USA help was all bought and paid for with the Marshall Plan...US never does anything unless it thinks it will gain from it...With the UK on its knees the US also managed to get the USD made to be the new world currency via the Bretton Woods System and eventually eliminate the gold standard, also its new found position gave the USA the ability to hand out handy "suggestions" on military spending by leveraging its position in giving aid....USA made out like a bandit after WW2...USA was basically the only major country to be pretty much untouched by conflict and come out far more prosper es than when the war began...ok it burned up some resources and man power but main land USA didnt have to be rebuilt from scratch like in Europe, Japan etc. Im not saying getting paid for help is good or bad, but dont come on here making out the USA was/is some generous benefactor assisting out of the goodness of its heart when the reality is totally different. In addition the USA was in a better position militarily to fight the Japanese due to the Pacific being on the west coast and a having direct line to Japan...would it make sense for UK to send a large proportion of its ships round the world or keep them for fighting in the Atlantic, Med, English Chan etc??? Resource Allocation!! Also, yes the USA was waiting to see what would happen during the war and how things would develop, it joined in late only when Pearl Habour got hit, the war had been going on for 2 years prior...Think about it...Now Scat.
To the question of how long $10/hour + social benefits can last, here in Denmark minimum wages is around $14/hour I believe. Unemployment benefits (good for life) are about twice American minimum wages and our income tax I believe is the 3rd highest in the world (48%-67% or so). No special benefits go with unemployment benefits or minimum wages because health care is free for all citizens (as is education up to and including university btw.). The precise figures may be slightly off, but only slightly and shouldn't distort the bigger picture. According to the principles I have learned from this thread, this monstrosity should not be able to exist, and yet our unemployment rate is currently 3% and GDP per capita is higher than that of the US. Can someone tell me how this is possible? Before you tell me I'm not grateful for being bailed out in WW1 or WW2 or whatever or that I should not tell Americans what to do, I'd like to say that 1. I'm very grateful (although i remain largely unconvinced that U-boat warfare 60 years ago has much bearing on the question that OP asked), and 2. I'm not telling anybody anything, I'm asking people with more economic insight than myself an earnest question. It's not like this Danish construction is without problems. Thanks in advance, Smurf PS: To my conservative American fellow traders, why are you always so exceptionally angry?
"The reason is these are the one's that do not want to work because they think society owes them. Nobody owes you jack shit in this world and if someone is good enough to hire you your lucky" _______________________________________________________ PS: To my conservative American fellow traders, why are you always so exceptionally angry? _________________________________________________________ If people think society owes them, people walk around angry. I think anger is a fashionable commodity currently in the US. Ps Smurf. Thanks for the words of gratitude.
Speak for yourself. You don't need to apologize for others. Nothing said here is anything to be ashamed of. The OP was trying to point out our "shortcomings", coming from a country with likely an equal number of "shortcomings."
I for one am not angry. I am happy. Happy I don't live off the state. I'm happy I make a good living in one of the most competitive jobs on the planet. I'm happy that my kids will never hear from me the words deserve,fair share, and entitled. I donate alot of money to charities like st. jude each year and that makes me happy. What does not make me happy is the government taking my money and paying for totally bloated social welfare that encourages an underclass of mediocrity.
Hi jd I have a question. Hypothetically speaking we'll contrast two models and call them the US model and the Scandinavian model respectively (I'm a Dane). In the US model, welfare is almost non-existent. You may not feel that, but I ensure you a trip to Northern Europe would blow your mind in terms of the 'bloatedness' of social welfare. However, poverty breeds crime and so a lot more funds have to go into building and maintaining prisons, resocialisation programs and police. In the Scandinavian model, social welfare is huge and the state (i.e. tax-payers) fund a segment of the population that lives modestly but does not per se need anything. However, they spend their lives doing nothing comfortably, but at least crime is very low. If a study showed these two models cost exactly the same, which model would you prefer? I prefer the Scandinavian one but I'm biased since I'm used to it. I also have a nagging sense of not being safe when I'm in America, but I may be paranoid from reading sensationalist news stories. In any case, it's an interesting difference in philosophy. Cheers, Smurf
Have I got this right nealvan. A smaller government means that people will look after their own health. Are you saying that on average the US citizens are healthier than the UK citizens regards f9
I think that if the US had the same attitude toward drugs that Northern Europe does there would be a lot less crime here and far fewer criminals and prisoners sitting in jail at a high cost to the tax payer. War or drugs is a fiasco, treatment not prison for drug offenders and decriminalizing and regulating is the way to go. Same with prostitution. It is a fact that when you bring these activities in to the light and regulate and tax them and decriminalize them crime, violence, disease, and cost to society in general all are reduced. The religions nuts will get their knickers in a twist though, that's the downside, but then again just about everything pisses them off and they don't trust adults to make their own decisions (because they are weak minded and feel the need for religion to help them control their actions they think everyone else does too) anyway so its about time they were put on ignore by the rest of the country.
Unfortunately this is a major problem with us Americans and I do feel I have to apoligize for the stupidity. People jumped all over the guy with remarks about him being from another country. This should not be the case when probably a majority in our country believe the same thing about minimum wage. They couldn't just stick to the discussion. Nobody in Europe owes anybody in USA anything for something that happened over 60 years ago when most on this board weren't even born.
what is wrong with abusing people?! there are some type of work that one might do even if (s)he does not need the money, for instance doing research, trading, being the CEO of a company but the remaining jobs are mostly abuse of the fucked up ones this abuse is inevitable, because taking advantage of other beings is human/animal nature, and just, because humans are pathetic beings and deserve what so ever comes upon them this can only be changed by replacing the humans that are currently being abused with other beings, maybe by building robots, or altering the genes of some animals like monkeys, so they are only smart enough to perform the necessary tasks, but isn't that what most people already are? why re-create what already exists?