Jump to content

Thoughts / Opinions on the Future of Western Countries


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, californiasardar1 said:

In the UK, people generally have to make similar choice, but you had opportunities in 2017 and 2019 to vote for a Labour party that was actually proposing real, sweeping changes that would benefit the average person. Americans have not had that opportunity in my lifetime.

He had proposed some decent policies. The way he was hounded out of power with certain allegations made me quite suspicious that he was a threat to the status quo from an economic perspective. Unfortunately, he seemed to relish courting a certain burgeoning minority from which he was selecting key shadow cabinet posts, lol, that the Indian demographic perceived to be a problem for understandable historical reasons.

It will never be discussed openly (because it would cause the asking of certain awkward questions that the architects of the current cultural climate have deemed to be off the agenda), but the Indian vote was absolutely key in the previous election. The Red Wall of the North may have been the obvious reason for the Conservative win, but the Indian swing behind right-wing candidates in response to a potential sticky situation had the Islamo-Left come to power was a deciding factor IMO. I feel this is a phenomenon that is being discussed quite openly behind neo-liberal, leftwing (if we can pretend those two factions represent the same thing) closed doors, and it will be addressed implicitly in the future come election time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think that these cultural issues are a big distraction designed to obscure the much more serious economic issues. In most Western countries, the gap between the rich and poor has been steadily growi

Your one-note appraisal of the situation is disappointing. Unsurprising yet disappointing. I give the Puritan settlers their dues without diminishing their inhumane treatment of the natives. I can hol

Difficult to say. clearly majority have gone away from God rather than attending Church but are many are living more ethically e.g veganism is popular, people better aware of environmental issues

Posted Images

11 hours ago, californiasardar1 said:

 

Well, if I could afford a house worth a million pounds in the UK on a 30k pound salary, I should move over there!

 

 

I completely agree with you about the healthcare system and vacation time.

 

I think the reason the US doesn't have a universal healthcare system like the UK is simple. Here is something that I have noticed about social safety net programs:

1. It is EXTREMELY difficult to establish social safety net programs (it takes a lot of political power and will, and there is resistance from the wealthy and powerful, who launch media campaigns to scare people away from such programs and stigmatize them).

2. Once a social safety net program is established, people realize how much they like it, and it is EXTREMELY difficult for politicians to take it away. Even right-wing politicians will largely concede that they need to protect these programs.

 

Because of point 1, social safety net programs typically can only be established during extraordinary times when people are desperate or receptive to big changes for various reasons. The NHS was established in the post-war period, for example. The US made various strides in adding to the social safety net during the 1930s, 1964-66, and 2009-2010. But the politicians in power fell short of establishing an NHS-style system during these very brief windows of opportunity. Outside of these once-in-a-generation opportunities, it is virtually impossible to get anything done.

Long story short: the UK left made better use of its once-in-a-generation opportunities than the American left.

 

Other than that, I see similar political problems in both countries. People keep voting for right-wing politicians who will screw them over economically instead of voting for people who are proposing new programs that could help them. Why? Right-wing politicians know how to scare people away from changes that could help them, and they know how to distract people by getting them to focus on culture war issues.

 

Americans keep having to choose between corporatist politicians. One corporatist party (Republicans) caters to racist whites who hate black people and immigrants. Another corporatist party (Democrats) pretends to be progressive, but focuses mostly on identity issues instead of economic issues (because their corporate masters don't mind them focusing on identity politics, but they do mind economic reforms that would make them pay more). In the UK, people generally have to make similar choice, but you had opportunities in 2017 and 2019 to vote for a Labour party that was actually proposing real, sweeping changes that would benefit the average person. Americans have not had that opportunity in my lifetime.

From what I understand is that the insurance companies hold too much sway.

In an average US salary, how much percentage of income goes into the medical insurance.

What is the point of paying into insurance when it comes to using it, the insurance companies do everything they can not to pay. 

In the UK, our NHS money is funded from our National Insurance contributions and I think we probably pay less into our healthcare than people do in the US, so what is your insurance contributions paying into?

NI is a tax but at least it's an upfront tax, not this sly stealthy cr*p where it looks like you pay less tax but your money is taken elsewhere.

The US maybe a vast place, but if it was done a state by state level where some states are between 5 million to 10 million people, I think it is quite do-able. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

From what I understand is that the insurance companies hold too much sway.

In an average US salary, how much percentage of income goes into the medical insurance.

What is the point of paying into insurance when it comes to using it, the insurance companies do everything they can not to pay. 

In the UK, our NHS money is funded from our National Insurance contributions and I think we probably pay less into our healthcare than people do in the US, so what is your insurance contributions paying into?

NI is a tax but at least it's an upfront tax, not this sly stealthy cr*p where it looks like you pay less tax but your money is taken elsewhere.

The US maybe a vast place, but if it was done a state by state level where some states are between 5 million to 10 million people, I think it is quite do-able. 

 

You won't get an argument from me defending insurance companies and the American healthcare model.

As I said in my post, the wealthy and powerful (e.g. insurance companies) do everything they can to prevent social safety net programs from being established and/or expanding. They own most of the politicians, and they are very adept at scaring voters by spreading misinformation and framing things in misleading ways. For example, some more left-wing democrats proposed abolishing private health insurance and moving to a more efficient, universal healthcare system. The talking point became that these democrats were "trying to take away your health insurance." Technically it is true, they wanted to take it away and replace it with something better. You can see how misleading it is, but one-liners like that go a long way in politics.

It's not the size of the America that makes an NHS-style system impossible. If such a thing were proposed at state levels, the same media campaign against it would take place in those states.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

He had proposed some decent policies. The way he was hounded out of power with certain allegations made me quite suspicious that he was a threat to the status quo from an economic perspective. Unfortunately, he seemed to relish courting a certain burgeoning minority from which he was selecting key shadow cabinet posts, lol, that the Indian demographic perceived to be a problem for understandable historical reasons.

It will never be discussed openly (because it would cause the asking of certain awkward questions that the architects of the current cultural climate have deemed to be off the agenda), but the Indian vote was absolutely key in the previous election. The Red Wall of the North may have been the obvious reason for the Conservative win, but the Indian swing behind right-wing candidates in response to a potential sticky situation had the Islamo-Left come to power was a deciding factor IMO. I feel this is a phenomenon that is being discussed quite openly behind neo-liberal, leftwing (if we can pretend those two factions represent the same thing) closed doors, and it will be addressed implicitly in the future come election time.

 

Divide and conquer, of course. Left-leaning coalitions are easy to defeat because they are made up of many different groups, and it is very easy to make it seem like one group is being favoured over another. Whatever issues Sikhs in the UK might have with another group, I think Corbyn (and even more so McDonnell) would have been great allies for the Sikhs. It's a shame. I get the impression that a majority of Sikhs vote Labour (although there are some who love the Tories ... they are the kind of odd people who feel proud that they can claim that their ancestors were from former British colonies). Do a majority of Hindus support the Tories?

I don't understand why the British voters were not more receptive to Corbyn's proposals. They sounded pretty good to me: fund the NHS properly, nationalize the railways, etc. I agree that he was clearly a threat to the status quo. Note how it came out later that high-ranking Labour officials were relieved when Labour narrowly lost the 2017 election! I think something similar would have happened in the US if Bernie Sanders had gotten the Democratic party nomination to run for President. Most Dem politicians and most "progressive" business leaders (e.g. Bill Gates) would have privately (or even publicaly) preferred Trump to Sanders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, californiasardar1 said:

 

You won't get an argument from me defending insurance companies and the American healthcare model.

As I said in my post, the wealthy and powerful (e.g. insurance companies) do everything they can to prevent social safety net programs from being established and/or expanding. They own most of the politicians, and they are very adept at scaring voters by spreading misinformation and framing things in misleading ways. For example, some more left-wing democrats proposed abolishing private health insurance and moving to a more efficient, universal healthcare system. The talking point became that these democrats were "trying to take away your health insurance." Technically it is true, they wanted to take it away and replace it with something better. You can see how misleading it is, but one-liners like that go a long way in politics.

It's not the size of the America that makes an NHS-style system impossible. If such a thing were proposed at state levels, the same media campaign against it would take place in those states.

The reason why if it is done by state is that if you start on a smaller scale with some flyover state like North Dakota or Arkansas and it is seen as successful and better than the current system, then other states will follow suit.

The elites can probably handle one or two problems but if all the states to implement a comprehensive health system simultaneously then the elites will find it difficult to handle.

Plus if it becomes a bottom up grass roots movement then you might stand a better chance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use