Is the American dream just a hoax...

[Eki]

...to make people slave just a little more falsely believing it will take them somewhere?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8162616.stm


Looking for the land of opportunity

If top professions in Britain are tough to break into for disadvantaged children, as former UK minister Alan Milburn's report on social mobility found, is there a land of opportunity that can serve as a beacon? Yes, but it's not the US, argues University of Ottawa professor Miles Corak.

The American Dream promises that aspiration, hard work and individual enterprise will be rewarded with prosperity, regardless of family background.
President Barack Obama, the first black president, epitomises this; but all too often the dream fails to match reality.

The truth is that the US sits with the UK at the bottom of the international league table of social mobility.

SOCIAL MOBILITY

TOP

Denmark
Norway
Finland
Canada

BOTTOM

France
US
Italy
UK

Family background has as strong an influence on socio-economic opportunity in the classless United States as it does in the supposedly hidebound class-ridden UK.

In terms of giving children a good start in life and having a fair labour market, both countries probably have much to learn from those at the top of the league table - Finland, Norway and Canada, among others.

A generation ago the UK spent less on the education of its children than most other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

This without doubt contributed to the lack of social mobility experienced by today's adults.

Class in the classroom

But Finland spent no more per pupil than the UK; the United States the most.
School financing in the US, based on local property taxes, is a strong force for concentrating advantage across the generations.

More affluent parents in America shop for schools, move neighbourhoods and spend a great deal on private tuition for their children.

This is in sharp contrast to the broad-based and universal structure of the Finnish system.

The UK has a good deal more in common with the US than it does with Finland, but is increasingly recognising that access to good quality education is a playing field that needs to be levelled.

Reform of school financing does not appear to be a priority for the current US administration.

But President Obama's focus on healthcare - if it is truly reformed in a way that will boost access for poorer children - may well pay dividends in promoting social mobility for the long run.

The point is that what matters is not so much the size of the government's social budget, but the degree to which the dollars, pounds or euros are advantageous to the disadvantaged.

In a similar way, removing labour market inequality also helps social mobility.

Nepotism

If the UK and the US have the lowest degree of social mobility it is not only because poorer children don't get the best start in life, but also because the stakes are higher.

In both countries labour markets are more unequal than elsewhere.

The barriers - both implicit and explicit - to entry into particular occupations, sectors and even firms are higher.

Taxes are less progressive and the gap between low and high incomes is greater.

Whether the degree of social mobility is a problem that needs to be addressed by our politicians depends very much upon the underlying causes.

Children are like their parents for all sorts of reasons, some of which are valued by the labour market.

If the reason adult incomes resemble that of their parents has to do with parental values and styles, and instilling motivation, then most of us would also agree there is likely little role for public policy.

But if it also extends to the role of connections, contacts or nepotism most would feel the opposite - that the playing field is not level.

In many advanced economies, most jobs held by young people are found through family and friends, and a good many children will end up working in the same occupation as their parents.

Old boys' network?

Whether it matters or not for social mobility depends upon whether there are other options available to young job seekers, whether the best jobs and occupations are allocated this way, and whether the resulting restrictions lead to excessive incomes.

In Canada - arguably the country whose labour market is closest in structure to the US - about four in 10 young men have worked at some point for the same employer as their fathers.

A significant proportion make careers with the same employer as their father had.

But only at the very top of the income distribution is this excessive, and suggestive of nepotism.

In the US and the UK on the other hand, where all the signs are that to a similar degree, children end up working for the same employer as their parents, the effect on social mobility is much greater.

This is because high-paying jobs are more concentrated within the professions, and the overall level of inequality is higher.

What many of the Nordic countries and Canada have recognised is that the full development of a child's early years - schooling, healthcare, and socialisation - is the first and most necessary prerequisite in developing a socially mobile society.

What they also teach us is that this is only a prerequisite, not a guarantee.
The degree of fairness, openness, and equality in labour markets is also a reason some countries are at the top of the league table, while others languish so much further down.

[Easy Drifter]

Four countries listed as the bottom so Eki his usual totally impartial way picks on one.
One study by a left wing Professor also proves zip.
If you hadn't put your name to it Eki I would of thought the post came from Wade91.

[ErkMa]

Why would a "...study by a left wing Professor..." prove nothing?
Is the truth a right wing thing? Was mr M such a perfect truth teller?

But this perhaps show us the true face of that dream, it's opium for the masses, to keep them in check. Let them believe they can better their situation, so they wont stir up trouble by getting into that democratic and thus left wing commie crap. Right?

[Eki]

Four countries listed as the bottom so Eki his usual totally impartial way picks on one.

Well, I've never heard of the British dream or the French dream, all I hear about those countries (from the US media) is that they are snobby elitists (or football hooligans, excuse me, soccer hooligans with bad teeth or hairy frog eating surrender monkeys).

[steve_spackman]

Well, I've never heard of the British dream or the French dream, all I hear about those countries (from the US media) is that they are snobby elitists (or football hooligans, excuse me, soccer hooligans with bad teeth or hairy frog eating surrender monkeys).

Bad teeth. Well thats news to me.

Seriously ive never known why they say that all Brits have bad teeth..Every country in the world has people with bad teeth..Its just a fact of life.

The issue here is that alot of people in the US (NOT ALL!!) go by here say more than anything else and believe what they are told.

The American dream is just that..a dream nothing more nothing less.

[anthonyvop]

The professor who wrote the "study" is an idiot.

Social Mobility as a factor? Please. I can argue that the "good" countries like Finland have just lowered their social standards. Listening to Eki makes it fairly obvious.

The American dream is financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family. I wonder what the twit considers a higher social standing?

[steve_spackman]

The professor who wrote the "study" is an idiot.

Social Mobility as a factor? Please. I can argue that the "good" countries like Finland have just lowered their social standards. Listening to Eki makes it fairly obvious.

The American dream is financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family. I wonder what the twit considers a higher social standing?

But really it cant be a American dream, as people in other countries have financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family among other things!

By the way GREAT articles on Bleacher Report...

[Easy Drifter]

You are right. Left wing really has nothing to do with it.
If my feeble memory is right though The University of Ottawa is ranked as one of the worst in Canada, especially as to the quality of teachers/ professors.
Get another study or two coming to the same conclusion would give him some creditability.

[BDunnell]

There is probably something in it, though the constant parroting of the phrase is undoubtedly trite.

[Roamy]

The great TIRE dream = a towel a turban and the koran = coming soon to a mosque near you.

I'll take the American Dream thank you = However there are a few in Argentina I wouldn't mind experiencing too!!

[steve_spackman]

The great TIRE dream = a towel a turban and the koran = coming soon to a mosque near you.

:rolleyes: Your outlandish statements never fail to amuse me my friend

[Rollo]

The American dream is financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family. I wonder what the twit considers a higher social standing?

Financial Stability should be statistically measured then. If we want an objective answer, then you need to find a empirical basis to draw a conclusion from.

To this end the Gini Coefficient maps incomes across the population:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Gini_since_WWII.gif

In terms of income, the general trend for the US is for a greater degree of inequality. Now whether that's due to either the top incomes rising far faster than the rest of society or the development of an underclass is a matter for debate.

It does follow that people on lower incomes have less ability to self-determine their destiny. That I would suggest includes the American Dream as people's incomes trend towards disparity.

[Easy Drifter]

While sitting out on my deck I started considering the 'study'.
Every top ranked country is northern and relatively small as to population.
The low ranked countries are much higher in population.
Outside of Canada the high ranked countries all have very limited immigration.
Canada does have a large immigration every year, in excess of 200,000.
A point ignored in this rather superficial study is that Canada has tens of thousands of doctors and other medical professionals, engineers, and high tech trained people who have emigrated to Canada driving taxis, delivering pizzas, working in fast food joints for minimum wage because we won't accept their credentials.
The whys are another story but this so called study totally ignores that.
In other words the results are totally bogus.

[anthonyvop]

By the way GREAT articles on Bleacher Report...
Thanks Steve.

[anthonyvop]

The American dream is financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family.
I forgot one major part. All of the above is acquired through hard work and perseverence. Not by Government mandate.

[Alexamateo]

As one who spent much of his formative years at or below the poverty level as a farm kid in Mississippi, I assure you the American Dream is alive and well and within easy reach of anyone willing to sacrifice a little and work hard.

Also, Rollo, I am not sure what the Gini index is measuring, but as I read the graph it shows that Mexico and the US are converging as far as income disparity to measure almost equal to each other. This to me is almost laughable. My wife is from Mexico, and yes the income disparity is there. The rich are spectacularly wealthy there and the poor are devastatingly poor.
From what I have seen with my own eyes, there is no way they should be anywhere close on that graph.

There is disparity here of course, but not like in Mexico, and I know how the rich have it here, I'm a landscape architect (was, I have a slightly different job in a related field now) who always worked with a high-end residential clientele, so I've been in their houses, and trod every square foot of their estates. It's a very nice life, but it's also attainable.

When my wife first moved here with me after we were married, we went downtown to the spanish-language mass. Most of the people there were construction workers, bricklayers, laborers and their families, many of qustionable immigration status. She (a very class conscious Mexican) looked around and said "How did these people," (the word she used was gentusa) "get such nice cars?, They couldn't get this in Mexico." I just laughed and laughed, and said. "Why do you think they're here?" Poverty is just a measure of relative wealth, and they know the "poor" in the US have it pretty nice.

On that note, One acquaintance of ours started out as an illegal immigrant and was granted amnesty back when Reagan gave it years ago. They are now citizens and have built themselves a nice little local chain of restaurants and are doing quite well having achieved "the American Dream" after arriving here penniless 25 years ago.

[steve_spackman]

One acquaintance of ours started out as an illegal immigrant and was granted amnesty back when Reagan gave it years ago. They are now citizens and have built themselves a nice little local chain of restaurants and are doing quite well having achieved "the American Dream" after arriving here penniless 25 years ago.

Good example, but i still dont get why its called the American Dream???

This kinda thing happens to people in other countries all across the world, so sorry to burst your bubble my American chums but nothing special about the US of A..Im telling ya now from what i have seen and experienced, its nothing worth bragging about!!!!

Living the American Dream?? WAKE UP!!!

[steve_spackman]

I forgot one major part. All of the above is acquired through hard work and perseverence. Not by Government mandate.

As you will find, other people in other countries work hard for what they get...its not provided by the government i can assure you. Whoever tells you this crap has no clue what they are saying!

[steve_spackman]

Thanks Steve.

No worries.

I may think you are off your rocker when it comes to stuff like politics, but your articles on Bleacher Report have gained my respect.

[Roamy]

:rolleyes: Your outlandish statements never fail to amuse me my friend


Thanks my friend ! The message of the day from Fousto
Control Immigration - it can kill you!!

[555-04Q2]

But really it cant be a American dream, as people in other countries have financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family among other things!

By the way GREAT articles on Bleacher Report...

I agree. I love the fact that America is financially motivated, as I am also motivated by financial gains to make my family secure and comfortable.

Unfortunately, the American Dream is just that, a dream. A hell of a lot of people in America dont own houses and most who do live in crappy wooden structures ( ever heard of brick and mortar guys? ). I was not impressed with Amercian homes when I visited there nor was I impressed with what the average American earned as a salary.

[steve_spackman]

Thanks my friend ! The message of the day from Fousto
Control Immigration - it can kill you!!

In a sense i could agree with you there

[Roamy]

I agree. I love the fact that America is financially motivated, as I am also motivated by financial gains to make my family secure and comfortable.

Unfortunately, the American Dream is just that, a dream. A hell of a lot of people in America dont own houses and most who do live in crappy wooden structures ( ever heard of brick and mortar guys? ). I was not impressed with Amercian homes when I visited there nor was I impressed with what the average American earned as a salary.

Actually there could be many arguments about the advantages of bricks and mortar vs sticks with hurricane ties.

The big problem with sticks is fire and pests along with expense to construct.

[Eki]

Thanks my friend ! The message of the day from Fousto
Control Immigration - it can kill you!!
Maybe you could make those butt plugs bigger and use them to plug your leaky border?

[BDunnell]

As you will find, other people in other countries work hard for what they get...its not provided by the government i can assure you. Whoever tells you this crap has no clue what they are saying!

Quite right. Very good point.

[Drew]

American dream or not, you have to work for it. Too many people expect things to be handed to them on a plate and do nothing to deserve it, then complain later that they never really had the chance and moan about the Poles coming over and taking "their" jobs. I come from a working class background and tbh my parents aren't well off, but I still manage to go to university because of help from the government, most of which i'll have to pay back. In the UK at least the opportunities are definitely there, it's more about whether people can be bothered. I'd love to see some research on laziness and lack of so called social mobility.

[Alexamateo]

Good example, but i still dont get why its called the American Dream???

This kinda thing happens to people in other countries all across the world, so sorry to burst your bubble my American chums but nothing special about the US of A..Im telling ya now from what i have seen and experienced, its nothing worth bragging about!!!!

Living the American Dream?? WAKE UP!!!

I would say it's called the American Dream because it happens so much here it's not that special. Anthony often mentions meritocracy and I would say it's true. You can start from nothing and build up a very successful business in a very short time, and for the most part you don't need political or family connections to do it.

[Alexamateo]

Unfortunately, the American Dream is just that, a dream. A hell of a lot of people in America dont own houses and most who do live in crappy wooden structures ( ever heard of brick and mortar guys? ). I was not impressed with Amercian homes when I visited there nor was I impressed with what the average American earned as a salary.

