The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Original post by Conciousness
Martin Van Buren, the eighth one. But apparently he's still related to Roosevelt so I'm not sure.

yes yes yes YES! Someone who gets it.


He sounds Dutch.
Original post by Conciousness
That explains why every president in US history bar one has been from the same bloodline.


Oh dear. Do you not understand how genetics works? At some point along the line you are distantly related to someone else. Just because some US presidents were tenth cousins with other ones (look that up - you'd be surprised just how distant the common ancestor was in a set of tenth cousins) does not mean, as you imply, that there is some overarching conspiracy to have a racially-pure line of presidents all from the same family. Most Americans of European descent - i.e. all presidents but Obama - come from a small pool of immigrants who fled Europe over two hundred years ago. That pool of people is where the presidents have common ancestors. Obama and G.W. Bush are 10th cousins, once removed, linked by Samuel Hinkley of Cape Cod, who died in 1662. Hardly evidence of some conspiracy. Do you know that most British PMs are probably related in a distant way too? Or that Obama is also distantly related to people like Brad Pitt, or that Hilary Clinton is distantly related to the Duchess of Cornwall?
You know to much... SEIZE HIM! :mob:
Reply 43
Original post by readysteady
My American friend was telling me what a wonderful country America is and it's the "land of opportunity,land of the free,America is freedom" bla bla


He's right.

America , is supposed to be "The Land of the Free" , yet it is one of the most racist countries I have ever encountered? not to mention the religious-right evangelical extremists,paying for healthcare etc.


Where is your evidence that the USA is very racist? Sure, it is an issue, but you must have only visited the USA if you think it is the most racist country you have been too.

There aren't very many far-right religious folk and you get them in every country anyways.

Also, healthcare is not a right. You should work to get healthcare and not just leech off the state. Besides, for the poor in our country we have very good social security.

Oh and America has free speech? yeah right!


Yes, people are free to say what they want, whether it is right or wrong. We don't get put in prison for denying the holocaust, for example.

All I'm saying is that America doesn't have any more freedom than Europe or Japan.


It is a freer country, but Japan is pretty cool too.
Original post by DYKWIA
He's right.


Rather unfortunately the US is not the beacon of 'opportunity' it claims to be. Social mobility is extremely rare and your opportunities are very much limited by your economic status, race, etc.

Where is your evidence that the USA is very racist? Sure, it is an issue, but you must have only visited the USA if you think it is the most racist country you have been too.


The stigma that african americans are 'thugs' or somehow more 'criminal' than whites? What about the stigma that the poor are black people because they are lazy? There are many ways in which the US can be quite racist. Of course so are many other countries, its not unique to the US but that doesn't make it less of a problem there.

There aren't very many far-right religious folk and you get them in every country anyways.


Yes you get far right religious people in every society but in the US its almost encouraged. See the latest doings of the Republican party. Look at the Tea Party movement. Look at the Bible Belt. Far right conservatism is not something thats uncommon.

Also, healthcare is not a right. You should work to get healthcare and not just leech off the state. Besides, for the poor in our country we have very good social security.

So if you can't work you shouldn't be allowed to be healthy? You shouldn't be able to afford going to the doctors? How does that make sense? :confused:

Yes, people are free to say what they want, whether it is right or wrong. We don't get put in prison for denying the holocaust, for example.


Here I may agree with you...mostly. The US has less strict restrictions on what would be considered 'free speech'. For example the SCOTUS upheld that the Westboro Baptist Church has the right to protest and express its views, despite them being vile and not agreeable to most people. However there are restrictions so people don't get to say whatever they want whether its right or wrong necessarily.

It is a freer country, but Japan is pretty cool too.


This is to you and the OP: I don't think its easy or sensible to try to claim one country as 'more free' than another. At least not when trying to compare much of the industrialized world. When comparing the US to the UK for example there are many differences in the systems so its difficult to compare really.
Reply 45
America is the Land of the Free (but only if you can afford it!)

<3 x
Reply 46
Original post by readysteady
So why do Americans think that they are better than anyone else?


Arrogance, plain and simple. They're also, as a nation, blind to critcism. Either that, or they simply do not care what the rest of the world thinks of them. We Brits can at least laugh at ourselves, they however, take being American extremely seriously.
Reply 47
Original post by elitepower
The opportunity is all about the american dream, anyone can make it, all that stuff


Sorry, but that is total bull****. There is so such thing as the American Dream. America is just like everywhere else in the world, it does have a class system, and who you know is more conducive to success than what you know. Any attempt to argue otherwise is surely misguided. The fact that they do not have royalty or an aristocracy has not prevented them from constructing their own pseudo-nobility. Freedom of opportunity has its societal limits everywhere, and America is no exception.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 48
Lolmerica!
Original post by Rakas21
Who was the exception?


