plenty of room for everyone (the East Coast and major cities were overcrowded), and you could have your own land, our own house and your own family. This dream was particularly present during the Depression, when world-wide failures of agriculture turned much of the Midwest (the breadbasket of America) into dust bowls. Forced to leave, the farmers saw hope in the west, in California, which they viewed as "paradise" (this story is recounted in Steinbeck's 'Grapes of Wrath').

The Immigrant Dream, represented by the Statue of Liberty, is a dream of those coming to America. While hope of their own house, own land and land-of-opportunity concepts were present, also present were ideas of liberty and freedom (especially from the oppression that existed in their homelands) - a good example would be Jews fleeing from Anti-semitism present in Europe - especially Germany - for up to a century before the second World War.

Then the world was fundamentally altered by two massive events - World War II and the Cold War. These two events introduced the concept of 'patriotism' to the American Dream - shown in JFK's famous line in hs speech about the American Dream: 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country'. This was the first thing that took the focus off the American DREAM and more on America itself.

The second concept introduced at this time was 'freedom'. Before, freedom was a concept prevalent mostly among immigrants and the worse-off in America - and then it only represented a freedom from oppression, of discrimination. During the Cold War, it represented.... basically everything America 'stood for', against communism and 'the Red Menace'. Again, JFK's 'Ich Bin Ein Berliner' speech is a good example of this. This word has become as corrupted as the dream itself, and now is meaningless save in random patriotic blithering about America - and its introduction into the American Dream is an equally corrupting power.

Now, in modern times, it has become infused with what I think is the most corrupting concept of all - capitalism. As most people have recognised, the American Dream today is a kind of 'get-rich-quick' scheme. My opinions, however, go well beyond this.

The American Dream, as I said earlier, has been appropriated by certain organisations and corporations to keep us buying their products, giving them money and keep us (common Americans) from questioning their deeds. This is designed to keep the common man from demanding tax equality for the rich, as they have instilled a fear that when the common man DOES become rich, he'll be taxed too! On the same token, it's used as an excuse to withhold (what I believe are) crucial advancements to welfare. making the excuse that 'The government, shouldn't help you, you can help yourself!'

As I said before, this is a lie.

Last edited by Spark (2007-03-21 23:58:07)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2007-03-22 05:34:56
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

The government does help Americans, it just doesn't carry the weak and lazy. For Americans the definition of freedom is the freedom to do, the ability to make our own way, to struggle, to achieve, to climb social-educational-economic ladders, and to move beyond our parents lot in life and give our children a better chance.

For the the Socialist the collective takes priority over the individual. It is the idea of we will not let our talented rise to high, and we will not let our lazy fall too low. Equality does not mean mean equal opportunity, but equal limitations.

The American dream is having a shot at the title as apposed to security at any cost. The American dream is providing the opportunities that allow us a chance to be great. We cherish the chance to realize our true potential. Reaching that potential is up to us. But our laws and our culture will not stand in our way. We do not have to accept our fate, we can make our own. We understand the risk and are willing to take them.

It's not a matter of whose idea is right or wrong. It is a choice, and that is what defines us. Americans wouldn't have it any other way, nor would the Socialist.

The dream is not dead. There are incredible success stories all around us everyday of those who came from nothing and created wonderful, successful lives for themselves. It's just not late breaking news anymore. It is something we know and have experienced.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-22 05:44:10
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6737|Éire

kmarion wrote:

For the the Socialist the collective takes priority over the individual. It is the idea of we will not let our talented rise to high, and we will not let our lazy fall too low. Equality does not mean mean equal opportunity, but equal limitations.
I wouldn't necessarily say Socialism stops the talented individual from rising too high, we have plenty of super successful millionaire mavericks here in Europe, what you could say is that as you get more successful more is expected back from you by society (in the form of higher tax brackets and such) and this is not necessarily a bad thing, I mean once you get past a certain amount of zeros on the end of your bank account it becomes a matter of greed.
2007-03-22 05:47:47
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

Braddock wrote:

kmarion wrote:

For the the Socialist the collective takes priority over the individual. It is the idea of we will not let our talented rise to high, and we will not let our lazy fall too low. Equality does not mean mean equal opportunity, but equal limitations.
I wouldn't necessarily say Socialism stops the talented individual from rising too high, we have plenty of super successful millionaire mavericks here in Europe, what you could say is that as you get more successful more is expected back from you by society (in the form of higher tax brackets and such) and this is not necessarily a bad thing, I mean once you get past a certain amount of zeros on the end of your bank account it becomes a matter of greed.
The idea does not. Of course some people escape the predetermined mold.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-22 06:45:46
Pierre
I hunt criminals down for a living
+68|7122|Belgium

Kmarion wrote:

The government does help Americans, it just doesn't carry the weak and lazy. For Americans the definition of freedom is the freedom to do, the ability to make our own way, to struggle, to achieve, to climb social-educational-economic ladders, and to move beyond our parents lot in life and give our children a better chance.

