The obvious difference being that in the decades that followed the decline of the British empire, particularly after the close of WWII, the UK expanded the social safety net, enjoyed greater economic equality, and was strongly democratic - at least until the last two decades anyway. You actually have a point in saying that the US is still relatively quite strong, even in spite of China’s being in the ascendant; however, that outward political strength belies the fact that the US is deteriorating rapidly from within.
The US is like a cancer patient. We won’t know she’s really sick until she’s coughing and shitting blood.
The one person that has done the most to put the USA into decline is IMO Rupert Murdoch. But he had enthusiastic powerful helpers. And many helped him for the wrong reasons.
Probably the same reason that the US is brought up in literally every thread, regardless of whether it’s about the US or not. Plus, it annoys me how much of a pass China and the CCP gets, especially around here. Also, in this case, if we are going to be discussing the US it seems right to compare us to a peer or near-peer power, not to nations who aren’t in the same league. China is the second largest economy, is active globally on pretty much all fronts, is constantly touted as the next great thing, is a near peer militarily, and so it seems that it’s a valid yardstick to compare to the US.
Sure you do (have to squint…IMHO of course). Our police forces aren’t out of control. This isn’t to say we don’t have problems…we do…but if you want to see out of control police forces it’s really not that difficult to see. If you want to see real brutality wrt to police against protesters, that’s not hard to see either. If you want to see this over not a compressed timeframe of a month or two but of years, that’s not hard to see either. This is what annoys me about arguments such as this…it looks at things in a vacuum and makes apples to orangutans comparisons. It’s also using variable yardsticks. For the US right now at this time the protests are bad. For the US, right now and at this current time the police are ‘out of control’. For the US things are bad. But relatively speaking we aren’t any where near the gloom and doom or edge of destruction or whatever other ridiculous thing being set forth. So, yeah…you need to squint and put on your colored glasses to think that the US is headed towards a fascist/communist totalitarian 3rds world poverty stricken whatever, and you have to do so compared to the US or other highly evolved and prosperous nations.
I’m sure you do. That’s bias, IMHO. Of course, you can say the same thing about me. From my perspective, actually having lived in poverty in the US and seen it first hand in many other countries, we don’t tick any of those boxes unless you squint and you filter everything from your own bias. Again, this isn’t to say we are perfect and have no problems…far from it. But our problems are those of a first world superpower with a diverse, often confrontational public who are often at odds with themselves on what we should be doing and how we should do it. Countries that REALLY tick those boxes such that you don’t have to squint are pretty apparent. One has but to look at our near peer competitor China to actually see those things naked and out there in the open, no squinting required.
Except we don’t have the worst wealth inequality. We had the worst, per your cite, of the G-7 nations. Take that to the G-20 and that’s no longer the case. And that’s the G-20…not of all nations.
You claimed 10’s of millions in absolute poverty. The UN has a definition for what absolute poverty is. Provide a cite for your assertion or retract it…or just ignore the call. Up to you. Saying we have homeless and food insecurity does not demonstrate your claim. It shows we have relative poverty, which is what I said…our poor are poor relative to the general US population. They aren’t poor relative to poverty in Mexico, or China, or sub-Saharan Africa or many other places. There simply aren’t 10’s of millions of Americans living in poverty comparable to those other places or worse places…which IS WHAT ABSOLUTE POVERTY MEANS.
China is the number 2 economic power on the planet. They aren’t ‘developing’, though I know they have striven to keep that designation for their own purposes. I’m bring them in specifically because they are often compared to the US, and they are the only near peer we have. Also to underscore how erroneous it is when folks assert how great China is and how they are the next world hyper power. In China they have literally hundreds of millions of people who ARE living in absolute poverty, despite the CCP lowering the bar so that they can demonstrate they have brought hundreds of millions out of that state (which, grudgingly they have…they have moved hundreds of millions from living on less than a dollar a day to between a dollar and two, which doesn’t sound all that great but actually has helped a lot). As to your PPP, feel free to back up your assertion however you like. If you want to claim that costs are less in China and make a comparison, go for it. Show me that, adjusted for PPP that 10’s of millions of Americans are living in absolute poverty by the UN’s definitions. Take into account government assistance, however. I believe you will find that the US 10’s of millions are certainly poor, but they are poor by US or other advanced nations (not including China of course) standards, not by the absolute standards of the world at large.