I'm not sure where you were, but where I live, it's all brick (truly balloon framing with brick & mortar facades) Is that what you were referring to? Construction techniques are going to vary from region to region. I was speaking with an out-of-town developer and he mentioned that in my region he never even tried to build a house with wood siding. Here everybody wants brick.

As far as salary, I don't know, but I've been to Europe 3 times in my life (England, France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland), and my general impression was it lagged behind the US in the general prosperity of its people

Don't get me wrong, I love Europe, and if I had to live anywhere else in the world besides here, it would be Spain, but you just can't beat the good ole USA. :)

[Wade91]

But really it cant be a American dream, as people in other countries have financial stability. A home. A Car. A Family among other things!

By the way GREAT articles on Bleacher Report...
yeah, that dream can easyly be acomplished in any country, the american dream has to be to have more then alot of people on most other countrys

[Mark in Oshawa]

The reason why it is called the American Dream is because in America ( and Canada although we humble modest Canucks never really think of it this way ) was the new world. People who were not getting anywhere in Europe or were fleeing war and oppression ( things that happened in Europe on a regular basis until the end of WW2 and the Marshall Plan) came to the USA and Canada (and Australia/NZ too) to go to the frontier. People were wanted, land was available to anyone (unlike Europe in the 19th century) and the laws and culture were not based on who you were but how hard you worked, and how aggressive you were as a business man. Self made Millionaires abound in the social history North America and the Antipodes but no political culture and social culture cultivated this phenomena like the USA.

Andrew Carnegie, the Mellon family, the Ford family, and in modern day people like the Ilitichs, and a guy like Arnold Schwarznegger all are typical of people coming from Europe and making it big in America. That is the prototypical American dream. Most of the self made millionaires in America from the 19th century to the present were often first generation or the son's/daughters of first generation immigrants. They arrived with the clothes on their backs in the early days. Now we ask...is that dream current?

Yes...it is. If it wasn't, people would stop coming and America is the biggest target for immigrants still. America is the only country with fat "poor" people. The "poor" in America often live better than the poor in most developing nations so any talk of the disparity of wealth in USA must be in the context of the world, rather than just Canada or Finland.

Homelessness, poor, working poor and the like all exist in the US, and maybe more so in some areas, but I have often noticed some of the most screwed up urban culture's for poor are often the same cities in the US where socialist social policies have been around for years. Simply, if you want poor people, build a social welfare state to feed them and they will have no incentive to leave it. That may sound harsh, but there is a large measure of truth to it.

Social welfare is a necessity but only as a step up, not a lifestyle choice.

The American dream, or Canadian dream or Australian dream isn't dead. In fact it spread to modern day Europe, where the royalty and the feudal systems died a hard death in the aftermath of total wars. The Americans don't have a copyright in starting poor and making it rich, but they have embraced that ideal over generations. It is still alive, as men like Bill Gates (a college dropout who started in his parent's garage) have proven. It just isn't unique to America.

As for your study Eki, it once again proves if you put enough left wing intellectuals in a room, they will never objectively notice that there is another way to do things besides getting everyone to pay more to achieve mediocrity.

[steve_spackman]

I would say it's called the American Dream because it happens so much here it's not that special. Anthony often mentions meritocracy and I would say it's true. You can start from nothing and build up a very successful business in a very short time, and for the most part you don't need political or family connections to do it.

You can start from nothing and build up a very successful business in a very short time, and for the most part you do not need political or family connections to do it in other countries too.

[Eki]

and a guy like Arnold Schwarznegger all are typical of people coming from Europe and making it big in America.

Arnold Schwarznegger was a very successful Austrian bodybuilder already before he emigrated to the US. If he had been an ordinary Austrian farmer, he may not have made it so well.

Things may have been different 100 years ago, but recently the US has mainly been pouching talents from other countries. Few years ago I read that most postgraduate students of engineering and economics in the USA were foreign born. First their native countries have paid their education and then they emigrate to the US to make money. For example, I knew someone who did her Master of Science degree in Finland and went to the US to do her PhD degree. She's made a successful career in California after her PhD.

[steve_spackman]

Arnold Schwarznegger was a very successful Austrian bodybuilder already before he emigrated to the US. If he had been an ordinary Austrian farmer, he may not have made it so well.

Richard Branson made his Virgin empire from nothing yet he didnt live the 'American Dream'

'American Dream' ..time to wake up and eat ya breakfast and live in the real word

[Eki]

Richard Branson made his Virgin empire from nothing yet he didnt live the 'American Dream'

'American Dream' ..time to wake up and eat ya breakfast and live in the real word

Or you could take Kimi Räikkönen as an example. His father was a steamroller driver in Finland, who was so ambitious about his son's driving hobby that he even settled for a house without an indoor toilet for to afford his son's carting hobby.

[Alexamateo]

Excellent post Mark. It puts everything in proper historical perspective.

Yes Steve, people can build success stories anywhere on the planet, but what places in their culture consistently rate the best places for entrepreneurship and high expectations? They are the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. They are that way for the reasons Mark laid out above.

In thinking about this, I am reminded of AnthonyVOP when he says we have freedom to fail. An article I read once touched on that fact. In the US it's not an uncommon story to hear of an entrepreneur failing two or three times before finally hitting it big. Other parts of the world wouldn't look so kindly upon a failure in one venture boldly showing his face with a brand new one. Indeed in places like Germany, one might be paying creditors back for years. That would certainly discourage risk taking.

[chuck34]

She's made a successful career in California after her PhD.

Why not in Finland?

Perhaps there is an American dream afterall?

[Rollo]

Richard Branson made his Virgin empire from nothing yet he didnt live the 'American Dream'

From nothing eh? He is the grandson of a High Court judge and Privy Councillor, and the son of a barrister, and attended Stowe school which if I recall was embroiled in a scandal involving the Office of Fair Trading for collusion over excessive fees.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article588559.ece
Stowe School - £22,980/yr
Would he have done anything if he had been born in Brixton to a couple of parents in debt?

[Mark in Oshawa]

Arnold Schwarznegger was a very successful Austrian bodybuilder already before he emigrated to the US. If he had been an ordinary Austrian farmer, he may not have made it so well.

Things may have been different 100 years ago, but recently the US has mainly been pouching talents from other countries. Few years ago I read that most postgraduate students of engineering and economics in the USA were foreign born. First their native countries have paid their education and then they emigrate to the US to make money. For example, I knew someone who did her Master of Science degree in Finland and went to the US to do her PhD degree. She's made a successful career in California after her PhD.

He was a a great bodybuilder in Europe, yet he didn't have barely 2 nickels to rub together because the "sport" as it was was a fringe activity. It wasn't until he went to the US and had the backing of the Weider's did he bring bodybuilding out of the shadows and make himself a star. Furthermore, he knew he wasn't going to do it in Europe.

The Americans don't POACH talent, they are providing the landscape to succeed, or fail. The chance to be big. Mark Burnett is another perfect example. He was a SAS soldier in the UK. Fought in the Falklands. Leaves the Army, goes into the security biz. Uses it to go to the US, and realizes he can make money selling tshirts on the beach. Goes from that and somehow ends up producing major reality TV shows. Did he look to the BBC? Did he look go to home to the UK? No...he saw opportunity he wasn't finding at home. Show me a long list of Americans or Canadians going to Europe to get rich and then compare it to the people all over the world coming to America and making it.

The US gov't nor their businesses poach talent that isn't willing to come in the first place. The American dream is not unique, and it is in some form available in most modern countries, but spare me this tripe it is dead.

[Eki]

Regarding legal immigration, these days the American dream is almost like the Monaco dream. You already have to be something or somebody before you're allowed to immigrate in Monaco. To be honest, the same goes to Canada and Australia as well. For example, if you want to emigrate from Finland to Australia these days, you have to be under 35 years with a university degree. In the 1960s, the Australian government even paid relocation costs of Finnish construction workers to go and work in Australia.

[Mark in Oshawa]

From nothing eh? He is the grandson of a High Court judge and Privy Councillor, and the son of a barrister, and attended Stowe school which if I recall was embroiled in a scandal involving the Office of Fair Trading for collusion over excessive fees.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article588559.ece
Stowe School - £22,980/yr
Would he have done anything if he had been born in Brixton to a couple of parents in debt?

Hardly coming from humble origins is it Rollo?

If he was in Brixton he may have never left the block he was raised in.

Then again, he might have. British society has opened up somewhat over the years, but it was in the new world that the breaking all social class barriers became fashionable.

[anthonyvop]

I agree. I love the fact that America is financially motivated, as I am also motivated by financial gains to make my family secure and comfortable.

Unfortunately, the American Dream is just that, a dream. A hell of a lot of people in America dont own houses and most who do live in crappy wooden structures ( ever heard of brick and mortar guys? ). I was not impressed with Amercian homes when I visited there nor was I impressed with what the average American earned as a salary.
Where did you visit...New Orleans?

Most people in the US own their homes. Most people work hard and make a very good life for themselves. They do so well that they never make the news.
The Suburbs are filled with them.

[steve_spackman]

From nothing eh? He is the grandson of a High Court judge and Privy Councillor, and the son of a barrister, and attended Stowe school which if I recall was embroiled in a scandal involving the Office of Fair Trading for collusion over excessive fees.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article588559.ece
Stowe School - £22,980/yr
Would he have done anything if he had been born in Brixton to a couple of parents in debt?

Yeah from nothing...Branson has dyslexia and had poor academic performance as a student, so just because he went to a expensive school means nothing really.

[BDunnell]

Where did you visit...New Orleans?

Most people in the US own their homes. Most people work hard and make a very good life for themselves. They do so well that they never make the news.
The Suburbs are filled with them.

I'm sorry to have to inform you that this doesn't mark the USA out in any way from the vast majority of other Western nations, many whose people do not, you may be shocked to discover, generally spend their time living on state handouts and going out on strike.

[BDunnell]

From nothing eh? He is the grandson of a High Court judge and Privy Councillor, and the son of a barrister, and attended Stowe school which if I recall was embroiled in a scandal involving the Office of Fair Trading for collusion over excessive fees.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article588559.ece
Stowe School - £22,980/yr
Would he have done anything if he had been born in Brixton to a couple of parents in debt?

Let's not forget either that Branson's first business venture was built on the basis of, if I remember correctly, a VAT fraud relating to the import/export of records. Not a good role model for anyone.

[steve_spackman]

Traditionally, Americans have sought to realise the American dream of success, fame and wealth through thrift and hard work. However, the industrialisation of the 19th and 20th centuries began to erode the dream, replacing it with a philosophy of "get rich quick". A variety of seductive but elusive strategies have evolved, and today the three leading ways to instant wealth are large-prize television game shows, big-jackpot state lotteries and compensation lawsuits.

http://www.americansc.org.uk/online/American_Dream.htm

I think the American Dream is nothing more than 'lip service'. Something to make people feel special

[steve_spackman]

I'm sorry to have to inform you that this doesn't mark the USA out in any way from the vast majority of other Western nations, many whose people do not, you may be shocked to discover, generally spend their time living on state handouts and going out on strike.

To be honest people in Europe have a better standard of living than those that live in the US, so im not too sure why people keep gobbing off about how great the American dream is?

[Mark in Oshawa]

To be honest people in Europe have a better standard of living than those that live in the US, so im not too sure why people keep gobbing off about how great the American dream is?

How did they GET that standard of living? Think long and hard about that answer Steve. OH never mind...they are getting a LOT of it by emulating the "American Dream" The concept of the ordinary man making it big didn't happen in Europe until Americans, Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders in the 19th century showed it happening over and over again. People fleeed to these nations because those opportunities didn't exist really in Europe until after WW2 when the Marshall Plan basically financed the European economy out of the rubble of a war that by the way, us North Americans didn't start.....

[steve_spackman]

For many Americans the formula is one of instant, albeit elusive, gratification. Rather than adhering to a traditional work ethic, far too many Americans are pinning their hopes on what they perceive as “easy” money.

http://www.americansc.org.uk/online/American_Dream.htm

[Mark in Oshawa]

For many Americans the formula is one of instant, albeit elusive, gratification. Rather than adhering to a traditional work ethic, far too many Americans are pinning their hopes on what they perceive as “easy” money.

http://www.americansc.org.uk/online/American_Dream.htm

For a guy who has been to the US, that is an incredibly WRONG and NAIVE argument.

I don't think Americans are opposed to hard work. Americans take less vacation time than most workers in the western world. The average joe trying to make a better life for his kids is the same the world over. They all want that dream that started in the New World....

[chuck34]

Regarding legal immigration, these days the American dream is almost like the Monaco dream. You already have to be something or somebody before you're allowed to immigrate in Monaco. To be honest, the same goes to Canada and Australia as well. For example, if you want to emigrate from Finland to Australia these days, you have to be under 35 years with a university degree. In the 1960s, the Australian government even paid relocation costs of Finnish construction workers to go and work in Australia.

Eki, you're up to your old trick of changing the subject again. I'd congratulate you, but you didn't manage to work in a "Bush is Bad" reference. I'll give this effort a B-

[BDunnell]

For many Americans the formula is one of instant, albeit elusive, gratification. Rather than adhering to a traditional work ethic, far too many Americans are pinning their hopes on what they perceive as “easy” money.

http://www.americansc.org.uk/online/American_Dream.htm

'Many Americans'? Really? I doubt that. Seems like a major generalisation to me.

[chuck34]

For many Americans the formula is one of instant, albeit elusive, gratification. Rather than adhering to a traditional work ethic, far too many Americans are pinning their hopes on what they perceive as “easy” money.

http://www.americansc.org.uk/online/American_Dream.htm

Sure some people in the US (maybe even a lot) are just looking for the easy money, or the quick score. So are people in other places. That doesn't mean that the American Dream is dead.

Nor is the American Dream dead because now people all over the world have adopted many of it's qualities (upward mobility and the like). As Mark has pointed out that sort of stuff was much less prevelent in Europe pre WWII. Just because the American Dream has spread to now be a World Dream, doesn't mean that it is dead by any means.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Eki, you're up to your old trick of changing the subject again. I'd congratulate you, but you didn't manage to work in a "Bush is Bad" reference. I'll give this effort a B-

He is proving it actually. He resents western nations such as Canada, USA and Australia are picky about accepting people from Europe. That is because we can only take so many and we want people who want to work, not petition the government to make our country more like the one they left, although there seem to be many in Canada and the USA that are buying into arguments for that...much to our detriment IMO.

[steve_spackman]

Just because the American Dream has spread to now be a World Dream

Never heard such rubbish

[chuck34]

Never heard such rubbish

Why is it rubbish? Because you say so?

[steve_spackman]

For a guy who has been to the US, that is an incredibly WRONG and NAIVE argument.

I don't think Americans are opposed to hard work. Americans take less vacation time than most workers in the western world. The average joe trying to make a better life for his kids is the same the world over. They all want that dream that started in the New World....

Well thats a quote from the link i posted....Sorry forgot to type in quote before i started.

[steve_spackman]

Why is it rubbish? Because you say so?

You said the American Dream is a world dream..Yes i think thats utter rubbish.

From what i see of the US its not the greatest model to base a lifestyle on and a good job people dont.

I spend ALOT of time in the US. I am in the US right now as i type.

Staying with family for a week or 2

[chuck34]

You said the American Dream is a world dream..Yes i think thats utter rubbish.

A large part of the American Dream was the fact that in the US/Canada/most of the "New World", you could do/be whatever you wanted regardless of class, social status, upbringing, whatever. Do you deny this?

I'll assume you don't deny the above assumption. So the next question is do you think that class, and the rest played a big role in Europe up to about WWII?

Again assuming that you don't deny that assumption (although I think you just might). Don't you think that one of the main reasons things changed in Europe following the Second World War was that Europeans saw what could be done if they scrapped their class system, or in other words, adopt the American Dream?

[chuck34]

You said the American Dream is a world dream..Yes i think thats utter rubbish.

From what i see of the US its not the greatest model to base a lifestyle from.

You added that last bit. So that begs the question what is the greatest model to base a lifestyle on? And, perhaps more importantly, why would you not follow the US model?

[BDunnell]

A large part of the American Dream was the fact that in the US/Canada/most of the "New World", you could do/be whatever you wanted regardless of class, social status, upbringing, whatever. Do you deny this?

I'll assume you don't deny the above assumption. So the next question is do you think that class, and the rest played a big role in Europe up to about WWII?

Again assuming that you don't deny that assumption (although I think you just might). Don't you think that one of the main reasons things changed in Europe following the Second World War was that Europeans saw what could be done if they scrapped their class system, or in other words, adopt the American Dream?

The class system is very much alive and well, in the UK and elsewhere, if not divided up along old feudal lines. Yet quite a lot of us get along OK.

[steve_spackman]

The class system is very much alive and well, in the UK and elsewhere, if not divided up along old feudal lines. Yet quite a lot of us get along OK.

agreed

[chuck34]

The class system is very much alive and well, in the UK and elsewhere, if not divided up along old feudal lines. Yet quite a lot of us get along OK.

From the little bit I've read about "Society" in Europe (granted not a lot, I'm no scholar on the subject) the class system is still alive, but not nearly as rigid as it once was.

[steve_spackman]

At the end of the day we live different lives and live in different cultures and are used to them.

Maybe we should just be thankful that we have what we have and remember that ALOT of people out there have nothing at all

[Mark in Oshawa]

You said the American Dream is a world dream..Yes i think thats utter rubbish.

From what i see of the US its not the greatest model to base a lifestyle on and a good job people dont.

I spend ALOT of time in the US. I am in the US right now as i type.

Staying with family for a week or 2

That is your opinion. I would wager that the idea you can have nothing and become rich and/or powerful from humble beginnings is a very good aspiration indeed if your honest. However it wasn't until people in the New world started making such climbs commonplace and Europe disembolowed itself twice in two world wars that the dream had become common outside of North America and the Antipodeal parts of the Commonwealth.

You say the American lifestyle is not one to emulate? What works for you? A Chinese one? A Russian one? How about A Finnish one? Define what is bad and what is good with the lifestyle you are living now?

So far all you are doing is acting as a kneejerk reactionary, while hypocritically sucking up the culture of something you so despise.

Unlike you, my week's holiday last week was in the US and I took in a lot of wonderful examples of US culture. For better or worse, I knew I wasn't home and I was seeing something remarkable. Does US culture and their social interaction have room for growth? oh god ya, but I would hardly say their society hasn't a lot worth emulating, and the Western World DOES.

[BDunnell]

Does US culture and their social interaction have room for growth? oh god ya, but I would hardly say their society hasn't a lot worth emulating, and the Western World DOES.

I would have classed the US as belonging to the Western world.

And why do we even have to discuss the whole matter, to be honest? There are good things to be taken from most cultures, and plenty of unfavourable points about them, too. Nobody is perfect and trying to come to a value judgment as to which is in some way superior will always end in argument.

[Mark in Oshawa]

At the end of the day we live different lives and live in different cultures and are used to them.

Maybe we should just be thankful that we have what we have and remember that ALOT of people out there have nothing at all

That's true, but we shouldn't feel guilt about it either. We should try to help those with less, but not by handing them money, but by trading with them and encouraging a free society. The have not nations of the world have often been as guilty of sabotaging their own growth as not....but to listen to you and Eki, it is all America's fault.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I would have classed the US as belonging to the Western world.

And why do we even have to discuss the whole matter, to be honest? There are good things to be taken from most cultures, and plenty of unfavourable points about them, too. Nobody is perfect and trying to come to a value judgment as to which is in some way superior will always end in argument.

yes..but the question was asked: Is the American Dream a Hoax? I think you and I can agree it may not be just the American Dream, but there are plenty of rags to riches stories out there. THAT or rather THOSE are typical of the "American Dream".

[Rollo]

Yeah from nothing...Branson has dyslexia and had poor academic performance as a student, so just because he went to a expensive school means nothing really.

It means a hell of a lot. It means that he was already in the proper social standings to meet people who would eventually become business connections. Hard work of itself rarely achieves greatness, and I think that this is summer up rather pertly with this:

It's not what you know, it's who you know,’ is the cry of the disappointed and excluded around the world. How true: intelligence and application help in life, but contacts are what count.
Alistair Darling - The Economist, 26 Dec

Don't get me wrong though, people who don't work and refuse to do so deserve to get nowhere in life. Or to quote a letter written about 2000 years ago:
"If a man does not work, neither shall he eat."
2 Thessalonians 3:10

[Mark in Oshawa]

Rollo, as usual some excellent quotes.

Steve, if Branson didn't make something of himself, it wasn't like he was exposed to the right people and THAT is half the battle.

[steve_spackman]

but to listen to you and Eki, it is all America's fault.

I didnt say its all America's fault

[steve_spackman]

So far all you are doing is acting as a kneejerk reactionary, while hypocritically sucking up the culture of something you so despise.

How wrong you are Mark. I never said i despise the US culture. IF i did dispise the US i wouldnt make trips there on a regular basis now would i???

All im saying is that the US aint the greatest nation on earth, but some people seem to think it is and thats pure ignorance.

[wedge]

Well, I've never heard of the British dream or the French dream, all I hear about those countries (from the US media) is that they are snobby elitists (or football hooligans, excuse me, soccer hooligans with bad teeth or hairy frog eating surrender monkeys).


The 'American Dream' is an out-dated concept when the US was still regarded as frontier and not enough immigrants for one to complain about

[Mark in Oshawa]

I didnt say its all America's fault

I have yet to see you say much good about it. I suspect you aren't as vocal about your opinion of America if you are out and about in the US in a bar....

I know actually you must like it on some level since you do visit, so yes, I retract what I said about you NEVER liking it but you must admit your opinion of the place on this forum is often pretty negative.

It is a far more complicated and complex place than anyone from outside it can understand.

[Easy Drifter]

I guess the US must be a terrible place now.
All those thousands of people trying to imigrate or apply for refugee status must be wrong.
And Eki you do not have a clue about immigration into Canada especially refugees. We accept 10's of thousands refugees every year and they usually are not well educated or have bags of money. Canada accepts more refugees in 1 year than a country like Finland has ever accepted in total.
Maybe it is because these people want to come to Canada, or the US not Finland.
Then you go on about how the American Dream is dead and shortly thereafter moan about Finnish people leaving for the US.
If the dream is dead why are your fellow Finns bailing to go to the US. Maybe because they see a chance to improve their lot over staying in Finland?

[steve_spackman]

I have yet to see you say much good about it. I suspect you aren't as vocal about your opinion of America if you are out and about in the US in a bar....

For your info Mark, i do actually comment to people here (in the US) that its a nice place. I also tell them what i like and dont like and they dont get offended. Reason being is because they ask me what my views are. One time i was in a bar and got chatting to a bunch of lads whom i had a great chat with about the differences between the US and the UK. Nobody got offended in a shape or form.

I have been to some amazing places here in the US and no i dont mean Disney Land ;)

[steve_spackman]

If the dream is dead why are your fellow Finns bailing to go to the US. Maybe because they see a chance to improve their lot over staying in Finland?

People move to different countries for different reasons. Work, family and things like that. I dont think its mainly to make something out of life..Although a percentage of people do!

[Mark in Oshawa]

People move to different countries for different reasons. Work, family and things like that. I dont think its mainly to make something out of life..Although a percentage of people do!

Work. That would mean trying to make a better life.

Family? Why did family emigrate? Usually making a better life.

People don't leave home unless what they are moving to is significantly better.

THAT sounds like the "American Dream" even if they are emigrating to the UK, Australia, Canada or yes...the US. Just notice tho the countries taking the largest numbers of immigrants from poorer nations are often the nations that embrace that ideal of coming with nothing and making something. Ummm Sounds like the American Dream, alive and well, even if they aint coming always to America.

[Shifter]

"They call it the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it" - George Carlin (RIP).

[steve_spackman]

Work. That would mean trying to make a better life.

Family? Why did family emigrate? Usually making a better life.

People don't leave home unless what they are moving to is significantly better.

THAT sounds like the "American Dream" even if they are emigrating to the UK, Australia, Canada or yes...the US. Just notice tho the countries taking the largest numbers of immigrants from poorer nations are often the nations that embrace that ideal of coming with nothing and making something. Ummm Sounds like the American Dream, alive and well, even if they aint coming always to America.

:rolleyes:

[anthonyvop]

To be honest people in Europe have a better standard of living than those that live in the US, so im not too sure why people keep gobbing off about how great the American dream is?
Cradle to grave Nanny state is not a standard of living I or a lot of Americans want.

Self-reliance is an important American trait.

[Eki]

we want people who want to work, not petition the government to make our country more like the one they left,
Are you saying that people over 35 or without a university degree don't want to work?

[janvanvurpa]

Cradle to grave Nanny state is not a standard of living I or a lot of Americans want.

Self-reliance is an important American trait.

Yeah you could say it's part of that "dream"----or fantasy.

Thing is I see a lot of guys talking real big on this "Self reliance" thing and nearly invariably it's some old coot out here in the West who lives at the end of some road but has electricity generated elsewhere, drives a car er pardom me, some Dodge Cummins diesel pick-up made in a very orchestrated near world wide waltz involving the cooperation of thousands of workers to make the vehicle come together, runs it on fuel from who knows where , transported by a fleet of others, live on whisket and smokes made half way around the world---and talks on a phone/inter-net that depends again on tens of thousands of people working together to make it work.

The folly of the mythological "Self reliant" hero Capt America should be evident even to the uneducated red-neck ranting about "Nobody done done anything for me!"

Meh, just more completely empty headed repetition of un-examined boilerplate nonsense it seems.
Is actually thinking about things occasionally really that difficult?

It would seem that anybody working around motorsports would naturally see in front of his own eyes a great example of reliance on team effort and specialisation and ultimately interdependence and a cooperative enterprise.

How does a simplistic bumpersticker type level of analysis triumph over the evidence in front of your eyes, that is what the big scientists want to know.

[Easy Drifter]

Eki: Are you and Wade 91 related?
Even for you that last post was idiotic.

[chuck34]

Yeah you could say it's part of that "dream"----or fantasy.

Thing is I see a lot of guys talking real big on this "Self reliance" thing and nearly invariably it's some old coot out here in the West who lives at the end of some road but has electricity generated elsewhere, drives a car er pardom me, some Dodge Cummins diesel pick-up made in a very orchestrated near world wide waltz involving the cooperation of thousands of workers to make the vehicle come together, runs it on fuel from who knows where , transported by a fleet of others, live on whisket and smokes made half way around the world---and talks on a phone/inter-net that depends again on tens of thousands of people working together to make it work.

The folly of the mythological "Self reliant" hero Capt America should be evident even to the uneducated red-neck ranting about "Nobody done done anything for me!"

Meh, just more completely empty headed repetition of un-examined boilerplate nonsense it seems.
Is actually thinking about things occasionally really that difficult?

It would seem that anybody working around motorsports would naturally see in front of his own eyes a great example of reliance on team effort and specialisation and ultimately interdependence and a cooperative enterprise.

How does a simplistic bumpersticker type level of analysis triumph over the evidence in front of your eyes, that is what the big scientists want to know.

Jan you completely miss the point of self reliance, and why does that not surprise me?

Of course team work is great, no one would ever deny that. What a lot of people, myself included, don't like is Government mandated team work.

I think what a lot of people, you seem to be in this group, don't understand is the US Constitution, and for that matter many of the state and local constitutions and sets of laws. The Constitution was set up basically to tell the government what rights we will allow to be seeded to the government. We'll allow you to provide for National Defense (in the case of the Feds), and set up a Fire Department (in the case of local gov.). But now those governments that WE set up with limited powers are reaching beyond those purposly narrow bounds and grabbing more power. THAT is what many of us "Right Wing Nutters" don't like. And I'm damn proud of not wanting any more government interference in my life, or your life, or anyone's life. If something needs to be "taken care of", in this day and age there are plenty of people and organizations that can help. The government doesn't need to intervene anymore.


And your example of people buy cars made by others, or using electricity generated elsewhere are just dumb. Of course man must rely on other men for many things. But there is free choice. If someone makes a product that I want, I am allowed to BUY it of my own free will. If government provides a service, private industry can not compete and will be driven out. Now I MUST buy the government's product whether I wan it or not. That's simple for most people to see, but I suppose you aren't most people.

[Eki]

And I'm damn proud of not wanting any more government interference in my life, or your life, or anyone's life.
How do feel about your government interfering in the lives of Iraqis, Afghans and basically everyone on this planet?

[GridGirl]

What's the big deal about government interference and having things like health care? You DON'T have to use them even if they are provided. I work, pay my taxes, have my own house, have never been on any kind of benefits and I'm doing just fine. The whole point is that these provisions are there if you require them.

There is no American dream for me. I could marginally change my standard of living but to actually significantly improve my life it would make no difference if I was here or in the US. The American dream is still possible but only to those is less developed countries.

[Mark in Oshawa]

What's the big deal about government interference and having things like health care? You DON'T have to use them even if they are provided. I work, pay my taxes, have my own house, have never been on any kind of benefits and I'm doing just fine. The whole point is that these provisions are there if you require them.

You pay taxes, and you have a government that will provide services. But what happens when those services don't meet your needs but the government wont allow you to access services you require ( health care options are the best example )? Then what do you do? In Canada, we pay for universal government run healthcare. WE have no private LEGAL healthcare. If I don't like the waiting time I am told to wait to get my rationed health care, too bad, or drive to the US and pay for a doctor to attend to my issues.
Grid Girl, I am all for government providing a limited but effective welfare net but not paying people able to work for YEARS to live off of my tax dollars, yet there are many polticians who never seem to grasp this. People who cry out for the self reliant are only pointing out that government should NEVER be used as a ploy to get votes from the "poor" who refuse to work. Social welfare schemes are always in danger of being used and abused by people who choose either to not work or find it more lucarative to take government benefits while working in the underground economy.



There is no American dream for me. I could marginally change my standard of living but to actually significantly improve my life it would make no difference if I was here or in the US. The American dream is still possible but only to those is less developed countries.

There is a dream there for you if you choose to take it. Not so much an American dream per se, but you woke up one morning with a great idea that you could sell, there is in modren democracies a way for you to do it, and if the country you live in is fair, you will profit from it. The "American" Dream is the fact that anyone can come up with an idea and sell it and make it big. It doesn't involve where you were born or the class status of your family. THAT is what is really implied in the "American Dream" where people came with nothing and found ways to survive and thrive. Andrew Carnegie was a poor Scot who arrived in America with nothing and died a multi millionaire in the 19th century by building steel mills. No one told him in the US that his father was a bum and wouldn't talk to him, or he didn't need to be friends with some Lord some where to get a contract. THAT is the essence of what is being defined. That dream isn't exclusive to America, and it was most obvious there, but happened in Australia, NZ, and Canada in equal measures. Just in the US, it was celebrated, promoted and identified. AS Tony would also be quick to point out, and rightly, it also means the right to fail. What he should say is the right to TRY. Poor people in Europe in the 19th century were not really given that right.

[Mark in Oshawa]

How do feel about your government interfering in the lives of Iraqis, Afghans and basically everyone on this planet?
I guess the Afghani's allowing Bin Laden to have refuge while he carried out his 9-11 attacks against the US was just a good neighbour policy? Your view of the world is a sad prism my friend...

[Easy Drifter]

As Eki tries again and again his tired same old tactic of turning another thread into an anti US rant.
The fact that his post has absolutely nothing to do with this thread is totally immaterial to Eki as long as he can spout his constant anti US whining.
He also conviently overlooks the fact that his beloved Finland has also 'invaded' Afghanistan.

[DexDexter]

From the little bit I've read about "Society" in Europe (granted not a lot, I'm no scholar on the subject) the class system is still alive, but not nearly as rigid as it once was.

Europe consists of dozens of countries, it's just sad that Americans generally refer to it as it was one single country. Brits have much more in common with Americans than Finns, for example, and every society is totally different when it comes to class systems and other things.

[Eki]

I guess the Afghani's allowing Bin Laden to have refuge while he carried out his 9-11 attacks against the US was just a good neighbour policy? Your view of the world is a sad prism my friend...
9/11 attacks were results of US foreign policy and their government's interference in the lives of people in foreign countries.

[Eki]

He also conviently overlooks the fact that his beloved Finland has also 'invaded' Afghanistan.
Finland should also get the hell out of Afghanistan IMO. They shouldn't have gone there in the first place. I have no objections in Finland attending UN peace keeping missions, but first there should be a peace to keep.

[Wade91]

9/11 attacks were results of US foreign policy and their government's interference in the lives of people in foreign countries.
that was no excuse for those idiots to come into this country and destoy the world trade center and kill all those people

[janvanvurpa]

Jan you completely miss the point of self reliance, and why does that not surprise me?

Maybe because you are totally devoid of imagination, know obviously very little and only allow one infinitesimally small point of view.




Of course team work is great, no one would ever deny that. What a lot of people, myself included, don't like is Government mandated team work.

Well who the f**k does?
See the problem with discussing with guys of your political slant---and that is a broadly generous statement---is that I say something which is an indisputable fact of modern life---and you change the thing to a personal feeling.
I don't like mandated anything.
For 25 years I've lobbied in the motorsport I have done for a simplification and easing of arbitrary and compulsory rules so as to have less need for RULES ENFORCERS seeing how most a in outer-theoretical space and are computer GEEKS first and competitors second or third.


I think what a lot of people, you seem to be in this group, don't understand is the US Constitution,

Don't bet too much on that, Bub. Just because I don't agree with your narrow views does not mean I don't "know" the Constitution.

Let me remind you that we have a judiciary that starts at little Magistrates courts all the way to the US Supreme Court and there are repeals, reversals and all sorts of revisions of LAW all the way to the Supreme court.

Seems those whose job is law also seem to have differing views on what the LAW intends and means.

What did you say your job was?





and for that matter many of the state and local constitutions and sets of laws. The Constitution was set up basically to tell the government what rights we will allow to be seeded to the government. We'll allow you to provide for National Defense (in the case of the Feds), and set up a Fire Department (in the case of local gov.). But now those governments that WE set up with limited powers are reaching beyond those purposely narrow bounds and grabbing more power. THAT is what many of us "Right Wing Nutters" don't like. And I'm damn proud of not wanting any more government interference in my life, or your life, or anyone's life. If something needs to be "taken care of", in this day and age there are plenty of people and organizations that can help. The government doesn't need to intervene anymore.

Dayum, let me remind you right here of what the Stated Purpose of the Constitution and how it views the PURPOSE of Government is (try and remember this is not my opinion, it is taken directly)


“ We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. ”

Your sort--whatever that is because I don't know what that is, and I see is some myopic fixated view on some singular aspects and WILLFUL AVERTING of the eyes from the OTHER STATED PURPOSES---because you don't agree so you act as if the words YOU LIKE are there and not the others---is very hard to talk with because you act as if your peculiar choosing of a couple of things means YOU "know' the Constitution, and those who read the document includeing its preamble "don't know" it.

That sort of selective misreading and contemptuous dismissal of others does not engender a desire to discuss with you.



And your example of people buy cars made by others, or using electricity generated elsewhere are just dumb. Of course man must rely on other men for many things.

It was indeed a PERFECT Illustration of the fundamental falsity and dishonesty of the "I'm self reliant" characters which one Party relies on as a cultural stereotype, including you and you friend which writes the simplistic crap with no reflection.

See that's the problem with Right wingers, they live on outdated, unexamined cliches which even in rudimentary examination are shown to be empty hollow postures, and they wallow in a purely emotional world of images, "Great Men", spooks and deities etc. yet claim intellectual and every other sort of superiority.

Who can talk seriously with such people?

[chuck34]

*snip* short-sighted myopic BS.



You do like to drone on about how wrong anyone is that doesn't agree with you, don't you? You think that by saying the same thing over and over it makes you right. Most of that didn't even make any sence. I know, I know, I'm not using my "imagination" again. Sorry, I am just a dumb redneck afterall.

A couple quick questions that don't take a book to answer.

1) When you read the entire US Constitution, including the Preamble and the Bill of Rights, do you think that it is granting positive rights or negative rights?

2) Is it, or is it not being self reliant when I go out, obtain a job, work hard, get paid, make a choice to buy something, and buying it?

[BDunnell]

Why such a heated discussion over what is, after all, just a notion, an idea? I simply don't understand it. There's really no need for anyone to make generalistic comments about the USA — yes, we may disagree vehemently with many of the policies of its recent administrations, and feel that some of these have brought to the surface some very unpleasant character traits in certain sections of society, but this doesn't offer any justification for vitriol against all Americans or the American way of life as a whole. Judging everyone in a particular country on the basis of those we personally find most offensive is not a good idea.

[chuck34]

Europe consists of dozens of countries, it's just sad that Americans generally refer to it as it was one single country. Brits have much more in common with Americans than Finns, for example, and every society is totally different when it comes to class systems and other things.

You are quite right. I was making a generalization that may have been too simplistic. However, that is what many do when they talk about the US. We have different states and different regions that have totally different ways of doing and looking at things.

[BDunnell]

You are quite right. I was making a generalization that may have been too simplistic. However, that is what many do when they talk about the US. We have different states and different regions that have totally different ways of doing and looking at things.

Bit different in factual terms, isn't it, given that the European nations are actually independent nations, unlike the US states? A fairer comparison would say, be between the German Länder, English regions, etc, and the US states, despite the size difference.

[chuck34]

Bit different in factual terms, isn't it, given that the European nations are actually independent nations, unlike the US states? A fairer comparison would say, be between the German Länder, English regions, etc, and the US states, despite the size difference.

Depends really. If you're talking about regions within one country, you are right. If you are talking about how the framers of our Constitution thought of it, you are wrong. They thought of states as States and the US was more of a EU type of deal (over simplifying a bit again, but sort of). Or if you are talking about regions divided by land area, the different regions of the US are roughly the same size as many of the countries in Europe. Culturally too, the US is about as diverse as Europe. Maybe more so?

[BDunnell]

Depends really. If you're talking about regions within one country, you are right. If you are talking about how the framers of our Constitution thought of it, you are wrong. They thought of states as States and the US was more of a EU type of deal (over simplifying a bit again, but sort of). Or if you are talking about regions divided by land area, the different regions of the US are roughly the same size as many of the countries in Europe. Culturally too, the US is about as diverse as Europe. Maybe more so?

I am talking about the current factual position regarding nation states. Interpretations of where regional differences lie are always extremely varied. I feel no particular sense of belonging to any British region, for instance.

[steve_spackman]

You are quite right. I was making a generalization that may have been too simplistic. However, that is what many do when they talk about the US. We have different states and different regions that have totally different ways of doing and looking at things.

Yeah just take a look at Arkansas..prime example of a different way of life LOL

[Rollo]

There are two comments you've made that are really massive cans of worms to be opened, so I hope I've best been able to arrange the worms in some logical fashion


I think what a lot of people, you seem to be in this group, don't understand is the US Constitution, and for that matter many of the state and local constitutions and sets of laws. The Constitution was set up basically to tell the government what rights we will allow to be seeded to the government.

Does it? As I understand it a "right" is an entitlement of an individual to the satisfaction of his needs and wants. The US Government isn't an individual either physical or corporeal, and as such I don't think it actually has any rights.

Besides which, the Constitution never appoints rights to the government. It appoints it with the rules by which the government can make laws, the makeup and structure of the government, and the powers that it has. That is materially what the seven Articles say.

The first sentence of Article I, Section 1 says it all. "All legislative Powers herein granted..."


1) When you read the entire US Constitution, including the Preamble and the Bill of Rights, do you think that it is granting positive rights or negative rights?

Neither.

The US Constitution grants NO rights, nor does it set out to do so. It only set out to list and protect those that were assumed to already have existed.

It does not contain phrases like, "The People shall have the right to free speech." It contains language like, "Congress shall make no law... abridging free speech..." or "..the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If the People did not already have the right to free speech, how could Congress abridge it?

[chuck34]

I am talking about the current factual position regarding nation states. Interpretations of where regional differences lie are always extremely varied. I feel no particular sense of belonging to any British region, for instance.

As I feel no particular sense of belonging to the Pacific Northwest.

[chuck34]

Does it? As I understand it a "right" is an entitlement of an individual to the satisfaction of his needs and wants. The US Government isn't an individual either physical or corporeal, and as such I don't think it actually has any rights.

Right. But for any government to have any power the citizens must give up some liberty. So I guess I could have worded that better and said. "The Constitution was set up basically to tell the government what liberties we will allow to be infringed upon by the government."


Besides which, the Constitution never appoints rights to the government. It appoints it with the rules by which the government can make laws, the makeup and structure of the government, and the powers that it has. That is materially what the seven Articles say.

The first sentence of Article I, Section 1 says it all. "All legislative Powers herein granted..."

Exactly, that's what I was trying to say. I may have worded it a bit clumsily (sp?).


Neither.

The US Constitution grants NO rights, nor does it set out to do so. It only set out to list and protect those that were assumed to already have existed.

It does not contain phrases like, "The People shall have the right to free speech." It contains language like, "Congress shall make no law... abridging free speech..." or "..the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If the People did not already have the right to free speech, how could Congress abridge it?

Before I answer this I want to see what Jan has to say. Check your PM.

[steve_spackman]

Right. But for any government to have any power the citizens must give up some liberty. So I guess I could have worded that better and said. "The Constitution was set up basically to tell the government what liberties we will allow to be infringed upon by the government."

When the Constitution was signed, americans gave all power to the US government. Americans are afraid of the government

Now look at the French..The government is afraid of the the people.

[chuck34]

When the Constitution was signed, americans gave all power to the US government. Americans are afraid of the government



That is not true at all. Read the US Constitution. It specifically outlines what powers the Federal Government has. The commerce clause has been so twisted (particularly in the last 100 years or so) that the Federal government has seen fit to expand it's powers well beyond those specifically granted to each branch.

[janvanvurpa]

You do like to drone on about how wrong anyone is that doesn't agree with you, don't you? You think that by saying the same thing over and over it makes you right. Most of that didn't even make any sence. I know, I know, I'm not using my "imagination" again. Sorry, I am just a dumb redneck afterall.

A couple quick questions that don't take a book to answer.

1) When you read the entire US Constitution, including the Preamble and the Bill of Rights, do you think that it is granting positive rights or negative rights?

2) Is it, or is it not being self reliant when I go out, obtain a job, work hard, get paid, make a choice to buy something, and buying it?

Hate to say, if it made no sense to YOU, I will very politely suggest the problem lies exactly between your ears.

Your number two is so confusing as to be nonsensical.
What are you raving about with this "make a choice to buy something, and buying it?".

It would seem self relaince would be you go clear some land, fell some trees, build a house, plant some crops, shoot some game and live SELF RELIANT-LY ie relying on SELF.

You don't, you live in a SOCIETY --a social milieu wether you and your ilk know it or admit it or not.

Here's a quote from a fellow appointed as the British Beachmaster for the invasion of Italy at Anzio, Denis Healy, later Lord Denis Healy speaking about his service:[ quote]
For me, as an individualist intellectual, however, the most valuable legacy of war service was the knowledge that I depended on other people and that other people depended on me. It was this knowledge which created the sense of comradeship so characteristic of wartime and so lacking in peace.[/quote]

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Now your life experiences and the reinforcements to your inclinations have led you to a set of very rigidly held beliefs.

Mine has led to another set of beliefs, and you obviously are unable to conced that any other point of view is conceivable, or should be allowed and thus you rant on and on and on---and invariably character assinate any who disagree's writing as RANTs--which of course I return your insults right back.

You choose to ignore the stated purpose of the Constitution and for that matter many State constitutions modeled closely on it because they certain stated elements about "providing for the general welfare" and the 'secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity" but that does not mean those words you willfully avert your eyes from are not there.

You Pick and Choose you beliefs, just like everybody else.
It does not mean they are correct or your rationalisation of why you ignore those for you uncomfortable bits is valid.

See if you can figure out for yourself what the relevance to this Healy's comments were.

If you can't be troubled, don't expect polite conversation like you have gotten.

[chuck34]

Hate to say, if it made no sense to YOU, I will very politely suggest the problem lies exactly between your ears.

Your number two is so confusing as to be nonsensical.
What are you raving about with this "make a choice to buy something, and buying it?".

It would seem self relaince would be you go clear some land, fell some trees, build a house, plant some crops, shoot some game and live SELF RELIANT-LY ie relying on SELF.

You don't, you live in a SOCIETY --a social milieu wether you and your ilk know it or admit it or not.

Here's a quote from a fellow appointed as the British Beachmaster for the invasion of Italy at Anzio, Denis Healy, later Lord Denis Healy speaking about his service:
For me, as an individualist intellectual, however, the most valuable legacy of war service was the knowledge that I depended on other people and that other people depended on me. It was this knowledge which created the sense of comradeship so characteristic of wartime and so lacking in peace.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Now your life experiences and the reinforcements to your inclinations have led you to a set of very rigidly held beliefs.

Mine has led to another set of beliefs, and you obviously are unable to conced that any other point of view is conceivable, or should be allowed and thus you rant on and on and on---and invariably character assinate any who disagree's writing as RANTs--which of course I return your insults right back.

You choose to ignore the stated purpose of the Constitution and for that matter many State constitutions modeled closely on it because they certain stated elements about "providing for the general welfare" and the 'secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity" but that does not mean those words you willfully avert your eyes from are not there.

You Pick and Choose you beliefs, just like everybody else.
It does not mean they are correct or your rationalisation of why you ignore those for you uncomfortable bits is valid.

See if you can figure out for yourself what the relevance to this Healy's comments were.

If you can't be troubled, don't expect polite conversation like you have gotten.


Mine has led to another set of beliefs, and you obviously are unable to conced that any other point of view is conceivable, or should be allowed and thus you rant on and on and on---and invariably character assinate any who disagree's writing as RANTs--which of course I return your insults right back. And you see other points of view quite well, don't you?

Of course we live in a society and we rely on others. But others of our choosing. Making that choice is also part of being self reliant. But that's a point that isn't really worth it anymore because you don't seem to be able to make the distinction between choosing to rely on people of your own choice and being forced to rely on people you may or may not know or care about.

YOU are picking and choosing the words YOU see in the Constitution. You only see "providing for the general welfare" and the 'secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity". I see those words and understand them IN CONTEXT. The way the founders wanted to provide these things was by providing for a government powerful enough to create order, but weak enough that it could not infringe upon our God given Liberties.

How about paying attention to words from the Bill of Rights, which is just as important as the preamble. Words like "Congress shall make no law" and "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

How about reading the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers to get a bit of context.

[chuck34]

Reading back through this mess, I'm not sure how we went from American Dream to debating what the Constitution says. It's probably my fault. Sorry about that. Back to your regularly scheduled program.

The American Dream is not dead, it's just been morphed a bit and adopted by many, many other coutries. This is a good thing!

[steve_spackman]

Reading back through this mess, I'm not sure how we went from American Dream to debating what the Constitution says. It's probably my fault. Sorry about that. Back to your regularly scheduled program.

The American Dream is not dead, it's just been morphed a bit and adopted by many, many other coutries. This is a good thing!

List the countries that have adopted the AD?

I tell you know MY country has not adopted it..never will. We dont need to dream, we need to get on and live our lives!!

[chuck34]

List the countries that have adopted the AD?

I'm not going to make a list for you to pick apart. But I would say that any country that once had a strict class (or caste) type society, or some form of monarchy (with power, not a figurehead), or a feudel type system, and they now have (or are moving to) a more-or-less classless sytem. I'm sure we can all think of a few of those countries. :-)

I don't think of the American Dream as some sort of policy to adopt. It's more of a societal mindset. So perhaps my use of the word "adopt" earlier was a bit misplaced.

[chuck34]

List the countries that have adopted the AD?

I tell you know MY country has not adopted it..never will. We dont need to dream, we need to get on and live our lives!!

You edit quickly my man. :-)

That last bit, at least in my mind, is a good portion of the American Dream. Getting government out of your way so that you can get on and live your life the way YOU see fit, not some beurocrat or regent.

[Eki]

that was no excuse for those idiots to come into this country and destoy the world trade center and kill all those people
No, but neither were the attacks excuses to invade Iraq or Afghanistan. Circle of revenge doesn't stop until someone breaks it.

[DexDexter]

You are quite right. I was making a generalization that may have been too simplistic. However, that is what many do when they talk about the US. We have different states and different regions that have totally different ways of doing and looking at things.

I know, been there many times, but the differences are not nearly as big as between the indenpendent nations of Europe. I just can't stand this Europe generalisation, we Finns for example have a language that is not related to most European languages at all, except Hungarian and Estonian. One really cannot generalise anything about Europe since it's a geographical term and people should instead talk about the individual countries in Europe. Anyway this is bit offtopic... :)

[anthonyvop]

List the countries that have adopted the AD?

I tell you know MY country has not adopted it..never will. We dont need to dream, we need to get on and live our lives!!
Well you do live in a drab, dreary and depressing land where MILLIONS of your people have abandoned and crossed the Atlantic to find a better life. That is the same of many other European countries and still continues. The Ratio of people immigrating to the US as opposed to those leaving is highly skewed. If you add in illegal immigrants it is well over 1000 - 1.

[steve_spackman]

Well you do live in a drab, dreary and depressing land where MILLIONS of your people have abandoned and crossed the Atlantic to find a better life. :rolleyes:

[chuck34]

:rolleyes:

He may not have said it very well, but he does have a point. Many (most?) of the people comming to the New World to live out the "American Dream" were English.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

He may not have said it very well, but he does have a point. Many (most?) of the people comming to the New World to live out the "American Dream" were English.

So that means that Americans and the English are both the same! :p

[steve_spackman]

He may not have said it very well, but he does have a point.

He has a point??

If i or someone else was to say something like that about America this thread would be awash with people like you gobbing off that we are all anti American..

Can you really blame the amount of anti Americanism when those kind of comments are made. You think you lot have the right to slag others to the ground and that you are the best in the world..Well news for you..you aint!

And you wonder why the world regards Americans as ignorant and stupid!!!!! And dont give me that crap about its only a small group of people who are like that in the US..Most people i come across are like that and i pity them!

I see how people in the US live and let me tell you, its nothing to brag about.

[chuck34]

So that means that Americans and the English are both the same! :p

Sure, at one point we were. Afterall, prior to 1775 (or 1776, or 1781, or 1783, maybe even 1814 depending on your point of view) Americans were subjects of the British Crown. So because of that we share a lot of the same traditions and customs.

But clearly we do not share a language. :-)

[chuck34]

He has a point?? If i or someone else was to say something like that about America this thread would be awash with people like you gobbing off that we are all anti American..

Can you really blame the amount of anti Americanism when those kind of comments are made. You think you lot have the right to slag others to the ground and that you are the best in the world..Well news for you..you aint!

And you wonder why the world regards Americans as ignorant and stupid!!!!!

Stop gobbing off about the "American Dream" and wake up for gods sake.

Hold on there a sec. I think you might have mis-understood what I was saying. I'm not trying to defend his "drab, dreary and depressing" remark. That is utter crap, and I should have said so. And I say so now.

My point was that early settlers of the New World had a high concentration of Englishmen. Englishmen fleeing England for whatever reason (monitary, religious, criminal, etc.). Are you trying to say that they weren't?

[steve_spackman]

Hold on there a sec. I think you might have mis-understood what I was saying. I'm not trying to defend his "drab, dreary and depressing" remark. That is utter crap, and I should have said so. And I say so now.

My point was that early settlers of the New World had a high concentration of Englishmen. Englishmen fleeing England for whatever reason (monitary, religious, criminal, etc.). Are you trying to say that they weren't?

No im not..Back in them days everyone was off to the US..the word colonisation comes to mind.

These days however its mainly people from poorer countries taking flight to the US. Go to Europe and ask people if they want to move to the US and see what response you get.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I think the reason why many Europeans have a negative view of America today is because Religion seems to play a more important role in their culture, education and politics than it does over here.

[steve_spackman]

I think the reason why many Europeans have a negative view of America today is because

of the amount of ignorant people..

Not all Americans are like that though im pleased to say. I have met alot who have a grasp on reality and know whats really going on...

[Roamy]

I think the reason why many Europeans have a negative view of America today is because Religion seems to play a more important role in their culture, education and politics than it does over here.

I can agree with this statement.

So my question is why do you allow islamic extremist to overrun you once beautiful country?? (countries)

We too are guilty of this !

[steve_spackman]

I can agree with this statement.

So my question is why do you allow islamic extremist to overrun you once beautiful country?? (countries)

We too are guilty of this !

We cannot talk about this, or we will be labeled racist :rolleyes:

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I can agree with this statement.

So my question is why do you allow islamic extremist to overrun you once beautiful country?? (countries)

We too are guilty of this !

That is only happening in the newspapers. Anyone who is living in the real world knows that this isn't happening at all.

[BDunnell]

I can agree with this statement.

So my question is why do you allow islamic extremist to overrun you once beautiful country?? (countries)

We too are guilty of this !

fousto, by making this statement, you demonstrate why your views are not to be taken seriously. It is utter rubbish of the first degree, and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

[Roamy]

that is a personal opinion and not a valid point STFU till you can make a point

[BDunnell]

that is a personal opinion and not a valid point STFU till you can make a point

NURSE!

[Mark in Oshawa]

He has a point??

If i or someone else was to say something like that about America this thread would be awash with people like you gobbing off that we are all anti American..

Can you really blame the amount of anti Americanism when those kind of comments are made. You think you lot have the right to slag others to the ground and that you are the best in the world..Well news for you..you aint!

And you wonder why the world regards Americans as ignorant and stupid!!!!! And dont give me that crap about its only a small group of people who are like that in the US..Most people i come across are like that and i pity them!

I see how people in the US live and let me tell you, its nothing to brag about.

Steve, you always complain about me accusing you as being Anti-Ameircan, but it is clear you think the whole country is screwed up.

Americans are lousy at understanding the world, collectively anyhow. Then again, maybe they see things we should and don't. You see how people in the US live and it is nothing to brag about? REally? Explain? You have made god knows how many references to this in the past but other than your complaints about the Americans lack of healthcare programs provided by the state ( a plus or a minus depending on your political prism), I have no clue.

I just know that in the US you still have the right to fail, succeed, mind your own business or attend to your own religion without oppression from the government...although those rights seem to be under fire right now.

I cant say I have been to Britain, but I do know you guys are overtaxed, underserved and also naive to the North American lifestyle at times too. I wouldn't say one is better than the other, but the fact remains more people are trying to get to the US and Canada than almost any other nations. The fact we are able to absorb them in the manner we do and adopt their cultures into our greater culture says a lot about the durability and adaptive qualities of our way of life.

Don't tell me this tripe that everyone in the UK loves things just the way they are......

[Mark in Oshawa]

As for you Eki...if you think any nation would allow 3000 people in its largest cities to be killed and just roll over and play dead, you are naive. Haven't you figured out yet that the reason the US are the "infidels" that must be killed has nothing to do with what the US does or doesn't do in the Middle East. It has EVERYTHING to do with extreme Islam needing something to hate, and they being an oppressive society will encourage their Jihad against the most liberal and free society on earth. You attack what you want to discourage. You see no issue with 3000 innocent people dying in the manner they did, since you have no issues it seems with AMERICANS dying.....

[Mark in Oshawa]

No im not..Back in them days everyone was off to the US..the word colonisation comes to mind.

These days however its mainly people from poorer countries taking flight to the US. Go to Europe and ask people if they want to move to the US and see what response you get.


Steve...the reason people from Western Europe are not coming to America is because they have adapted many parts of the "American Dream" in many countries IN Europe. That doesn't mean it is exactly the same, but as I pointed out god knows how many posts ago, European democratic countries didn't exist in the form they do now save maybe Sweden or Switzerland. Before WW2 Europe was a radically different place and before WW1 radically different again. Europe is much more like America on a lot of levels than they were before. You don't see it, because you refuse to see it, but one has to only look at the wealth and how it is used and attained in Modern society in Europe, and compare that to the Americans and you don't see a lot of differences.

Americans just pay less tax, are more individualistic, and have more people with faith. That would be a by product of the first nation to keep government out of people's faith, being a country of pioneers and being a country that gives people the freedom to fail. The fact you think these things are bad means you should stay in the UK, but the DNA of the risk takers who didn't want to be ruled and dictated to in the 17th to 19th centuries is over on this side of the Atlantic, and the attitude towards all of these things is evidence of it.

[janvanvurpa]

He may not have said it very well, but he does have a point. Many (most?) of the people comming to the New World to live out the "American Dream" were English.

Gawd do you write nothing but claptrap?

There were 3 major waves of Immigration to this country and here a chart which may or may not format but it shows as usual that you're woefully ignortant. And you do remember we discussed that ignorant is not a moral judgement, just shows a lack of knowledge:
Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, 1850–2000

Ten leading countries
Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, 1850–2000
(resident population)
Ten leading countries

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0900547.html
by rank1 1850 1880 1900 1930 1960


And looking here:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0201398.html

If we look here from 1820-1940 we see 8,500,000 Germans and Austians arriving compared to just barely 4,200,000 "UK-ians"---does not break down Welsh and Scots and Ulster and there were 3,300,000 "Russians", 1,300,000 Swedes even.

So, wrong by a 2:1 margin over the country with the "Most" immigrants coming

Take it up to 1996 and we have 9,769,000 Germans and 5,353,000 Italians and just 5,197,000 UKians and 4,700,000 Irish, not to mention 3,749,000 Russians/ "Ex-Soviets"

We see the "UK-ians" near drowed out in massive immigration from other places.


So we see once again, as usual and as expected your basic assumptions are again wrong, not surprisingly leading to absurd conclusions.

Have you ever bother to check you basic assumptions?

Have you any idea of how many German language newspapers there was in this country in 1910?

How can you imagine you know anything about the "American Dream" or anything at all about this country of ours if you don't know jack-s**t about who came here--and what was motivating the mass movement of millions to EVERYWHERE (Of course you're not aware that during the periods of mass Immigration to this country there was about a 20-25% return rate or a continuing on to someplace else, didn't know that? Do you at least know that millions were immigrating all over at the same time? Not just to USA?)

[BDunnell]

Americans just pay less tax, are more individualistic, and have more people with faith.

'More individualistic'? How is it possible to come to such a judgment? It's certainly not one that I agree with, for a start.

[Roamy]

Gawd do you write nothing but claptrap?

There were 3 major waves of Immigration to this country and here a chart which may or may not format but it shows as usual that you're woefully ignortant. And you do remember we discussed that ignorant is not a moral judgement, just shows a lack of knowledge:
Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, 1850–2000

Ten leading countries
Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, 1850–2000
(resident population)
Ten leading countries

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0900547.html
by rank1 1850 1880 1900 1930 1960


And looking here:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0201398.html

If we look here from 1820-1940 we see 8,500,000 Germans and Austians arriving compared to just barely 4,200,000 "UK-ians"---does not break down Welsh and Scots and Ulster and there were 3,300,000 "Russians", 1,300,000 Swedes even.

So, wrong by a 2:1 margin over the country with the "Most" immigrants coming

Take it up to 1996 and we have 9,769,000 Germans and 5,353,000 Italians and just 5,197,000 UKians and 4,700,000 Irish, not to mention 3,749,000 Russians/ "Ex-Soviets"

We see the "UK-ians" near drowed out in massive immigration from other places.


So we see once again, as usual and as expected your basic assumptions are again wrong, not surprisingly leading to absurd conclusions.

Have you ever bother to check you basic assumptions?

Have you any idea of how many German language newspapers there was in this country in 1910?

How can you imagine you know anything about the "American Dream" or anything at all about this country of ours if you don't know jack-s**t about who came here--and what was motivating the mass movement of millions to EVERYWHERE (Of course you're not aware that during the periods of mass Immigration to this country there was about a 20-25% return rate or a continuing on to someplace else, didn't know that? Do you at least know that millions were immigrating all over at the same time? Not just to USA?)


Yea and do you know why so many Italians are named 'Tony" ???








Because they would stamp on their forehead TO NY

could you please give us the immigration figures for the past 5 years including refuges and origins???

[Mark in Oshawa]

'More individualistic'? How is it possible to come to such a judgment? It's certainly not one that I agree with, for a start.

They are. They believe in indvidual rights a lot more than I suspect people in the UK do. The right to carry arms, the right to worship, the right to sue, the right of free speech. Americans live these ideals out to the extreme. In Canada, or the UK, we have gun control, we have the state involved in regulating religion (The Canadian human rights tribunals are trying to justify making the churches do gay weddings, legal in the eyes of government but not with some churches). We have limited redress on civil law suits in our countries. We have a culture of comprimise and trying to find the best for the greater good in our parliaments.

Most European nations I suspect are very simliar. IN the US, it is the individual's rights that are spelled out in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. It is pursuing this "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" that has created this culture of individualism. THink about it Ben, it is what separates us from them. You and I are living under the crown, and the Westminister system of government and how we see government and our rights is different from the American model. They are more individualistic.

[BDunnell]

They are. They believe in indvidual rights a lot more than I suspect people in the UK do. The right to carry arms, the right to worship, the right to sue, the right of free speech. Americans live these ideals out to the extreme. In Canada, or the UK, we have gun control, we have the state involved in regulating religion (The Canadian human rights tribunals are trying to justify making the churches do gay weddings, legal in the eyes of government but not with some churches). We have limited redress on civil law suits in our countries. We have a culture of comprimise and trying to find the best for the greater good in our parliaments.

Most European nations I suspect are very simliar. IN the US, it is the individual's rights that are spelled out in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. It is pursuing this "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" that has created this culture of individualism. THink about it Ben, it is what separates us from them. You and I are living under the crown, and the Westminister system of government and how we see government and our rights is different from the American model. They are more individualistic.

I have thought about it, and I simply do not recognise what you say. Is bearing arms really an example of 'individualism'? Hardly, given that so many people do so. Is what strikes me as the unthinking support for the Commander-in-Chief, come what may, that exists in major sections of American society a demonstration of individualistic tendencies? No, I think you are quite wrong in what you say.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I have thought about it, and I simply do not recognise what you say. Is bearing arms really an example of 'individualism'? Hardly, given that so many people do so. Is what strikes me as the unthinking support for the Commander-in-Chief, come what may, that exists in major sections of American society a demonstration of individualistic tendencies? No, I think you are quite wrong in what you say.

Ben...bearing arms means you are responsible for your protection, NOT THE STATE. They don't have unthinking support of their Commander in Chief. It may appear that way, but they dissent everything in the US. Trust me on THAT one. Americans are also far more hostile to the idea of paying taxes as a rule than Euro's or Canadians. The loud boistrous culture in the US, whether it be rap/hiphop music or country music, is full of glorifying the concept of being your own man.

Ben...travel around the US and observe. The reason people from the religious right to the wacky left all share the same space and don't kill each other in a civil war is truly because people know their individual right to be as wacky as they like is part of the culture. Being a celebrity and making it big is seen as a great thing, whereas I think in Canada anyhow, the bigger you get, the more people resent you not being one of us....

No...you cannot think of the Americans as a monolithic bunch of mouth breathers with everyone rowing the same direction. you have more kooks and wacky ideas there because being strange or different in thought is tolerated MORE in America.

[BDunnell]

Mark, I find it very hard to take your opinion on this seriously. I know Americans and (admittedly more) Europeans, and don't feel that there is any difference between the levels of individuality displayed by any of them. Contrary to what you might think, not all of us in Europe are unoriginal, plodding morons on the grounds that we aren't all allowed to bear arms, a notion I find laughable.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Mark, I find it very hard to take your opinion on this seriously. I know Americans and (admittedly more) Europeans, and don't feel that there is any difference between the levels of individuality displayed by any of them. Contrary to what you might think, not all of us in Europe are unoriginal, plodding morons on the grounds that we aren't all allowed to bear arms, a notion I find laughable.

you find it laughable but you miss my point Ben. That carrying the gun is saying to the world that THEY are responsible for their own safety. No one in Europe or Canada really is advocating it that, most of us in the UK and Canada think it is totally out to lunch to let one individual have that much lethal force at their fingertips; yet Americans fight over this all the time. Is the STATE more important than ME? I know Europeans or Brits ( some in Britain resent being lumped in with the masses on the continent) are NOT a monolithic society, but doing things for the common good and comprimise in political matters are far more accepted in Europe often than they are in the US.

The Americans are more individualistic. Not a whole lot more, but enough. IT is part and part of the culture and it was far more obvious 100 years ago than it may be today. In Canada, we didn't have a written separate document of individual rights until the early 80's. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a modern document. I have no idea of the UK version ( some derivative from the Magna Carta?) but the point is in the US that document of the US Consistution is very specific on individual rights, and it was the first one really to be glorifiying in the right to be left alone and be free. In 1776 that was a radical depature of the times. Canada never wrote down its take on that idea until 1982. The Yanks are more individualistic in legal terms, and are more in reality. You don't see it, but they are. The American government is supposed to be and still is a bottom up process, not a top down process. There is no Royal Family that grants power, in the US, the government is derived and is to serve at the whims and wishes of the electorate. The fact the electorate is out to lunch at times and distracted by modern life has allowed their politicians to run the world into a ditch, but it still comes from the voter. The individual. The dude with rights...including one to carry a gun.

[BDunnell]

Your knowledge of the historical aspects here is impressive, I grant that, but I simply do not believe that what you speak of has any true bearing on current reality. But if you want to go around thinking that us Europeans are all characterless fools compared with our trans-Atlantic counterparts, all desperately toeing the line because the state tells us to, a notion (and it's nothing more than that) then fine. You are VERY much mistaken.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Ben, I don't think for a second you in the UK or Eki in Finland are fools per se (Eki tries me on THAT)but the notion of how you view government is different. It is evident from your arguments on many topics. You have a faith and respect for government in general. Your skepticism is individualistic yes, but you would never take your skepticism to the length of saying "I don't think the local law here will protect me, I am going to carry a handgun". An American would and does.

You would advocate I am sure the right of same sex couples to marry and think that the state should protect that right. In the US, they see the right to marry as between man and woman, and the state shouldn't be telling the churches otherwise. In Canada, the state is attempting this and having a great difficulty with it. In the US, the state wont go there, and leaves Churches to their own. That is an individualistic notion of government and its role in people's lives.

It is a very slight nuance Ben, but it exists. Americans, with the exception of a few nuts on the hard left and hard right, do not want government dictating their social mores and they don't see government as giving them their rights. They see government often taking away rights, and it bothers them I suspect more than it does us in Canada or you in the UK. We tolerate more government because we grew up with it. The Yanks fight it......that right to bear arms thing originally was written so the people had the right to go to the capital and reclaim their republic if the politico's got out of hand. CHarming notion today, but in 1776 that was a real threat.