For the the Socialist the collective takes priority over the individual. It is the idea of we will not let our talented rise to high, and we will not let our lazy fall too low. Equality does not mean mean equal opportunity, but equal limitations.

The American dream is having a shot at the title as apposed to security at any cost. The American dream is providing the opportunities that allow us a chance to be great. We cherish the chance to realize our true potential. Reaching that potential is up to us. But our laws and our culture will not stand in our way. We do not have to accept our fate, we can make our own. We understand the risk and are willing to take them.

It's not a matter of whose idea is right or wrong. It is a choice, and that is what defines us. Americans wouldn't have it any other way, nor would the Socialist.

The dream is not dead. There are incredible success stories all around us everyday of those who came from nothing and created wonderful, successful lives for themselves. It's just not late breaking news anymore. It is something we know and have experienced.
It's good to have a dream and to try to achieve this goal. As Braddock wrote, even in Europe - which some Americans see as extreme socialist - it is very well accepted to set your goals as high as possible and to do your utmost to achieve your dream. There are no laws against trying, and you may succeed, or not, that's up to you. Inbev was once not so long ago a small brewery in Leuven, and look where it is now.

But the question remains what you do in the meantime with the people who fall behind, for a number of reasons (sickness, unlucky, accident, or whatever)? Do you leave them behind or do you help them? European countries have decided - since the industrial revolution - that it is best for a community to help the weakest who otherwise would fall behind. Therefore you will find less poverty, less minimum wages (no McJob's) etc in European countries than in the US. You will find labour laws protecting the employee. That's also the reason why the EU has been spending billions in the 'poorer' countries in the past (Spain, Greece, etc) when they joined, and it is the reason why we are spending billions for the 'new' members (former East European countries).

It's a choice, and I like to think that the succes of a society is not measured by the number of individual billionaires it counts, but by the absence of extreme poverty and by the way it helps the weak and elderly.

It might also be a reason why a lot of Americans are so religious: if your fellow man doesn't help you, you'd better be good with Heaven.
2007-03-22 07:22:44
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6892|The Land of Scott Walker

Braddock wrote:

I wouldn't necessarily say Socialism stops the talented individual from rising too high, we have plenty of super successful millionaire mavericks here in Europe, what you could say is that as you get more successful more is expected back from you by society (in the form of higher tax brackets and such) and this is not necessarily a bad thing, I mean once you get past a certain amount of zeros on the end of your bank account it becomes a matter of greed.
I don’t think the rich should have higher tax brackets.  Why should they be penalized for acquiring more wealth?  Simply having wealth is not evil, it just depends on how one obtained it or uses it that could be a matter of greed. I completely disagree that the amount of zeros determines one’s greed.  There are many generous multi millionaires and billionaires that do good in this world that those of us making $30K-50K per year could never dream of doing.  Bill Gates is a great example with the large amounts he donates.  Do we love to hate him?  Of course, but that’s our own jealousy that we haven’t been as successful as he has. 

The US also helps those who need it and our labor laws protect the employee in a number of ways.  Don't forget all the money the US sends all over the world.  I don't think minimum wage jobs are a bad thing, either.  Those jobs are a starting point and they should not be paying a larger wage or people would not be motivated to improve their skills or education in order to gain a better job.  Entry level jobs such as McDonalds are not intended to be used as an adult living wage.
2007-03-22 07:37:50
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

Pierre wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

The government does help Americans, it just doesn't carry the weak and lazy. For Americans the definition of freedom is the freedom to do, the ability to make our own way, to struggle, to achieve, to climb social-educational-economic ladders, and to move beyond our parents lot in life and give our children a better chance.

For the the Socialist the collective takes priority over the individual. It is the idea of we will not let our talented rise to high, and we will not let our lazy fall too low. Equality does not mean mean equal opportunity, but equal limitations.

The American dream is having a shot at the title as apposed to security at any cost. The American dream is providing the opportunities that allow us a chance to be great. We cherish the chance to realize our true potential. Reaching that potential is up to us. But our laws and our culture will not stand in our way. We do not have to accept our fate, we can make our own. We understand the risk and are willing to take them.

It's not a matter of whose idea is right or wrong. It is a choice, and that is what defines us. Americans wouldn't have it any other way, nor would the Socialist.

