"Third World Empire"

[Livewire]

Thread title is quoted directly from Ralph Nader's speech at my university this past Wednesday.

How far behind other nations has the United States fallen since the end of WWII? Many nations in Western Europe, Canada, and the developed Asian nations sport better healthcare, better infrastructure, higher voter turnout, lower disease rates, higher life expectancy, more women in high positions of power, higher college graduation & literacy rates than the U.S.A, to name a few of the important categories.

What is the cause of this? Is the US's war involvement post-WWII to blame? (Korea and Vietnam, lack of a domestic policy focus) Or is it poor domestic policy by the nations politicians? How do we break out of this monotonous slump?



Discuss.

 

[Zet]

I think it is because of how the generation was raised and how traditional it is to hold onto old beliefs. Anyone who is smart and can make a great contribution to politics, and how the country should be run in America is shunned, and called a traitorous bastard for trying to make America look weak and having to rely on others.

Other countries are more open to the idea of allowing women to have higher positions because they can bring in great contributions and ideas to workplaces and trying to bring more money into the economy. As for higher voter turnouts, politicians focus more on making the country better without having to resort to "I'll make sure gays don't marry", "I'll make sure the rich don't get higher taxes" etc And healthcare is a given because they know there are people who just can't afford expensive surgery and trips to the Doctors over a cold.

 

[donavannj]

One of the primary causes is that a significant portion of our tax revenue goes to military expenses to help defend our NATO allies. Tying into that are several costly and sometimes misguided wars as well as the interventions that some ask the United States to do because the United States is one of the few countries that can intervene at times.

As for healthcare, though I do agree that we are behind in overall access to healthcare (but not by much if you actually know whether to go with a state, federal, or regional program for your individual needs), I do think that whether we are actually behind or not in quality of healthcare is debatable, especially relative to Canada. Sure, we have lobbying by pharmaceutical companies that keeps things from actually getting approved, but many in Canada who can afford to are willing to cross the border for quicker access to generally higher quality healthcare and service, at least in Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan.

A lack of better infrastructure has a fair bit to do with the logistical challenges of maintaining a top-tier road system in a positively massive country in which people live in almost every corner of it, even if it's just one or two every half mile or so. And those same logistical challenges also prevent better spreading of railway systems. And let's not forget our individualist culture and many metropolitan areas having multiple centers for jobs that prevent point to point mass transportation systems from being as effective as they are in more densely populated countries.

The voter turnout disparity is absolutely to do with our individualistic culture where a lot of people just don't even bother caring. Though I do prefer not being required to vote over having mandatory voting like they do in Australia, as I'd prefer someone to be making a 100% informed decision when voting as opposed to tossing in a careless vote simply because they have to vote or be fined.

The disease rates tie very much into our individualistic culture, but do have something to do with healthcare access as well. And then, of course, there's also our history as a manufacturing powerhouse (we still definitely are one, believe it or not) that is still echoing through our population in terms of diseases and such. Life expectancy also is affected by these very same things.

More women in positions of power does have to do with our much more culturally varied individual views and stereotypes about women, as much of America has only recently come around to accept women in positions of authority.

Higher college graduation rates ties into the individualistic culture YET AGAIN, as well as the logistical challenges of providing financial aid for every last student to the degree that many other developed countries do.

Literacy rates again are primarily due to our individualistic culture.

In summation, a lot of it is due to very effective lobbying on the parts of corporations, but others are due to logistical challenges that no other country really has to deal with. And then there's the whole we don't want to pay for it factor that affects almost all of this, which is rooted in our individual-centric culture.

 

[Livewire]

Pretty much what Don said. The "Military Industrial Complex", Ronald Reagan, Corporate interests, etc, I think are most to blame. We've just taken everything to excess it seems.

 

[OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire]

I think that it's our lack of focus on domestic policy, America seems to have lost sight of itself, pre war world II a lot of the policy was domestic and very little foreign.
Also we waste way too much money on Weapons, cutting taxes on the rich, and welfare spending rather than using that money to educate the people, promoting better heath care, ect.
Though in all honesty I don't think the US is in the third world empire part of the scale, yet...it's heading there though...

 

[Moonmover]

Judging from the posts above me, a bunch of nerds on an internet forum about Pokémon are several times over more intelligent than most of our politicians and business leaders.

That probably is not a good sign.

 

[Livewire]

Judging from the posts above me, a bunch of nerds on an internet forum about Pokémon are several times over more intelligent than most of our politicians and business leaders.

