7 ms·

> and don’t have a huge second world country at their southern border. Some might dispute that claim.

toasterlovin 7y ago
To be honest, glib remarks about how the US is a second world country play well to a certain crowd, but they make the person making them look like a biased hack to anybody who engages in serious thinking.
- justinclift 7y ago
  Citation needed.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income Basically the only countries (excluding city states) that beat the US by a significant margin are the Scandinavian countries. Sweden is the largest of those countries at about 10.5 million people. For a point of reference, that's about the size of Georgia, the 8th largest state. If you compare US median household income to the larger European countries (Germany, France, UK, etc.), the comparison is devastating. The US has a household median income of around $43,500. Germany comes in at $33,000, with France and the UK trailing closely behind that. That's a 30% lead to the US. And, yes, those are purchasing power parity numbers. So, let me re-iterate: when you assert that the US is anything other than a first world country you look like an idiot who is too lazy to spend the the 5 minutes on Wikipedia necessary to disabuse themselves of their prejudices and foolish notions.
    - teh_klev 7y ago
      From your first comment: "glib remarks" and "making them look like a biased hack to anybody who engages in serious thinking." > you look like an idiot who is too lazy to spend the the 5 minutes on Wikipedia Yes, thank you for insulting me a second time. And sorry, I don't regard Wikipedia as a reliable source, despite its selective citations. Median income is a single measurement, it doesn't mean an iota if your country can't provide universal healthcare, free (or inexpensive) education, social security that is a genuine safety net for those who're in desperate circumstances, etc, etc. I consider these important elements of being a first world country.
      - toasterlovin 7y ago
        You casually slandered my entire country and now you have a problem with my tone? What, exactly, do you expect? Especially when you’re just flat out wrong. I’m not even arguing that the US is the best, merely that it’s clearly a first world country, as evidenced by the incredible prosperity that most Americans participate in. And regarding health care and a social safety net: you should familiarize yourself with Medicaid and our welfare programs. Many of the poorest Americans receive assistance of various kinds, on par with many first world nations.
        teh_klev 7y ago
        > You casually slandered my entire country I made an observation about the state and its governance, not the inhabitants. These are two quite different things.
        toasterlovin 7y ago
        Alright, I'm out of here. Just for the record, though: only one of us offered any evidence to support their position. And it wasn't you.
        justinclift 7y ago
        As a data point, "first", "second", "third" world country (the term) means a different thing than you're both trying to convey. It's a literal grouping of countries by an old system, rather than meaning "economic" or "cultural" backwater. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model As a 2nd data point, the median income response is about economic power. It's obviously possible to be economically strong whilst at the same time having poor culture. There seem to be several current examples of this in the world. :/
        toasterlovin 7y ago
        You are citing a historic (and outdated) meaning of the three world system. The current meaning is essentially an economic classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World “Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the definition has instead largely shifted to any country with little political risk and a well functioning democracy, rule of law, capitalist economy, economic stability, and high standard of living. Various ways in which modern First World countries are often determined include GDP, GNP, literacy rates, life expectancy, and the Human Development Index.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_World “Subsequently the actual meaning of the terms "First World", "Second World" and "Third World" changed from being based on political ideology to an economic definition.”
dang 7y ago
Please don't post nationalistic flamebait to HN. We ban accounts that do that. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use the site in its intended spirit, we'd be grateful.

To be honest, glib remarks about how the US is a second world country play well to a certain crowd, but they make the person making them look like a biased hack to anybody who engages in serious thinking.

justinclift 7y ago
Citation needed.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income Basically the only countries (excluding city states) that beat the US by a significant margin are the Scandinavian countries. Sweden is the largest of those countries at about 10.5 million people. For a point of reference, that's about the size of Georgia, the 8th largest state. If you compare US median household income to the larger European countries (Germany, France, UK, etc.), the comparison is devastating. The US has a household median income of around $43,500. Germany comes in at $33,000, with France and the UK trailing closely behind that. That's a 30% lead to the US. And, yes, those are purchasing power parity numbers. So, let me re-iterate: when you assert that the US is anything other than a first world country you look like an idiot who is too lazy to spend the the 5 minutes on Wikipedia necessary to disabuse themselves of their prejudices and foolish notions.
  - teh_klev 7y ago
    From your first comment: "glib remarks" and "making them look like a biased hack to anybody who engages in serious thinking." > you look like an idiot who is too lazy to spend the the 5 minutes on Wikipedia Yes, thank you for insulting me a second time. And sorry, I don't regard Wikipedia as a reliable source, despite its selective citations. Median income is a single measurement, it doesn't mean an iota if your country can't provide universal healthcare, free (or inexpensive) education, social security that is a genuine safety net for those who're in desperate circumstances, etc, etc. I consider these important elements of being a first world country.
    - toasterlovin 7y ago
      You casually slandered my entire country and now you have a problem with my tone? What, exactly, do you expect? Especially when you’re just flat out wrong. I’m not even arguing that the US is the best, merely that it’s clearly a first world country, as evidenced by the incredible prosperity that most Americans participate in. And regarding health care and a social safety net: you should familiarize yourself with Medicaid and our welfare programs. Many of the poorest Americans receive assistance of various kinds, on par with many first world nations.
      - teh_klev 7y ago
        > You casually slandered my entire country I made an observation about the state and its governance, not the inhabitants. These are two quite different things.
        toasterlovin 7y ago
        Alright, I'm out of here. Just for the record, though: only one of us offered any evidence to support their position. And it wasn't you.
        justinclift 7y ago
        As a data point, "first", "second", "third" world country (the term) means a different thing than you're both trying to convey. It's a literal grouping of countries by an old system, rather than meaning "economic" or "cultural" backwater. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model As a 2nd data point, the median income response is about economic power. It's obviously possible to be economically strong whilst at the same time having poor culture. There seem to be several current examples of this in the world. :/
        toasterlovin 7y ago
        You are citing a historic (and outdated) meaning of the three world system. The current meaning is essentially an economic classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World “Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the definition has instead largely shifted to any country with little political risk and a well functioning democracy, rule of law, capitalist economy, economic stability, and high standard of living. Various ways in which modern First World countries are often determined include GDP, GNP, literacy rates, life expectancy, and the Human Development Index.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_World “Subsequently the actual meaning of the terms "First World", "Second World" and "Third World" changed from being based on political ideology to an economic definition.”

dang 7y ago

Please don't post nationalistic flamebait to HN. We ban accounts that do that. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use the site in its intended spirit, we'd be grateful.