Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why do Americans put up with their politics? Watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I was looking at some healthcare stats - and was wondering why Americans elect politicians opposed to any form of healthcare reforms for example (i.e. the Nov mid-terms).

    A simple glance at healthcare stats - shows that the USA spends by far the largest amount of money around 2.24 trillion, or 16% of GDP, or around $7,200 per person (compared with the UK at 8.4% of GDP and around $3,000 per person). Yet around 40 million are uninsured, and millions more have the stress of potenitally losing insurance. Americans still claim they have the best and fairest healthcare - why do people support this collosal waste of public money in their droves? Ignorance? Any Americans want to shed some light on it?

    It extends to other issues, for example poor people voting for parties that give massive tax cuts to the richest, but raise their own taxes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    They are just stupid by nature?

    They elected Bush twice you see...

    trollface.jpeg
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Because they're indoctrinated by Fox News into believing that any vaguely socialist policy is evil, and any politician who supports it is a Red under the bed who must be burnt at the stake. All this despite the fact there is massive support for policies that are already in place that are also socialist in their nature, like Medicaid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    1. American politicians are given huge donations by interest groups like the health insurance industry.

    2. Tax breaks for the rich plays into the American dream - all Americans somehow think that one day they will be so rich that they will be able to benefit from such tax breaks.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The pressure groups wanting to stop the healthcare reforms are really powerful. AMA stopped the reforms when they were introduced in the 1990s. Government can't just ignore the AMA.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    because were freaken awesome dude
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I think Muffinz is pretty accurate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It's just a different mentality. You have to remember how vehemently most Americans will defend classic liberalism (Or what they call conservatism) because that's basically what their country is built on, no government intervention where it's not necessary.

    It's hard for us to understand because we've always had a strong welfare state, a healthcare system and in general a fairly large government as far as we can remember, but in America that isn't the case and any government intervention is seen as an infringement of personal rights and liberties. F.e with healthcare, even though it makes more sense to create an NHS style system, a lot of Americans won't vote for it based on principle, because it goes against what their country was fundamentally built on, basically.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tieyourmotherdown)
    You have to remember how vehemently most Americans will defend classic liberalism
    You would think so. But, most events they don't seem socially liberal.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    at least American politics is far more exciting than british
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Muffinz)
    1. American politicians are given huge donations by interest groups like the health insurance industry.

    2. Tax breaks for the rich plays into the American dream - all Americans somehow think that one day they will be so rich that they will be able to benefit from such tax breaks.
    This. They certainly don't have the best and fairest healthcare system in the world, it's subjective though.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    This should answer your question... very good article...


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8474611.stm
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    It could equally be argued that Americans vote for candidates opposed to healthcare reform because they think alternative proposals are genuinely weaker than the system in place, and believe that such proposals would be against their interests in the long-term as a larger state is generally detrimental to all.

    EDIT: Also, American politics is far superior to British politics, in my mind; at least there's a varied spectrum of political ideologies to choose from (combined with a marginally better electoral system), instead of a choice of 'two-and-a-half' relatively centrist parties with relatively centrist candidates, like we have currently.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    You would think so. But, most events they don't seem socially liberal.
    Yeah, it is odd. I saw a poll which showed how most Americans choose what party they vote for according to social and moral issues, not economic ones, which would explain why a lot of Americans label themselves as conservatives, because socially they are, despite the fact that they side with classic liberal economics.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    because most are just stupid.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tieyourmotherdown)
    Yeah, it is odd. I saw a poll which showed how most Americans choose what party they vote for according to social and moral issues, not economic ones, which would explain why a lot of Americans label themselves as conservatives, because socially they are, despite the fact that they side with classic liberal economics.
    But conservative economic policies are often very similar to liberal economics. - Lower taxation and less government interference in order to leave people free to develop wealth. Edmund Burke spoke out against governments of huge spending and debts, at a time when the Tory PM succeeded in massively reducing the national debt by liberalising the economy.

    As others have said, American politics has a refreshingly large spectrum compared to over here. There is ultimately very little between Labour & Conservative ideologically, something which can't be said of Democrats & Republicans at the moment.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tc92)
    But conservative economic policies are often very similar to liberal economics. - Lower taxation and less government interference in order to leave people free to develop wealth. Edmund Burke spoke out against governments of huge spending and debts, at a time when the Tory PM succeeded in massively reducing the national debt by liberalising the economy.

    As others have said, American politics has a refreshingly large spectrum compared to over here. There is ultimately very little between Labour & Conservative ideologically, something which can't be said of Democrats & Republicans at the moment.
    It's funny you say that, as the Americans I know consider the Republicans and Democrats to be pretty similar. I think it's grass is always greener myself...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    It's funny you say that, as the Americans I know consider the Republicans and Democrats to be pretty similar. I think it's grass is always greener myself...
    Interesting. I think that may well be the case. Of course, for years it was British politics which was ideologically divided, particularly around the time of Thatcher. It was (arguably) New Labour that led to this situation of mostly centrist parties, which has the benefit/negative of making coalition governments easier to form. And in America, it's only now with Obama that the ideological divide seems to be emerging between some degree of socialism and the Tea Party idea of fiscal conservatism and small government. After all, George Bush took many measures which, taken by Obama now, would be considered 'socialist', greatly increasing the national debt.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tc92)
    Interesting. I think that may well be the case. Of course, for years it was British politics which was ideologically divided, particularly around the time of Thatcher. It was (arguably) New Labour that led to this situation of mostly centrist parties, which has the benefit/negative of making coalition governments easier to form. And in America, it's only now with Obama that the ideological divide seems to be emerging between some degree of socialism and the Tea Party idea of fiscal conservatism and small government. After all, George Bush took many measures which, taken by Obama now, would be considered 'socialist', greatly increasing the national debt.
    I can't argue with that I guess polarisation/blurring of party lines goes in ebbs and flows, and given a while it will happen to the UK again. Personally I'd prefer Britain's current status to the vitriolic hatred that has poisoned US politics.
    • Offline

      0
      (Original post by caroline147)
      It could equally be argued that Americans vote for candidates opposed to healthcare reform because they think alternative proposals are genuinely weaker than the system in place, and believe that such proposals would be against their interests in the long-term as a larger state is generally detrimental to all.
      The chances of this being true over the explanation in spazman's article:

      the voters' preference for emotional engagement over reasonable argument has allowed the Republican Party to blind them to their own real interests.

      The Republicans have learnt how to stoke up resentment against the patronising liberal elite, all those do-gooders who assume they know what poor people ought to be thinking.
      Right-wing politics has become a vehicle for channelling this popular anger against intellectual snobs.


      The result is that many of America's poorest citizens have a deep emotional attachment to a party that serves the interests of its richest.

      is practically nil. Whenever there's an explanation that people rationally decide to shoot themselves in the foot, verses an explanation that people emotionally, and stupidly do so, the emotional and stupid one is just about always the answer.
     
     
     
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. 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

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