5 ms·

This aligns well with the concept of economic mobility: Team of Brookings Institution researchers publish study - http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/E

This aligns well with the concept of economic mobility: Team of Brookings Institution researchers publish study - http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/EMP_American_Dream.pdf http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/EMP_American_Dre... From the PDF: the U.S.A. has fallen behind other western nations, such as Canada, Germany, Norway, Sweden in maintaining the concept of economic or upward mobility... And this is the main reason, as I recall, why the U.S. was always portrayed as more desirable than European nations (and it was true in the 50s; part of my German family immigrated to the U.S. in the 50s). If you take that concept away - why would you want to live in the U.S. anymore: - none of U.S. cities rank in the top 100 most livable places (Mercer Cities Ranking) - high schools and many public schools rank low in comparison to other western nations - education is much more expensive - there is no organized trade school education, like in Germany, Britain etc. - salaries for the lower third are less - health care (don't get me started) - hardly any social safety net - crime, largest per capita prison population in the world - infrastructure - roads, bridges, buildings etc. (don't get me started; it's almost third world country level) - average lasting quality of housing (drywall, cheap wood framing, bad carpentry on windows and doors etc.) - manufacturing quality and capability: look at American made cars or power tools (I always prefer foreign made) - half of the government budget goes towards the military - lack of public transportation (Standard Oil bought up the urban train networks in the 1940's and had them decommissioned: street cars, urban transit etc.) - no functioning Euro-style city cores, urban sprawl, stuffed highways with commuters - and the most important fact of all: the byzantine law system of the U.S. and the huge costs of lawyers and law suits (this affects many areas); lawyers can cost over $ 500/ hour and if you can't afford one you are out of luck; further, judges are not high-end lawyers trained as judges (like in Germany etc.) but can be any random divorce lawyer that got appointed regionally, as I understand Final verdict: the U.S. has been badly managed in the last 30 years, and the poor carry the burden. The final evidence is given in the study of Cliometrics and measuring average body height of nations (an indicator for health/ prosperity): it used to be (up until the 1950s) that U.S. Citizens were taller than Europeans; this trend has been reversed in the last 30 years - now the Euros are taller (especially the Dutch)

mattmcknight 17y ago
"half of the government budget goes towards the military" This is some serious misinformation that I see repeated over and over again, propaganda style. It's really under 21%. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d4/Fy2009spendingbycategory2.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d4/Fy2009spending...
- christofd 17y ago
  "During FY 2008, the U.S. government spent nearly $800 billion on defense and homeland security, approximately 30% of tax collections." (and this does not include interest on debt owed on past military expenses - http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm; therefore, it can be argued that almost half of the U.S. budget goes towards defense) - (GAO-2008 Report Page 35): http://www.gao.gov/financial/fy2008/08stmt.pdf http://www.gao.gov/financial/fy2008/08stmt.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_S... The big picture argument here is: the U.S. spends almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined - http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spendi...
  - mattmcknight 17y ago
    Homeland security isn't the military. That Ware Sisters site is pure propaganda, a complete factual distortion zone. All of the interest being paid on debt is not "military".
greyboy 17y ago
It sounds as if you aren't a US native, so I won't assume you are. However, a few remarks: > none of U.S. cities rank in the top 100 most livable places (Mercer Cities Ranking) Unless I am mistaken, this link shows 8 US cities in the top 50. Are you referring to something else? http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/livable_cities_worldwide/ http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/livable_cit... > crime, largest per capita prison population in the world Honest question, is this totally a bad thing? Does punishing criminals under a certain standard imply something poor? Or am I fuzzy on the statement? > infrastructure - roads, bridges, buildings etc. (don't get me started; it's almost third world country level) Whoa! Have you ever been to the US? This is a very bold statement to make. (note: I've been all around the world in my days) > average lasting quality of housing (drywall, cheap wood framing, bad carpentry on windows and doors etc.) Hmm, I've never seen this in my travels around the States. Quality depends on many factors. I've lived in newly built to 40+ year old homes and I've never had the problems you've mentioned. I've never heard of anyone I've personally known with those problems, either (not that they don't exist, of course). > no functioning Euro-style city cores, urban sprawl, stuffed highways with commuters Some areas could use some help, but I've successfully navigated around San Diego, Seattle, Washington DC, NYC, and other metros without a personal vehicle, and have relatives who do so all the time. Does this not fit the description? On a side note, my personal city is 400,000 people over 115 sq miles (county: 900,000 people over 832 sq miles) - it's a different way of life and trying to force a metro-city transportation system into this area is bound for failure (though I will agree that there is room for improvement). The US isn't perfect. But not that imperfect, either.

mattmcknight 17y ago

"half of the government budget goes towards the military" This is some serious misinformation that I see repeated over and over again, propaganda style. It's really under 21%. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d4/Fy2009spendingbycategory2.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d4/Fy2009spending...

christofd 17y ago
"During FY 2008, the U.S. government spent nearly $800 billion on defense and homeland security, approximately 30% of tax collections." (and this does not include interest on debt owed on past military expenses - http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm; therefore, it can be argued that almost half of the U.S. budget goes towards defense) - (GAO-2008 Report Page 35): http://www.gao.gov/financial/fy2008/08stmt.pdf http://www.gao.gov/financial/fy2008/08stmt.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_S... The big picture argument here is: the U.S. spends almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined - http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spendi...
- mattmcknight 17y ago
  Homeland security isn't the military. That Ware Sisters site is pure propaganda, a complete factual distortion zone. All of the interest being paid on debt is not "military".

greyboy 17y ago

It sounds as if you aren't a US native, so I won't assume you are. However, a few remarks: > none of U.S. cities rank in the top 100 most livable places (Mercer Cities Ranking) Unless I am mistaken, this link shows 8 US cities in the top 50. Are you referring to something else? http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/livable_cities_worldwide/ http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/livable_cit... > crime, largest per capita prison population in the world Honest question, is this totally a bad thing? Does punishing criminals under a certain standard imply something poor? Or am I fuzzy on the statement? > infrastructure - roads, bridges, buildings etc. (don't get me started; it's almost third world country level) Whoa! Have you ever been to the US? This is a very bold statement to make. (note: I've been all around the world in my days) > average lasting quality of housing (drywall, cheap wood framing, bad carpentry on windows and doors etc.) Hmm, I've never seen this in my travels around the States. Quality depends on many factors. I've lived in newly built to 40+ year old homes and I've never had the problems you've mentioned. I've never heard of anyone I've personally known with those problems, either (not that they don't exist, of course). > no functioning Euro-style city cores, urban sprawl, stuffed highways with commuters Some areas could use some help, but I've successfully navigated around San Diego, Seattle, Washington DC, NYC, and other metros without a personal vehicle, and have relatives who do so all the time. Does this not fit the description? On a side note, my personal city is 400,000 people over 115 sq miles (county: 900,000 people over 832 sq miles) - it's a different way of life and trying to force a metro-city transportation system into this area is bound for failure (though I will agree that there is room for improvement). The US isn't perfect. But not that imperfect, either.