The US poor are poor compared to the poor in many (not all) highly advanced nations with large social safety nets. This means much of western Europe, places like Canada, Japan, Australia, etc. That probably doesn’t include Russia, as they don’t have that large a social safety net. Certainly doesn’t include China as they don’t have a full social safety net either. I don’t know about Morocco or Poland off the top of my head.
Not exactly the argument I’m making so not sure why I should defend this. There are 10’s of millions of poor in the US. There is food insecurity. We could do better. But that’s why I said our poor are relatively poor compared to the rest of the our (or other advanced nations) populations. My issue was with the attempt to use the term absolute, as that has real meaning, and if you are going to use it you need to use it correctly. Let me ask you something…do you think that being poor in the US is equivalent to being poor in, say, Mexico? Or Latin America? In sub-Saharan Africa? In China or South East Asia? In India? If you think yes to that, then you are saying that we have 10’s of millions in absolute poverty…in which case, I’d like a cite for this extraordinary claim. If no, then dump the other baggage you are bringing here. I’m not saying what we have is good, or that steps shouldn’t be taken to continue to rectify this situation. I’d like to see us more like our Western European brethren and sistren, or like Japan or Canada or other advanced, prosperous nations.
The term being used is absolute poverty, not just the word absolute.
Absolute poverty is when household income is below a certain level, which makes it impossible for the person or family to meet basic needs of life including food, shelter, safe drinking water, education, healthcare, etc.
Being homeless and hungry in America IS absolute poverty, same as it is anywhere else. I can certainly agree that if offered the “choice” I might choose starving on the street in LA over starving on the street in Jakarta or Mumbai… but that is certainly not a glowing endorsement of the USA.
ETA: That definition for absolute poverty is from Habitat for Humanity.
Again with the baggage…I never said this was a ‘glowing endorsement of the US’. What you seem to be saying is that this is ‘absolute poverty’…for the US.
Here, let me help you all out. This is an older article from the Washington Post:
The U.N. says 18.5 million Americans are in ‘extreme poverty.’ Trump’s team says just 250,000 are.
[quote]The U.N.'s numbers come from the official Census definition that has been kept for decades by the U.S. government, defining extreme poverty as having an income lower than half the official poverty rate, Alston said in an interview. (For 2016, that was about $12,000 a year for a family of four.) By this criteria, the poverty rate in America has only slightly ticked downward since the mid-1960s.
The U.N. is using the Census figure that is “the gauge most people rely on when measuring extreme poverty,” said Mark Rank, a poverty expert at Washington University in St. Louis.
Some on the right have long rejected this measure in part since it only counts income, or how much money each American receives. Instead, American officials in Geneva cited survey data produced by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, that also measures purchasing power.
[/quote]
[quote]Citing a recent survey of American households, Heritage found only 0.08 percent of American households (or about to 250,000) are in “deep poverty,” defined by Heritage as living on less than $4 a day. This statistic does account for government social spending programs that help the poor — like Medicaid, food stamps, and housing assistance — while the figure cited by the U.N. does not.
“No one likes the official poverty measure because it doesn’t count the enormous assistance we provide low-income Americans,” said Robert Doar, a conservative scholar at the American Enterprise Institute think tank. “It makes you think they have very little — that they have nothing — when in fact that’s not true.”
Several poverty experts acknowledged flaws with the official Census count, but described the Heritage statistic cited by the U.S. as much too low. Some questioned why $4 a day was an appropriate measure of extreme poverty, since that only translates into about $1,500 of spending for an entire year on food, health care, rent and everything else needed to survive.
The Heritage number cited by the U.S. also does not reflect that many families must go into debt to sustain spending, and that government benefits like Medicaid and food stamps cannot be used to meet some unexpected expenses. Another criticism of Heritage’s data is it is based on a survey of consumers that appears to produce different results than other poverty data, according to poverty experts.
“It’s a total joke,” said Rank, the Washington University professor. “To say that there are 250,000 people in deep poverty in the U.S. is just ridiculous.”
[/quote]
All that was just background, here is the key bit:
[quote]Another convention for measuring poverty overall is to look at those with less than half the median national disposable income. By that measure, about 18 percent of Americans are in poverty — higher than that virtually all other developed nations, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
A separate study from Princeton University economist Angus Deaton, also cited in the U.N. report, found about 5.3 million Americans live on less than $4 a day, including government transfers.[/quote]
So, what we are looking at here is that 5.3 million Americans live on less than $4 a day. Certainly, that is very poor…compared to the rest of the US population. But it’s not absolute poverty defined by the UN, even when you take into account PPP. And it’s not 10’s of millions living in this.