The dream is not dead. There are incredible success stories all around us everyday of those who came from nothing and created wonderful, successful lives for themselves. It's just not late breaking news anymore. It is something we know and have experienced.
It's good to have a dream and to try to achieve this goal. As Braddock wrote, even in Europe - which some Americans see as extreme socialist - it is very well accepted to set your goals as high as possible and to do your utmost to achieve your dream. There are no laws against trying, and you may succeed, or not, that's up to you. Inbev was once not so long ago a small brewery in Leuven, and look where it is now.

But the question remains what you do in the meantime with the people who fall behind, for a number of reasons (sickness, unlucky, accident, or whatever)? Do you leave them behind or do you help them? European countries have decided - since the industrial revolution - that it is best for a community to help the weakest who otherwise would fall behind. Therefore you will find less poverty, less minimum wages (no McJob's) etc in European countries than in the US. You will find labour laws protecting the employee. That's also the reason why the EU has been spending billions in the 'poorer' countries in the past (Spain, Greece, etc) when they joined, and it is the reason why we are spending billions for the 'new' members (former East European countries).

It's a choice, and I like to think that the succes of a society is not measured by the number of individual billionaires it counts, but by the absence of extreme poverty and by the way it helps the weak and elderly.

It might also be a reason why a lot of Americans are so religious: if your fellow man doesn't help you, you'd better be good with Heaven.
I hope you understand that we do help our fellow man. In fact there are many different government programs that are designed to help those that have (sickness, unlucky, accident, or whatever). http://www.govbenefits.gov/govbenefits_en.portal
This does not include the private sectors such as charities/religious organizations that are given tax breaks by the government. Our help is less permanent though. It is designed to help people get up when they have fallen and begin to contribute once again. It is not a final plan.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-22 08:24:51
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,073|7219|PNW

As to the poem, it's neat and all, but we're a society buried in papers and red tape. We're free to a certain extent, but it isn't lollipop-land free.

Braddock wrote:

kmarion wrote:

For the the Socialist the collective takes priority over the individual. It is the idea of we will not let our talented rise to high, and we will not let our lazy fall too low. Equality does not mean mean equal opportunity, but equal limitations.
I wouldn't necessarily say Socialism stops the talented individual from rising too high, we have plenty of super successful millionaire mavericks here in Europe, what you could say is that as you get more successful more is expected back from you by society (in the form of higher tax brackets and such) and this is not necessarily a bad thing, I mean once you get past a certain amount of zeros on the end of your bank account it becomes a matter of greed.
That makes about as much sense as the "well, do you have enough gum for everyone" argument teachers put forth to schoolchildren. Ironically, I once brought enough for everyone, but it was still confiscated even when I answered the aforementioned question affirmatively.

Never did get it back, either.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-03-22 08:27:07)

2007-03-22 08:42:04
theelviscerator
Member
+19|6735
So you really think America is the same as it was in the early 1900's?

Thats the experience he is drawing from.

What do you think Aboriginal life was during that same period?

Have you written anything on that?

Write us a poem about Australians rounding up Aborginals and shooting them, I understand this occured as late as 1926.

Last edited by theelviscerator (2007-03-22 08:44:44)

2007-03-22 09:10:57
Pierre
I hunt criminals down for a living
+68|7122|Belgium

Kmarion wrote:

I hope you understand that we do help our fellow man. In fact there are many different government programs that are designed to help those that have (sickness, unlucky, accident, or whatever). http://www.govbenefits.gov/govbenefits_en.portal
This does not include the private sectors such as charities/religious organizations that are given tax breaks by the government. Our help is less permanent though. It is designed to help people get up when they have fallen and begin to contribute once again. It is not a final plan.
I do understand.  But I'm talking of medical aid.  I'm in contact with American organisations of patients with kidney diseases, and let me tell you, I'm happy to be over here in our system. If you fail to have private insurance in the US or if it runs out, or if the company goes banckrupt, you're screwed.
2007-03-22 09:17:40
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

Pierre wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

I hope you understand that we do help our fellow man. In fact there are many different government programs that are designed to help those that have (sickness, unlucky, accident, or whatever). http://www.govbenefits.gov/govbenefits_en.portal
This does not include the private sectors such as charities/religious organizations that are given tax breaks by the government. Our help is less permanent though. It is designed to help people get up when they have fallen and begin to contribute once again. It is not a final plan.
I do understand.  But I'm talking of medical aid.  I'm in contact with American organisations of patients with kidney diseases, and let me tell you, I'm happy to be over here in our system. If you fail to have private insurance in the US or if it runs out, or if the company goes banckrupt, you're screwed.
That is two fold. It also eliminate competition. The best doctors are going to go where they can be most successful. That's why allot of times when you are in an American hospital talking to the best doctors in their fields they have foreign accents. Again mediocrity does not always ensure the best option for medical care. Don't get me wrong though, our health care system does need to be reformed.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-22 09:27:10
SoLeftofLEFTimRIGHT
Member
+0|6693