Lol this is a tough one :beard::holmes:
Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 50
Free Coke with a Big Mac!

They are free, its all the other countries they are treading on that aren't.
Reply 51
Original post by RandZul'Zorander
Rather unfortunately the US is not the beacon of 'opportunity' it claims to be. Social mobility is extremely rare and your opportunities are very much limited by your economic status, race, etc.


Social mobility isn't a problem. If you are poor in this country it is not hard to work and get to a better position.


The stigma that african americans are 'thugs' or somehow more 'criminal' than whites? What about the stigma that the poor are black people because they are lazy? There are many ways in which the US can be quite racist. Of course so are many other countries, its not unique to the US but that doesn't make it less of a problem there.


I don't think this is true. For example there are many, if not more, white people who are poor simply because they are lazy.

Yes you get far right religious people in every society but in the US its almost encouraged. See the latest doings of the Republican party. Look at the Tea Party movement. Look at the Bible Belt. Far right conservatism is not something thats uncommon.


Conservatism is good. But it isn't tied entirely to religion. There is a strong principle of separation of church from state.

So if you can't work you shouldn't be allowed to be healthy? You shouldn't be able to afford going to the doctors? How does that make sense? :confused:


If you are unwell for a good portion of your life then social security will take care of you. On the other hand if you temporarily become ill then you should have insurance from working.

Here I may agree with you...mostly. The US has less strict restrictions on what would be considered 'free speech'. For example the SCOTUS upheld that the Westboro Baptist Church has the right to protest and express its views, despite them being vile and not agreeable to most people. However there are restrictions so people don't get to say whatever they want whether its right or wrong necessarily.


Exactly, we are good to have free speech.




Not really, although I admit Hussein "if you've got a business, you didn't build that - i did" Obama is doing his best to destroy social mobility in this country.

Due to high costs for education and healthcare, and other economic, political and sociological factors, many countries in Europe now enjoy higher rates of social mobility than the United States.


How is social mobility necessarily a good thing anyways? You essentially are saying that it is okay for a large portion of the country to be poor so long as it is possible to trample on others and move up the food chain. Surely inequality is the issue, not social mobility.

The United States is significantly more racist than a number of countries in Europe - simple experience and surveys conducted by psychologists, political scientists and sociologists can easily reveal this data.


We have a black president. We are not a racist country as a whole. Sure there are issues, but no worse than other countries and it is getting better.

Do you just make statements without ever actually researching anything before you say it? Do you just happen to think "I think that X is true, so because I think it, it must clearly be true."


No, I make statements that I know to be true. It is you who keeps fabricating liberal BS.

Again, more ignorance. The United States is significantly more religious than other first-world countries. Simple research would have told you this.


And more moral too. There is no issue with people being religious, so long as it doesn't influence government, which I think it doesn't to any significant degree.
Original post by DYKWIA
Social mobility isn't a problem. If you are poor in this country it is not hard to work and get to a better position.

This is just blatantly not true. Social mobility in the US is extremely difficult. To go from poverty to working class or middle class is extremely rare. Do you know why? It has a lot to do with the culture and stigma surrounding poverty in the US.

I don't think this is true. For example there are many, if not more, white people who are poor simply because they are lazy.

I didn't say they were true. I said they were stigma. They are stereotypes.

Conservatism is good. But it isn't tied entirely to religion. There is a strong principle of separation of church from state.

Not in modern conservatism. In our modern day politics even liberals need to associate themselves with religion. I'm not getting into a conversation on whether conservatism is good or bad, but to say that the religious right is somehow 'small' is just dishonest.

If you are unwell for a good portion of your life then social security will take care of you. On the other hand if you temporarily become ill then you should have insurance from working.


If you aren't working or lose a job then you don't deserve to have insurance? Your logic is extremely neglectful towards others. You said insurance should be only for those who work. So then are you against medicare and medicaid?

Exactly, we are good to have free speech.

I personally do not necessarily agree with the SCOTUS ruling for the WBC but yes we do have...more liberty when it comes to that particular right (whether that is good or bad is another discussion).

Not really, although I admit Hussein "if you've got a business, you didn't build that - i did" Obama is doing his best to destroy social mobility in this country.

How about showing a little respect? He is your president lets not act like a child and call names simply because you don't like him. You also have no idea what Obama meant when he gave that speech so don't try to quote it. Even Fox gave up on trying that one because they know it doesn't make sense.

How is social mobility necessarily a good thing anyways? You essentially are saying that it is okay for a large portion of the country to be poor so long as it is possible to trample on others and move up the food chain. Surely inequality is the issue, not social mobility.

You brought up mobility when you said it was a 'land of opportunity'. If it were a land of equal opportunity for all then social mobility would be significantly higher than it currently is.

