Turn on thread page Beta

Anti-Americanism watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    So why point out that 70% of Americans have private coverage? Is that somehow bad?
    Yes its bad!!!! Because it means 30% do not have full medical coverage!!!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Yes its bad!!!! Because it means 30% do not have full medical coverage!!!
    That isnt the case.

    70% have PRIVATE..

    others have state provided coverage ...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    Yeah - people hated the US way before Bush...
    Bush is used as an excuse for hating the US, but if Bush wasn't president, the america-haters would come up with another reason for not liking me. On my last visit, Clinton was president and I wouldn't say the red carpet was rolled out for me when the plane landed. I didn't have any problems in London, but I almost got into a physical confrontation in a pub in wales because 5 guys didn't like my accent. I thought it was an isolated incident, but maybe not?

    It is a bit ironic to see the BBC reporting news on Anti-Americanism when it's the BBC that is responsible for perpetuating so many negative American stereotypes.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nic_knock)
    I havent read all the comments on this topic because I havent got time. I would like to say my opinion on the subect. I am not anti america. I love america and hope to move there once Ive done my nursing. I know an american who came over to this country and got called an iraqi killer. BUT, when I went to america for a short visit last year, i got fed up with "if it wasnt for us you english would all be speaking german". To me there is a minority of anti english in america.

    I met some lovely people, they all liked my "cute" accent. There are plenty people in this country that like americans. Its the minority thats giving the bad name.
    I'm surprised you found anyone that was anti-english in the US. Americans generally love British people, so consider yourself lucky because we don't love anyone else.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Made in the USA)
    Bush is used as an excuse for hating the US, but if Bush wasn't president, the america-haters would come up with another reason for not liking me. On my last visit, Clinton was president and I wouldn't say the red carpet was rolled out for me when the plane landed. I didn't have any problems in London, but I almost got into a physical confrontation in a pub in wales because 5 guys didn't like my accent. I thought it was an isolated incident, but maybe not?

    It is a bit ironic to see the BBC reporting news on Anti-Americanism when it's the BBC that is responsible for perpetuating so many negative American stereotypes.
    Wouldn't have mattered; we all know the Welsh are a bunch of Miss Nancy's anyways.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    That isnt the case.

    70% have PRIVATE..

    others have state provided coverage ...
    Incorrect there is no NHS. And for clarification 15% and all americans have NO medical coverage state provided or private. Geeez. All this work for one point ffs.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Incorrect there is no NHS. And for clarification 15% and all americans have NO medical coverage state provided or private. Geeez. All this work for one point ffs.
    If 70% have private insurance and 85% have health coverage, then it doesn't take someone with any brain cells to determine that the government forks the bill for the other 15%. And people say Americans are terrible at math.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Re: Anti-Americanism

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    As a basis, for example, of a railway system, doesn't it seem odd that the 'purpose of the operation is to accumulate as much money as possible for, basically, those 'elite' who already have sufficient money by any rational assessment?

    Not really. If they charge too much, people won't buy tickets, hence they loose money. Plus, as said, many of the shareholders in the privatized industries are, ultimately speaking, average individuals.

    Ans : Not my point although maybe badly put! Would it not seem logical for the purpose of a railway system to be the conveyance of those who want or need to use it to get from A to B? That’s not it’s purpose according to our capitalist rules; it’s to make money for a few, presumably very largely those who don’t want or need to use it.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    We may believe it mis-guided to cut down the rainforests in the name of 'profit' but whilst money is to made out of it they will be cut down by those in that industry who if necessary will bribe the necessary people.

    I think you are confusing capitalism with unregulated snatch and grab. You can have capitalism with rules and regulations. I mean, it may be profitable to shoot someone in the head and steal their wallet, but the fact that we criminilse such behavior doesn’t negate capitalism. We simply need minimum globalised standards of conduct in relation to labor, environmental issues and safety.

    Ans: That capitalism should need rules & regulations (which can be virtually ignored by international companies who operate 'abroad') perhaps is to admit it’s faults. Generally I think you’ll find most rules would be aimed at protecting the environment in the country where the capitalists involve live, not elsewhere

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    Put simply we are destroying the Planet;

    A thing that markets can actually HELP with - see for instance Kyoto’s quota trading.

    Ans: Kyoto mayhelp highlight the problem. Firstly the need for it was surely an admittance of the damage we’re doing and the incredible outcome of ‘carbon trading’ is surely bizarre. What are we saying to our ‘underdeveloped’ neighbours? Don't start building up your own industries and polluting the Planet, we'll do it for you and pay you (bribe?) for not producing the pollution that we will produce on your behalf? Maybe we're not destroying the planet but maybe we are. Shall we just wait-and-see?


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    the war in Iraq is for money

    There is no evidence whatsoever of that. Though I know full well it is an incredibly fashionable view.

    Ans: Again maybe the war wasn't for money. Although it's an over-simplification did we not put Saddam in power and support him until he started threatening our oil supplies? What do we now claim to be our aim; to install a democratic government? We have a democratic government in this country, do we not?
    I would argue that we do not, we have an elected dictatorship (albeit initially benign) which at regular intervals we can vote out of office to make way for a new bunch who can set about learning the ropes and once they've been learnt, normally through incompetence mess things up, get voted out and so the cycle repeats. It's called Party politics which is a good name for it but sadly for them there always comes a time when ‘the party’s over’ The business of running the country carry’s on, through the undulations, by the Establishment. A very handy arrangement for some (and it may even be the best system.available!)
    Of course this is a Conspiracy theory and can therefore be dismissed as the ramblings of an unthinking moron (& of course jealous).
    The view accepted by many as being the cause of the war with Iraq is the threat of terrorism. Who and what causes terrorism, the West or the East? If it isn't us, or even if it is us, doesn't it go some way to suggesting we’re not as clever as we think, since it clearly exists and is a growth industry. Good for the armaments industry?
    Are we increasingly locking-up our students in ‘educational zoo’s’ to teach them our existing (mainly capatalist) values (brain-washing?) I hope not. There’s more to life, or should be, than ever-increasing technology and if we can’t kick the habit of ‘money’ let’s try and modify it. If the value of a gallon of oil is £1 let’s value the cost of a walk in an undisturbed part of the country as £1 billion. Preferably let’s re-think the idea of money altogether and remove the need for the exploitation of the planet and it’s inhabitants by an ‘elite’ few, who surely are the mis-guided ones!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    What is your basis for that claim?



    Where do you go to school that you have a significant number of americans? Ahhh - Geneva... are you at boarding school - Geneva in the Summer Gstaad in the winter?

    Ill agree that the US can be overly egocentric... the land of the free.. home of the brave...

    My favorite is "the home of democracy" :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


    I dont think she was saying that though.
    Please understand I go to an international school, and in Geneva there are a lot of Americans. 35% of my school is American and 25% Arab, so what I stated was based purely on these students.
    Problem with many Americans is their pride. They come to Europe and think that we should all bow down to them and automatically approve of whatever they say because their AMericans.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deedee7)
    Re: Anti-Americanism

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    As a basis, for example, of a railway system, doesn't it seem odd that the 'purpose of the operation is to accumulate as much money as possible for, basically, those 'elite' who already have sufficient money by any rational assessment?

    Not really. If they charge too much, people won't buy tickets, hence they loose money. Plus, as said, many of the shareholders in the privatized industries are, ultimately speaking, average individuals.

    Ans : Not my point although maybe badly put! Would it not seem logical for the purpose of a railway system to be the conveyance of those who want or need to use it to get from A to B? That’s not it’s purpose according to our capitalist rules; it’s to make money for a few, presumably very largely those who don’t want or need to use it.
    Capitalism helps increase wealth for the many, including raising social mobility and increasing property for the poor. The more Capitalist a country is, the more it grows. This seems fairly indisputable. Saying that the production of a country is good but the distribution is bad isn't missing the point as well; Distribution affects production. People are selfish; Capitalism realises this and addresses it with a system of meritocracy. Welcome to the real world.

    (Original post by deedee7)
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    We may believe it mis-guided to cut down the rainforests in the name of 'profit' but whilst money is to made out of it they will be cut down by those in that industry who if necessary will bribe the necessary people.

    I think you are confusing capitalism with unregulated snatch and grab. You can have capitalism with rules and regulations. I mean, it may be profitable to shoot someone in the head and steal their wallet, but the fact that we criminilse such behavior doesn’t negate capitalism. We simply need minimum globalised standards of conduct in relation to labor, environmental issues and safety.

    Ans: That capitalism should need rules & regulations (which can be virtually ignored by international companies who operate 'abroad') perhaps is to admit it’s faults. Generally I think you’ll find most rules would be aimed at protecting the environment in the country where the capitalists involve live, not elsewhere
    Capitalism is about not having rules and regulations as the need for rules is based on the view that man is primarily destructive in an entirely free market. There are bad companies who have a bad image and they suffer for it. Good companies have good reputations and get rewarded for it. Ina free market, image is everything. The protection of individual rights is the only job of the government according to capitalism.

    (Original post by deedee7)
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    Put simply we are destroying the Planet;

    A thing that markets can actually HELP with - see for instance Kyoto’s quota trading.

    Ans: Kyoto mayhelp highlight the problem. Firstly the need for it was surely an admittance of the damage we’re doing and the incredible outcome of ‘carbon trading’ is surely bizarre. What are we saying to our ‘underdeveloped’ neighbours? Don't start building up your own industries and polluting the Planet, we'll do it for you and pay you (bribe?) for not producing the pollution that we will produce on your behalf? Maybe we're not destroying the planet but maybe we are. Shall we just wait-and-see?
    How is capitalism responsible for pollution when the 2 biggest contriubtors of greenhouse gases are the American and Chinese governments respectively?

    (Original post by deedee7)
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by deedee7
    the war in Iraq is for money

    There is no evidence whatsoever of that. Though I know full well it is an incredibly fashionable view.

    Ans: Again maybe the war wasn't for money. Although it's an over-simplification did we not put Saddam in power and support him until he started threatening our oil supplies? What do we now claim to be our aim; to install a democratic government? We have a democratic government in this country, do we not?
    I would argue that we do not, we have an elected dictatorship (albeit initially benign) which at regular intervals we can vote out of office to make way for a new bunch who can set about learning the ropes and once they've been learnt, normally through incompetence mess things up, get voted out and so the cycle repeats. It's called Party politics which is a good name for it but sadly for them there always comes a time when ‘the party’s over’ The business of running the country carry’s on, through the undulations, by the Establishment. A very handy arrangement for some (and it may even be the best system.available!)
    Of course this is a Conspiracy theory and can therefore be dismissed as the ramblings of an unthinking moron (& of course jealous).
    The view accepted by many as being the cause of the war with Iraq is the threat of terrorism. Who and what causes terrorism, the West or the East? If it isn't us, or even if it is us, doesn't it go some way to suggesting we’re not as clever as we think, since it clearly exists and is a growth industry. Good for the armaments industry?
    Are we increasingly locking-up our students in ‘educational zoo’s’ to teach them our existing (mainly capatalist) values (brain-washing?) I hope not. There’s more to life, or should be, than ever-increasing technology and if we can’t kick the habit of ‘money’ let’s try and modify it. If the value of a gallon of oil is £1 let’s value the cost of a walk in an undisturbed part of the country as £1 billion. Preferably let’s re-think the idea of money altogether and remove the need for the exploitation of the planet and it’s inhabitants by an ‘elite’ few, who surely are the mis-guided ones!
    So we're "locking up out students in educational zoos"? Well then why not make schooling voluntary and provided by the free-market? That way no locking up is done, right? Or is that capitalism?

    Got a better solution?

    (Original post by WokSz)
    Please understand I go to an international school, and in Geneva there are a lot of Americans. 35% of my school is American and 25% Arab, so what I stated was based purely on these students.
    Problem with many Americans is their pride. They come to Europe and think that we should all bow down to them and automatically approve of whatever they say because their AMericans.
    Bull****. You just don't like Americans and you're making this up to prove your point.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gideon2000uk)
    Because American spelling and pronunciation is having an influence on our language.
    Oh, why?


    The American economy is better than ours
    Ah, I see now.

    What can I say?
    Well, start by retracting the implication that the UK dictates what is or isnt acceptable in the English language.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So we're "locking up out students in educational zoos"? Well then why not make schooling voluntary and provided by the free-market? That way no locking up is done, right? Or is that capitalism?

    Got a better solution?

    I did say I hope we're not creating educational zoo's! I do think 'education' should be voluntary and that means the choice should be left to those involved and not imposed by the state That might provide a more balanced result. So far as the provision of education being left to the 'free-market' being capitalism it would presumably only be regarded as such if the object of the school was to make money rather than provide 'education' Is not the ultimate success of any 'capitalist' organisation it's ability to succeed by competition and put it's rivals out of business? Thaty leaves a single monopoly organisation, something very close to socialism or even communism? and so the cycle repeats! It seems to me we have most things the wrong way round. Perhaps the government (UK Ltd) should be 'privatised' and be accountable to it's shareholders, the citizens, and all other activities 'nationilsed'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Will Grimes1)
    I dont think it is unfair to dislike someone because of their goverment we all have to experience prejudice because of our goverment. And America need our sympathy least of all. the majority of people voted for the bush administration therefore the majority of America have the wrong values. America is also trying to take over the world

    The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.

    This is a real site with people such as Donald Rumsfeld supporting it
    http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
    So do I and so does Margaret Thatcher. Whats your point?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gideon2000uk)
    Our history is a cohesive whole and there are remnents of traditions which do penetrate back into the farthest anals of our history. Conservatives in America cannot appeal to history because they don't really have one. The Native Americans culture was crushed by the immigrants who populated America, and what is left is a cultural melting pot held together by fairly vaccuous values, cultures and traditions, with far less depth than those seen in Europe.