Kmarion wrote:

Pierre wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

I hope you understand that we do help our fellow man. In fact there are many different government programs that are designed to help those that have (sickness, unlucky, accident, or whatever). http://www.govbenefits.gov/govbenefits_en.portal
This does not include the private sectors such as charities/religious organizations that are given tax breaks by the government. Our help is less permanent though. It is designed to help people get up when they have fallen and begin to contribute once again. It is not a final plan.
I do understand.  But I'm talking of medical aid.  I'm in contact with American organisations of patients with kidney diseases, and let me tell you, I'm happy to be over here in our system. If you fail to have private insurance in the US or if it runs out, or if the company goes banckrupt, you're screwed.
That is two fold. It also eliminate competition. The best doctors are going to go where they can be most successful. That's why allot of times when you are in an American hospital talking to the best doctors in their fields they have foreign accents. Again mediocrity does not always ensure the best option for medical care. Don't get me wrong though, our health care system does need to be reformed.
The biggest problem with the health care concept in America (IMO) is the lack of preventative incentives, and the lack of general health care accessibility. Not all health-care requires an M.D. or M.D. specialist. A Midwife, Reg. Nurse, Lic. Dr. Assistant, or the like, could provide much of the necessary care / health needs / prof. advice-care that people of lower income (actually any income) often need.

There isn’t enough of a push towards broadening health-care in America, by including incentives for those who take care of themselves, and getting more qualified individuals licensed to provide care, who are not M.D.s.
2007-03-22 09:32:29
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6737|Éire

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

That makes about as much sense as the "well, do you have enough gum for everyone" argument teachers put forth to schoolchildren.
Do you not pay tax in the United States? ...In Europe we pay a little more and take greater care of our fellow citizens. We can still get filthy rich and be super successful except we have the added bonus that we know our higher rate of tax is doing more good for society. We don't actually have a 'keep them down' mentality in the way Kmarion hinted at here in the EU (I can't speak for any other socialist systems out there), I've never sensed that ...in fact our socialist structures provide numerous types of grants and start up schemes for aspiring businessmen and entrepreneurs that would not be there in a more brutally capitalist economy. We're a lot like the US in many ways but not as cutthroat and that's what I like. I feel the American model to be too hard-edged, everyone's out for themselves (IMO).

If the gap between your rich and poor gets too wide that can be a dangerous thing and in the American society it seems to me to be more of a possibility. If your poor outnumber your rich too overwhelmingly it can lead to unrest and revolt.
2007-03-22 09:35:09
theelviscerator
Member
+19|6735
That socialist utopia is rapidly going broke btw.

Esp considering the influx you have of muslims who will out breed you ten to one, and they largely go direct to welfare.

Paris is clue.
2007-03-22 09:36:08
EVieira
Member
+105|6925|Lutenblaag, Molvania
That text can be applied to any modern country. We all have nice constitutions, bills of rights, etc, that exemplify the dreams of countries: Freedom, progress, equality, greatness, etc... Dreams that root back to French Revolution, Aristotle, Romans, Egyptians and others. But those dreams get suffocated in greed and competition.
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered;  the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei  (1564-1642)
2007-03-22 09:38:49
apollo_fi
The Flying Kalakukko.
+94|6977|The lunar module

theelviscerator wrote:

That socialist utopia is rapidly going broke btw.

Esp considering the influx you have of muslims who will out breed you ten to one, and they largely go direct to welfare.

Paris is clue.
Mr. Barlow, is it YOU?
2007-03-22 09:39:23
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|7093
Handouts for everyone yay.
2007-03-22 09:44:48
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

Braddock wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

That makes about as much sense as the "well, do you have enough gum for everyone" argument teachers put forth to schoolchildren.
Do you not pay tax in the United States? ...In Europe we pay a little more and take greater care of our fellow citizens. We can still get filthy rich and be super successful except we have the added bonus that we know our higher rate of tax is doing more good for society. We don't actually have a 'keep them down' mentality in the way Kmarion hinted at here in the EU (I can't speak for any other socialist systems out there), I've never sensed that ...in fact our socialist structures provide numerous types of grants and start up schemes for aspiring businessmen and entrepreneurs that would not be there in a more brutally capitalist economy. We're a lot like the US in many ways but not as cutthroat and that's what I like. I feel the American model to be too hard-edged, everyone's out for themselves (IMO).