We have a black president. We are not a racist country as a whole. Sure there are issues, but no worse than other countries and it is getting better.

Having a black president does not make our country/society 'less racist' :facepalm: thats just lazy thinking.

And more moral too. There is no issue with people being religious, so long as it doesn't influence government, which I think it doesn't to any significant degree.


What makes them 'more moral'? :confused: Don't answer that actually its off topic and completely irrelevant. You think the constant spewing of religious beliefs in the public forum doesn't influence the government? What about with Prop 8 and the mormon church funding and pushing it through? How is that not 'influencing government to any significant degree'? :confused:
If it really is the Land of the Free and if, as is claimed, and anyone really can become the president, you would fairly expect that the 43 presidents from George Washington to George W. Bush would express that genetic diversity. But the presidents of the United States are as much a royal dynasty as anything in Europe, from whence their bloodlines came.

If America declared its Independence from the European monarchies in 1776, and presidents are democratically elected as we are told, what are the odds that Americans would always choose members of British and French royal bloodlines to lead us?

But we can see that Presidents come from the same class, the same families, the same networks. They come from the same bloodline which controlled Europe for a large part of its history. I mean even **** Cheney is Obama's eighth cousin.

So Obama, the Bush family, Cheney, the Clintons, The British Royal Family, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Paris Hilton, Madonna, Mitt Romney, Princess Diana, Winston Churchill etc etc. They are all descendants of Godfroi de Bouilion, the first King of Jerusalem.

This bloodline also includes the Habsburgs, the most powerful family in Europe under the Holy Roman Empire, Geoffrey Plantagenet and the Plantagenet royal dynasty in England, King John, who signed the Magna Carta, Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles, Princes William and Harry from Charles, Princess Diana, Vlad the Impaler, the powerful de Medici family of Venice etc etc.

This bloodline connects into every surviving royal family in Europe, including King Juan Carlos of Spain and the Dutch, Swedish, and Danish royal lines. President George Bush is related to all 60 royal families in Europe. Bush is a fourth cousin fifteen times removed of King Ferdinand I, the first king of United Spain and his wife Isabella.

Burkes Peerage, the bible of royal and aristocratic genealogy based in London, has said that every presidential election since and including George Washington in 1789 has been won by the candidate with the most royal genes.

In every single Presidential election, both candidates are always distant cousins from the same bloodline. Obama and Mitt Romney, George Bush and John Kerry, Bill Cinton and Bob Dole etc. Clinton is related to every ancient aristocratic family in Britain today.

I mean we're all related somewhere along the line, however we're not all 8th cousins and we don't all hold the highest political offices in countries around the world.
Social mobility in USA is nearly impossible, you have to pay more to go to a better university rather than just on academic merit, healthcare in USA is privatised meaning that poverty ridden people die young, USA has the highest difference between rich and poor than ANY other first world country if I was in USA and got all As in my A-levels I'd still have to go to an awful university as the better ones are like 50000 a year USA is geared in such a way that the poor stay poor and the rich stay rich, over here the teaching quality of schools may be better in private institutions but the difference between the private and state school in USA is astonishing. How else can you explain an idiot like George bush getting into an ivy league?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 55
Original post by Conciousness
...


Do you understand how exponentials work? If there were no inbreeding whatsoever and ignoring population growth, you would have ~100 million tenth cousins, perhaps more.
Reply 56
Or maybe I am not anti-american like you. You are so blinded by your dislike of the USA that you refuse to see when the USA is better than other countries.

Show your ignorance again. How typical. The point behind that statement, which you obviously haven't even quoted correctly, was that small business were not built independently from the government or the rest of society. Did that person go to public school? Did they go to college? Did they receive federal loans/grants to go to college? Federal business loans? etc.


Indeed, they are built despite the (current) government. He is trying to take credit for the success of capitalism.

No, you clearly misunderstand social mobility as well..... How ignorant are you?

Social mobility is an ability to change social classes, it has nothing to do with how poor people may be. It's bad that there are people who are very poor who cannot afford to live (look at you, admitting that there are poor people and that's bad but of course you couldn't possibly make their lives easier by giving the healthcare, no preposterous!), so yes it would be good if the minimum standard of living could be increased. However, it's more difficult in the US to increase one's standard of living via social mobility than it is in other countries, including many parts of Europe.


I still don't understand how the ability to change class suddenly makes it acceptable to live in an unequal society.

It is, as a matter of fact, worse than other countries. You seriously need to learn Google before you continue to make such utterly ignorant claims.


Thank you. I don't need to be told how to use a search engine. I am just not selectively blind to the real world.

Quite the opposite. Pick up a simple textbook for a course in American politics. You'll find things like.... less social mobility in the US, the higher religiosity of the US, higher racism, etc. are all easily found in even basic elementary level textbooks. :facepalm: But of course you could never actually be bothered to pick up a textbook.


