Talk:Standard of living in the United States/Archive 1

message: Well, let's see, actually LIVING in the United States, and being disabled, I experience some of the worst low income nightmares you could imagine.
For instance, I cannot wash my own hair due to my physical disability. I must pay an enormous amount of money to have this done, yet I am way below the
poverty level in income due to the U.S.'s insistance that taxes are just "too high". So, essentially, I have the choice of eating (and thus, continuing to exist) and being a social pariah with filthy hair, or I can forgo eating to be clean. Is this a "good standard of living"?
Supposedly, working people should never have to pay for anything as non-important as the well-being of their fellow man -- even if he is a cripple. Damn him for not working and making his way in the great capitalistic nation. But you don't hear about that, because the United States is currently stealing even MORE money from the poor to pay the rich. It's reverse Robin Hood ethics. I wouldn't call that a "good standard of living". Would you?
::Could you maybe explain to me what being below the poverty level has to do with the U.S. believing that taxes are too high?  Jrkarp 21:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Seems kinda obvious to me. Higher taxes would mean more money going into welfare and social security (disabilities, sickness, parental leave, childcare,...), unless you were to put it into the military. Taxes are used (in Europe) to make the differences in income less and to give a better life to the poor. Somebody has to give, either the rich (money) or the poor (being poorer then they could be).HichamVanborm 21:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: "Ethoncentric imperialistic attidudes"? Are you mad? Imperialism is a focused attempt BY THE STATE to coerce and assimilate other nations. Please, do not confuse capitalism (the free movement of capital) with imperialism. And how is it "ethnocentric"? Please explain.
Left-wing communist countries have NOTORIOUS green records.
And the EU is NOT better than America. I know, I live in the goddamn protectionist racket. 
And please, please give a valid alternative, not just whine. Thank you. --Onias 23:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: comment by nobodyz

message: From some of comments i've read,I get the impression that the people complaining about this article are just plain bitter.Bitter at the fact that the U.S.A is not the greatest country to live in( Oh heavens!Say it's not so! How dare you!)and the typical response is "You must be a communist" or even better "Anti American"...weak. Now, when i think of "Standard of Living" i also think of quality of life. I'm glad i do not have to live in a country where i have to carry a gun for protection, or worry about taking the wrong exit,ending up in a neighborhood "that dont like whitey". I also enjoy the fact that i can go to any emergency room at a hospital without the worry of "Is my insurance up to date" or see any doctor i want without having to check with my HMO.In addition, prices on prescription drugs are way more affordable in Canada. Heaps of Americans come up to Canada to get these "must have" drugs because they cant afford them in their own country,or even worse,not availiable,such as a flu shot...pathetic. By the way, many of the doctors that emigrated to the U.S. in the 90s'are now returning to Canada.I guess the grass isnt alays greener on the other side after all eh? Canada has all the "stuff" America has,except the high violent crime rate,the ghettos(good recruiting grounds for the military)and a climate of fear. Before there is any whineing about about Canada not contributing to the security of the U.S,Canada has 2000 troops in Afghanistan to free up U.S.troops for Iraq. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.66.121.193 (talk • contribs) .
:Great, but Standard of Living is a defined economic measure. Quality of life is another and is not as clear. What is good quality of life to one person isn't a good quality of life to another person. But one is a very sustinct economic measure and one is not.--Rotten 14:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, contrary to what people from countries with socialized medicine think, even with no insurance, you will get health care in the U.S.; it is illegal for an ER to refuse to serve you due to lack of insurance.  So we too can go to an ER and know that our insurance status will not affect our quality of care.  It is amazing how many Canadians and Britons actually believe that in the U.S., if you have no insurance, an ER will kick you out. Jrkarp 21:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's ture the ER will take you, but you won't get braces for your kids and the hospital will only do the bear minimum that's neccesary to keep you alive. Let's face it the health care system is not America's corwn jewel (America ranks number 72). Besdies Standard of Living is a purely economic measure, it is not the same as quality of life. GDP per capita and HDI are the best indicators for Standard of living. This article should not be pro-US propaganda nor should it be a list of what's wrong with the US. Regards, Signaturebrendel 22:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  THat's a bullshit study. Notice how Jamaica and Costa Rica rank above Germany? The entire study is flawed.--Rotten 04:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be that as it may, the health care system of the US is not what it should be, look at the life expetancy, infant moratlity rate, etc... As I have said this article should neither feature proganada nor should it be a "What's wrong with the US" article. Regards, Signaturebrendel 06:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those figures could have nothing to do with the health care system of the US. Infant mortality could be skewed higher because we try to save infants that would otherwise be aborted in other countries for example.--Rotten 05:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just Bitter