If the gap between your rich and poor gets too wide that can be a dangerous thing and in the American society it seems to me to be more of a possibility. If your poor outnumber your rich too overwhelmingly it can lead to unrest and revolt.
Or it can breed strength and motivate those who are less fortunate to challenge themselves rather than accept their fate. If Americans were to integrate into the welfare states they would be quite shocked at the lack of opportunity. The every mans a servant is not a concept they would enjoy.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-22 09:48:56
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6737|Éire
I'll point this out again for all the people who think Socialism = Communism:

Not everyone qualifies for welfare.

If you are on unemployment benefit you have to be seen to be actively seeking employment or risk suspension of said unemployment benefit.

Not everyone gets free healthcare, go above a certain tax level and you have to pay for most medical and dental treatment (plus most people who can afford it go private as the treatment is usually more efficient and of a higher standard).

It's no fun trying to live off of welfare, it's not something anyone aspires to and most people prefer to have a decent job and a decent wage and by extension a higher quality of living.

This thread was supposed to be about the American dream, there is a thread to discuss Socialism vs. Capitalism somewhere else in D&ST, perhaps comparisons should be posted there so as not to completely derail the thread.
2007-03-22 09:57:07
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6737|Éire

Kmarion wrote:

The every mans a servant is not a concept they would enjoy.
We don't have any concepts like that bred into us here in the EU. If we do they've completely missed me. We are raised to believe we should aspire to work hard in school, if possible go onto further education and get a good qualification and try and get as high paying or satisfying a job as possible. We have competitive entry requirement standards for high demand college courses so even though college fees are Government paid (in most cases in Ireland anyway) you still have to be good enough and smart enough to get into them. If you are not going the academic route the prevalent mental attitude is work hard and provide as high a level of quality work as possible and you will stand to make more money, common sense really.
2007-03-22 10:11:55
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

By servant I mean everyone working/serving for the common.

Braddock wrote:

I'll point this out again for all the people who think Socialism = Communism:

Not everyone qualifies for welfare.
Same here

Braddock wrote:

If you are on unemployment benefit you have to be seen to be actively seeking employment or risk suspension of said unemployment benefit.
Same here

Braddock wrote:

Not everyone gets free healthcare, go above a certain tax level and you have to pay for most medical and dental treatment (plus most people who can afford it go private as the treatment is usually more efficient and of a higher standard).
Same here

Braddock wrote:

It's no fun trying to live off of welfare, it's not something anyone aspires to and most people prefer to have a decent job and a decent wage and by extension a higher quality of living.
Same here
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-22 10:16:29
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,073|7219|PNW

Kmarion wrote:

Braddock wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

That makes about as much sense as the "well, do you have enough gum for everyone" argument teachers put forth to schoolchildren.
Do you not pay tax in the United States? ...In Europe we pay a little more and take greater care of our fellow citizens. We can still get filthy rich and be super successful except we have the added bonus that we know our higher rate of tax is doing more good for society. We don't actually have a 'keep them down' mentality in the way Kmarion hinted at here in the EU (I can't speak for any other socialist systems out there), I've never sensed that ...in fact our socialist structures provide numerous types of grants and start up schemes for aspiring businessmen and entrepreneurs that would not be there in a more brutally capitalist economy. We're a lot like the US in many ways but not as cutthroat and that's what I like. I feel the American model to be too hard-edged, everyone's out for themselves (IMO).

If the gap between your rich and poor gets too wide that can be a dangerous thing and in the American society it seems to me to be more of a possibility. If your poor outnumber your rich too overwhelmingly it can lead to unrest and revolt.
Or it can breed strength and motivate those who are less fortunate to challenge themselves rather than accept their fate. If Americans were to integrate into the welfare states they would be quite shocked at the lack of opportunity. The every mans a servant is not a concept they would enjoy.
Besides which we're too busy thumbing our noses at Canada's waiting periods for health care.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-03-22 10:16:39)

2007-03-22 10:17:46
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6737|Éire
I know Kmarion, I think we covered all of this in another thread ..de ja vu! That's why I said earlier "We're a lot like the US in many ways". I think the US and EU will always have exaggerated concepts of the other's ecomonic system.

Do you think it would be fair to say you can rise highest in the US but run the risk of hitting rock bottom harder as opposed to being able to rise high, but not as high, in the EU but not having to run the risk of hitting rock bottom as hard?

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard