Seriously thoughtful US/Europe Cultural Divide -- Musings

[wodin]

Originally Posted by BlackVoid

As for the US vs. Europe. It seems that in the USA, people have no problem with bailing out failed private companies with taxpayer money. Yet universal health care financing with tax payer money is a bad idea. Strange indeed.

The jury is still out on whether people have a problem bailing out failed private companies. Today is April 15th, tax day in the US. This year at least it is also tax protest day. We shall see how the protests fare.

The protests are being called “Tea Parties” after the Boston Tea Party when the colonists protested taxes levied by George of England on tea. I just heard the local disk jockey say TEA means “Taxed enough already”.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Personally, I think the biggest problem with our (US of A) economy is the tax system. I really think moving to the fairtax.org plan would help us get back on track very quickly. It would also save billions off the US budget and really help our trade imbalance.

BOb

Hear hear! But based on what I read in this thread, our European friends would be incensed it we moved from a progressive tax system to a neutral one, and it actually WORKED!

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by wodin

Hear hear! But based on what I read in this thread, our European friends would be incensed it we moved from a progressive tax system to a neutral one, and it actually WORKED!

I think many people in Europe would favour a change from direct to indirect taxation.
Especially if it worked.

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by wodin

Hear hear! But based on what I read in this thread, our European friends would be incensed it we moved from a progressive tax system to a neutral one, and it actually WORKED!

Why would we? I for one never said that I am a fan of a progressive tax system, nor did I state that I oppose it (at least I never wanted to state any of those). I just wanted to clarify that a progressive taxation system is not necessarily penalizing success).
Discussing taxation systems might be interesting (I for one would join the discussion in a new thread) - but perhaps OT, dont ye think?

[wodin]

Originally Posted by slayda

The potential to fail is, IMO, just as much of the "American dream" as the potential to succeed.

Wow! Bravo! What a wonderful observation, do you mind if I plagiarize it?

[DixieGal]

I surrender. We suck. I'm home recovering from kidney stone surgery yesterday, right? So watching daytime TV, and THERE IS A COMMERCIAL FOR POP TARTS WHERE THEY TELL MOMS TO MAKE A "SUNDAE" BY STICKING A 400 CALORIE TART INTO A BIG BOWL OF ICE CREAM COVERED WITH FUDGE SAUCE.

No amount of charity or schooling is going to help us now!

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by DixieGal

THERE IS A COMMERCIAL FOR POP TARTS WHERE THEY TELL MOMS TO MAKE A "SUNDAE" BY STICKING A 400 CALORIE TART INTO A BIG BOWL OF ICE CREAM COVERED WITH FUDGE SAUCE.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

"socialism" is ruling the USA now.

Not yet, but a socialist is!

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by wodin

Not yet, but a socialist is!

And there I was believing that somebody ready my posts. Oh well, seems like McCarthy really is like Elvis (still alive). I was under the impression, that Obama might be "left wing", but so far not much of a socialist.

To quote Wikipedia:

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equality for all individuals, with a fair or egalitarian method of compensation.

For Germans: Socialism != Sozialismus.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by tirsales

And there I was believing that somebody ready my posts. Oh well, seems like McCarthy really is like Elvis (still alive). I was under the impression, that Obama might be "left wing", but so far not much of a socialist.

"Elvis is not dead, he just went home." K. in The Men In Black

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by tirsales

And there I was believing that somebody ready my posts. Oh well, seems like McCarthy really is like Elvis (still alive). I was under the impression, that Obama might be "left wing", but so far not much of a socialist.
[SNIP Wikipedia quote]

Tirsales -- it seems to me that responding to wodin by invoking McCarthy might be going a bit far. Your wikipedia quote seems like a fine definition. But in most day-to-day discussion here in the US, the operative definition of "socialist" is "farther left than the speaker approves of." And in off-the-cuff conversation, I might well use it that way too. NOT because it's the "correct definition" but rather because I'd expect the person I'm speaking with to understand it that way.

So, maybe we can ask wodin which way he meant it -- the dictionary definition, the common usage, or both?

Xenophon

P.S. My personal view is that Obama is a "socialist" in the common usage sense, but not the dictionary definition sense. But as a small-l-libertarian I don't really fit the traditional left-right divide at all! As always, your mileage may vary.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

"Socialized business practices" would've never allowed those banks to get in the amount of trouble they did. The whole point of this crisis is that it was "liberal", i.e., unregulated. The whole idea of being a "socialist" country is to ensure that situations like this don't occur, by creating rules those businesses have to adhere to, and so making sure that they live by more or less the same rules as individuals do. What you mention, however, has nothing whatsoever to do with "socialism", and everything with protectionism (which really is something that is more in favor of individual corporations than it is in favor of "capitalism").

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

...
Anyway, nice try dodging having to reply to my response to your statement that "socialism" is ruling the USA now.

Originally Posted by tirsales

...
No this is a statement only an american can make. Please - read again what sozialism is and try not to stubbornly repeat what McCarthy said and the yellow press is repeating over and over again.
A general available-for-all system is NOT sozialism and got NOTHING to do with sozialism - in fact, it would be totally acceptable for a capitalistic system.

...

Sozialism is about the ownership of production capabilities.. In fact a capitalistic system is more then able to spend money into companies...
....

Thanks. I was thinking it was about time I wrote something about this myself. To be blunt and generalistic, many Americans do seem to be (from what I see/hear/read) under the misapprehension that welfare state equals socialism. It does not. Please do read

And Barack Obama is not a socialist

@zerospinboson: I am of the impression that what we call 'liberal' in Europe, is much closer to what they would call 'libertarian' in the US, than what they mean by 'liberal'.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

...
P.S. My personal view is that Obama is a "socialist" in the common usage sense, but not the dictionary definition sense. But as a small-l-libertarian I don't really fit the traditional left-right divide at all! As always, your mileage may vary.

Please keep in mind that that common usage would only count for USA

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by Ea

Please keep in mind that that common usage would only count for USA

Right, that would be "US common usage sense." Although I expected that to be clear from the context of the message.

Xenophon

[wodin]

Originally Posted by nekokami

innovation has come out of Japan, even with their economic problems. I'm afraid I'm not convinced that the ability to fail is intrinsic in the ability to succeed. (And one-sided lists of the things invented in the US are not going to change my mind-- I'm looking for a meaningful comparison.)

The Japanese are geniuses at improving things. One can point to any number of products that they made better, faster, cheaper. A few that jump to mind are cameras, televisions, cars, printers, but there are any number of others. I think one of the main reasons for that is their impeccable work ethic, and corporate loyalty to their employees (equality).

However, they seem a little lacking in bringing new products/ideas to market. They didn't invent any of those things but they made all of them better, some to the point of having a monopoly in them. I think one of the main reasons for that is their emphasis on equality rather than opportunity.

Which is better? I don’t know, I think we need both! Which is a great argument for multi-nationalism.