That probably is not a good sign.

Sad but true. However, one day this generation of nerds will contribute to our elected offices, some of them may even become senators or House Reps. All hope is not lost. But waiting another generation to fix the problems America faces is a death sentence for this country. We can't afford to wait around, action has to be taken now.

 

[Esper]

There are some obstructionists here in America, it's true. As a country we've never had a big talk on the direction we're going or if we need to change how we do things. (I mean, people talk like this to score political points, but it's not genuine like it was with lots of European countries after WWII when they really did need to rethink things.) That makes it easy for people to oppose changes as a rule instead of asking which changes need to be made. And currently we're too polarized, too political to accomplish much of anything. I would point at least some of the blame to our 2-party system. It's too easy under it to have a back-and-forth name-calling war.

We've also really gotten quite anti-immigrant, I think. I can't speak for past decades, but I don't think we're that welcoming and as a consequence we're not getting a lot of talent because they're going elsewhere.

 

[donavannj]

We've also really gotten quite anti-immigrant, I think. I can't speak for past decades, but I don't think we're that welcoming and as a consequence we're not getting a lot of talent because they're going elsewhere.

If you look at conservative views throughout American history, portions of America's populace has always been vehemently against a certain immigrant group. Despised immigrant groups that come to mind just off the top of my head are the Chinese in California in both the mid-1800s as well as the 1920s, the Irish in the 1910s and 1900s, the Japanese between 1920 and 1945, and Hispanics throughout American history.

There are people who are obstructionist toward any sort of change, but many times it is the older generation, who do have a different set of expectations and social norms than younger generations do.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

As for healthcare, though I do agree that we are behind in overall access to healthcare (but not by much if you actually know whether to go with a state, federal, or regional program for your individual needs), I do think that whether we are actually behind or not in quality of healthcare is debatable, especially relative to Canada. Sure, we have lobbying by pharmaceutical companies that keeps things from actually getting approved, but many in Canada who can afford to are willing to cross the border for quicker access to generally higher quality healthcare and service, at least in Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan.

I think there may be a little bit of confusion on that scenario.

Our quality of care is the same if not better (longer life expectancies, infant mortality rate, etc). The long waits aren't because it is operated by the government (because it isn't. Services are provided by private entities.), but since everyone has access to health care everyone uses it. Also a lack of smaller local clinics. But, in general, more people using the system means longer lines. Less people having access to the system, means much smaller lines, but also more sick and dying people. So, I think it's a fair trade-off.

Each Province and Territory has their own implementation of the single-payer health care system. That means they decide what is covered under the public insurance plan. Given that it is on the public dollar, new and experimental treatments take some time before they are covered. They wait for the data to come in. Each Province and Territory makes their own assessment and decision independently (which I think is strange, but whatever. I think there should be one Canada-wide decision. But, I digress). However, there is nothing preventing such treatments from taking place in Canada for a premium. Often the demand just isn't there.

Some come to the United States to jump the queue (which I think is fine. Honestly, do whatever you can to make yourself or your family better, faster) or more commonly for experimental treatments that may not yet be covered under their public plan. Also if an non-covered experimental treatment is offered in Canada, they may still come to the States just because it is cheaper (everything in America is cheaper than Canada).

But, overall we pay less and see better results, so I wouldn't say that the US has higher-quality healthcare.

 

[Dakotah]

The last time I had to go to the hospital was for kidney stones. Any one who has had them can attest to the pain these cause. Ask any doctor and they'll tell you it's the third worst pain a human can experience, behind heart attacks and labour. I was driven to the hospital by a co-worker, 30 seconds after entering the hospital I was put into a wheel chair by a triage nurse, my OHIP card information was recorded and I was sent to be treated by a doctor. Received a good dose of morphine for the pain and spent the next several hours in a hospital bed while the doctors ran tests on my urine. There was blood in it. I was later given a prescription for pain meds and anti-inflammatory meds which costs me $110 in total. Two days later the stones passed and a week later I was able to stop taking the meds.

So, to summarize, here is the total cost to me for my treatment:

Hospital stay: $0
Testing by the doctors: $0
Morphine administered: $0
Prescription meds: $110

I experienced no line ups. No waiting. No having to wait for an available bed. No having to wait for an available doctor. My care was immediate, efficient, and professionally done. And while I do not pretend to claim that this experience is shared by all patients, it is the type of care that more often than not patience do receive in Ontario. We are very proud of the health care we receive. Over 86% of us are happy with it. That's saying something I think.