[BDunnell]

Ben, I don't think for a second you in the UK or Eki in Finland are fools per se (Eki tries me on THAT)but the notion of how you view government is different. It is evident from your arguments on many topics. You have a faith and respect for government in general. Your skepticism is individualistic yes, but you would never take your skepticism to the length of saying "I don't think the local law here will protect me, I am going to carry a handgun". An American would and does.

You would advocate I am sure the right of same sex couples to marry and think that the state should protect that right. In the US, they see the right to marry as between man and woman, and the state shouldn't be telling the churches otherwise. In Canada, the state is attempting this and having a great difficulty with it. In the US, the state wont go there, and leaves Churches to their own. That is an individualistic notion of government and its role in people's lives.

It is a very slight nuance Ben, but it exists. Americans, with the exception of a few nuts on the hard left and hard right, do not want government dictating their social mores and they don't see government as giving them their rights. They see government often taking away rights, and it bothers them I suspect more than it does us in Canada or you in the UK. We tolerate more government because we grew up with it. The Yanks fight it......that right to bear arms thing originally was written so the people had the right to go to the capital and reclaim their republic if the politico's got out of hand. CHarming notion today, but in 1776 that was a real threat.

Again, all very well and good, but I don't see it as having any bearing on most people. I don't see this individualism in all the Americans who were desperately cowed by terrorism after '9/11', for example, when the imposition of overly restrictive security measures in all sorts of areas of life — in ways that simply would not be tolerated over here — seemed to be accepted without a lot of fuss, based on what I consider to be no small degree of paranoia.

[airshifter]

Gawd do you write nothing but claptrap?

There were 3 major waves of Immigration to this country and here a chart which may or may not format but it shows as usual that you're woefully ignortant. And you do remember we discussed that ignorant is not a moral judgement, just shows a lack of knowledge:
Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, 1850–2000

Ten leading countries
Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, 1850–2000
(resident population)
Ten leading countries

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0900547.html
by rank1 1850 1880 1900 1930 1960


And looking here:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0201398.html

If we look here from 1820-1940 we see 8,500,000 Germans and Austians arriving compared to just barely 4,200,000 "UK-ians"---does not break down Welsh and Scots and Ulster and there were 3,300,000 "Russians", 1,300,000 Swedes even.

So, wrong by a 2:1 margin over the country with the "Most" immigrants coming

Take it up to 1996 and we have 9,769,000 Germans and 5,353,000 Italians and just 5,197,000 UKians and 4,700,000 Irish, not to mention 3,749,000 Russians/ "Ex-Soviets"

We see the "UK-ians" near drowed out in massive immigration from other places.


So we see once again, as usual and as expected your basic assumptions are again wrong, not surprisingly leading to absurd conclusions.

Have you ever bother to check you basic assumptions?

Have you any idea of how many German language newspapers there was in this country in 1910?

How can you imagine you know anything about the "American Dream" or anything at all about this country of ours if you don't know jack-s**t about who came here--and what was motivating the mass movement of millions to EVERYWHERE (Of course you're not aware that during the periods of mass Immigration to this country there was about a 20-25% return rate or a continuing on to someplace else, didn't know that? Do you at least know that millions were immigrating all over at the same time? Not just to USA?)

Once again you demonstate your ability to ignore something already clarified by the poster you quote. Just a few posts after your above quote he makes it quite clear that he was speaking of the early settlers to the New World.

In that sense, he was entirely correct.

Even ignoring his intent and jumping forward to only a few years ago, immigration from the English speaking world remains one of the highest.

[airshifter]

Mark, I find it very hard to take your opinion on this seriously. I know Americans and (admittedly more) Europeans, and don't feel that there is any difference between the levels of individuality displayed by any of them. Contrary to what you might think, not all of us in Europe are unoriginal, plodding morons on the grounds that we aren't all allowed to bear arms, a notion I find laughable.

I think all of us know it's not Marks intention to state anyone is a plodding moron, but I do somewhat agree with his position, as well as your own.

Americans in the US are simply more inclined towards individual rights and freedoms, and less government control. This doesn't apply to all nor does it claim to be something all Americans agree on, but from my experience overall most of the US feels more stongly about these individual rights than most people I have dealt with in the UK and Europe in general.

As an example, I live in a state that allows concealed weapons carry by permit. Though I own guns I don't have a concealed carry permit nor do I intend to get one. If I felt myself or my family were in that much danger I would move first. BUT, I will also strongly support the individual rights of others to obtain a permit.

Some of the individual rights other countries have taken away will never happen in the US. Too many people still have the belief that the government given a chance will screw things up worse.

[airshifter]

Again, all very well and good, but I don't see it as having any bearing on most people. I don't see this individualism in all the Americans who were desperately cowed by terrorism after '9/11', for example, when the imposition of overly restrictive security measures in all sorts of areas of life — in ways that simply would not be tolerated over here — seemed to be accepted without a lot of fuss, based on what I consider to be no small degree of paranoia.

This always gives me a laugh. To be honest I've heard more about the paranoia that 9/11 caused in Americans on this forum and BBC news than I've ever seen displayed by Americans. I'll be the first to admit that the airport security was screwed up, but to think people are happy with it is simply wrong. One knee jerk reaction taken to extremes does not represent the entire country.

We had instinces of political figures and governments involved in showing direct concern of traditional Muslim attrire in a number of European countries. IIRC a young man was gunned down for simply appearing to be of middle eastern decent and carrying a backpack in the UK.

Tolerance can't be judged on those individual actions, nor can one society be judged on the perception of another countries media.

[janvanvurpa]

Once again you demonstate your ability to ignore something already clarified by the poster you quote. Just a few posts after your above quote he makes it quite clear that he was speaking of the early settlers to the New World.

In that sense, he was entirely correct.

Even ignoring his intent and jumping forward to only a few years ago, immigration from the English speaking world remains one of the highest.

Oh Great and mighty Airshifter, you see I was confused.

All this endless yapping about "The American Dream" and then this confused talk of EARLY settlers.
See, unlike you and your cohorts, not having a narrow AMERICO-CENTRIC world view, it confused me how somebody could be suggesting that in the minds of British settlers to British Colonies they was burning brightly a concept of "THE AMERICAN DREAM" a hundred and fifty years before there was an "America" aka the USA.

But that's all because I am a mere peon and unlike you and your buddies, I am unable to delve into the minds of either those early British Colonists or Chuckies fertile imagination.

But as we know so well from your invariably smug and oddly condescending replies, you do know what they were all thinking, and for that I am sure the Forum is grateful.

I do know however that post about 1650 immigration added never more than 1% yearly to the country's population and that looking at the National Origin of the population in period of the first AMERICAN census in 1790 that the total of all others excepting English
was around 358,000 and including slaves about 718,000 while little ol' England gave us about 230,000.

Hmmmmm, 230,000 out of 718,000.

I guess you boy will consider that a majority, right?

And that the native born population of the U.S. has never fallen below 85% of the population after about 1675--100 years before the American Revolution.

It seems maybe the mythos of waves of English arriving here for "The American Dream" prior to there being a USA is a little fuzzy by a couple of hundred years and maybe the "majority" being "English" isn't quite the solid fact some think, or at least not solid enough to justify such contemptuous dismissal.

Smoooochies! ;)

[airshifter]

:laugh:

Yes Janvan, only you could stoop to considering the slaves as voluntary immigrants to try to prove your point correct.

As to trying to decide what he was thinking, it was as easy as reading the words he wrote. Unlike others I take a persons stated opinion as being just that, and don't try to twist it to suit my personal view.

[janvanvurpa]

:laugh:

Yes Janvan, only you could stoop to considering the slaves as voluntary immigrants to try to prove your point correct.

As to trying to decide what he was thinking, it was as easy as reading the words he wrote. Unlike others I take a persons stated opinion as being just that, and don't try to twist it to suit my personal view.

No Einstein, I listed them as separate because they were counted as separate at the time.

I see, as usual for your sort, you remain totally silent when something refuting some rigid is presented.

Why the silence?

And smug-master, I don't twist things----any more than you in your lame attempts---I conceded I was confused at his poor attempts at conveying what he meant.

That is a clear statement that I don't PRESUME to know what somebody is thinking---doubly ironic since the thing I was confused about is how he--and since you are so determined to act like you're defending him, presumably you (when really we know you don't give a sh*t about discussion, learning--since you're an ex-spurt at everything--- or even considering any new info--you're here just to snipe and pontificate) knew what was in the minds of so many people so long ago.

First its the American Revolution was a some motivating factor in the minds of illiterate French peasants, now you're claiming to know that the "American Dream" was in the minds of all these settlers to the British Colonies 150 years before the country was founded.

You boys are amazing.
But I'm still confused how you know what was on those people's minds.

And how you and he presume to speak for them.

[DexDexter]

I think all of us know it's not Marks intention to state anyone is a plodding moron, but I do somewhat agree with his position, as well as your own.

Americans in the US are simply more inclined towards individual rights and freedoms, and less government control. This doesn't apply to all nor does it claim to be something all Americans agree on, but from my experience overall most of the US feels more stongly about these individual rights than most people I have dealt with in the UK and Europe in general.

As an example, I live in a state that allows concealed weapons carry by permit. Though I own guns I don't have a concealed carry permit nor do I intend to get one. If I felt myself or my family were in that much danger I would move first. BUT, I will also strongly support the individual rights of others to obtain a permit.

Some of the individual rights other countries have taken away will never happen in the US. Too many people still have the belief that the government given a chance will screw things up worse.

What's this thing that Europeans don't carry guns, we Finns for example have fourth most firearms in the world per capita, not that I'm happy about it.

[chuck34]

No im not..Back in them days everyone was off to the US..the word colonisation comes to mind.

These days however its mainly people from poorer countries taking flight to the US. Go to Europe and ask people if they want to move to the US and see what response you get.


Yes that was what I was refering to "colonisation". The "New World" was refered to as America even before the US was a country.

I agree that these days people from Europe probably don't want to move to the US. See a few posts back where I was saying that many European countries have adopted many of the aspects of the American Dream.

[chuck34]

Oh Great and mighty Airshifter, you see I was confused.

All this endless yapping about "The American Dream" and then this confused talk of EARLY settlers.
See, unlike you and your cohorts, not having a narrow AMERICO-CENTRIC world view, it confused me how somebody could be suggesting that in the minds of British settlers to British Colonies they was burning brightly a concept of "THE AMERICAN DREAM" a hundred and fifty years before there was an "America" aka the USA.

The conversation had clearly shifted. And if that wasn't clear, or made clear by my use of the word early, then I'm sorry. The "New World" was refered to as America long before there was a US.


But that's all because I am a mere peon and unlike you and your buddies, I am unable to delve into the minds of either those early British Colonists or Chuckies fertile imagination.

No need to delve into my imagination (I thought you said I didn't have one), just read my words. Early is a good word.


But as we know so well from your invariably smug and oddly condescending replies, you do know what they were all thinking, and for that I am sure the Forum is grateful.

From what I have seen lately, you are about the smuggest one here. But I'm sure you see nothing wrong with your replies.


I do know however that post about 1650 immigration added never more than 1% yearly to the country's population and that looking at the National Origin of the population in period of the first AMERICAN census in 1790 that the total of all others excepting English
was around 358,000 and including slaves about 718,000 while little ol' England gave us about 230,000.

Hmmmmm, 230,000 out of 718,000.

I guess you boy will consider that a majority, right?

And that the native born population of the U.S. has never fallen below 85% of the population after about 1675--100 years before the American Revolution.

It seems maybe the mythos of waves of English arriving here for "The American Dream" prior to there being a USA is a little fuzzy by a couple of hundred years and maybe the "majority" being "English" isn't quite the solid fact some think, or at least not solid enough to justify such contemptuous dismissal.

Smoooochies! ;)

Ok the 13 colonies that formed the original United States were not English Colonies. And therefore, the native born population was not English. Thanks again for the history lesson.

[steve_spackman]

Yes that was what I was refering to "colonisation". The "New World" was refered to as America even before the US was a country.

I agree that these days people from Europe probably don't want to move to the US. See a few posts back where I was saying that many European countries have adopted many of the aspects of the American Dream.

Explain to me how many European countries have adopted many aspects of the American Dream?

[chuck34]

Explain to me how many European countries have adopted many aspects of the American Dream?

Rigid socio-economic class structures have gone by the way-side.

[steve_spackman]

Rigid socio-economic class structures have gone by the way-side.

explain what you mean.. i am very interested in what your views are on this

[steve_spackman]

Here is my view..The American Dream is a bubble that people live in, as they dont want to live in the real world..

[chuck34]

explain what you mean.. i am very interested in what your views are on this

Well not being a sociologist, I could be wrong. And if so I'm sure someone will correct me. And this is in no way ment to be all-inclusive.

In my readings of history, there seems to be a theme of people being "stuck" in a certain class. If you were born poor you were bound to stay that way for a myriad of reasons.

Now in the "New World" you could go and make your own way. Start a buisness, invent a product, run for political office, buy a bunch of "cheap" land, whatever you want.

That's a brief overview of what I'm thinking. I'm sure many (perhaps not you Steve) will point out how wrong I am about this part and that statement. Frankly I'm tired of it, so blast away.

[chuck34]

Here is my view..The American Dream is a bubble that people live in, as they dont want to live in the real world..