Basically, what was being asserted is wrong. It was an exaggeration. Again, this isn’t to say that the reality isn’t bad. It is. We ARE one of the worst countries for poverty among prosperous, developed nations. And that is and should be a national shame. But we aren’t falling into 3rd world levels, which is what the OP is asserting or proposing for the full decline bit. The US has problems, but they aren’t the presage to the fall of the American Empire, they are issues we can deal with moving forward…as we’ve dealt with them in the past. Our real trouble is that we aren’t anything close to unified on how to deal with them…but that’s nothing new either. We really have never been except for brief periods in our history which are notable more for how unusual they are.
…this is a reach. This is a US hosted board where almost everybody here are posting from the US. Would you expect anything different?
Or perhaps you have chosen to use China because “it annoys you” how much China gets a “free pass” around here. And when you see it happening you just have to remind everybody that “we are giving China a free pass.” It is perfectly reasonable given the scope of the thread to compare the US to China. But it is also reasonable to compare the US to nations that you consider “aren’t in the same league”, because when we are talking morality and ethics and the way that a country should “act”, then it is real easy to point to a country that is universally decried as a walking-talking-human-rights-violation and declare “we are better than that.” Being “better than that” simply isn’t enough.
If you ignore everything I said, and if you ignore everything that is going on around you? Sure.
Did you know that the NYPD has embedded intelligence officers in 13 cities overseas? They have officers stationed in Israel, Singapore, France and the Dominican Republic. The SBANYPD tweeted this the other day:
The SBANYPD doxxed the Mayor’s daughter. The NYPD have been fighting to keep arrest record secret for decades. And they are doing all of this for one simple reason. They are out of control.
We can do an in-depth analysis of other police forces around the country if you like. We could talk about this in LA. Or this. It does start to get outside of the scope of this thread though. But this is much more than just a few “problems.” Its a complete failure of oversight.
I disagree. I think the future of the United States is going to hinge on the next election. The President of the United States is openly talking about ignoring the results of the next election, is encouraging his voters to vote twice, his attorney general wants to charge protesters with sedition, the acting heads of DHS and ICE got appointed to their positions illegally and are acting without congressional oversight, a court has just blocked and ordered the reversals of the actions of the postmaster general (who will probably ignore the ruling), immigration policy is being set and driven by an unelected white supremacist nazi-wannabe.
And that was just yesterday.
You don’t have to squint to see that Trump & Co want a white supremacist authoritarian state. They are doing it right there, in front of your eyes, you just refuse to see them do it.
I presented you with a list. You’ve merely dismissed that list with a wave of your hand. I acknowledge my bias. But at least I’ve presented a case.
This ain’t it. You aren’t exceptional. Having a “confrontational public who are often at odds with themselves on what we should be doing and how we should do it” is an entirely normal state of affairs. The fact that you are also a “superpower” doesn’t change anything.
America ticks almost all of the boxes, and the one box that it doesn’t currently tick is on a knife edge.
One only has to look at what is happening in America right now to see these things naked and out there in the open. But to see them you have to actually open your eyes.
The main causes likely involve the use of the dollar as a reserve currency, conventional oil production peaking in the 1970s and the move to petrodollar recycling to maintain steady oil supplies and control of Middle East producers, a drop in real wages as late capitalism began to set in by the 1970s, the start of chronic trade deficits then following a decrease in economic growth starting around a decade earlier, increased borrowing and spending from the early 1980s onward to counter that and combinations of these leading to the 2008 crash, and within all that the drive to maintain a warmongering status to keep that dollar reserve status up.
Some say that problems started even earlier, with the formation of a quasi-central bank controlled by Wall Street.
Most of Americas problems IMO can come down to 2 things.
Regulatory capture and an environment where private interests take over the government and as a result prices go up and quality goes down all over the marketplace (health care, telecommunications, real estate, etc).
Identity politics and having large swaths of Americans be more concerned with inflicting pain and suffering on anyone who isn’t a native born white christian rather than pursuing good ideas to make the country better.
When a vast and increasing number of people - including people elected to the highest offices in government - insist that reality is defined by whatever they want to be true and that “freedom” means “I get to do whatever I want without consequence”, we are already on the downward slope.
This statement has, of course, been rather forcefully validated since you originally posted it.