    Look around you. Look at the Royal Family, Parliament, Our Politcal Parties... even our post boxes... They are wonderfully British. American society is so fractured and divided, iti s very difficult to appeal to anything beyond constitutional values which can unify people in quite the same way as the cup of tea can in Britain.
    Im sorry, but ive not read so much garbage on this issue in a long time. I sincerely hope you posting this tongue-in-cheek.

    Im interested to know if you've ever visited Bradford, and secondly, how a deep, traditional culture such as that seen in Aulnay-sous-Bois constitutes social cohesion? Maybe the 13 year olds who applauded the honour killing of a sister for living like a German, would have something to say about Beer festivals and Bratwurst.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Im sorry, but ive not read so much garbage on this issue in a long time. I sincerely hope you posting this tongue-in-cheek.

    Im interested to know if you've ever visited Bradford, and secondly, how a deep, traditional culture such as that seen in Aulnay-sous-Bois constitutes social cohesion? Maybe the 13 year olds who applauded the honour killing of a sister for living like a German, would have something to say about Beer festivals and Bratwurst.
    I think my attack on America was a bit harsh, however I certainly do not retract my claim that British culture is stronger, and in my view better than American culture when taken as a whole.

    Allow me to say also that I believe America to have many fine qualities which are not possessed by other nations. A love of freedom born out of their war against the Brits (even though they were actually being taxed less than we were at the time...) as well as emotional openness, warmth of character and an exceptional can-do attitude.

    Instead of taking the arrogent view that my coutry is best (and I still personally believe this to be largely true). I will compromise and say that in a plurality of nations and cultures, America has it's place with Europe as being a bastion of freedom for the world and a damn fine example to those countries who still preach hatred and barbarity.

    Ohhh. and i'm a fan of the Project For the New American Century too.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deedee7)
    I did say I hope we're not creating educational zoo's! I do think 'education' should be voluntary and that means the choice should be left to those involved and not imposed by the state That might provide a more balanced result. So far as the provision of education being left to the 'free-market' being capitalism it would presumably only be regarded as such if the object of the school was to make money rather than provide 'education' Is not the ultimate success of any 'capitalist' organisation it's ability to succeed by competition and put it's rivals out of business? Thaty leaves a single monopoly organisation, something very close to socialism or even communism? and so the cycle repeats! It seems to me we have most things the wrong way round. Perhaps the government (UK Ltd) should be 'privatised' and be accountable to it's shareholders, the citizens, and all other activities 'nationilsed'
    So what you're saying is that education should be voluntary, government run institutions funded by the general taxpayer...?

    What about parents who don't want to send their kids to a state school, but want to go private?

    A companies success depends entirely on it's ability to provide a good education; Setting up a business does not automaticall generate money, it needs to provide a service which people often use, voluntarily! A predator monopoly cannot exist in an entirely free market. And your point about so much capitalism will eventually lead us to communism is so absurd it doesn't even bear thinking about.

    And no, the government should be government run. However, it should sell off it's assets which are not required to uphold individual rights.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    So do I and so does Margaret Thatcher. Whats your point?
    Margaret Thatcher's completely lost her marbles?:rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    It is a private Christian university in Tennessee. What exactly did the guy expect? I'm fairly sure that you'd never see this happen in a public university or any university in the non-redneck parts of the country...
    It was this university in Kentucky: http://www.cumberlandcollege.edu/

    They found out that the student was gay when they came across his MySpace site. The college president claims the rules were made clear to the student before he enrolled. I don't think one can assert that this represents the values of an entire nation though.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BellaCat)
    It was this university in Kentucky: http://www.cumberlandcollege.edu/

    They found out that the student was gay when they came across his MySpace site. The college president claims the rules were made clear to the student before he enrolled. I don't think one can assert that this represents the values of an entire nation though.
    The values of the South definately do not represent the much more liberal views of the particularly east and west coast. Unfortunately though homophobic values are prevelant...even in London 30 yrs ago my friends aunt was thrown out of St pauls girls (posh private school here) for openly being a lesbian.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    OMG. But remember the other 90% in Britain are covered by the NHS. The 15% of Americans without insurance have nothing. Don't you understand that simply point jesus... So there is a difference. The UK looks after the sick regardless of income...in the US if your not earning enough you recieve sub-standard health care and none at all depending on your illness. Don't you see the culture difference?
    Google 'medicaid' and 'Section 8 Housing'.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 9, 2008
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.