What do you mean by a bubble and the real world? I'm not following that statement at all.

[chuck34]

Perhaps we should more properly define the "American Dream".

To me it means that no matter your economic or social standing at birth, you can always move up (or for that matter down). A man is judged solely on his actions, not his station in life. This is achieved through a minimum of government intervention in our lives, sort of "letting the free-markets do their thing".

Now that being said, I do not deny that there have been times/places/situations in the US where this has not been the case. But overall it has been.

[steve_spackman]

Perhaps we should more properly define the "American Dream".

To me it means that no matter your economic or social standing at birth, you can always move up (or for that matter down). A man is judged solely on his actions, not his station in life.

This happens everyday in other countries regardless of government intervention..

I suggest instead of blabbing on about the US being special in this area, you take a long holiday and travel Europe and other parts of the world that dont have to hold onto such a dream..

The term American Dream has only been around since 1931..from what ive seen it aint been much help to people

[anthonyvop]

Here is my view..The American Dream is a bubble that people live in, as they dont want to live in the real world..
You have that backwards.

[airshifter]

No Einstein, I listed them as separate because they were counted as separate at the time.

I see, as usual for your sort, you remain totally silent when something refuting some rigid is presented.

Why the silence?

And smug-master, I don't twist things----any more than you in your lame attempts---I conceded I was confused at his poor attempts at conveying what he meant.

That is a clear statement that I don't PRESUME to know what somebody is thinking---doubly ironic since the thing I was confused about is how he--and since you are so determined to act like you're defending him, presumably you (when really we know you don't give a sh*t about discussion, learning--since you're an ex-spurt at everything--- or even considering any new info--you're here just to snipe and pontificate) knew what was in the minds of so many people so long ago.

First its the American Revolution was a some motivating factor in the minds of illiterate French peasants, now you're claiming to know that the "American Dream" was in the minds of all these settlers to the British Colonies 150 years before the country was founded.

You boys are amazing.
But I'm still confused how you know what was on those people's minds.

And how you and he presume to speak for them.


Having simply weighed in on the immigration numbers, of which you still consider slaves voluntary immigrants, I find it amazing that you have read so much into statments I've never made.

Being I've never said a word about my opinion on "The American Dream" it's simply your assumptions you are debating. Please continue debating with yourself about statements I've never made, as it displays your willingness to rant about nothing. :laugh:

Once again, if you would actually read what people write instead of reading into what people write you would find things much easier. Chuck made a statement which he later clarified and can be easily shown to be historical fact (unless you wish to consider slaves voluntary immigrants). You disputed known fact and I weighed in with my opinion.

You may wish living in your own world, with your own twisted statistics, debating things never said. Most of the people on the forum would rather keep their discussions and debates reality based.

[chuck34]

This happens everyday in other countries regardless of government intervention..

Now. Yes.


I suggest instead of blabbing on about the US being special in this area, you take a long holiday and travel Europe and other parts of the world that dont have to hold onto such a dream..

I see it differently.


The term American Dream has only been around since 1931..from what ive seen it aint been much help to people

Way to quote almost directly from the Wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream

In the American Dream, first expressed by James Truslow Adams in 1931 ... The presence of the American Dream has not historically helped the majority of minority race and lower class American citizens to gain a greater degree of social equality and influence.[5] Instead, the American wealth structure has often been observed to sustain class differences in which well-positioned groups continue to be advantaged.


I'm bored. You guys are right. I guess that America hasn't ever done anything right. There were no people that ever came here looking for a better life. It's all been a hoax foisted upon us by the Knights Templar or something.

[steve_spackman]

Way to quote almost directly from the Wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream

didnt quote from Wikipedia..

[race aficionado]

The US of A has been very good to me.

Was it a dream I was going for?
Of course, if a dream means going for something I wanted and then thankfully getting it because I worked my ass to make it happen.

This is a land of opportunity - just ask all the people from different countries and cultures that have made it here. I live in NY and I see such a large variety of countries represented with their businesses here, from the 24 hour Korean deli to the fancy 5th avenue boutique shop.

Will everybody make it? Of course not. This city can embrace you or spit you out like a bad memory.

This is New York of course, a city that doesn't necessarily represent this large country but the fact is that if you work hard for something, you may get it but of course it is much easier if you are not an undocumented immigrant. There lies a big problem.

If your documents are in order, there are many government aids that will help you but for this to happen you have to do your part also: That is, work hard.

Remember, this is a country that doesn't go on vacations because all it does is work, work, work - of course I am starting to babble here now that the unemployment rate continues to soar given the economic situation but I am one that will affirm to you that as I have done well, I have seen many others do so because of the opportunities provided to us.

Right now, I can't advise anybody anything about the current american dream or any other countries' dream because we are facing a world crisis that will take time and sacrifice from all of us for it to start recovering.

Rant over - gotta find some work or my dream will turn into a nightmare :hmh:

:s mokin:

[Tomi]

Right now, I can't advise anybody anything about the current american dream or any other countries' dream because we are facing a world crisis that will take time and sacrifice from all of us for it to start recovering.

Rant over - gotta find some work or my dream will turn into a nightmare :hmh:

:s mokin:

Guess it was someones american dream that caused this crisis, but guys, let the americans keep on dreaming :)

[Roamy]

I havvve a dream !!

Linux computer
Nokai phone
bottle of findlandka
big igloo




NOT :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Tomi]

I havvve a dream !!

Linux computer
Nokai phone
bottle of findlandka
big igloo




NOT :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I suppose this is how the typical american see a dream, different brands, nothing abstract.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Tomi....When we want your opinion on the American Dream, it truly will be over. You make Eki sound enlightned when it comes to your opinion of Americans.

The American Dream aint dead...just a few people here apparently would love to kill it....

[janvanvurpa]

I suppose this is how the typical american see a dream, different brands, nothing abstract.


Yes we already saw it defined as "I can get a job, make some money and decide to buy something..."

Everything in America is measured by appearances.

What was the popular commercial on TV?
"Perception is Reality"

[Eki]

Yes we already saw it defined as "I can get a job, make some money and decide to buy something..."

Everything in America is measured by appearances.

What was the popular commercial on TV?
"Perception is Reality"
Quote from Easy Drifter from another thread:

http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134263


A few light clouds but sun still shining. Then just a few drops of very light rain. But off to the Southeast 2 brilliant rainbows appeared.
After about 10 minutes rain got slightly heavier (not much) and I moved under the cover of a swing now looking North West. An absolutely fabulous Georgian Bay Sunset!
Just reminded me of why I love it here.

Can someone put a price tag on that?

[Eki]

I havvve a dream !!

Linux computer
Nokai phone
bottle of findlandka
big igloo




NOT :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Arizonian dream:

Drawing board
Anvil
ACME rocket rocket roller skates
Roadrunner for dinner

[chuck34]

Yes we already saw it defined as "I can get a job, make some money and decide to buy something..."

Everything in America is measured by appearances.

What was the popular commercial on TV?
"Perception is Reality"

Wonderfully out of context. Just what I'd expect from Jan.

*sigh*

[airshifter]

Arizonian dream:

Drawing board
Anvil
ACME rocket rocket roller skates
Roadrunner for dinner

I think Fousto will even have to admit that was a good one. :)

[Eki]

I think Fousto will even have to admit that was a good one. :)
Arizonian dreams are made of these:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b6/LRowanwood/Blog/acmeCatalog.jpg

[Pitflaps]

The American Dream is a bit like God: enough people believe in it to make it hard to disprove even when there's a mountain of evidence to suggest it's nonsense.

[chuck34]

The American Dream is a bit like God: enough people believe in it to make it hard to disprove even when there's a mountain of evidence to suggest it's nonsense.

This is just silly. All the evidence you need is sitting right there in the Oval Office. Love him or hate him, agree with him or disagree with him, it can not be denied that he is a living personification of the American Dream. He came from basically nothing and made it to the most powerful office in the world. As have most of our Presidents.

[Eki]

He came from basically nothing and made it to the most powerful office in the world. As have most of our Presidents.
Except you know who. He was a zero but didn't come from basically nothing, you could say he inherited his position.

BTW, Barack Obama didn't exactly come from a ghetto or even from a working class family. His mother and father met in a university in Hawaii, and his father later became a Kenyan senior governmental economist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama,_Sr.

[Tomi]

Except you know who. He was a zero but didn't come from basically nothing, you could say he inherited his position.

BTW, Barack Obama didn't exactly come from a ghetto or even from a working class family. His mother and father met in a university in Hawaii, and his father later became a Kenyan senior governmental economist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama,_Sr.

not so nice of u to spoil others dreams :)

[Alexamateo]

Barack Obama Sr may have eventually become a Kenyan government official, but he basically abandoned his family and was an absent father who only ever saw his son once at ten years old after Barack II's first or second year.

By most definitions, he came from a broken, unstable home, up until he was moved back to Hawaii to be raised by his maternal grandparents, while he certainly didn't grow up in poverty, he was not what I would call a privileged youth either. I think it's fair to call Obama the epitome of the American Dream.

[chuck34]

Except you know who. He was a zero but didn't come from basically nothing, you could say he inherited his position.

BTW, Barack Obama didn't exactly come from a ghetto or even from a working class family. His mother and father met in a university in Hawaii, and his father later became a Kenyan senior governmental economist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama,_Sr.

Credit where credit is due Eki ... not a thread goes by (and hardly a response) that you don't take the opertunity to bash Bush. Please can you stop it, it's really old. Unless the thread at least has some tangential need for talking about Bush, then maybe it might be warranted.

And as Alex pointed out, Obama's dad may have gone on to do some stuff too. But he wasn't around the kid's life, nor did he "amount to much" when Jr. was born.

[steve_spackman]

He came from basically nothing and made it to the most powerful office in the world.

Most powerful office in the world?

What makes you say that?

[steve_spackman]

I'm bored. You guys are right. I guess that America hasn't ever done anything right. There were no people that ever came here looking for a better life. It's all been a hoax foisted upon us by the Knights Templar or something.

So Americans think that there is such a thing as the American dream..thats fine.

People go to countries all over the world looking for a better life, not just the USA...

For you to say that other countries copied the American Dream is absurd

[chuck34]

Most powerful office in the world?

What makes you say that?

Come on Steve. Don't go down that road. Just because you may not like the US much, or think that we should be the most powerful nation in the world, doesn't change the fact that we are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops

So other than number of active troops we are number one economically and militarily. Unless you have another way to define things I'd say we're still the most powerful nation.

[chuck34]

So Americans think that there is such a thing as the American dream..thats fine.

People go to countries all over the world looking for a better life, not just the USA...

For you to say that other countries copied the American Dream is absurd

Fine I'm absurd then, whatever, I don't care. But remember I didn't make up the term, it came from somewhere for some reason.

[steve_spackman]

Come on Steve. Don't go down that road. Just because you may not like the US much, or think that we should be the most powerful nation in the world, doesn't change the fact that we are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP))

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops

So other than number of active troops we are number one economically and militarily. Unless you have another way to define things I'd say we're still the most powerful nation.

Doesnt make you the most powerful, just because you have more than others

China has the largest army in the world, so does that make it the most powerful army?

If you are the most powerful, then surely you would of won the 2 wars you are currently fighting???

I tend to not get my facts from Wiki...

[ShiftingGears]

The ideal of the American Dream originated when immigrants to America had opportunities that they never had before, and capitalised on it to succeed.

I really don't see the point of debating whether or not this ideal exists, because it obviously does.

[555-04Q2]

If you guys really want to know, the land of dreams is now China. There are so many opportunities for people to make it big there, even during the current reccession.

[chuck34]

Doesnt make you the most powerful, just because you have more than others

China has the largest army in the world, so does that make it the most powerful army?

If you are the most powerful, then surely you would of won the 2 wars you are currently fighting???

I tend to not get my facts from Wiki...

I don't get my facts from Wiki. I link to them because it's quick and easy, and on things like this it tends to be correct. Give me a while and I'll find other links.

So if you don't rate power economically or militarily, how do you rate power?

Yes China has the largest army in the world and I addressed that in my previous post. And if you want to argue that China has the most powerful army in the world, you would have a very good argument to make. I don't necessarily believe that as I think power comes from numbers and tech. But there is a very good argument to be made for numbers alone.

As for the wars. All I will say is that the violence is WAAAAY down in Iraq, and Afganistan is not over yet.

[chuck34]

The ideal of the American Dream originated when immigrants to America had opportunities that they never had before, and capitalised on it to succeed.

I really don't see the point of debating whether or not this ideal exists, because it obviously does.

Some can't or won't see that.

[steve_spackman]

Some can't or won't see that.

Because we have our own views on things..Just because some say its there does not mean other think so

[chuck34]

Because we have our own views on things..Just because some say its there does not mean other think so

So you are denying that people have come to the US to seek a better life, and that they continue to migrate here today for that same purpose?

[chuck34]

I don't get my facts from Wiki. I link to them because it's quick and easy, and on things like this it tends to be correct. Give me a while and I'll find other links.



Do these help?

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,,contentMDK:20399244~menuPK:1504474~pagePK:64133 150~piPK:64133175~theSitePK:239419,00.html

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

I don't know if they're the best sources. Worldbank is probably pretty good. I have no idea who or what globalfirepower is, but it came up quick in a google search. Seems about right. If you still want more, let me know I'll do your googling for you. But it won't be today, actually have stuff going at work for once :-)

Again, if you don't define power economically or militarily, how do you define power?