People can CHOOSE to be religious, but they are not forced to be religious. I am sure there have been athiest presidential candidates. It is just a simple fact that most people in this country are Christian, which is why there are many Christian politicians.

I'd love to see you even try to defend that statement.


The USA is more moral. That is why we should spread the US way of life to other countries and introduce American ideals.

In case you haven't read the Constitution or the theory behind the system of US government, or why the US was even founded in the first place, religion isn't supposed to affect government in any way at all. The fact legislatures look to and use Christianity as justification for certain law is entirely against the theory of the US government.


But they don't. There is always some non-religious motivation behind certain laws. For example, banning gay marriage protects society and especially it protects young children from homosexuality. The fact that some people put reasons from the bible in there is just because it is a another reason, alongside all the non-religious ones.

Take a history class; take a political science class; stop being so completely ignorant.


I have and I don't like history. I don't like how the USA and the west always seem to be the bad guys. The USA is a great country now. It doesn't matter what the USA was like in the past (and it wasn't even that bad in comparison to other countries - no empire for one).

Additionally, the number of poor white people, as a percentage of the white population (and as a whole) is hugely significantly lower than the number of poor people who are of other races or ethnicities.


That isn't great, but it is simply a side effect of the past. Things will get better.
It's a myth
Original post by DYKWIA
Or maybe I am not anti-american like you. You are so blinded by your dislike of the USA that you refuse to see when the USA is better than other countries.


Hm...I don't think thats true. It seems to be you who is refusing to see reality. Not NYU.

Indeed, they are built despite the (current) government. He is trying to take credit for the success of capitalism.


Despite? without the public schools and roads there would be no society or anything for the success or the opportunity to create businesses.

I still don't understand how the ability to change class suddenly makes it acceptable to live in an unequal society.


Social mobility is a huge indicator of the equality of a society. If a society is truly equal in opportunity, social mobility would be more than just a rare occasion.

Thank you. I don't need to be told how to use a search engine. I am just not selectively blind to the real world.

Says the person who claims that the US is 'the land of opportunity'. Go ask your professors. Go ask anyone who knows anything about politics or government, they'll all tell you the same.

People can CHOOSE to be religious, but they are not forced to be religious. I am sure there have been athiest presidential candidates. It is just a simple fact that most people in this country are Christian, which is why there are many Christian politicians.


Go ahead and find one. :smile: And just because people 'choose' to be religious (I'm not sure everyone does) doesn't mean anything.

Lets also note that the bold goes against what you said before. That there isn't a high preponderance of right wing religious people. :rolleyes:

The USA is more moral. That is why we should spread the US way of life to other countries and introduce American ideals.

That didn't defend what you said but was just a reiteration :facepalm:

But they don't. There is always some non-religious motivation behind certain laws. For example, banning gay marriage protects society and especially it protects young children from homosexuality. The fact that some people put reasons from the bible in there is just because it is a another reason, alongside all the non-religious ones.

But they do because the basis of the laws is their 'religious morals'. :rolleyes: Using your own example gay marriage if you look at it from a secular point of view has no negative consequences, as there is nothing to 'protect' young children from.

That isn't great, but it is simply a side effect of the past. Things will get better.

How long do people have to wait for that to happen? Its been what? between 30 and 50 years now? And how is that supposed to happen if conservatives like you keep pushing legislation that disproportionally affects minority groups in low income areas?
Original post by callum9999
It's called patriotism... People really should be aware of what it is by now...

The exact same reason why I have a natural tendency to prefer Britain over other countries that, on paper, look similar. It's what I'm used to.

I think patriotism should be less about blowing your own country, and more about accepting that things are wrong (and being willing and try and fix it).


Particularly the Southern states think that everything they have was God given and that they really have the next holy-land outside of Jerusalem.

At a time it may have made steps towards freedom, but no longer. How many acts in the past year have nearly gone through to restrict websites from having even the faintest connection with other sites suspected of piracy? The incredibly relaxed method of writing the law makes it open to huge debate and prevents websites from normally operating, even if they were legal.

The US has the largest amount of citizens behind bars than any other country. It's not that crime should not be punished, or that to be "free" you must release everyone, but it's usually for petty crimes. The "3 strikes and you're out" means that you can get a life sentence from 3 convictions.

They whack off their constitution about free speech and freedom of religion, yet blast it in everyones' face and are incredibly intolerant. It's funny because the US should be a secular nation, but has a de facto religion. The UK is a religious country and is de facto non-specific.


Bad healthcare. Expensive medication. Bad education. A vague constitution. Constant invasion by the feds. A political system where companies are "people" and may buy out politicians en masse.

Yep. Free. Well, free to own a firearm (but they probably shouldn't be allowed).

Latest